From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Oct 1 01:10:37 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 18:10:37 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20040930142629.37431.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <021c01c4a753$78575510$6501a8c0@SHELLY> We hadn't the force multipliers then that we have now. Too many guys can be worse than not enough. s > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Trend Ologist > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 7:26 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? > > > This is not a foregone conclusion. When the USA was > attacked in 1861 and 1941, a draft became 'necessary'. > > > > > Spike wrote: > > Unnecessary under those circs. The draft board > > would be swamped with volunteers of all ages. > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL > -NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From kurt at metatechnica.com Fri Oct 1 03:35:21 2004 From: kurt at metatechnica.com (Kurt Schoedel) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 20:35:21 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] More irriducible complexity and ID Message-ID: The statistical analysis on the initial formation of life from non-life has actually been done. Thomas Gold, in his book "The Deep Hot Biosphere" does some statistical analysis on the formation of the initial DNA and enzymes necessary to form life. He believes that there is enough "raw material" in the deep earth that the statistical chances of the first self-replicating DNA or RNA was above unity. He also believes that the conventional theory that life first formed in shallow pools on the surface is not statistically favorable (not enough shallow pools available at the time). The conventional theory of evolution (the idea that evolution is driven by random mutations) does have flaws in it. There is new research in molecular biology that suggests that evolution may, in fact, be "self- directed". This would explain why the rate of evolution has increased along with the increasing complexity of life forms. A good website for this idea is www.darwingenome.info. Greg Bear (the SF writer) has incorporated some of these ideas in some of his more recent novels. Kurt Schoedel MetaTechnica From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 07:04:17 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 00:04:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Drextech computer memory: mechanical vs electronic In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20040929150310.01b8bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041001070417.17911.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> Fast, robust, and a blast from the past, mechanical memory switch outstrips chip technology Nanomechanical memory cell could catapult efforts to improve data storage http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-09/bu-fra093004.php Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Fri Oct 1 18:17:35 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 19:17:35 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <415D9F3F.20505@optusnet.com.au> Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Kurt Schoedel wrote: > > >>The creationists argue that biological systems so complex, irriducibly >>complex that they simply cannot have evolved through natural processes. >>So they say, biology had to have been designed. The problem, of course, >>is that the designer itself is an example of an irriducibly complex >>system that the designer itself had to have been designed by another >>designer, and so on. this is an example of an infinite recursion. When >>you point this out to creationists, they tend to go bananas on you. > > > In your dreams. When I have pointed this out to Christians, they > have just stared at me incomprehendingly as if I had just said > something entirely nonsensical. God is the Creator, the Source of > all, who just IS. A question about the origin of God is MEANINGLESS. > This is entirely OBVIOUS. > > Considering that even (by US standards) enlightened Christians fail > to grasp the problem there, I don't think this will make the least > impression on whacko creationists. > I think a useful strategy against ID would be to emphasize the "alien creator" aspects of their argument. If they are trying to remove God from their arguments, then portray them as arguing that mankind was created by little green men. This is very easy to make fun of, and the only way they can counter it is to bring God back, which makes their argument religious, not scientific. From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Fri Oct 1 18:26:36 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 19:26:36 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] More irriducible complexity and ID In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <415DA15C.20001@optusnet.com.au> Kurt Schoedel wrote: > The conventional theory of evolution (the idea that evolution is driven > by random mutations) does have flaws in it. There is new research in > molecular biology that suggests that evolution may, in fact, be "self- > directed". This would explain why the rate of evolution has increased > along with the increasing complexity of life forms. A good website for > this idea is www.darwingenome.info. > > Kurt Schoedel > MetaTechnica Evolution is not self-directed. There may be a type of meta-evolution where having a high mutation rate is an advantage, and hence selected for, but there is absolutely no direction to that mutation on any level. Any apparent direction is caused by selection of what works. (or more accurately - deselection of what doesn't work) From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 12:38:41 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:38:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <021c01c4a753$78575510$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041001123841.52546.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Certainly, but I was told there could be a draft, say 5- 10 years from now, if a WMD attack were at that time to be launched on America-- or even on one of its allies. We only know what we are told by those with connections; we're not in the loop. --- Spike wrote: > We hadn't the force multipliers then that we > have now. Too many guys can be worse than > not enough. s > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf Of > > Trend Ologist > > Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2004 7:26 AM > > To: ExI chat list > > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory > draft for your child? > > > > > > This is not a foregone conclusion. When the USA > was > > attacked in 1861 and 1941, a draft became > 'necessary'. > > > > > > > > > Spike wrote: > > > Unnecessary under those circs. The draft board > > > would be swamped with volunteers of all ages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL > > -NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even > more fun! > http://uk.messenger.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 > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 12:55:22 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:55:22 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20040930141428.029ae508@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001125522.65655.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Another somewhat-apparent aspect is that the enemy is not 100% culpable. It is a myth Germany was seeking revenge for the Versailles treaty; Germany had recovered from Versailles by 1939. The critical cause of WWII was Germany being trapped between Stalin's genocidal communism in the east, and ultra-capitalism in the west. The Germans overreacted yet they were under severe pressure and didn't know what to do so they went totalist. Our current enemy is extremely reactionary but this is also partially overreacting to an undoubted imperialist tendency on our part. --- Hara Ra wrote: > Um, it's one thing if a definite enemy is known and > localizable, like > Germany or to some degree, VietNam. Question is, > does joining the service > really helps to solve the problem. We have a new > kind of war here, and > traditionally, the military always is refighting the > previous war. One's > skills might better serve the nation as a civilian. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 13:46:07 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:46:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] More irriducible complexity and ID References: Message-ID: > The conventional theory of evolution (the idea that evolution is driven > by random mutations) does have flaws in it. There is new research in > molecular biology that suggests that evolution may, in fact, be "self- > directed". This would explain why the rate of evolution has increased > along with the increasing complexity of life forms. A good website for > this idea is www.darwingenome.info. Neither increasing rates of evolution, nor increasing complexity are part of evolutionary theory. Complexity is just as likely to decrease as increase, and rates of change vary according to the environment. For example, nothing has matched the cambrian explosion in sheer varity of life in such a short period of time. Ecolution is more like a blind drunk walking up an alley rather than a march toward increasing complexity. Snakes are a prime example. Their ancestors were more complex and had limbs for walking. These are the simple things that are often overlooked by creationists when preaching their crap. Even thoise who accept evolution claim that it is a process God uses to move from the simple life forms to the most complex with human beings at the Apex. From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 13:54:27 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:54:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution References: Message-ID: It still remains within the basic framework. The ability to evolve some sort of mechanism to control evolution would itself be the result of natural selection. Evolution does not have "flaws" in the framework, but like anything, it occasionally needs to have the details tweaked. Gould's "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory" brings up many of these points. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kurt Schoedel" To: Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:32 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > The creationists are correct that the currently accepted theory of > evolution has flaws in it. Their problem is that they think that the > only alternative explanation is their religious psycho-pathology. > > The website: www.darwingenome.info > > offers a potential alternative explanation of evolution. > > Kurt Schoedel > MetaTechnica > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 13:55:48 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:55:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <415D9F3F.20505@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: > > I think a useful strategy against ID would be to emphasize the > "alien creator" aspects of their argument. If they are trying > to remove God from their arguments, then portray them as arguing > that mankind was created by little green men. > This is very easy to make fun of, and the only way they can > counter it is to bring God back, which makes their argument > religious, not scientific. > This sounds like fun. I am on board for this one. I will start looking for articles to respond to today! From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 14:00:48 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:00:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <6.0.3.0.1.20040930140631.029ad3c8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > > 2. By Darwin, all structures must over any long time be useful for survival > or they gradually vanish. What is the survival advantage of having God? > According to Darwin, yes, but I am not so sure about that. I am working on a way to show that some structures can persist with no advantage on occasion as long as there is no selection pressure against. This is very unlikely, but surely it is possible. I've already been able to demonstrate that through random chance, a characteristic that is actually harmful can form and become "normal" in a population. I am writing a paper on it as we speak. From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 14:02:31 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:02:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <20040930174113.4A41757E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: > It's also worth keeping in mind that in fact, life on Earth did not > evolve much until quite recently in geological terms. For 80% of its > tenure life was restricted to the simplest forms. Something happened > then and we had an explosion of multicellular diversity, leading to > colonization of the land and air. This argues against an ID hypothesis > for biogenesis, because it is unlikely that an ID would seed the planet > with a life form so limited that it would be unable to evolve diversity > for three billion years. An ID would probably rather see immediate and > more certain results, in my opinion. > Hal, Don't you KNOW that the Earth is ONLY about 6000 years old?!?!?! From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 14:02:17 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:02:17 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041001140217.79404.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> If snakes are a form of 'backward evolution', then so too could hominids eventually regress, which means flaws do exist in the framework. --- Kevin Freels wrote: > It still remains within the basic framework. The > ability to evolve some sort > of mechanism to control evolution would itself be > the result of natural > selection. Evolution does not have "flaws" in the > framework, but like > anything, it occasionally needs to have the details > tweaked. Gould's "The > Structure of Evolutionary Theory" brings up many of > these points. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Kurt Schoedel" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:32 PM > Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > > > > The creationists are correct that the currently > accepted theory of > > evolution has flaws in it. Their problem is that > they think that the > > only alternative explanation is their religious > psycho-pathology. > > > > The website: www.darwingenome.info > > > > offers a potential alternative explanation of > evolution. > > > > Kurt Schoedel > > MetaTechnica > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 14:07:49 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:07:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <20040930150958.76881.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Here's an interesting article about a plan to create life in a lab. http://www.carlzimmer.com/articles/2004/articles_2004_Before_DNA.html And another: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/556984.stm From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 14:11:56 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:11:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution References: <20041001140217.79404.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Nope. Not a flaw. A fact. We very well could "regress". For an interesting fictinal story about this, read "Evolution" by Stephen Baxter. In evolutionary theory, the new synthesis does not allow for "progression" or "regression". Progressive evolution is simply an illusion seen by people who haven;t spent enough time learning evolutionary theory. This shows just how poorly schools cover the subject. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trend Ologist" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 9:02 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > If snakes are a form of 'backward evolution', then so > too could hominids eventually regress, which means > flaws do exist in the framework. > > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > It still remains within the basic framework. The > > ability to evolve some sort > > of mechanism to control evolution would itself be > > the result of natural > > selection. Evolution does not have "flaws" in the > > framework, but like > > anything, it occasionally needs to have the details > > tweaked. Gould's "The > > Structure of Evolutionary Theory" brings up many of > > these points. > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Kurt Schoedel" > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:32 PM > > Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > > > > > > > The creationists are correct that the currently > > accepted theory of > > > evolution has flaws in it. Their problem is that > > they think that the > > > only alternative explanation is their religious > > psycho-pathology. > > > > > > The website: www.darwingenome.info > > > > > > offers a potential alternative explanation of > > evolution. > > > > > > Kurt Schoedel > > > MetaTechnica > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 14:14:11 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:14:11 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041001141411.1802.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Wouldn't this 'fact' be a possible indication that there is no ID or that there is a Designer who is unintelligent (UD). --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Nope. Not a flaw. A fact. We very well could > "regress". For an interesting > fictinal story about this, read "Evolution" by > Stephen Baxter. In > evolutionary theory, the new synthesis does not > allow for "progression" or > "regression". Progressive evolution is simply an > illusion seen by people who > haven;t spent enough time learning evolutionary > theory. This shows just how > poorly schools cover the subject. > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Trend Ologist" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 9:02 AM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > > > > If snakes are a form of 'backward evolution', then > so > > too could hominids eventually regress, which means > > flaws do exist in the framework. > > > > > > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > > It still remains within the basic framework. The > > > ability to evolve some sort > > > of mechanism to control evolution would itself > be > > > the result of natural > > > selection. Evolution does not have "flaws" in > the > > > framework, but like > > > anything, it occasionally needs to have the > details > > > tweaked. Gould's "The > > > Structure of Evolutionary Theory" brings up many > of > > > these points. > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Kurt Schoedel" > > > To: > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:32 PM > > > Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > > > > > > > > > > The creationists are correct that the > currently > > > accepted theory of > > > > evolution has flaws in it. Their problem is > that > > > they think that the > > > > only alternative explanation is their > religious > > > psycho-pathology. > > > > > > > > The website: www.darwingenome.info > > > > > > > > offers a potential alternative explanation of > > > evolution. > > > > > > > > Kurt Schoedel > > > > MetaTechnica > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > Yahoo! > Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > http://uk.messenger.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 > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Oct 1 14:18:37 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 07:18:37 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001123841.52546.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000201c4a7c1$8b3f1370$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Trend Ologist: > Certainly, but I was told there could be a draft, say > 5- 10 years from now, if a WMD attack were at that > time to be launched on America-- or even on one of its > allies. We only know what we are told by those with > connections; we're not in the loop. Ja, well if you are worried Trend, don't take a chance: vote republican everything. I still think its political grandstanding however, a sneaky republican trick to get votes. I would go libertarian. spike From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 14:39:05 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 15:39:05 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <000201c4a7c1$8b3f1370$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041001143905.95691.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No, im voting Democratic, think of it as term limitation without mandating TL by legislation. Even if you don't like a non-incumbent candidate at all, you can vote for that candidate to keep the incumbent from being re-elected. I voted against Clinton in '96 not because I didn't approve of his performance, but because I don't like a politician serving more than one five or six year term. Since we can't have a one term 5 or 6 year presidency, voting against the incumbent makes sense unless the guy is a Churchill. Or if a president were to be a woman she's have to be extremely good-looking ;/ Being a woman, we wouldn't have to pay her as much, either. > Ja, well if you are worried Trend, don't take a > chance: > vote republican everything. > > I still think its political grandstanding however, a > sneaky republican trick to get votes. I would go > libertarian. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Oct 1 14:47:44 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 07:47:44 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001143905.95691.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000501c4a7c5$9fd15ab0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> This post might ordinarily rate some kind of response from me, however I wish to respond to some of the evolution comments later today; we have agreed to keep our posts to 7 per day to prevent anyone from dominating the discussions. spike > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > Trend Ologist > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 7:39 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? > > > No, im voting Democratic, think of it as term > limitation without mandating TL by legislation. > > > Ja, well if you are worried Trend, don't take a > > chance: > > vote republican everything. > > > > spike From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 15:00:09 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:00:09 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <000501c4a7c5$9fd15ab0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041001150009.93129.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Didn't know there was a 7 post-per-day limitation. This'll be my last post for today. BTW, electing a woman for prez is good policy (but the salary OUGHT to be lowered back to $200,000 per annum) electing a woman for president will get them off our backs, we can say at that time, "Look, you've got one of your kind elected to the top position in the world, stop nagging me". --- Spike wrote: > This post might ordinarily rate some kind of > response > from me, however I wish to respond to some of the > evolution comments later today; we have agreed to > keep our > posts to 7 per day to prevent anyone from dominating > the discussions. spike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On > Behalf Of > > Trend Ologist > > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 7:39 AM > > To: ExI chat list > > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory > draft for your child? > > > > > > No, im voting Democratic, think of it as term > > limitation without mandating TL by legislation. > > > > > Ja, well if you are worried Trend, don't take a > > > chance: > > > vote republican everything. > > > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 15:07:30 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:07:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution References: <20041001141411.1802.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: That's exactly what it indicates. Unfortunately, it is not usually taught in school since most teachers are hesitant to delve too deeply into evolution for fear of bringing the wrath of God (or the parents) upon themselves. Most teachers don;t even understand evolution enough to be more than wishy-washy on the subject. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trend Ologist" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 9:14 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > Wouldn't this 'fact' be a possible indication that > there is no ID or that there is a Designer who is > unintelligent (UD). > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > Nope. Not a flaw. A fact. We very well could > > "regress". For an interesting > > fictinal story about this, read "Evolution" by > > Stephen Baxter. In > > evolutionary theory, the new synthesis does not > > allow for "progression" or > > "regression". Progressive evolution is simply an > > illusion seen by people who > > haven;t spent enough time learning evolutionary > > theory. This shows just how > > poorly schools cover the subject. > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Trend Ologist" > > To: "ExI chat list" > > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 9:02 AM > > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > > > > > > > If snakes are a form of 'backward evolution', then > > so > > > too could hominids eventually regress, which means > > > flaws do exist in the framework. > > > > > > > > > > > > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > > > It still remains within the basic framework. The > > > > ability to evolve some sort > > > > of mechanism to control evolution would itself > > be > > > > the result of natural > > > > selection. Evolution does not have "flaws" in > > the > > > > framework, but like > > > > anything, it occasionally needs to have the > > details > > > > tweaked. Gould's "The > > > > Structure of Evolutionary Theory" brings up many > > of > > > > these points. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Kurt Schoedel" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 6:32 PM > > > > Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution > > > > > > > > > > > > > The creationists are correct that the > > currently > > > > accepted theory of > > > > > evolution has flaws in it. Their problem is > > that > > > > they think that the > > > > > only alternative explanation is their > > religious > > > > psycho-pathology. > > > > > > > > > > The website: www.darwingenome.info > > > > > > > > > > offers a potential alternative explanation of > > > > evolution. > > > > > > > > > > Kurt Schoedel > > > > > MetaTechnica > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > > Yahoo! > > Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > > http://uk.messenger.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 > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Fri Oct 1 14:18:31 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 18:18:31 +0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <20040930202445.7503.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20040930174113.4A41757E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041001173918.00a9f4f0@pop.cris.net> Kurt Schoedel wrote >The problem, of course, > is that the designer itself is an example of an > irriducibly complex > system that the designer itself had to have been > designed by another > designer, and so on. this is an example of an > infinite recursion. and Trend Ologist wrote: >A possibility that comes again & again to me is that the Designer is perhaps >not intelligent. The Designer could be like an engineering student who >partied too much, then later designs faulty products and systems. It reminded me of a great essay by Borges, The Vindication of pseudo-Basilides (Una vindicacion del falso Basilides, from his book Discusion published in 1932). To quote it in English, I tried to find a translation on the Net and failed. Instead I was linked by Google to a site (Gnostic Friends Network -- "a virulent anti-Christian outpouring") and a page with title: Basilides, Tertullian, 365 heavens, Borges, self-reproducing inflationary universe, anthropic principle. There was not Borges but there was Basilides. Basilides is a gnostic theologian who thought that: the first beings of all had been the aeons, invisible deities who dwell in the Pleroma (the secret gnostic light-heaven). In the heart of the Pleroma lived the "Unborn Father," a being of such pure and infinite perfection it was impossible to describe or even contemplate. Creation began when one of the aeons accidentally created the "Rulers," powerful angels who fell from the Pleroma and built a first heaven underneath it. These angels created another heaven beneath them, populated by yet more Rulers; creation proceeded apace until soon there were 365 heavens, one inside the other, each succeeding layer filled with beings completely unaware of all those above them. The Rulers who control the lowest heaven (the one most Christians know about) made the Earth and everything on it; their leader Yahweh impersonates "God" in the Old Testament. =========== That is, the Creator of our Universe (or, at least, the Master of this Civilization) is the farthest from the pure Light of Pleroma and the most vicious demiurge of all creators. As Borges wrote in the essay (in my humble translation from Russian translation): What is important for us is the common idea of these stories: We are uncareful or felonious lapse, a fruit of interaction of defective god and churlish, ungrateful material. Best! Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 15:31:27 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:31:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] More irriducible complexity and ID In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041001153127.73079.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kurt Schoedel wrote: > > The conventional theory of evolution (the idea that evolution is > driven > by random mutations) does have flaws in it. There is new research in > molecular biology that suggests that evolution may, in fact, be > "self-directed". This would explain why the rate of evolution has > increased along with the increasing complexity of life forms. > A good website for this idea is www.darwingenome.info. Creationists ignore the effect that catalysts and other metabolites have on accelerating the rate of random fluctuations and mutations. They also ignore threshold events like asteroid strikes, nearby supernovae, etc on background radiation and other stresses on the biosphere. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 15:35:22 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001123841.52546.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001153522.80078.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Certainly, but I was told there could be a draft, say > 5- 10 years from now, if a WMD attack were at that > time to be launched on America-- or even on one of its > allies. We only know what we are told by those with > connections; we're not in the loop. Well, this is significantly different from what you presented before. In 5-10 years, Bush won't even be in office anymore, so why are you presenting it as if it is an issue germaine to the presidential debate? ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 15:39:20 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001125522.65655.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001153920.80395.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Another somewhat-apparent aspect is that the enemy is > not 100% culpable. It is a myth Germany was seeking > revenge for the Versailles treaty; Germany had > recovered from Versailles by 1939. The critical cause > of WWII was Germany being trapped between Stalin's > genocidal communism in the east, and ultra-capitalism > in the west. The Germans overreacted yet they were > under severe pressure and didn't know what to do so > they went totalist. This is the most blinkered apologia I've seen for Naziism in quite a while. Yup, it was that 'ultra-capitalism' that drove them to it, folks. Better not be an 'ultra-capitalist', some fascist bastard with adequacy issues might genocide on you, and it would be all your fault. > Our current enemy is extremely > reactionary but this is also partially overreacting to > an undoubted imperialist tendency on our part. Many doubts, sorry. Free trade is not imperialism. Promoting liberty is not imperialism. Brinksmanship to oppose global communism is not imperialism. Sounds like someone just returned from a 5th ComIntern congress. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 15:41:42 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:41:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041001154142.62058.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > > > I think a useful strategy against ID would be to emphasize the > > "alien creator" aspects of their argument. If they are trying > > to remove God from their arguments, then portray them as arguing > > that mankind was created by little green men. > > This is very easy to make fun of, and the only way they can > > counter it is to bring God back, which makes their argument > > religious, not scientific. > > > This sounds like fun. I am on board for this one. I will start > looking for articles to respond to today! Meta-sysop theory, while only testable by trying to produce pocket universes ourselves, is hardly religious, though it does have metaphysics aspects. It is just this side of science fiction. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 15:43:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:43:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] More on Evolution In-Reply-To: <20041001140217.79404.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001154352.62343.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > If snakes are a form of 'backward evolution', then so > too could hominids eventually regress, which means > flaws do exist in the framework. It is a mistake to assume that evolutions only goal is to produce higher and more complex forms of life. Evolutions goal is to fill as many possible niches as is possible in any possible ecosystem. There is no 'ascent' of species, there is no permanent equilibria or meta-stability. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 15:48:06 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 08:48:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001143905.95691.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001154806.75766.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > No, im voting Democratic, think of it as term > limitation without mandating TL by legislation. Trend here reminds me of a socialist fellow I talked with a few months ago. He was ranting on about the 'coming draft' that 'that bastard Bush' was implementing. When I informed him that every sponsor and cosponsor of both draft bills in congress were all left-wing Democrats, he abruptly started ranting how he approves of a draft, because it is more 'democratic' in that it applies to senators sons as well as poor kids (despite what has come out about favors for national guard postings during Vietnam), and that it prevents the creation of a "separate and elitist mercenary caste" in our society. So, Trend, you voting Democrat cause you want the draft now? ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 15:47:20 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:47:20 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001153522.80078.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001154720.82570.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Mike, what Bush or Kerry does from January 2005 to January 2009 will profoundly affect what occurs from October 1st 2009 to October 1st 2014... certainly beyond 2014 as well. i basically don't care who wins, there are advantages to either candidate. i'm voting for Kerry because of, mainly, having been reared by a liberal family. i promised to restrict post to seven a day, so if anyone wants to dish the dirt, mail me at: kerry_prez at yahoo.com > Well, this is significantly different from what you > presented before. > In 5-10 years, Bush won't even be in office anymore, > so why are you > presenting it as if it is an issue germaine to the > presidential debate? > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 16:05:27 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 17:05:27 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001153920.80395.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001160527.86807.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I had to answer this post. My Dad was in the Army Air Force (changed it to the Air Force in 1947) from '42-'46. He was a tender-hearted person whose life was ruined by what he saw. But he never blamed the Germans or Nazis. There is no real purpose in blaming anyone for what happened 60 years ago. Do we hate Nixon for how he poisoned politics? Hate Carter for being a total wuss? Nazism was a reaction to Stalin's hideous Communism, magnified by the disregard harbored by the West for the Germans : "let the Krauts do what they want, they're just Huns, we're protected by the Maginot line, the British have the best Fleet ever". That's what I mean about ultra capitalism, 'Huns' and other 'varmints' are treated as things to be manipulated, until they get uppity and think they are more than Huns or ragheads or whatever. > This is the most blinkered apologia I've seen for > Naziism in quite a > while. Yup, it was that 'ultra-capitalism' that > drove them to it, > folks. Better not be an 'ultra-capitalist', some > fascist bastard with > adequacy issues might genocide on you, and it would > be all your fault. > > > Our current enemy is extremely > > reactionary but this is also partially > overreacting to > > an undoubted imperialist tendency on our part. > > Many doubts, sorry. Free trade is not imperialism. > Promoting liberty is > not imperialism. Brinksmanship to oppose global > communism is not > imperialism. Sounds like someone just returned from > a 5th ComIntern congress. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 16:05:32 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001154720.82570.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001160532.66738.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Mike, what Bush or Kerry does from January 2005 to > January 2009 will profoundly affect what occurs from > October 1st 2009 to October 1st 2014... certainly > beyond 2014 as well. According to Kerry he will: - eliminate tax cuts - send 100,000 more men to Iraq (i.e. draft, sounds like Lyndon Johnson here) PLUS hunt down and kill every terrorist on Earth (with another 100,000 troops we don't have?) - protect our gun rights by banning many types of guns, including semi-automatic shotguns commonly used in skeet shooting and bird hunting, .50 caliber rifles commonly used in big game hunting, and semi-automatic pistols commonly used in self defense. - eliminate Patriot Act controls on library book borrowing, but keep Patriot Act banking and licensing controls that violate the First Amendment rights of millions of religious people who object to the numerical inventorying of human flesh. - promote government funding of state controlled stem cell research, thus out-competing private funding and private researchers via the use of police force, and ensuring that the government owns the IP created by this research, thus is able to control its use. Longevity and enhancement technologies will be rationed only to 'essential personnel' (i.e. elected officials and their thugs). - introduce a controversial plan to use zoning and planning ordinances across the country to economically force tens of millions of people to abandon living in rural areas and small towns, to migrate them to the cities where populations can be better controlled (and who they vote for can be controlled as well). All the abandoned land will be returned to wilderness for the reintroduction of wolves, grizzlies, mountain lions, and other species across North America, and used as a land bank of collateral to back massive welfare state borrowing paid for by massive taxes on energy and consumption in the guise of protecting us from "Global Warming", but are really intended to make the EU and Japan economically competetive with us again.. by dragging us down. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 1 16:19:20 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 09:19:20 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bone for the Extropian Wolves Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001091331.0290e900@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> A friend wrote: In my not always so humble opinion though, "hope" is not the greatest of bio-engineering strategies. And I replied: Both 'hope' and 'faith' carry strong subtexts of 'death' and 'failure'. Prior to the scientific age, the associated social and religious mechanisms did promote slightly better chances of survival by these means. Religious conversion and mystical insight (which I have experienced) both operate by making the real world irrelevant and an imaginary 'higher' world the ultimate reality. It has to be ultimate to be effective, and the main effect is to delete the fear response, freeing one for a wider field of action, often contrary to one's social programming. "God said so" is a panacea for ignoring social constraints. Evolution only conserves survivability, so we are saddled with these Stone Age mechanisms, which do work in their limited way. ================================== = 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 Fri Oct 1 16:30:15 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:30:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001160532.66738.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001163015.58417.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > According to Kerry he will: > - promote government funding of state controlled > stem cell research, > thus out-competing private funding and private > researchers via the use > of police force, Nit: "via" implies direct cause. While the police force may help collect the taxes that would then fund research, that's not the same thing as police directly causing lack of competition - e.g., shutting down privately funded researchers just because they are not on the government dime. > Longevity and > enhancement technologies will be rationed only to > 'essential personnel' > (i.e. elected officials and their thugs). When did Kerry say this, or even explicitly mention longevity? From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 1 17:07:28 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:07:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-hurricane engineering In-Reply-To: <093020041348.5051.415C0EAA0005C6FC000013BB2200762302C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041001170728.3966.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Ody777 at comcast.net wrote: > I?m no engineer, but as I understand it, the Ocean > Thermal process requires HEATING UP the cold water. > There are three steps: > > (a) ?heat transferred from the warm surface sea > water causes a working fluid... to turn to vapor.? > > (b) ?The expanding vapor drives a turbine attached > to a generator which produces electricity.? > > (c) ?Cold sea water passing through a condenser > containing the vaporized working fluid turns the > vapor back into a liquid which is then recycled > through the system.? > > (From > http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/ert/otec_hi.html#anchor356606 > .) > > The third step must heat up the cold water. If > there were any relatively cooler water left over > from this process, I assume you?d just want to use > it for the same purpose, to generate more > electricity, until it was the same temperature as > the surface water. So there wouldn?t be any ?cold > spot? produced. Ah, but where does that heat come from? Check step a: it leeches heat from the warm surface water. Yes, the cold water below gets warmer; we don't care about that. The heat will eventually come back up, but until it does, some of the heat near the top - which would have gone into feeding the hurricane - is no longer there. From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 1 16:32:11 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:32:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity Message-ID: <20041001163211.A827857E2A@finney.org> Gennady Ra writes: > Creation began when one of the aeons accidentally created the "Rulers," > powerful angels who fell from the Pleroma and built a first heaven > underneath it. These angels created another heaven beneath them, > populated by yet more Rulers; creation proceeded apace until soon there > were 365 heavens, one inside the other, each succeeding layer filled with > beings completely unaware of all those above them. > > The Rulers who control the lowest heaven (the one most Christians know > about) made the Earth and everything on it; their leader Yahweh impersonates > "God" in the Old Testament. That's a cute story. But from the Extropian perspective it is not over. The next step is clearly for us to create universes below our own, in the form of computer simulations which we will preside over as gods. Then the inhabitants of those universes would themselves eventually create their own sub-universes, and so on forever. Hal From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 17:28:37 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:28:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <20041001163211.A827857E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: Reminds me of the "Otherland" stories by Tad Williams. Ever read it? ----- Original Message ----- From: ""Hal Finney"" To: Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 11:32 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity > Gennady Ra writes: > > Creation began when one of the aeons accidentally created the "Rulers," > > powerful angels who fell from the Pleroma and built a first heaven > > underneath it. These angels created another heaven beneath them, > > populated by yet more Rulers; creation proceeded apace until soon there > > were 365 heavens, one inside the other, each succeeding layer filled with > > beings completely unaware of all those above them. > > > > The Rulers who control the lowest heaven (the one most Christians know > > about) made the Earth and everything on it; their leader Yahweh impersonates > > "God" in the Old Testament. > > That's a cute story. But from the Extropian perspective it is not over. > The next step is clearly for us to create universes below our own, > in the form of computer simulations which we will preside over as gods. > Then the inhabitants of those universes would themselves eventually create > their own sub-universes, and so on forever. > > 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 Fri Oct 1 17:29:28 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 12:29:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001122552.01b0e470@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/01/opinion/01krugman.html?th=&pagewanted=print&position= "As a result of the American military," President Bush declared last week, "the Taliban is no longer in existence." It's unclear whether Mr. Bush misspoke, or whether he really is that clueless. But his claim was in keeping with his re-election strategy, demonstrated once again in last night's debate: a president who has done immense damage to America's position in the world hopes to brazen it out by claiming that failure is success. [...] We can already see one example of this when we look at the question of torture. Abu Ghraib has largely vanished from U.S. political discussion, largely because the administration and its Congressional allies have been so effective at covering up high-level involvement. But both the revelations and the cover-up did terrible damage to America's moral authority. To much of the world, America looks like a place where top officials condone and possibly order the torture of innocent people, and suffer no consequences. What we need is an effort to regain our good name. What we're getting instead is a provision, inserted by Congressional Republicans in the intelligence reform bill, to legalize "extraordinary rendition" - a euphemism for sending terrorism suspects to countries that use torture for interrogation. This would institutionalize a Kafkaesque system under which suspects can be sent, at the government's whim, to Egypt or Syria or Jordan - and to fight such a move, it's up to the suspect to prove that he'll be tortured on arrival. Just what we need to convince other countries of our commitment to the rule of law. Most Americans aren't aware of all this. The sheer scale of Mr. Bush's foreign policy failures insulates him from its political consequences: voters aren't ready to believe how badly the war in Iraq is going, let alone how badly America's moral position in the world has deteriorated. But the rest of the world has already lost faith in us. In fact, let me make a prediction: if Mr. Bush gets a second term, we will soon have no democracies left among our allies - no, not even Tony Blair's Britain. Mr. Bush will be left with the support of regimes that don't worry about the legalities - regimes like Vladimir Putin's Russia. ============================== No, wait, if John Howard's govt returns to power in Australia in a week's time, Oz will still be panting along behind, eyes tight shut. Damien Broderick From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 1 16:58:47 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? Message-ID: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > Trend here reminds me of a socialist fellow I talked with a few months > ago. He was ranting on about the 'coming draft' that 'that bastard > Bush' was implementing. When I informed him that every sponsor and > cosponsor of both draft bills in congress were all left-wing Democrats, > he abruptly started ranting how he approves of a draft, because it is > more 'democratic' in that it applies to senators sons as well as poor > kids (despite what has come out about favors for national guard > postings during Vietnam), and that it prevents the creation of a > "separate and elitist mercenary caste" in our society. Wow, nothing could be a better example of the hazards of being in the grip of an ideology. Who among us would want to be in the position of this poor fellow, enslaved by a mind virus which forces him to absurdly reverse his position as soon as he is told what is ideologically correct? He acts like a fool but is unable to perceive it because his mind is under control of the ideology which has infected him. Yet how many of us recognize the danger of ideological infection? Ideologies are extremely hazardous to the rational mind, as Mike's sad story illustrates. Each of us should work to free himself of this subtle enslavement. One approach is to critically examine every position you have which is ideologically correct. Do your best to find some idea or controversy where you differ from your ideology. Try to say, I mostly agree with the general philosophy of X, but I differ on these specific positions... Take this step of escaping the control of your ideological master in one small area, and you will have begun your move towards mental freedom and rationality. Hal P.S. I am not speaking facetiously or ironically here. I am completely serious. If the person in Mike's story doesn't seem foolish to you, it is only because such ideological control is so widespread that we can only shake our heads in sad recognition of our human foibles. I don't think we should be so complacent. We are each just as vulnerable as that foolish socialist. We would certainly object to mental slavery if a human being undertook to exercise control over our will; the fact that ideologies have evolved memetically to seem pleasant shouldn't make it any more acceptable. From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 1 17:50:54 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 12:50:54 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001125011.01c9b338@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:58 AM 10/1/2004 -0700, Hal wrote: >P.S. I am not speaking facetiously or ironically here. No, but it's funnier read that way. :) Damien Broderick From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 17:58:32 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 18:58:32 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001154806.75766.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001175832.44043.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> This post is immensely dumbed-down, it is thoroughly unworthy of you, Mike. > Trend here reminds me of a socialist fellow I talked > with a few months > ago. He was ranting on about the 'coming draft' that > 'that bastard > Bush' was implementing. When I informed him that > every sponsor and > cosponsor of both draft bills in congress were all > left-wing Democrats, > he abruptly started ranting how he approves of a > draft, because it is > more 'democratic' in that it applies to senators > sons as well as poor > kids (despite what has come out about favors for > national guard > postings during Vietnam), and that it prevents the > creation of a > "separate and elitist mercenary caste" in our > society. > > So, Trend, you voting Democrat cause you want the > draft now? > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage! > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 18:07:12 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:07:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001160532.66738.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001180712.8828.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Okay, okay, you and Hal and all the rest have it all figured out, and sneaky crypto-pinko cowards like me are infected with the socialist-liberal mind virus. Now it is all clear. > According to Kerry he will: > - eliminate tax cuts > - send 100,000 more men to Iraq (i.e. draft, sounds > like Lyndon Johnson > here) PLUS hunt down and kill every terrorist on > Earth (with another > 100,000 troops we don't have?) > - protect our gun rights by banning many types of > guns, including > semi-automatic shotguns commonly used in skeet > shooting and bird > hunting, .50 caliber rifles commonly used in big > game hunting, and > semi-automatic pistols commonly used in self > defense. > - eliminate Patriot Act controls on library book > borrowing, but keep > Patriot Act banking and licensing controls that > violate the First > Amendment rights of millions of religious people who > object to the > numerical inventorying of human flesh. > - promote government funding of state controlled > stem cell research, > thus out-competing private funding and private > researchers via the use > of police force, and ensuring that the government > owns the IP created > by this research, thus is able to control its use. > Longevity and > enhancement technologies will be rationed only to > 'essential personnel' > (i.e. elected officials and their thugs). > - introduce a controversial plan to use zoning and > planning ordinances > across the country to economically force tens of > millions of people to > abandon living in rural areas and small towns, to > migrate them to the > cities where populations can be better controlled > (and who they vote > for can be controlled as well). All the abandoned > land will be returned > to wilderness for the reintroduction of wolves, > grizzlies, mountain > lions, and other species across North America, and > used as a land bank > of collateral to back massive welfare state > borrowing paid for by > massive taxes on energy and consumption in the guise > of protecting us > from "Global Warming", but are really intended to > make the EU and Japan > economically competetive with us again.. by dragging > us down. > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile > phone. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 18:19:12 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:19:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001153522.80078.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001181912.99104.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Mike, are you being coy? To reiterate: there probably wont be a draft, but if at some time in the future, perhaps if (just say) five or ten years a WMD attack on America occurs, then mass conscription could follow. Did getting shot in the leg make you a little testy? > Well, this is significantly different from what you > presented before. > In 5-10 years, Bush won't even be in office anymore, > so why are you > presenting it as if it is an issue germaine to the > presidential debate? ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 1 17:37:23 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 10:37:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? Message-ID: <20041001173723.9341557E2A@finney.org> Trend Ologist writes: > Okay, okay, you and Hal and all the rest have it all > figured out, and sneaky crypto-pinko cowards like me > are infected with the socialist-liberal mind virus. > Now it is all clear. I think you have missed the point of my comment. It was not directed towards you or towards any political position in particular. We are all vulnerable to the temptation to force our thoughts into conformance with an overriding ideology. Conservatives, liberals, republicans, democrats, libertarians, socialists, even extropians, all adherents to a system of beliefs are at risk. Objectively, how likely is it that a popular ideology would be so perfectly attuned with your own mind's opinions that you would agree with it in every respect? Given the tremendous variation in our individual natures and experiences, the chances are really very low. And yet so often we find ourselves unconciously adopting certain views simply because they are part of some ideological package. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 18:25:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 11:25:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001175832.44043.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001182510.6317.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > This post is immensely dumbed-down, it is thoroughly > unworthy of you, Mike. I am really sorry, but your illogic just has me confused, and I'm trying to determine some way in which your argument makes any sort of sense. I'm just trying to determine how it is that an allegedly rational person can believe a) being pro-Kerry (who is for a draft) to prevent a draft from being implemented by Bush, is better than b) being against the draft if Bush implements it, though he has said he doesn't want one and we don't need one. THis is the epitome of Michael Badnarik's dismissal of the 'wasted vote' syndrome. A condemned man has a 50% chance of hanging, 45% chance of lethal injection, and 5% chance of escape, yet he earnestly clings to voting for lethal injection because it will hurt less than hanging. Better yet, by your logic, the condemned man votes for hanging because he really wants to be lethally injected but is convinced that the warden is going to execute him with whatever he doesn't choose, just to be mean. The idea of voting for escape never even crosses his mind, he is so well institutionalized into the prison system. Voting for a Kerry draft over a Bush draft is EXACTLY what we are talking about here, despite the reality that only the Democrats have actually called for a draft. If you really oppose the war in Iraq, and really oppose the draft, then your only real choice is Badnarik, unless of course, some other agenda is more important to you. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 18:29:56 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:29:56 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001173723.9341557E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041001182956.10846.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> All i said to Mike was I'm voting for Kerry because i came from a liberal family and consider voting against Bush a form of term limits, but naturally the word socialist comes up; it's surprising 'communist' wasn't thrown in for good measure. I was a flaming pinko in the past- not any more, that's all for young punks who have to learn the hard way. i just want to die and be frozen. > I think you have missed the point of my comment. It > was not directed > towards you or towards any political position in > particular. We are all > vulnerable to the temptation to force our thoughts > into conformance with > an overriding ideology. Conservatives, liberals, > republicans, democrats, > libertarians, socialists, even extropians, all > adherents to a system of > beliefs are at risk. > > Objectively, how likely is it that a popular > ideology would be so > perfectly attuned with your own mind's opinions that > you would agree > with it in every respect? Given the tremendous > variation in our > individual natures and experiences, the chances are > really very low. > And yet so often we find ourselves unconciously > adopting certain views > simply because they are part of some ideological > package. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 1 18:39:43 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:39:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001182510.6317.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041001183943.39337.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Geesh, I made it clear I am a conscientious objector, NOT anti-conscription. In the past I opposed the draft but received such hostility I lost all interest. More and more it appears better to let Americans do what they want overseas. I don't want to complain endlessly or perhaps even bite the Hand That Feeds. > I am really sorry, but your illogic just has me > confused, and I'm > trying to determine some way in which your argument > makes any sort of > sense. > > I'm just trying to determine how it is that an > allegedly rational > person can believe a) being pro-Kerry (who is for a > draft) to prevent a > draft from being implemented by Bush, is better than > b) being against > the draft if Bush implements it, though he has said > he doesn't want one > and we don't need one. > > THis is the epitome of Michael Badnarik's dismissal > of the 'wasted > vote' syndrome. A condemned man has a 50% chance of > hanging, 45% chance > of lethal injection, and 5% chance of escape, yet he > earnestly clings > to voting for lethal injection because it will hurt > less than hanging. > Better yet, by your logic, the condemned man votes > for hanging because > he really wants to be lethally injected but is > convinced that the > warden is going to execute him with whatever he > doesn't choose, just to > be mean. The idea of voting for escape never even > crosses his mind, he > is so well institutionalized into the prison system. > > Voting for a Kerry draft over a Bush draft is > EXACTLY what we are > talking about here, despite the reality that only > the Democrats have > actually called for a draft. > > If you really oppose the war in Iraq, and really > oppose the draft, then > your only real choice is Badnarik, unless of course, > some other agenda > is more important to you. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Express yourself with Y! Messenger! Free. Download > now. > http://messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 19:52:49 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 14:52:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001122552.01b0e470@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: I agree. The way to make America appear better in the eyes of the internatioanl community is to tell everyone in the world that we will do as they think we should. Better yet, let's just say whatever needs to be said to get people to like us and change our minds whenever someone gets mad at us. "We can already see one example of this when we look at the question of > torture. Abu Ghraib has largely vanished from U.S. political discussion, > largely because the administration and its Congressional allies have been > so effective at covering up high-level involvement. But both the > revelations and the cover-up did terrible damage to America's moral > authority. To much of the world, America looks like a place where top > officials condone and possibly order the torture of innocent people, and > suffer no consequences." By the way. Why is it that people think that "torture" and "abuse" are the same thing? Torture is what Saddam did. Our prisoners in Abu Ghraib were abused. I am not condoning this behavior, but it's not like these prisoners were being beheaded with a knife, having limbs cut off, being electrocuted, or starved to death. Those are the images that the word "torture" brings to mind. I don't know if that was your work, or quoted from the article. I hope it isn;t yours. As an excellent writer, you are perfectly aware of the difference between torture and abuse. As a professional writer, I would hope that you would be more careful about how you present your arguments. Such tactics are beneath you. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 12:29 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play > > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/01/opinion/01krugman.html?th=&pagewanted=print&position= > > "As a result of the American military," President Bush declared last week, > "the Taliban is no longer in existence." > > It's unclear whether Mr. Bush misspoke, or whether he really is that > clueless. But his claim was in keeping with his re-election strategy, > demonstrated once again in last night's debate: a president who has done > immense damage to America's position in the world hopes to brazen it out by > claiming that failure is success. > [...] > > We can already see one example of this when we look at the question of > torture. Abu Ghraib has largely vanished from U.S. political discussion, > largely because the administration and its Congressional allies have been > so effective at covering up high-level involvement. But both the > revelations and the cover-up did terrible damage to America's moral > authority. To much of the world, America looks like a place where top > officials condone and possibly order the torture of innocent people, and > suffer no consequences. > > What we need is an effort to regain our good name. What we're getting > instead is a provision, inserted by Congressional Republicans in the > intelligence reform bill, to legalize "extraordinary rendition" - a > euphemism for sending terrorism suspects to countries that use torture for > interrogation. This would institutionalize a Kafkaesque system under which > suspects can be sent, at the government's whim, to Egypt or Syria or Jordan > - and to fight such a move, it's up to the suspect to prove that he'll be > tortured on arrival. Just what we need to convince other countries of our > commitment to the rule of law. > > Most Americans aren't aware of all this. The sheer scale of Mr. Bush's > foreign policy failures insulates him from its political consequences: > voters aren't ready to believe how badly the war in Iraq is going, let > alone how badly America's moral position in the world has deteriorated. > > But the rest of the world has already lost faith in us. In fact, let me > make a prediction: if Mr. Bush gets a second term, we will soon have no > democracies left among our allies - no, not even Tony Blair's Britain. Mr. > Bush will be left with the support of regimes that don't worry about the > legalities - regimes like Vladimir Putin's Russia. > > ============================== > > No, wait, if John Howard's govt returns to power in Australia in a week's > time, Oz will still be panting along behind, eyes tight shut. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Oct 1 20:04:21 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 15:04:21 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001122552.01b0e470@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001150215.01aebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:52 PM 10/1/2004 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: >http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/01/opinion/01krugman.html?th=&pagewanted=print&position= > > > > "As a result of the American military," President Bush declared last week, > > "the Taliban is no longer in existence." > > > > It's unclear whether Mr. Bush misspoke, or whether he really is that > > clueless. >I don't know if >that was your work, or quoted from the article. What, it's really *that hard* to click on the url and find out? Damien Broderick From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com Fri Oct 1 20:31:07 2004 From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 13:31:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <415D9F3F.20505@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041001203107.56462.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com> question here. Many philosphers like Camus, Sartre, and Kierkegard seemed to meditate on the inherent meaninglessness of life assuming there is 'no God.' They seemed to think that without a creator or power greater than the sum of all humanity than the notion of any meaning in life becomes a cosmic joke. Contemporary existentialists like Woody Allen and Ingmar Bergman certainly use this brand of nihilistic atheistic philosophy as a key focus for many of their films. The idea of nihilism certainly frustrates me on a gut level; the fact that people 'freak out' at the notion that if there is no God than all of humanities aspirations, ambitions, creations, and individual and collective thoughts maybe completely transitory and therefore become pointless/meaningless. In Annie Hall the young Woody Allen character seemed to find life meaningless at just the thought of the eventual collapse of the universe. That anthro-biased word 'meaning' that philosphers and laypeople babble on about seems so often to be the key deciding factor for whether people see the glass half full or empty in life. It seems to me that many, if not most people, who are not very religious seem to use distraction through simple pleasure/novelty seeking as a way to shield them from the threat of atheism and therefore nihilism. Most people in the middle therefore have a don't think to hard or else become depressed kind of attitude...this also frustrates me. Now I know that part of existenialist, humanist, and transhumanist thinking is that humans can and do create 'meaning' through our actions and our ability to reason etc. And >humanists seem to believe that our ability to make decisions will one day be augmented and advanced through bio-engineering and nano-technology and so on. They seem to hint at the notion that we can overcome the threat of nihilism through creating a world of amazing complexity through AI, the Singularity and cyborgian super advanced humans, and people like Kurzweil take it even further. The notion of superintelligence itself promises to break the cold barriers of hard determinism and potentially create true free will. I could speculate on both sides of the issue and babble on about free-will vs. detereminsim and whether >humanist level thinking can produce greater free will etc. But I was curious to hear some of your opinions on creating more meaning, true free will, and whether or not other 'old hash' philosophical ideas like nihilism, existentialism, and human level meaning have any validity when dealing with hard materialist science? Is nihilism just a stupid loaded term or does it have any truth to it? David wrote: Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Kurt Schoedel wrote: > > >>The creationists argue that biological systems so complex, irriducibly >>complex that they simply cannot have evolved through natural processes. >>So they say, biology had to have been designed. The problem, of course, >>is that the designer itself is an example of an irriducibly complex >>system that the designer itself had to have been designed by another >>designer, and so on. this is an example of an infinite recursion. When >>you point this out to creationists, they tend to go bananas on you. > > > In your dreams. When I have pointed this out to Christians, they > have just stared at me incomprehendingly as if I had just said > something entirely nonsensical. God is the Creator, the Source of > all, who just IS. A question about the origin of God is MEANINGLESS. > This is entirely OBVIOUS. > > Considering that even (by US standards) enlightened Christians fail > to grasp the problem there, I don't think this will make the least > impression on whacko creationists. > I think a useful strategy against ID would be to emphasize the "alien creator" aspects of their argument. If they are trying to remove God from their arguments, then portray them as arguing that mankind was created by little green men. This is very easy to make fun of, and the only way they can counter it is to bring God back, which makes their argument religious, not scientific. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Devon Fowler -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 1 21:02:52 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:02:52 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001122552.01b0e470@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041001150215.01aebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Yep. I don;t have a subscription.... :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Damien Broderick" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 3:04 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play > At 02:52 PM 10/1/2004 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/01/opinion/01krugman.html?th=&pagewanted=pri nt&position= > > > > > > "As a result of the American military," President Bush declared last week, > > > "the Taliban is no longer in existence." > > > > > > It's unclear whether Mr. Bush misspoke, or whether he really is that > > > clueless. > > >I don't know if > >that was your work, or quoted from the article. > > What, it's really *that hard* to click on the url and find out? > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From amara.graps at gmail.com Fri Oct 1 21:08:55 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:08:55 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] A black paintbrush dotting the globe, making it dotty Message-ID: It's not often that I ramble here, I hope that you don't mind a little bit for this Friday. Sometimes I have a sense that black paintbrush has been swept over the globe; hope, optimism, joy, the richness of variety, that was before, so easy to see around, is submerged. Every day I read the news, and every day I hate it worse. It is a total fear-driven world we are living in now. The politicians are dumber than usual, the wars and killing are more brutal, intelligent people that should know better are only able to see black and white too. a couple of stories I am on the local organizing comittee of a scientific meeting next week, and a few weeks ago, a man from Pakistan wrote to me and asked if he could be invited to our conference. He is vice principal of a girls high school, and he also happens to be taking an online astronomy course from James Cook University in Australia (because Pakistan doesn't have higher degrees for astronomy at the universities there). I put his name into Google, and it was obvious to me that this man loves astronomy. I didn't need convincing whether he was legititimate, but even so, he was very willing to provide whatever proof we needed to verify he was who he said he was. However when I forwarded his letter to the scientific organizing comittee, who make the decisions for things like this, the response from one committee member was that, because he is from Pakistan, and that AlQaeda was headquartered there (the committee member said), then this was too dangerous of a situation, and he recommended not inviting him. More discussions ensued, and it was settled at the end, but I was so suprised to encounter this from intellectuals. Pakistan has a population almost as large as the US, could he honestly believe that the population of that country is filled with terrorists? That country is filled with humans like you and I, who also happen to be facing the same terrorist problems there. People like this astronomy enthusiast should get our understanding, not our ostracization. ----- The second story is one regarding the two Italian girls who were held hostage and released. I wasn't following the huge Italian news about that, but I know that during the last couple of weeks, the whole country was emotionally involved in that story while they were held, and then when the girls were released, more stories on TV and in the newspapers were written about them. What I appreciate about these two girls is that they said the facts and they displayed their respect and care for the Iraqis. We learned that people who are kidnapping there are a large spectrum, from mild to fanatic, and their tactics change accordingly. For these girls, they were taken by the 'mild' variety of kidnappers, who apparently (according to the girls) treated the girls well. And the girls stated this. Moreover, when the girls were 'recovered' they were wearing long black head pieces with respect to the muslims around them. This was shown many times on video. Today I heard that- The Italian government (right side) was apparently bent out of shape that they paid one million euro ransom for getting the girls from 'nice' kidnappers. Moreover, the girls shouldn't have given such awful people so much respect, by stating that they were treated well and by wearing black headdress, the stupid Italian politician said. These dingbats said (publically!) that they should boot the girls back to Iraq to the kidnappers, for the girls' stupid behavior, (that is, for 'respecting' the kidnappers and the Iraqis). The world is completely crazy. ----- The best thing that we can do to get out of this mess is to recognize the human faces. Kevin Sites Blog (in Iraq) You can't get any more sublime than this. http://www.kevinsites.net/ and a little more politics : Why We Must Not Re-elect President Bush http://georgesoros.com:80/index.cfm?Fuseaction=SpeechHTML Amara From amara.graps at gmail.com Fri Oct 1 21:48:40 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:48:40 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mt. St. Helens blows its toupee Message-ID: Mt St. Helens blew a small eruption in its crater: http://olympics.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=domesticNews&storyID=6393375 The Mt. St. Helens Live Cam (was up earlier today, seems to be down for the moment) http://www.fs.fed.us/gpnf/volcanocams/msh/ -- 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 Fri Oct 1 21:58:58 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:58:58 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play Message-ID: Kevin Freels megaquark at hotmail.com: >By the way. Why is it that people think that "torture" and >"abuse" are the same thing? Torture is what Saddam did. Our >prisoners in Abu Ghraib were abused. I am not condoning this >behavior, but it's not like these prisoners were being beheaded >with a knife, having limbs cut off, being electrocuted, or >starved to death. (I wonder how you cannot know this.) Three more navy seals charged with the Abu Ghraib prisoner's deaths (this brings the number of seals charged to seven) http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/25/international/middleeast/25abuse.html catch all of the news http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=tus&q=Abu+Ghraib+navy+seals Many many items here regarding deaths, tortures, rapes: http://www.boingboing.net/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=1&search=Abu+Ghraib (read down to the Seymour Hersh news, especially) Amara From pharos at gmail.com Fri Oct 1 22:18:48 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:18:48 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] A black paintbrush dotting the globe, making it dotty In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:08:55 +0200, Amara Graps wrote: > Today I heard that- > The Italian government (right side) was apparently bent out of > shape that they paid one million euro ransom for getting the > girls from 'nice' kidnappers. Moreover, the girls shouldn't have > given such awful people so much respect, by stating that they > were treated well and by wearing black headdress, the stupid > Italian politician said. These dingbats said (publically!) that > they should boot the girls back to Iraq to the kidnappers, for the > girls' stupid behavior, (that is, for 'respecting' the kidnappers > and the Iraqis). > > The world is completely crazy. > And the next day video footage of 10 new hostages kidnapped in Iraq was broadcast on the al-Jazeera television channel. "More than 140 foreigners have been kidnapped in Iraq, and at least 26 hostages have been killed. Hundreds of Iraqis have been kidnapped since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, mainly by criminal gangs seeking large ransoms". ------------ There are no nice easy solutions to the hostage problem. But I doubt that telling the bandits that we will pay a million USD per hostage will help much. BillK From pharos at gmail.com Fri Oct 1 22:33:23 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:33:23 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001122552.01b0e470@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041001150215.01aebec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 16:02:52 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: > Yep. I don;t have a subscription.... :-) > The site: provides signons and passwords to these free signon sites to bypass the annoyance of having to feed in garbage data to their online forms. If you use Mozilla FireFox (wise move) you can install the Bugmenot extension so that a right-click on the signon box fills it in automatically for you. Easy! On a few sites that are really determined to annoy their readers, there is a mini war going on where they are deleting Bugmenot signons, but new ones are being added faster than they are deleting them. On these sites it might take a few extra clicks to find a signon that works. :) Happy browsing. BillK From dgc at cox.net Sat Oct 2 00:38:40 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 20:38:40 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Drextech computer memory: mechanical vs electronic In-Reply-To: <20041001070417.17911.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041001070417.17911.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <415DF890.60107@cox.net> I am a proponent of nanomechanical computing, on theoretical grounds. It seem to me that the Heisenberg uncertainty principle imposes an upper bound on the density of electronic circuitry (or equivalently, a lower bound on the inter-element spacing.) For example, an attempt to use functionalized nanotubes as wires is constrained by the uncertainty in electron location: if two nanotube wires are too close to each other, an electron that is supposed to be in one of them has a non-trivial probability of showing up in the other one. the only way to avoid this problem is to keep the "wires" far enough apart, but if this spacing is achievable by lithography, then nanoelectronics has nothing to offer. By contrast, nanomechanical elements are each based on at least one proton, and most nanomechanical elements are multiple protons. A proton is 1836 times heavier than an electron, so to a first approximation, nanomechanical elements can be packed at least 1836 times more closely than nanoelectronic elements IF Hiesenburg imposes the upper bound. In practice, the Heisenburg bound is controlling for electronic circuits, I think,. The physical size of a structure is the important constraint for nanomechanical structures, because once you introduce a proton, The Heisenbburg uncertainty in location is smaller than the size of the atom the proton is embedded in, even if it is a simple hydrogen atom. If my (qualitative) analysis is correct, we can basically ignore Hiesenburg for nanomechaics, but Heisenberg (quantum tunneling) is dominant for nanoelectronics. Jeff Davis wrote: >Fast, robust, and a blast from the past, mechanical >memory switch outstrips chip technology > >Nanomechanical memory cell could catapult efforts to >improve data storage > >http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-09/bu-fra093004.php > > > From jef at jefallbright.net Sat Oct 2 01:09:51 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 18:09:51 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <20041001203107.56462.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041001203107.56462.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <415DFFDF.8080806@jefallbright.net> This question is deeply intertwingled with the issues of morality, subjective experience or 'qualia', personal identity, free will, and meaning of life that are discussed on this list. Each of these appears to present a paradox when considered beyond the context of conventional human experience. Each of these issues can be seen in completely rational terms if the context is enlarged (approaching an objective viewpoint) but then there is a sense of loss as each appears to be devoid of meaning, in the terms to which we are accustomed. I had an experience many years ago that I describe as "going through the void and coming out the other side". No drugs were involved, but I had been struggling painfully for years to make sense of these philosophical issues and others. Zen philosophy took me part of the way, with the subjective component, and my scientific rationalist background took me the rest of the way. I realized that each of these issues appears paradoxical only through the tunnel vision of our limited subjective experience, and necessarily so. We can rationally conceive of the larger view, and we see that everything works just as before, but we recoil from the perception that it is utterly mechanical. "Going into the void" means letting go of the illusion of an independent Self, defined by transparent beliefs and values. Coming out the other side means making the journey, looking back, and seeing that all is as it was, but with a new perspective that provides clarity on these issues. Like particle/wave duality, there is a subjective/objective duality of human understanding that underpins each of these apparent paradoxes. What is the meaning of life? In the ultimate, objective sense there is none. But when people ask this question, there's an implicit request for a value statement, inherently subjective. Therefore the practical question becomes "I exist. What can I do to maximize the value of my life experience?" And given that understanding, the quest is (subjectively) fully self-directed. Do I have free will? In the ultimate, objective sense, everything is determined (good thing, too.) From the subjective point of view, the only point of view that matters to the subjective Self, one has complete free will. What is the nature of 'qualia' that makes my subjective experience seem so unique? From the ultimate objective point of view, the experience is just the result of the mechanical functioning of the brain. Anything that can ask itself the question "How do I feel?" will report the answer as an experience. From the subjective point of view, with no other way to experience except via the mechanism be queried, the experience is the total reality. Can there be an objective morality? From the ultimate, objective point of view, there is none. The ultimate law is what works, survives and grows. But from the subjective point of view, which is the only point of view that has value (meaning) to us, our evolutionary and social matrix clearly defines what is Right for us at this moment. As we make choices, those that work will tend to proliferate, and no matter what our starting point, our 'moral' choices will approach, but never reach, an objective basis. In the bigger picture, it all fits -- there is no place for paradox in the universe. But in the perceiving it's all a matter of context. Why does all this matter? We are close to a technological and cooperative cusp that may carry us into a new phase of human existence. Within the intersubjective 'reality' that we humans share, accurate perception leads to actions that work, and are therefore 'good'. Clinging with blind unawareness to all aspects of our evolved nature will result in actions that don't work, and the pain of bumping into the hard edges of reality. The (subjective) choice is ours. - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net > > > Many philosphers like Camus, Sartre, and Kierkegard seemed to meditate > on the inherent meaninglessness of life assuming there is 'no God.' > They seemed to think that without a creator or power greater than the > sum of all humanity than the notion of any meaning in life becomes a > cosmic joke. Contemporary existentialists like Woody Allen and Ingmar > Bergman certainly use this brand of nihilistic atheistic philosophy as > a key focus for many of their films. The idea of nihilism > certainly frustrates me on a gut level; the fact that people 'freak > out' at the notion that if there is no God than all of humanities > aspirations, ambitions, creations, and individual and collective > thoughts maybe completely transitory and therefore become > pointless/meaningless. > > In Annie Hall the young Woody Allen character seemed to find life > meaningless at just the thought of the eventual collapse of the > universe. That anthro-biased word 'meaning' that philosphers and > laypeople babble on about seems so often to be the key deciding factor > for whether people see the glass half full or empty in life. It seems > to me that many, if not most people, who are not very religious seem > to use distraction through simple pleasure/novelty seeking as a way to > shield them from the threat of atheism and therefore nihilism. Most > people in the middle therefore have a don't think to hard or else > become depressed kind of attitude...this also frustrates me. > > Now I know that part of existenialist, humanist, and transhumanist > thinking is that humans can and do create 'meaning' through our > actions and our ability to reason etc. And >humanists seem to > believe that our ability to make decisions will one day be augmented > and advanced through bio-engineering and nano-technology and so on. > They seem to hint at the notion that we can overcome the threat > of nihilism through creating a world of amazing complexity through AI, > the Singularity and cyborgian super advanced humans, and people like > Kurzweil take it even further. > > The notion of superintelligence itself promises to break the cold > barriers of hard determinism and potentially create true free will. I > could speculate on both sides of the issue and babble on about > free-will vs. detereminsim and whether >humanist level thinking can > produce greater free will etc. But I was curious to hear some of your > opinions on creating more meaning, true free will, and whether or not > other 'old hash' philosophical ideas like nihilism, existentialism, > and human level meaning have any validity when dealing with hard > materialist science? Is nihilism just a stupid loaded term or does it > have any truth to it? > > > */David /* wrote: > > Christian Weisgerber wrote: > > Kurt Schoedel wrote: > > > > > >>The creationists argue that biological systems so complex, > irriducibly > >>complex that they simply cannot have evolved through natural > processes. > >>So they say, biology had to have been designed. The problem, of > course, > >>is that the designer itself is an example of an irriducibly complex > >>system that the designer itself had to have been designed by > another > >>designer, and so on. this is an example of an infinite > recursion. When > >>you point this out to creationists, they tend to go bananas on you. > > > > > > In your dreams. When I have pointed this out to Christians, they > > have just stared at me incomprehendingly as if I had just said > > something entirely nonsensical. God ! is the Creator, the Source of > > all, who just IS. A question about the origin of God is MEANINGLESS. > > This is entirely OBVIOUS. > > > > Considering that even (by US standards) enlightened Christians fail > > to grasp the problem there, I don't think this will make the least > > impression on whacko creationists. > > > > > I think a useful strategy against ID would be to emphasize the > "alien creator" aspects of their argument. If they are trying > to remove God from their arguments, then portray them as arguing > that mankind was created by little green men. > This is very easy to make fun of, and the only way they can > counter it is to bring God back, which makes their argument > religious, not scientific. > > From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 2 02:48:18 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:48:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer In-Reply-To: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <003401c4a82a$47e48d30$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Discovery! I am reluctant to use bug spray in my house because I don't know what is in it or what is left behind. Yesterday I was cleaning windows while a fly buzzed around out of reach, bugging me to distraction. He landed, I zzzitzed him with windex. Plain old blue windex, non-toxic, evaporates with no visible trace, utterly harmless to humans. That fly prompty expired! Gone, to that promised land, the great dog turd in the sky. Windex em. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 2 03:55:43 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 20:55:43 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Kevin Freels > Irriducible Complexity > > > > 2. By Darwin, all structures must over any long time be useful for > survival or they gradually vanish. What is the survival advantage of > having God? > > > According to Darwin, yes, but I am not so sure about that... Did Darwin express this thought or is it a derivative? The Origin of Species carries some thoughts that are kinda along these lines, but nearly 2/3 of the book is actually about mate selection. This is a neglected part of evolution education which causes many misunderstandings. Mate selection can lead to many structures that have no apparent survival advantage, and may carry survival disadvantages, such as the peacock's heavy tail plumage. Steven Jay Gould gives an example of a species that apparently went extinct because of mate-selection characteristics that worked against survival of the genome: a particular species of elk that developed monster-huge antlers. The theory is that the does continued to choose the bucks with the largest antlers long after they were too big to use for fighting rival males. Eventually the buck's antlers became so heavy, the does were not able to support their considerable heft during the mating process. The results were predictable. I have posted one of my favorite notions here before, that human brains resulted from mate selection: both genders selected mates with bulbous heads because the big-headed were cute. They looked like babies. The cute tended to mate sooner and more often, giving a slight reproductive advantage to the large-headed, resulting in a totally accidentally smart species. The punchline to all this is that large brains now work against our survival, just as the oversized antlers did for those elk and their ilk. We make war, we use birth control, we build nukes, all of which work against human survival. Before you reject this notion, consider this. Some have argued that our large brains contribute to our survival in the wild, for we outsmart other beasts, etc, so that large brains have a survival advantage. The argument continues that humans have little natural defense: we are not particularly swift runners, we have no claws, no fangs, etc. I would question this to some extent, but even if I allow these notions, we have another natural defense that few humans think about: we taste terrible. Evidence: there are cases where lions or other large carnivores have slain humans, but do not actually devour same. Here in Taxifornia, we have mountain lions. Occasionally one attacks and even slays a human. It is common to find such a victim with exactly one hunk of meat torn away. The hunk of meat is often found nearby, undevoured. The Alaska bear guy who was found dead recently had exactly one leg more or less eaten. The Australian babe carried away by the dingo was evidently not devoured either, for her clothing would have been shredded. If any large carnivore attacks a human, surely that beast was hungry, yet the prey is seldom devoured. My conclusion is that evidently we taste terrible, and probably smell bad to most animals too. So humans could likely survive in the wild alongside large carnivores, even without actually outsmarting them, like the skunk. Friends, we are skunks. Given that, I would argue we are waaaay smarter than we need to be to survive, but more to the point, we are too smart for our own good. We might actually breed better if we were dumber. We would be far less comfortable as individuals, of course, but evolution does not work towards the comfort and survival of the individual. In that sense, large brains are analogous to large antlers. If we manage to grey goo the planet with runaway nanotech, do let me say I told ya so. In advance. spike From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Oct 2 04:48:59 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:48:59 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <415DFFDF.8080806@jefallbright.net> References: <20041001203107.56462.qmail@web50709.mail.yahoo.com> <415DFFDF.8080806@jefallbright.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001213610.029238f0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> One philosopher (an acadamic at UC Santa Cruz, but I don't recall the name) suggests that the quale for two logical circuits or functions are identical if they are logically equivalent. However I can't think of a way to test this.... >This question is deeply intertwingled with the issues of morality, >subjective experience or 'qualia', personal identity, free will, and >meaning of life that are discussed on this list. ================================== = 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 Oct 2 04:51:07 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:51:07 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer In-Reply-To: <003401c4a82a$47e48d30$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> <003401c4a82a$47e48d30$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001214923.029180f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Can you spell 70% Isopropyl Alchohol? (with blue dye and a bit of detergent) Only nontoxic externally on the skin. > Plain old blue windex, non-toxic, >evaporates with no visible trace, utterly harmless to humans. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Oct 2 04:54:29 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 21:54:29 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001215228.02918240@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, matey, a tasteless post indeed ;) (and, now I know why politicians like pork...) (and, mee ooh you woo oo oo grey goo) >we have another natural defense >that few humans think about: we taste terrible. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 2 05:00:23 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 00:00:23 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001214923.029180f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> <003401c4a82a$47e48d30$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.0.3.0.1.20041001214923.029180f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001235857.01ab9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:51 PM 10/1/2004 -0700, Hara Ra wrote: >Can you spell 70% Isopropyl Alchohol? Oh, hell, I'll give it a shot: Seventy percent Isopropyl Alcohol. Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 2 05:15:38 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 22:15:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001214923.029180f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005401c4a83e$db2302c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Hara Ra > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer > > > Can you spell 70% Isopropyl Alchohol? ... {8^D Hara Ra, dont ya just hate it when this happens? {8^D Reminds me of the time when someone posted a comment about xenon forming a compound. I made some wise-ass comment, then later found out someone really had coaxed xenon into a reaction of some kind. Must have been the alchohol talking. Lucky for me you have a good sense of humor. {8^D spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 2 05:48:22 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 22:48:22 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] rather they hadnt done that In-Reply-To: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <000b01c4a843$6db28df0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Occasionally god must hafta just roll on the cloud, laughing his ass off: http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0923-02.htm From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Oct 2 06:04:35 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 23:04:35 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001235857.01ab9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041001165847.19B9E57E2A@finney.org> <003401c4a82a$47e48d30$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.0.3.0.1.20041001214923.029180f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041001235857.01ab9ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001230332.02951b88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, I surely can't... >At 09:51 PM 10/1/2004 -0700, Hara Ra wrote: > >>Can you spell 70% Isopropyl Alchohol? > ~~~~~~~~ > >Oh, hell, I'll give it a shot: > >Seventy percent Isopropyl Alcohol. > >Damien Broderick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 2 06:39:27 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:39:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041002063927.47442.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> NY Times hasn't yet caught on to a modified cypherpunks account they were given back in the "make a bunch of anonymous accounts with username & password 'cypherpunk' or 'cypherpunks'" heyday, years after most such accounts were caught and shut down: cypherpunkss/cypherpunkss (Of course, watch them take notice of that account now.) --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Yep. I don;t have a subscription.... :-) > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Damien Broderick" > To: "ExI chat list" > Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 3:04 PM > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of > play > > > > At 02:52 PM 10/1/2004 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: > > > > > >http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/01/opinion/01krugman.html?th=&pagewanted=pri > nt&position= > > > > > > > > "As a result of the American military," > President Bush declared last > week, > > > > "the Taliban is no longer in existence." > > > > > > > > It's unclear whether Mr. Bush misspoke, or > whether he really is that > > > > clueless. > > > > >I don't know if > > >that was your work, or quoted from the article. > > > > What, it's really *that hard* to click on the url > and find out? > > > > 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 hal at finney.org Sat Oct 2 06:08:56 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:08:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Vitamin supplementation increases mortality risk Message-ID: <20041002060856.702C557E2A@finney.org> There are several news reports appearing about a recent publication in the British medical journal The Lancet which suggests that vitamin supplementation increases mortality risk. The report is available at and an interpretation at See http://www.bugmenot.com for a login and password, or use the free registration available. I got cpmmsh/rpmseam from bugmenot. The new result is a meta-analysis, which means that the researchers did not actually do any experimentation, but rather went back and combined the data from numerous reported trials to see if they could derive a more statistically significant result. Specifically they were looking at studies of vitamin and nutrient supplementation to prevent cancer. Their basic conclusion was that the supplements don't help, with the possible exception of selenium which had a small protective effect. However a surprising result of their meta-analysis was that in fact the supplements (other than selenium) actually increased overall mortality. This result was statistically significant, barely. The interpretation and analysis from the 2nd link above is a little more optimistic. There are some methodological quirks in the way the research was done that make the statistical significance a little questionable. In addition, the researchers only looked at studies where supplements were being tested against cancer, while their mortality results were from all-causes mortality. If they really want to know whether supplements increase general mortality, they should look at all studies which report such results, not just cancer studies. The analysts suggest that this means that the current results should only be considered preliminary until further work is done. It will also be important to identify which particular supplements and dosages are risky. Hal From megaquark at hotmail.com Sat Oct 2 11:43:30 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 06:43:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: It's derived from Darwin. Much as the entire "survival of the fittest" line which Darwin never once mentioned. It would be nice to be able to get into the schols and see exactly what they are teaching. So many people "know" the same misunderstood information, you wonder if it isn;t coming from the schools themselves. As for your brain, mate-selection idea, I kind of like it. I had made some notes about that a while back and never followed up on it. That would go a long way to explain why such an expensive change would occur in terms of energy since the human brain costs far more than we actually get out of it in terns of benefits. Looking at my notes, I also see that it was a possible explanation for the extinction of H. neanderthalensis. Have you had any similar thoughts about that? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 10:55 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity > > > Kevin Freels > > Irriducible Complexity > > > > > > 2. By Darwin, all structures must over any long time be useful for > > survival or they gradually vanish. What is the survival advantage of > > having God? > > > > > According to Darwin, yes, but I am not so sure about that... > > > Did Darwin express this thought or is it a derivative? > The Origin of Species carries some thoughts that are > kinda along these lines, but nearly 2/3 of the book > is actually about mate selection. This is a neglected > part of evolution education which causes many > misunderstandings. Mate selection can lead to many > structures that have no apparent survival advantage, > and may carry survival disadvantages, such as the > peacock's heavy tail plumage. > > Steven Jay Gould gives an example of a species that > apparently went extinct because of mate-selection > characteristics that worked against survival of the > genome: a particular species of elk that developed > monster-huge antlers. The theory is that the does > continued to choose the bucks with the largest antlers > long after they were too big to use for fighting rival > males. Eventually the buck's antlers became so heavy, > the does were not able to support their considerable > heft during the mating process. The results were > predictable. > > I have posted one of my favorite notions here before, > that human brains resulted from mate selection: both > genders selected mates with bulbous heads because the > big-headed were cute. They looked like babies. The > cute tended to mate sooner and more often, giving a > slight reproductive advantage to the large-headed, > resulting in a totally accidentally smart species. > > The punchline to all this is that large brains now > work against our survival, just as the oversized > antlers did for those elk and their ilk. We make > war, we use birth control, we build nukes, all of > which work against human survival. > > Before you reject this notion, consider this. Some > have argued that our large brains contribute to our > survival in the wild, for we outsmart other beasts, > etc, so that large brains have a survival advantage. > The argument continues that humans have little > natural defense: we are not particularly swift runners, > we have no claws, no fangs, etc. > > I would question this to some extent, but even if I > allow these notions, we have another natural defense > that few humans think about: we taste terrible. Evidence: > there are cases where lions or other large carnivores > have slain humans, but do not actually devour same. > Here in Taxifornia, we have mountain lions. Occasionally > one attacks and even slays a human. It is common to > find such a victim with exactly one hunk of meat torn away. > The hunk of meat is often found nearby, undevoured. > The Alaska bear guy who was found dead recently had exactly > one leg more or less eaten. The Australian babe carried > away by the dingo was evidently not devoured either, for > her clothing would have been shredded. > > If any large carnivore attacks a human, surely that beast > was hungry, yet the prey is seldom devoured. My conclusion > is that evidently we taste terrible, and probably > smell bad to most animals too. So humans could likely > survive in the wild alongside large carnivores, even > without actually outsmarting them, like the skunk. > Friends, we are skunks. > > Given that, I would argue we are waaaay smarter than > we need to be to survive, but more to the point, we are > too smart for our own good. We might actually breed > better if we were dumber. We would be far less comfortable > as individuals, of course, but evolution does not work > towards the comfort and survival of the individual. > > In that sense, large brains are analogous to large > antlers. If we manage to grey goo the planet with > runaway nanotech, do let me say I told ya so. In > advance. > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sat Oct 2 12:00:09 2004 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 05:00:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041002120009.7427.qmail@web60504.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > > Kevin Freels > > Irriducible Complexity > > > > > > 2. By Darwin, all structures must over any long > time be useful for > > survival or they gradually vanish. What is the > survival advantage of > > having God? Well depending on what time period you look at there were many. There are fewer today but they are still there. The God meme once served as an explanation for everything unexplained. He was the conceptual blackbox that simulated the universe in the minds of early man. He explained our origin, our purpose, our destiny. He seved many roles in his various names and guises throughout history. Yes he was a crutch for ignorance, but we needed a crutch. I look around me and I still think we need one today. I tutored a student, (she was an older lady but she looked like she might have once been a model/actress), on introductory biology. She was a particularly challenging student because she had serious problems understanding the concept of atoms. She was also stressed because her exam was coming up right after the Rosh-Hashana holidays and she was Jewish. I realized something that day. She could go through her whole life, with the exception of a passing grade in biology, without really understanding what an atom was and be perfectly happy. God was sufficient for her. God serves many functions. The God meme is cited as the authority from which rights extend. Whether it be the Divine Right of medieval kings to rule or the "unalienable rights endowed by the Creator" the Declaration of Independence. Acts of God are still in modern times written into insurance policies as a disclaimer of responsibility. God is a mental crutch and as such is an important and useful meme since most people probably still need a crutch. Some people cannot stare into the abyss of nihilism without going mad. Why take any responsibility at all if there is no final justice? Why stay with your family? Why not just do what your hormones are telling you and run away with that cute redhead? God might be the only thing that keeps some people from acting like the monkey that carries their wallet. > > --- Spike wrote: > I have posted one of my favorite notions here > before, > that human brains resulted from mate selection: both > genders selected mates with bulbous heads because > the > big-headed were cute. They looked like babies. The > cute tended to mate sooner and more often, giving a > slight reproductive advantage to the large-headed, > resulting in a totally accidentally smart species. You are good company, Spike. Geoffery Miller wrote an intersting book about this very subject, although the head size thing is something he overlooks in his book. He talks more about the role that big intelligent brains served in courtship. How us men saying and doing creative things were the equivelent of a peacock fanning its tail to all the prospective mates out there. This led to women's intelligence being selected so she could critique the overtures of her prospective suitors. This is definately viable but can't be the entire cause of the runaway selection for brain size. After fire came about, other survival advantages for a big brain just kept feeding the evolutionary pump. > The punchline to all this is that large brains now > work against our survival, just as the oversized > antlers did for those elk and their ilk. We make > war, we use birth control, we build nukes, all of > which work against human survival. Well... the Serpent slithers on its belly eating dust, and Prometheus served quite a long sentence getting his liver torn out. They have paid their dues, now we have both fire and the knowledge of good and evil, the test is ours and ours alone. Will we pass it? Stay tuned to reality to find out. > > I would question this to some extent, but even if I > allow these notions, we have another natural defense > > that few humans think about: we taste terrible. > Evidence: > there are cases where lions or other large > carnivores > have slain humans, but do not actually devour same. We may taste bad but if we do, it is probably because the predators that thought so, survived to reproduce. How else could you explain Jeffery Daumer? I wonder if the moutain lions would be more amenable to eating us if we came with chianti and fava beans on the side. ;) ===== The Avantguardian "He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind." _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From pharos at gmail.com Sat Oct 2 13:08:38 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 14:08:38 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <005101c4a833$b1777150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 20:55:43 -0700, Spike wrote: > > I would question this to some extent, but even if I > allow these notions, we have another natural defense > that few humans think about: we taste terrible. Evidence: > there are cases where lions or other large carnivores > have slain humans, but do not actually devour same. > Here in Taxifornia, we have mountain lions. Occasionally > one attacks and even slays a human. It is common to > find such a victim with exactly one hunk of meat torn away. > The hunk of meat is often found nearby, undevoured. > The Alaska bear guy who was found dead recently had exactly > one leg more or less eaten. The Australian babe carried > away by the dingo was evidently not devoured either, for > her clothing would have been shredded. > > If any large carnivore attacks a human, surely that beast > was hungry, yet the prey is seldom devoured. My conclusion > is that evidently we taste terrible, and probably > smell bad to most animals too. So humans could likely > survive in the wild alongside large carnivores, even > without actually outsmarting them, like the skunk. > Friends, we are skunks. > I don't think I can agree with this claim. Cannibalism is not that uncommon, and reports say that humans taste like pork. Quote: Subject: Re: The Joys of Cannibalism Date: Mon, 03 May 1999 16:58:37 -0800 ...to those who posted the quaint belief that humans would somehow "taste bad" or that it is preferable to eat herbivores rather than carnivores -- actually, humans are neither herbivores nor carnivores; they are omnivores and their meat tastes about like pig. Other omnivores whose meat is popular with humans include raccoon, opossum, domestic dog, and chickens. Other carnivores whose meat is popular with humans include snakes (they taste just like chicken) and many species of fish. So that "herbivore versus carnivore" distinction in flavour is a false notion, as far as i can tell from experience. I have eaten and enjoyed all of the above named species except domestic dog; although, truth to tell, the only human flesh i have consumed is the customary home-grown placenta (it tastes like fresh liver, but has a slightly crunchy-chewy texture that is quite appealing, like heart or kidney). End quote -------------- Human bones, picked clean, are often found in the wild. You have to allow time for a big cat or a bear to eat a whole human. I would think that all the flesh off one leg would just about fill a bear's stomach. After a day or two the body would be surrounded by animals, birds, insects, all looking for their share. Another alternative protection is smell. Many species smell bad to deter being eaten. But I doubt if this applies to humans. I've never heard reports of a lion attacking a human, then wrinkling it's nose at the pong and retreating. ;) Another protection is distinctive coloration. Wasps, snakes etc., use bright colors to warn away predators. But again, I don't think this applies to humans. But really, the whole principle is wrong, because: Research Shows A Lot Of Things That Taste Bad Are Good For You BillK "I like children, but I couldn't eat a whole one" From jonkc at att.net Sat Oct 2 16:08:09 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 12:08:09 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Vitamin supplementation increases mortality risk References: <20041002060856.702C557E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <014301c4a89a$13163930$eafe4d0c@hal2001> ""Hal Finney"" > It will also be important to identify which particular > supplements and dosages are risky. It said: "the risk of death was found to be 30 percent higher in people taking beta-carotene and vitamin A than for those not taking the combination." John K Clark jonkc at att.net From Ody777 at comcast.net Sat Oct 2 16:27:41 2004 From: Ody777 at comcast.net (Ody777 at comcast.net) Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 16:27:41 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity Message-ID: <100220041627.7957.415ED6FD000C9F8B00001F152200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> ?Spike? wrote (1 Oct): <> But why did the does continue to choose the bucks with the largest antlers? Wouldn?t natural selection tend to eliminate this contra-survival behavior? Wouldn?t the does that preferred smaller antlers mate more often, have more functional offspring, and thus pass on more genes? Rob Masters From jonkc at att.net Sat Oct 2 20:05:30 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 16:05:30 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <100220041627.7957.415ED6FD000C9F8B00001F152200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Message-ID: <001c01c4a8bb$6b0a3bc0$f7ff4d0c@hal2001> > But why did the does continue to choose the bucks with the > largest antlers? Because it?s hardwired into her genes that enormous antlers are sexy. > Wouldn?t natural selection tend to eliminate this > contra-survival behavior? It did eliminate this behavior, it eliminated it big time, they went extinct. > Wouldn?t the does that preferred smaller antlers mate more often, > have more functional offspring, and thus pass on more genes? Yes, a mutant female who thought smaller antlers were sexy would indeed have an advantage, but advantageous mutations do not show up on demand; the big antler liking gene drove the species into extinction before a favorable mutation showed up that would have reversed antler race madness. A female elk needs to judge, sometimes quickly, the health and fitness of a potential mate; up to a point antler size is probably a pretty good standard for doing that, but then things got ridiculous. There is a parallel in our own species, for millions of years a gene that told us to eat as much sweet and fatty foods as we can get our hands on worked great for survival, but today food is so plentiful people become fat and get heart attacks. We know it?s bad for us but it just tastes so damn good. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From dgc at cox.net Sat Oct 2 20:26:50 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Sat, 02 Oct 2004 16:26:50 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <001c01c4a8bb$6b0a3bc0$f7ff4d0c@hal2001> References: <100220041627.7957.415ED6FD000C9F8B00001F152200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> <001c01c4a8bb$6b0a3bc0$f7ff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <415F0F0A.8010003@cox.net> John K Clark wrote: > >There is a parallel in our own species, for millions of years a gene that >told us to eat as much sweet and fatty foods as we can get our hands on >worked great for survival, but today food is so plentiful people become fat >and get heart attacks. We know it?s bad for us but it just tastes so damn >good. > > > But this behavior has little evolutionary effect. Most consequences of consumption of fatty and sweet foods occur after the age of reproduction, and is therefore not directly selected against. The effects on the next generation are mixed: Granddad has a heart attack. Dad gets his inheritance in time to actually improve Kid's life during the formative years. Or, the inheritance is smaller because Granddad kicked the bucket before retiring. Or, the inheritance is bigger because the old geezer lived well into retirement and spent the money on himself. From jonkc at att.net Sat Oct 2 20:45:08 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 16:45:08 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design andIrriducible Complexity References: <100220041627.7957.415ED6FD000C9F8B00001F152200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net><001c01c4a8bb$6b0a3bc0$f7ff4d0c@hal2001> <415F0F0A.8010003@cox.net> Message-ID: <005101c4a8c0$bd0b2d30$f7ff4d0c@hal2001> "Dan Clemmensen" > But this behavior has little evolutionary effect. Obviously, otherwise the behavior would no longer exist. > The effects on the next generation are mixed: > Granddad has a heart attack. Dad gets his inheritance > in time to actually improve Kid's life during the > formative years. Irrelevant. There is no evidence that rich people have more children than poor people; if anything the reverse is true. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From megaquark at hotmail.com Sat Oct 2 23:08:56 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 18:08:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <100220041627.7957.415ED6FD000C9F8B00001F152200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Message-ID: > But why did the does continue to choose the bucks with the largest antlers? Wouldn't natural selection tend to eliminate this contra-survival behavior? Wouldn't the does that preferred smaller antlers mate more often, have more functional offspring, and thus pass on more genes? > > > Rob Masters Natural selection does not say that species won;t develop that develop behaviors like this. It only says that those that do will be come extinct leaving only the species that do not do this. In this case, that is exactly what happened. The behaviors themselves come about for other reasone such as random mutation, genetic drift, etc. For the species to come about at all, large antler selection probably had an advantage at some point when small antlers were the norm and the few who had large antlers were larger and more capable of producing viable offspring for some reason or another. Eventually the species evolves to include the selection of the larger antlers as part of normal behavior because this helps the species. After a time though, the everyone's antlers are large enough to solve the problem. The old problem has been neutralized, but the solution (picking mates with the largest antlers) is still there. It slowly becomes a handicap and leads to the demise of the species. A lesson can be learned from this. :-) From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 2 23:47:53 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 00:47:53 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] clash of values In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041002234753.4254.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Not only will you young bucks will find 'resistance' (a prim little word) but everything you do will be undermined by those whose values are entirely different from ours. This 'resistance' will continue through the rest of this decade and into the next. So being 'pro-active' will avail you nothing. But go ahead, sharpen your antlers, knock yourselves out. Count me out. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From megaquark at hotmail.com Sat Oct 2 23:54:41 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 18:54:41 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design andIrriducible Complexity References: <100220041627.7957.415ED6FD000C9F8B00001F152200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net><001c01c4a8bb$6b0a3bc0$f7ff4d0c@hal2001> <415F0F0A.8010003@cox.net> Message-ID: > John K Clark wrote: > > > > >There is a parallel in our own species, for millions of years a gene that > >told us to eat as much sweet and fatty foods as we can get our hands on > >worked great for survival, but today food is so plentiful people become fat > >and get heart attacks. We know it?s bad for us but it just tastes so damn > >good. > > > > > > > But this behavior has little evolutionary effect. Most consequences of > consumption of fatty > and sweet foods occur after the age of reproduction, and is therefore > not directly selected > against. The effects on the next generation are mixed: Granddad has a > heart attack. Dad gets > his inheritance in time to actually improve Kid's life during the > formative years. Or, the > inheritance is smaller because Granddad kicked the bucket before > retiring. Or, the inheritance > is bigger because the old geezer lived well into retirement and spent > the money on himself. > It is difficult to use humans as an example since medical science does an end run around natural selection. Infant mortality in the US is extremely low. Children who would have died 100 years ago in the young years through impaired immune systems now live to pass those genes on to their children. It's all fine as long as we can maintain a sanitary environment. Natural selection works in some strange ways. One only has to look at Tay-Sachs in Askenazi Jews or Sickel Cell in African populations to see that. Hypertension in AMeriocan blacks may well be attributed to a gene(s) that help the body to retain salt. Many slaves died on the ships on the way to the US and those that survived may have been able to retain salt better in their bodies or have less need for it. The few survivors would have been more prone to hypertension because of it. John's parallel, although not the best example, is still a good one. It's not something likely to lead to our extinction and I don;t think he meant it that way. It is a holdover from our ancestry when that behavior was necessary at the time, but now hurts us. Grandparents have nothing to do with it. Since people only needed to live to 30 or so years, they could eat all they wanted when available. This ensured they wouldn't starve when times were tough. Those that could store more food would live through famine times better. Only now does it present a problem as we expect to live longer lives. From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 3 06:57:03 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sat, 2 Oct 2004 23:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001182956.10846.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041003065703.21583.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> Yo, Trend, I notice your email address places you in the UK. Yet you say you're voting in the US elections. This suggests--at least one possibility--that you are a US expat in the UK. Rather than guess, could you clear things up? What you'd written below, trial by Lorrey and all, resonated, seeming similar to my own,... After the torchlight red on sweaty faces, After the frosty silence in the gardens After the agony in the stony places The shouting and the crying Prison and palace and reverberation Of thunder of spring over distant mountains, He who was living is now dead We who were living are now dying With a little patience, Planning to be frozen. Anyway, if we should ever meet, I'd be pleased to buy you a beer. Best, Jeff Davis "For centuries our race has built on false assumptions. If you build a fantasy based on false assumptions and continue to build on such a fantasy, your whole existence becomes a lie which you implant in others who are too lazy or too busy to question it's truth." - Michael Moorcock --- Trend Ologist wrote: > All i said to Mike was I'm voting for Kerry because > i > came from a liberal family and consider voting > against > Bush a form of term limits, but naturally the word > socialist comes up; it's surprising 'communist' > wasn't > thrown in for good measure. > I was a flaming pinko in the past- not any more, > that's all for young punks who have to learn the > hard > way. i just want to die and be frozen. _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 3 13:42:33 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 14:42:33 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041003065703.21583.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041003134233.48266.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No, live in America. As an anglophile, when i got this address i chose 'english-speaking, British', to receive adverts from Old Blighty. BTW Lorrey is a great foil, how many old soldiers have we communicated with who know so much about science? >Jeff Davis wrote: > Yo, Trend, > > I notice your email address places you in the UK. > Yet > you say you're voting in the US elections. This > suggests--at least one possibility--that you are a > US > expat in the UK. > > Rather than guess, could you clear things up? > > What you'd written below, trial by Lorrey and all, > resonated, seeming similar to my own,... > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 3 14:37:01 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 15:37:01 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gandhi's antipode Message-ID: <20041003143701.61526.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Read the second paragraph of 'Pacifism As Mental Illness', it is diametrically opposed to Gandhism: http://dogchurch.org/discus/messages/118/167.html ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 3 18:08:15 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 11:08:15 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Cool! Last time this topic came up, there were other important things going on. Now the crew seems more in the mood to discuss evolution. I tried on some of these memes last time, so some of this essay has repetition, but there is also some new material and some actual signal among the silliness. Evolution is often misunderstood because caricatures of the theory only deal with half of Darwin's revolutionary ideas, stressing survival selection and neglecting mate selection. The comment is often made that modern technology allows an end run around natural selection because nearly all babies survive. But the same technology that supresses survival selection hands us the opportunity to throw mate selection into high gear. In slow-breeding mammals, such as humans, mate selection would be far more effective in modifying the genome than would survival selection. It appears that humans are changing anatomically far faster than other mammal species. Consider the diminutive suits of armor used by humans a mere 20 generations ago. Most of the difference can be explained by better modern diets. But it is also possible that modern humans prefer taller or larger mates. Consider also that we humans have structures that are larger than necessary for optimal survival. Go get your Playboy magazine for excellent examples of mate-selection- optimized humans. (Or Playgirl, if appropriate. What magazines do bisexuals read? Playperson?) Notice that the attractiveness-optimized female humans have breasts that are larger than necessary to feed their infants. The optimized males have larger than necessary pectorals, almost comically enlarged. OK, put the magazine away and pay attention. Hey! Stop that! Nowthen, ponder the human body from the point of view of a mechanical engineer. A well designed machine is stressed evenly, so that no single part will wear out long before everything else. But Cadillacs had tail fins, strictly for decoration. My notion is that human bodies have both over"designed" parts and underdesigned. Which? I have already cited female breasts and male pecs. But the most outstanding example of overdesign would be our rears. Both genders seem to prefer mates with protruding buns, resulting in those curvatious protruding asses. Compare with other mammals, particularly the anatomically similar chimps. They don't really have butts like ours. Whenever you get a chance to go on a 30 km hike, what body parts are sore the next couple days? Your quads, mostly. The vastus medialis, the vastis lateralis, the rectus femoris, in the lower leg the tibialis anterior, which is doing so much work when we hike. But not the gluteus maximus. It is hard to rip the gluts! Even if we want to. Those muscles are larger and stronger than they need to be. It strengthens my point that we have popular exercise tapes called Buns of Steel, yet they really don't work all that well, as evidenced by the fact that few people ever get them, and those that do need to work for hours at very awkward excersizes to make it happen. If you need more proof, try this experiment. squeeze the quads and walk across the room. Feel them working? Now repeat the experiment pinching your butt cheeks as you walk across the room. (Do not let your neighbors see you doing this.) Feel how relaxed they are? If that doesn't convince you, have your spouse lose the extra clothing and grab her (or his) buns and have her (or him) walk in front of you. This may end up taking an hour or two, but today is Sunday and you have nothing better to do. (Is there ever anything better to do?) We also have underdesigned parts. Human knees are a weak spot. Ideally they would have more surface area, so that the pressure would be reduced. Yet we humans have chosen slender legs and nearly invisible knees. Imagine what larger knees would look like on a standing human: big knobby things, oy vey! We have evolved underdesigned knees, that eventually fail on most of us, especially if we run. The point of this essay is to introduce the notion that we developed large brains for the same reason that we developed large asses. This isn't a new idea, but I do have a new twist on it. Geoffrey Miller, in The Mating Mind, proposes that large brained individuals in a protohuman population had intelligence-related abilities that made them more desireable mates. I propose that this mechanism is only part of the reason we have large heads. The other, and perhaps larger part, is simply that large headed protohumans were cuter, because they more closely resembled human infants. Thus they enjoyed more mating opportunities their entire reproductive lives. OK, I am still on familiar ground here, so now starts the new idea, that just occurred to me recently. It is well understood that survival selection applies only to the individual. However my notion is that survival selection and mate selection, when taken together, can operate on the genome at the group level. When that concept is understood, it has great explanatory power. Consider that isolated populations of modern humans can develop odd notions of beauty, expressed in various body modifications such as stretching the neck with rings, flattening the heads, binding the feet, our western practices of tattooing and body piercing, etc. A striking example is an African tribe that decided that wide hips were cool. Evidently both genders preferentially selected wide-hipped mates, resulting in this group with anomalously small trunks with enormous hips. Perhaps someone here knows the name of that hip group. Now consider an isolated population of protohumans, at the technology level approximately at the level of modern chimps: they hurled stones as weapons, they occasionally used sticks as a striking instrument, but had not controlled fire or made weapons. What if that isolated population decided that big heads were cute, analogous to the big-hip people. Both genders began preferentially selecting big-headed mates, not for their intelligence or ability, but strictly for their looks. Then, over a relatively short time, perhaps as little as a thousand generations, we could imagine the development of a group of large- headed protohumans, analogous to the modern wide-hipped people. Here's the punchline: if this group of large-headed protohumans did develop, we can imagine that they were accidentally more intelligent than their small- brained cousins, making them more ideal candidates to discover and master two very important early technologies: the control of fire and the technique of hurling a stick lengthwise, the way a spear is hurled. A group of fire and spear using protohumans would have a biiiig survival advantage over other groups of protohumans without those two technologies. If that is the case, then we have an example of natural selection working at the group level. But this only works if we use the term natural selection to include both survival selection and mate selection. If we allow natural selection to work at the group level, we suggest some possible solutions to the more difficult puzzles of evolution. spike From sentience at pobox.com Sun Oct 3 20:20:35 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 16:20:35 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> Spike wrote: > > If that is the case, then we have an example of > natural selection working at the group level. But > this only works if we use the term natural selection > to include both survival selection and mate selection. > If we allow natural selection to work at the group > level, we suggest some possible solutions to the > more difficult puzzles of evolution. Group selection may be the wrong word for this, since it's usually taken to imply a conflict between individual-level selection and group-level selection with the group selection pressure winning. What you're talking about is an isolated subpopulation undergoing genetic drift augmented by sexual selection, that then pops up and outcompetes other subpopulations. That's not 'group selection' as usually defined because there's no obvious conflict between group-level selection pressure and individual-level selection pressure. No one denies that groups (such as human tribes) are occasionally the vehicles selected upon; the difficult part is for group-level selection pressure to ever defeat a countervailing individual selection pressure. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 3 22:34:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 15:34:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Design and IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041003150615.0292e3f8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> >the attractiveness-optimized female humans have breasts >that are larger than necessary to feed their infants. The >optimized males have larger than necessary pectorals, almost >comically enlarged. >Not just pectorals. I am sure an effecive penis enlargement would be worth >billions) >most outstanding example of overdesign would be our rears. >Both genders seem to prefer mates with protruding buns, resulting >in those curvatious protruding asses. > >The point of this essay is to introduce the notion that >we developed large brains for the same reason that we >developed large asses. A >striking example is an African tribe that decided that >wide hips were cool. group with >anomalously small trunks with enormous hips. Perhaps >someone here knows the name of that hip group. Hottentots In a hot climate fat storage was in the rear (there's a word steatopyga ('stee-uh-toe-PIE-guh) for this. Google Images for "big Black Booty" and here and there you will find examples. I read once that some of the Hottentot women had 2-3 wide cheeks and needed help to stand up. If you have a good image of same email it to me (privately) Attached is a little 11K jpg of same. The end of armor came with the crossbow, whose quarrel could penetrate any wearable armor. Only recently the kevlar type vests have came back, but they can't withstand rifle shots, only pistols. Remember also in the armor days it was mostly iron. Steel was reserved for swords, and carbon steel was both very rare and brittle. A knight unseated from his horse could not afford the fragmentation of carbon steel. In the military, the body vests are mostly for low velocity shrapnel and low caliber assault weapons. they are useless against sniper fire. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: stea.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 9301 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From bjk at imminst.org Mon Oct 4 00:21:19 2004 From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein) Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 19:21:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update Message-ID: <4160977F.8070009@imminst.org> IMMINST FILM PROJECT Film Title: "Exploring Life Extension" -- http://www.imminst.org/film Film Status: In Production Film Style: Educational Documentary Participating Interviewees: 50+ individuals in 14 different States Miles to be traveled: 12,000+ from Sept to Dec 2004 Film Editing: Jan - Mar 2005 Film Release: Apr 2005 Film Financial Support: $5,000 - James Halperin $5,000 - David Kekich $500 - Thor Christensen Contact Bruce Klein - bjk at imminst.org - to make a tax-deductible contribution. David Kekich, Peter Voss, Louise Gold, Michael Roy Ames and David Pizer have thus far graciously provided overnight accommodations to help defray film travel expenses. There have been ten interviews completed thus far with pictures found here: Pictures of individuals filmed thus far: http://www.imminst.org/film.php#Far IMMINST EVENT ImmInst Social: Ramada Inn, near Hartford, CT -- Sat Dec 4, 2004 ImmInst Chair, Bruce Klein will speak about the new ImmInst book, "The Scientific Conquest of Death," and the ImmInst Film Project, "Exploring Life Extension." Contact Bruce bjk at imminst.org to reserve your free room for Dec 4. That's right, FREE room. An anonymous ImmInst supporter has reserved a number of rooms for this event. See: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4220 EVENT Accelerating Change Conference (ACC) -- Physical Space, Virtual Space, and Interface Stanford University, Palo Alto CA - November 5 - 7, 2004 http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4299 ImmInst Chair, Bruce Klein will be at ACC with video camera in hand for the ImmInst Film Project. ARTICLE The Problem with "Immortality" by Reason The problem with immortality is really a problem with people, and it extends to any discussion of the topic. As soon as you mention immortality outside of a religious context you are in danger of being lumped in with the vocal wingnut and oddball fringe... http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=106&t=4298 ABOUT IMMINST Immortality Institute - For Infinite Lifespans Mission - End the Blight of Involuntary Death Members: 1,713 - Full Members: 103 From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Oct 4 06:16:12 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2004 23:16:12 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> Message-ID: <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Eliezer Yudkowsky > > Spike wrote: > > > > If that is the case, then we have an example of > > natural selection working at the group level... > > Group selection may be the wrong word for this, since it's > usually taken to imply a conflict between individual-level selection and > group-level selection with the group selection pressure winning. What > you're talking about is an isolated subpopulation undergoing genetic drift... > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky... What we will eventually need to really understand this is a good computer simulation of evolution. Without the simulation, we are merely armchair philosophers, Greeks arguing over the number of teeth in the horse. I had a professor in college who worked on the problem of Prandtl-Meyer flow, which is used to explain why the exhaust plumes of jet engines display the characteristic diamond patterns when the pilot gets hard on the gas: http://www.visi.com/~jweeks/aircraft/mig100.gif In those days, the NASTRAN models didn't predict the diamond patterns. He got his PhD by tweaking up the computer flow models until they correctly predicted the diamonds, angles, conditions under which they would appear, etc. I have a notion that we will understand group selection vs individual survival selection only when we can develop the software to simulate evolution, and get it at least as good as the diamond pattern predicting compressible flow computer models. The biologists have done their thing. Now for evolutionary theory to move forward, the computer guys need to step up to the plate. As an aside, a sufficiently sophisticated simulation of evolution, running on a sufficiently powerful computer or cluster of computers, should be able to predict a singularity. Perhaps it will answer some singularity questions I have been puzzling over for years: is the Yudkowsky hard-takeoff model the only possible singularity? What would happen if humanity somehow discovered the software needed to create AI, in an alternate universe where there were only 100 computers in the world? What if there were a billion slow computers, such as 286 vintage machines? Or an M-brain, a quadrillion pentium class processors separated by an average spacing of about a meter? Are there other scenarios that make sense, such as a saturated-feedback-loop response-damped singularity? How about an unknown mechanism kicking in, somehow causing an anti-singularity? Could we have an oscillating AI software battle for control going on inside the machines, of which computer users would be completely unaware? Would it matter if we somehow discovered uploading before the singularity? Would a sufficiently sophisticated simulation of evolution actually cause a singularity? Perhaps the work of Eliezer and the SAIA can be viewed as a kind of evolution simulator that starts in the present and moves forward in time. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Oct 4 07:19:45 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 02:19:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041004021726.01a005a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Talk about buggy code, and conserved introns, and all. What the hell is *happening* in that stuttering, jammed, gappy, ill-spelled subject line? Where's the cruel culling hand of evolution when you need it? Damien Broderick From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 4 07:37:57 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 00:37:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041004002145.0291c740@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Group evolution is a very poorly defined term. A species is defined as a collection of organisms which can only reproduce among themselves. Even this definition has its flaws, there is a bird found in the Himalyas which at any longitude mates with its own kind, but birds taken from Pakistan cannot mate with ones taken from Burma. Albatrosses go around the world, but there is an overlap zone where two types appear which cannot reproduce, but are the ends of a continum. Evolution can be applied to collections of organisms which interbreed but groups in humans have enormous variety, and are often defined by culture, which is a mementic kind of thing. Memes are too ill defined to say much about them, wheras DNA has a very specific physical definition in the base pairs. Also, groups do not reproduce, their members do. I would rather say a group's characteristics unfold than evolve. And, organisms have elements with definite boundaries which we call bodies. I can't say the same of a group. Finally we have to be careful here - the usual folk meaning of evolution implies positive change. Actual evolution is persistence and survival. Remember the rat and the cockroach, whose forms are so successful they haven't changed in ages. Their evolution is to remain the same..... > > Eliezer Yudkowsky > > > > Spike wrote: > > > > > > If that is the case, then we have an example of > > > natural selection working at the group level... ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 4 07:21:37 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 00:21:37 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Rocket Diamonds In-Reply-To: <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041004001746.028e5868@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Here is an excellent page with MUCH better pictures: http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aerojava/rocket3.htm BTW these patterns also are seen in rocket exhausts. >I had a professor in college who worked on the problem >of Prandtl-Meyer flow, which is used to explain why >the exhaust plumes of jet engines display the characteristic >diamond patterns when the pilot gets hard on the gas: >spike > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 4 07:41:16 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 00:41:16 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity combined with oxymoronic pseudo political extrapolative thinking among a group that thinks it is evolving somewhwere singular. Doh Doh double Doh o do h In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041004021726.01a005a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041004021726.01a005a8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041004003843.02926760@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> So I wrote two posts, and changed the ugly subject line. And this one tooo.... At 12:19 AM 10/4/2004, you wrote: >Talk about buggy code, and conserved introns, and all. What the hell is >*happening* in that stuttering, jammed, gappy, ill-spelled subject line? >Where's the cruel culling hand of evolution when you need it? > >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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 13:08:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 06:08:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bone for the Extropian Wolves In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001091331.0290e900@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004130859.39612.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hara Ra wrote: > A friend wrote: > > In my not always so humble opinion though, "hope" is not the greatest > of bio-engineering strategies. > > And I replied: > >Both 'hope' and 'faith' carry strong subtexts of 'death' and'failure'. > Prior to the scientific age, the associated social and religious > mechanisms did promote slightly better chances of survival by > these means. Religious conversion and mystical insight (which I > have experienced) both operate by making the real world irrelevant > and an imaginary 'higher' world the ultimate reality. It has to be > ultimate to be effective, and the main effect is to delete the fear > response, freeing one for a wider field of action, often contrary > to one's social programming. "God said so" is a > panacea for ignoring social constraints. Evolution only conserves > survivability, so we are saddled with these Stone Age mechanisms, > which do work in their limited way. They work because pure rationality embodied in scientific logic is a constrained set by which to view the world. As Natasha, myself, Ramez, and others have posted on occasion, the history books are littered by the pronouncements by the best scientific minds that this or that was impossible, only to be proven wrong by those whose want, drive, NEED, for something to be true, to become real, was so great that they ignored the best scientific information and made reality so. This demand to believe in a future reality which is better than the one we live in now is possible the greatest motivator for human progress, and is at the core of the extropian ethic. Only a pessimist would say that hope and faith subtext death and failure. To me, they subtext transcending, avoiding, evading, or otherwise conquering them. An extropian beleives that walls are made to be gone over, under, around, or through, when the wall itself doesn't serve the extropians purpose. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 13:09:23 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 06:09:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] A black paintbrush dotting the globe, making it dotty In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041004130923.81705.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:08:55 +0200, Amara Graps wrote: > > Today I heard that- > > The Italian government (right side) was apparently bent out of > > shape that they paid one million euro ransom for getting the > > girls from 'nice' kidnappers. > > The world is completely crazy. > > > > And the next day video footage of 10 new hostages kidnapped in Iraq > was broadcast on the al-Jazeera television channel. > > > > "More than 140 foreigners have been kidnapped in Iraq, and at least > 26 hostages have been killed. Hundreds of Iraqis have been kidnapped > since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, mainly by criminal gangs > seeking large ransoms". Ah, we have a profitable industry going there. Congratulations, Europe. Apparently appeasing pacifist socialists CAN create jobs... Hey, if we all hold each other hostage, and we pay each other a million EU in ranson, would that increase or decrease the value of the EU on currency markets, and thus make European companies more competetive with the US? Would you call acts which destroy civil trust an 'anti-trust action'?? Is anti-libertarian europe endorsing the de-monopolized market of violence in Iraq? Would you say that the US military policy of disarming civilians in Iraq was decreasing or increasing violent crime there? Would you say that the open immigration policy in effect is improving or deteriorating social stability and crime in Iraq? Would you say that Europe has adopted a policy of being "not in the business of nation building" when it comes to Iraq? Oh, I'm just having too much fun with this situation here.... Rand, Rothbard, and Hayek are quaking in their graves at the ironies... ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 13:13:23 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 06:13:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <20041003143701.61526.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004131323.92543.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Read the second paragraph of 'Pacifism As Mental > Illness', it is diametrically opposed to Gandhism: > http://dogchurch.org/discus/messages/118/167.html Proud pacifists always seem to conclude that Gandhism is pure pacifism, when it is not. Gandhism is a specific strategy of non-violent resistance that ONLY functions when the oppressor state has a free press and a populace that both controls who sits in government and considers themselves moral and compassionate people. Gandhism does not work with amoral regiemes, with states lacking in public virtue, open channels of communication, or a means by which the public can hold the state responsible. That many pacifists continue to cling to such a misimpression so desperately is definitely a sign of mental defect of some sort. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 4 13:21:27 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:21:27 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <20041004131323.92543.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004132127.58941.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> 'Pure' pacificists don't exist, save for the Jains, who may be extinct. BTW, I'm a conscientious objector, not a real pacifist, I have already fought in self-defense, the time in the car with the choker. A true pacifist would sacrifice his or her life rather than fight back against deadly force, correct? > Proud pacifists always seem to conclude that > Gandhism is pure pacifism, > when it is not. Gandhism is a specific strategy of > non-violent > resistance that ONLY functions when the oppressor > state has a free > press and a populace that both controls who sits in > government and > considers themselves moral and compassionate people. > Gandhism does not > work with amoral regiemes, with states lacking in > public virtue, open > channels of communication, or a means by which the > public can hold the > state responsible. > > That many pacifists continue to cling to such a > misimpression so > desperately is definitely a sign of mental defect of > some sort. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Mon Oct 4 13:31:37 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 09:31:37 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bone for the Extropian Wolves In-Reply-To: <20041004130859.39612.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041004130859.39612.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <416150B9.9010604@pobox.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > > They work because pure rationality embodied in scientific logic is a > constrained set by which to view the world. As Natasha, myself, Ramez, > and others have posted on occasion, the history books are littered by > the pronouncements by the best scientific minds that this or that was > impossible, only to be proven wrong by those whose want, drive, NEED, > for something to be true, to become real, was so great that they > ignored the best scientific information and made reality so. Oh, now that's just plain untrue. Do you think the Wright Brothers ignored physics? What distinguished the Wright Brothers from their competitors was that the Wright Brothers were competent physicists, did calculations from first principles, tested their designs experimentally, invented new measuring instruments (such as the wind tunnel), discovered an error in an established scientific constant (the coefficient of air pressure) when their calculations failed to match experiment, and, finally, flew. The Wright Brothers won because they understood how to employ abstract physics in the service of flight, not because they were plucky or defiant or driven. As for the folks building desperation device after desperation device, hoping against hope it would soar, they are the comical idiots you see in that famous movie of would-be flying machines, with the giant umbrella and so on. As for those "scientific" minds who declared heavier-than-air flight impossible, they didn't run the numbers. Science doesn't work for eminent scientists, or people with doctorates. Science works for people who work the numbers. The Wright Brothers worked the numbers. The people saying flight was impossible didn't. Hence the triumph of human ingenuity. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From megaquark at hotmail.com Mon Oct 4 13:29:50 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 08:29:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity References: <002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: The problem with a computer simulation is that the model will not accurately predict anything. Much of natural selection rests on blind chance. If not for a big rock smacking the Earth 65 mya, things would be very different right now. Such random events contribute even more as the scale gets smaller. Small events such as land slides, volcanos, floods, earthquakes, etc that lead to isolation of groups can lead to speciation and divergence. Unless you could accurately predict all of these types of random events over hundreds of millions of years, it would be totally worthless. If you could do such a thing, it would be fairly simple to know the weather in Albuquerque, NM at 2:29pm on November 5, 453,686 CE. As it is, we can;t even predict a hurricane's landfall until a couple of days before. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 1:16 AM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity > > Eliezer Yudkowsky > > > > Spike wrote: > > > > > > If that is the case, then we have an example of > > > natural selection working at the group level... > > > > Group selection may be the wrong word for this, since it's > > usually taken to imply a conflict between individual-level selection > and > > group-level selection with the group selection pressure winning. What > > > you're talking about is an isolated subpopulation undergoing genetic > drift... > > -- > > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky... > > What we will eventually need to really understand this > is a good computer simulation of evolution. Without > the simulation, we are merely armchair philosophers, > Greeks arguing over the number of teeth in the horse. > > I had a professor in college who worked on the problem > of Prandtl-Meyer flow, which is used to explain why > the exhaust plumes of jet engines display the characteristic > diamond patterns when the pilot gets hard on the gas: > > http://www.visi.com/~jweeks/aircraft/mig100.gif > > In those days, the NASTRAN models didn't predict the > diamond patterns. He got his PhD by tweaking up the > computer flow models until they correctly predicted the > diamonds, angles, conditions under which they would > appear, etc. > > I have a notion that we will understand group selection > vs individual survival selection only when we can develop > the software to simulate evolution, and get it at least > as good as the diamond pattern predicting compressible > flow computer models. The biologists have done their > thing. Now for evolutionary theory to move forward, > the computer guys need to step up to the plate. > > As an aside, a sufficiently sophisticated simulation > of evolution, running on a sufficiently powerful > computer or cluster of computers, should be able > to predict a singularity. Perhaps it will answer > some singularity questions I have been puzzling over > for years: is the Yudkowsky hard-takeoff model > the only possible singularity? What would happen if > humanity somehow discovered the software needed to > create AI, in an alternate universe where there were > only 100 computers in the world? What if there were > a billion slow computers, such as 286 vintage machines? > Or an M-brain, a quadrillion pentium class processors > separated by an average spacing of about a meter? > Are there other scenarios that make sense, such as > a saturated-feedback-loop response-damped singularity? > How about an unknown mechanism kicking in, somehow causing > an anti-singularity? Could we have an oscillating AI > software battle for control going on inside the machines, > of which computer users would be completely unaware? > Would it matter if we somehow discovered uploading > before the singularity? Would a sufficiently sophisticated > simulation of evolution actually cause a singularity? > > Perhaps the work of Eliezer and the SAIA can be > viewed as a kind of evolution simulator that starts > in the present and moves forward in time. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From megaquark at hotmail.com Mon Oct 4 13:37:47 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 08:37:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity References: <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com><002701c4a9d9$a6b195f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.0.3.0.1.20041004002145.0291c740@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: > > Finally we have to be careful here - the usual folk meaning of evolution > implies positive change. Actual evolution is persistence and survival. > Remember the rat and the cockroach, whose forms are so successful they > haven't changed in ages. Their evolution is to remain the same..... > Aside from some recently gained immunities to pesticides such as chlordane and DDT. :-). Here's an interesting website titled "Attack of the Mutant Giant Madagascar Cockroaches" http://members.aol.com/Kaltofen/aolMKroach.html It's about cockroaches that were created by the US ARMY. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 13:46:30 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 06:46:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <20041004132127.58941.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004134630.86270.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > 'Pure' pacificists don't exist, save for the Jains, > who may be extinct. BTW, I'm a conscientious objector, > not a real pacifist, I have already fought in > self-defense, the time in the car with the choker. A > true pacifist would sacrifice his or her life rather > than fight back against deadly force, correct? Real pacifists are a dime a dozen. A pacifist may convince himself that the instinctual response of 'fight or flight' was a concious choice on their part, but it still does not make them not a pacifist. Non-pacifism is demonstrated when the individual is under no legal compulsion or situational constraint against actions other than active defense, and consciously chooses to face fear with determination in defense of themselves, others, their property, or the state. I do not begrudge a person's choice at pacifism. The public virtue that a free state depends upon can only exist if we are all free to choose to act virtuously or not, just as sin can only exist if we all have the free will to choose to commit good or evil. Compelled morality is an oxymoron of totalitarianism, but he who freely chooses against virtue should not try to pretend that they are instead taking the virtuous choice, or that what they might do, or may have done in the past, in a situation where they had no choice, therefore makes them virtuous in spite of their truly free choices. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 4 13:51:24 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 14:51:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <20041004134630.86270.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004135124.68685.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> This is all debatable. > Real pacifists are a dime a dozen. A pacifist may > convince himself that > the instinctual response of 'fight or flight' was a > concious choice on > their part, but it still does not make them not a > pacifist. > Non-pacifism is demonstrated when the individual is > under no legal > compulsion or situational constraint against actions > other than active > defense, and consciously chooses to face fear with > determination in > defense of themselves, others, their property, or > the state. > > I do not begrudge a person's choice at pacifism. The > public virtue that > a free state depends upon can only exist if we are > all free to choose > to act virtuously or not, just as sin can only exist > if we all have the > free will to choose to commit good or evil. > Compelled morality is an > oxymoron of totalitarianism, but he who freely > chooses against virtue > should not try to pretend that they are instead > taking the virtuous > choice, or that what they might do, or may have done > in the past, in a > situation where they had no choice, therefore makes > them virtuous in > spite of their truly free choices. > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of > human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of > slaves." > -William > Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: > http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From megaquark at hotmail.com Mon Oct 4 13:55:57 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 08:55:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A black paintbrush dotting the globe, making it dotty References: <20041004130923.81705.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Stop it Mike, you're killing me! lol I had an idea though. It seems to me that independence and freedom simply can't be imposed from outside. You have to learn your lessons and take your lumps. Why don;t we come up with an "Arm the Iraqi's" fund. We can buy all of the private citizens guns, the get the hell out of town. Since everyone will have guns, all will be equal. There will be lots of death and injury (as if this hasn;t been the case for a long time), but in the end, they will all work out their differences at the polite end of the gun barrel. Freedom will assert itself, and they will either learn to get along, or die. We had a similar occurance called the civil war and I think that it went a long way to securing our way of life. Britain figured it out after we kicked their asses in the Revolutionary war. Germany and Japan figured it out after having their butts kicked too. How Australia figured it out, I have no idea. Still working on that one. :-0 We've simply been too nice over there trying to "maintain control" and "stabilize" the country. Saddam is gone now, let's arm everyone, get out, and let nature take its course! ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: "BillK" ; "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 8:09 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A black paintbrush dotting the globe,making it dotty > > --- BillK wrote: > > > On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 23:08:55 +0200, Amara Graps wrote: > > > Today I heard that- > > > The Italian government (right side) was apparently bent out of > > > shape that they paid one million euro ransom for getting the > > > girls from 'nice' kidnappers. > > > The world is completely crazy. > > > > > > > And the next day video footage of 10 new hostages kidnapped in Iraq > > was broadcast on the al-Jazeera television channel. > > > > > > > > "More than 140 foreigners have been kidnapped in Iraq, and at least > > 26 hostages have been killed. Hundreds of Iraqis have been kidnapped > > since the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, mainly by criminal gangs > > seeking large ransoms". > > Ah, we have a profitable industry going there. Congratulations, Europe. > Apparently appeasing pacifist socialists CAN create jobs... Hey, if we > all hold each other hostage, and we pay each other a million EU in > ranson, would that increase or decrease the value of the EU on currency > markets, and thus make European companies more competetive with the US? > > Would you call acts which destroy civil trust an 'anti-trust action'?? > > Is anti-libertarian europe endorsing the de-monopolized market of > violence in Iraq? > > Would you say that the US military policy of disarming civilians in > Iraq was decreasing or increasing violent crime there? > > Would you say that the open immigration policy in effect is improving > or deteriorating social stability and crime in Iraq? > > Would you say that Europe has adopted a policy of being "not in the > business of nation building" when it comes to Iraq? > > Oh, I'm just having too much fun with this situation here.... Rand, > Rothbard, and Hayek are quaking in their graves at the ironies... > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." > -William Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > > > _______________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From megaquark at hotmail.com Mon Oct 4 14:10:47 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:10:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity References: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> Message-ID: True, but you may want to consider ants for a moment. The individual is not all that important to the group. As environmental conditions change, adaptations actually occur more often in the group's behavior than they do in the structure and form of the individual ants themselves. Whether this is a sign of "group" change or a collection of minor adaptations in individual ant brains is hard to say, but interesting to think about nonetheless. Another thought on ants: An ant brain has about 250,000 brain cells. A human brain has about 10,000 million. So a colony of 40,000 ants has a collective brain roughly the size of a human. (Can't remember the source) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity > Spike wrote: > > > > If that is the case, then we have an example of > > natural selection working at the group level. But > > this only works if we use the term natural selection > > to include both survival selection and mate selection. > > If we allow natural selection to work at the group > > level, we suggest some possible solutions to the > > more difficult puzzles of evolution. > > Group selection may be the wrong word for this, since it's usually taken to > imply a conflict between individual-level selection and group-level > selection with the group selection pressure winning. What you're talking > about is an isolated subpopulation undergoing genetic drift augmented by > sexual selection, that then pops up and outcompetes other subpopulations. > That's not 'group selection' as usually defined because there's no obvious > conflict between group-level selection pressure and individual-level > selection pressure. No one denies that groups (such as human tribes) are > occasionally the vehicles selected upon; the difficult part is for > group-level selection pressure to ever defeat a countervailing individual > selection pressure. > > -- > 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 14:42:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:42:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041004144258.53114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > Another thought on ants: An ant brain has about 250,000 brain cells. > A human brain has about 10,000 million. So a colony of 40,000 ants has > a collective brain roughly the size of a human. (Can't remember the > source) Of course, not only does a colony of ants have a lot more legs to worry about, the fact that each unit of 250k brain cells is not synaptically linked to the others. Its like having 40,000 hemispheres in the human brain. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Oct 4 14:47:04 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:47:04 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: References: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> Message-ID: <41C7D0D7-1614-11D9-98B9-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 4 Oct 2004, at 16:10, Kevin Freels wrote: > Another thought on ants: An ant brain has about 250,000 brain cells. A > human > brain has about 10,000 million. So a colony of 40,000 ants has a > collective > brain roughly the size of a human. (Can't remember the source) You have an interesting form of memory since you appear to remember the text word perfect, but not the source: http://www.lingolex.com/ants.htm http://www.ideasmerchant.com/ http://barkinspider.diaryland.com/020415_58.html http://www.pamdemocrat.org/Newspaper/YouthArise.cfm Unfortunately, some of my students have a similar problem. best, patrick From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Oct 4 14:53:11 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:53:11 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: <20041004144258.53114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041004144258.53114.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1C8ECF54-1615-11D9-98B9-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 4 Oct 2004, at 16:42, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Of course, not only does a colony of ants have a lot more legs to worry > about, the fact that each unit of 250k brain cells is not synaptically > linked to the others. Its like having 40,000 hemispheres in the human > brain. But of course its much worse than that since the same neural functions are replicated 40k times in ants: 40k simpler systems do not equal one more sophisticated one (e.g., the visual system of one human is vastly superior to a whole colony of ants). best, patrick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 14:56:33 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 07:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Considering the Source In-Reply-To: <41C7D0D7-1614-11D9-98B9-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041004145633.97222.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > > You have an interesting form of memory since you appear to remember > the text word perfect, but not the source. This is an interesting observation to make, Patrick. I imagine that when one gets one's information from the internet, their mind associates it all with that screen on one's desk, versus in the olden days when we had distinctly different physical objects by which to refer to sources, i.e. printed books like Grey's Anatomy, Black's Law, etc. Imagine each person only having one book in their library, in which all information can be found. Asking for one to give the source or 'reference' is a bit anachronistic from that point of view. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From megaquark at hotmail.com Mon Oct 4 15:25:04 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 10:25:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity References: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY><41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> <41C7D0D7-1614-11D9-98B9-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: Nope. Not word perfect. It may have been the top one that you provided, but it was a couple of days ago when I ran across it. I was looking at several different things along the same lines, and vaguely remember seeing several of the pages you provided. I wasn't doing a research paper or planning to use it as a source at the time, I was just being curious, so I only made a mental note of the numbers. There were multiple sources for the same information and many of them WERE word for word. It may have very well been none of these. I wonder if the original source could even be tracked down. My memory isn;t selectively perfect. My wording was not perfect. The source would not have been either. On the internet, one letter being wrong can lead you to a totally different page. It is senseless to make an attempt at it unless you can be 100% correct. I did give enough info for someone to find it on their own and did let you know that it wasn;t my own research providing it. I wasn;t attempting to mislead or plagiarize. I am sure there are many numbers and statistics in my head that I have ran across as trivial, yet interesting and I probably couldn;t source a single one of them. Some of them may actually turn up on a Google search if you quoted me even if I never read their material. If I were doing a research paper, I wouldn;t use that information, and instead would go through the trouble of locating the information and providing a source for it even if I didn;t know where I originally learned the numbers, statistics, etc. For chit-chat on a message board, that is a bit extreme and would still be tantamount to lying if I looked up the numbers and provided a link to the first source you provided as my source if in fact, the actual source was from the third link you provided and I didn;t find that one on my search. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Patrick Wilken" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 9:47 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity > > On 4 Oct 2004, at 16:10, Kevin Freels wrote: > > > Another thought on ants: An ant brain has about 250,000 brain cells. A > > human > > brain has about 10,000 million. So a colony of 40,000 ants has a > > collective > > brain roughly the size of a human. (Can't remember the source) > > You have an interesting form of memory since you appear to remember the > text word perfect, but not the source: > > http://www.lingolex.com/ants.htm > http://www.ideasmerchant.com/ > http://barkinspider.diaryland.com/020415_58.html > http://www.pamdemocrat.org/Newspaper/YouthArise.cfm > > Unfortunately, some of my students have a similar problem. > > best, patrick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From natashavita at earthlink.net Mon Oct 4 15:55:31 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:55:31 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACESHIP ONE WINS $10 Million Ansari X Prise Message-ID: <78060-220041014155531970@M2W038.mail2web.com> MOJAVE DESERT, California (CNN) -- SpaceShipOne climbed into space for the second time in a week to claim the $10 million Ansari X Prize. http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/10/04/spaceshipone.attempt.cnn/index.html This is special for me too because I know Spacecraft designer Burt Rutan and have been to his home and hanger in Mojave. A Toast to our Future in Space! Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From pharos at gmail.com Mon Oct 4 16:07:01 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 17:07:01 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] US Pilots fight in Iraq - from Las Vegas !!!!!! Message-ID: Is this unbelievable or what ???? October 03, 2004 Pilotless strikes on Iraq by RAF ROYAL Air Force officers have joined a team of American pilots based in the desert near Las Vegas that is flying and firing missiles from unmanned Predator spy planes more than 7,000 miles away in Iraq, writes Stephen Grey. The British airmen are part of a 24-hour operation that controls the Predators remotely by satellite, secretly filming militants attacking American and British troops and using Hellfire air-to-ground missiles to destroy enemy positions. Kurt Scheible, 41, the US commander of Predator operations at Balad, said it was cheaper and more efficient to base most pilots far from the combat zone. "When I'm back in Nellis I can fly a mission over Iraq with the Predator, and then go home and take my children to a ball game," he said. --------------- Un - xxxxing - believable !!!! BillK From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 4 16:17:04 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:17:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Rocket Diamonds In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041004001746.028e5868@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004161704.46637.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Hmm. A rather complex description, though. Does it boil down to this? "Rockets are optimized for operation in space (i.e., in vacuum), so their exhaust has a lower pressure than the atmosphere near the ground. This would prevent exhaust from escaping the engine, except that the exhaust is going supersonic. So it escapes, but is compressed (see point A in the diagram) - and overcompressed as it travels away from the engine (see point 3 in the diagram), so it eventually expands again (see point 5), then gets re-overcompressed, and so forth. The exhaust gets brighter at the points of maximum compression (it's hot enough to glow anyway, and there's more of it in a smaller volume at those points). Eventually, the exhaust loses its kinetic energy to the atmosphere, causing the line of bright points to break up." --- Hara Ra wrote: > Here is an excellent page with MUCH better pictures: > > http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aerojava/rocket3.htm > > > BTW these patterns also are seen in rocket exhausts. > > >I had a professor in college who worked on the > problem > >of Prandtl-Meyer flow, which is used to explain why > >the exhaust plumes of jet engines display the > characteristic > >diamond patterns when the pilot gets hard on the > gas: > >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 = > ================================== > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 4 16:25:51 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 09:25:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] US Pilots fight in Iraq - from Las Vegas !!!!!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041004162551.46322.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> What, you didn't know about this? This was announced some time ago. The era of video game wars has begun. Now if only they could automate the ground forces, especially the infantry, with the same degree of effectiveness. (Among other challenges: getting a reliable radio signal in the urban jungle, and making the robots sufficiently aesthetically pleasing to help with humanitarian missions and/or get citizens to open up to them and confide about the terrorists they just saw.) --- BillK wrote: > Is this unbelievable or what ???? > > > > October 03, 2004 > > Pilotless strikes on Iraq by RAF > > ROYAL Air Force officers have joined a team of > American pilots based > in the desert near Las Vegas that is flying and > firing missiles from > unmanned Predator spy planes more than 7,000 miles > away in Iraq, > writes Stephen Grey. > > The British airmen are part of a 24-hour operation > that controls the > Predators remotely by satellite, secretly filming > militants attacking > American and British troops and using Hellfire > air-to-ground missiles > to destroy enemy positions. > > Kurt Scheible, 41, the US commander of Predator > operations at Balad, > said it was cheaper and more efficient to base most > pilots far from > the combat zone. "When I'm back in Nellis I can fly > a mission over > Iraq with the Predator, and then go home and take my > children to a > ball game," he said. > > --------------- > > Un - xxxxing - believable !!!! > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 4 17:40:16 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 10:40:16 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Re: Intelligent Designand IrriducibleComplexity In-Reply-To: References: <005501c4a973$f4d8f950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <41605F13.2040006@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041004102027.02924d28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I have read "The Ants" by EO Wilson and it is clear that an ant colony adapts to its environment only in modifying the timing of the various roles an individual ant selects ("Assigned to" is overly telelogical and ant colonies run on scent.) and the ratios of the castes which except for the sexual forms are determined by how the larvae are fed by the workers. The worker's stages are, once in adult form: 1. Nursery - feeding and cleaning larvae, moving pupae 2. Queen feeding and egg removal (usually mixed in with Nursery) 3. General nest - building passages, tending fungi if leaf cutters, weaving leaves if weaver ants, removing trash, cutting up incoming prey 4. Foraging. Foraging is last because it is very hazardous, in some species the daily attrit rate runs 30% for foragers. Experiments have done, and no evidence of a group "mind" or the like has ever been found. Interactions such as trails or similar to fish schools or bird flocks 'emergent behaviour' are present. >True, but you may want to consider ants for a moment. Um, the number is 200 billion for a human brain. Each cell connects with abount 1000 others. I don't know about ant brains, but I suspect the connectivity is much less, perhaps 100. The inter-ant bandwidth is very slow, 100 bits/sec at best. The inter-ant signal delay is tens of milliseconds. The ants moving about prevents the detailed specialization which is found in all parts of the brain. (An indirect argument against any homogenous form of 'computronium') Ant colonies with multiple queens wiht populations running 6 million do exist. >Another thought on ants: An ant brain has about 250,000 brain cells. A human >brain has about 10,000 million. So a colony of 40,000 ants has a collective >brain roughly the size of a human. (Can't remember the source) > >From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Oct 4 18:14:32 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:14:32 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bone for the Extropian Wolves In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001091331.0290e900@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041001091331.0290e900@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e0410041114334ce25e@mail.gmail.com> ----- Original Message ----- From: Hara Ra Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2004 09:19:20 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bone for the Extropian Wolves To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org A friend wrote: In my not always so humble opinion though, "hope" is not the greatest of bio-engineering strategies. And I replied: Both 'hope' and 'faith' carry strong subtexts of 'death' and 'failure'. Prior to the scientific age, the associated social and religious mechanisms did promote slightly better chances of survival by these means. Religious conversion and mystical insight (which I have experienced) both operate by making the real world irrelevant and an imaginary 'higher' world the ultimate reality. me: That does not match my own experiences. The notion that the every day world is irrelevant seems more like a post-experience conclusion perhaps shaped by local doctrines. The experience itself was one of great insight of how everything interconnects and experience of the entirety from within it. While these were utterly mind-blowing and led to much re-evaluation of what is and is not important the experiences themselves in no way made the "real world" irrelevant. They did however show that much I and others consider of high relevance is largely due to a mistaken and far too myopic point of view. hara ra: It has to be ultimate to be effective, and the main effect is to delete the fear response, freeing one for a wider field of action, often contrary to one's social programming. "God said so" is a panacea for ignoring social constraints. Evolution only conserves survivability, so we are saddled with these Stone Age mechanisms, which do work in their limited way. me: Getting beyond the fear response can indeed be a very good thing. Seeing oneself as Bucky put it, as a "verb" or process of being and doing or part of a larger purpose can also free up the individual to act according to ideals instead of being all involuted around self. God, per se, seems to me to have little to do with it on the positive or negative sides. - s ================================== = 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 sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Oct 4 18:31:27 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:31:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <01b101c4a5e8$d8bbf990$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <7a321705040928212810019380@mail.gmail.com> <01b101c4a5e8$d8bbf990$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <948b11e04100411315a4adecc@mail.gmail.com> Spike, With all due respect we must act as if this bill is quite real. Theories that it may not be must be weighed against the considerable cost to all of us if this bill is implemented. I have no doubt that both Bush and Kerry will in fact push for a draft. Both parties have made some noise about all Americans owing some part of the most formative years of their lives to the nation. To reword, the State believes it owns the lives of its citizens for its own purposes. This bill also removes college education as being important enough (beyond age 20 at least) to cause any deferrment. How many young wonderful minds that are our future will we let the state spend on whatever it wishes? I urge everyone to oppose this in the strongest terms possible. Amara is right. It is damn dark, crazy and scary out there. Lay the cynicism aside and shine some friggin light. - samantha On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 22:54:55 -0700, Spike wrote: > > > Zero Powers > > Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? > > > > > > OK folks, I got the below very breathless email about a purported > > looming draft bill. I didn't follow the links, and barely perused the > > message. But I remember there was debate on this list about whether > > dubya is out to implement a draft. Perhaps this answers that > > question? > > > > Zero > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 21:21:57 -0700 > > Subject: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? > > To: Zero Powers > > > > Mandatory draft for males and females (ages 18-26) starting June > > 15,2005, is something that everyone should know about... > > Hmmm, several items in there immediately tipped me off > that this article is as reliable as the former "news" > service carried by Sea of BS, and their unimpeachable > anchor Dan Blather. Consider: > > "Also, crossing into Canada has already been made very difficult." > > Really? > > "...send this on to all the parents and teachers you know,and all the > aunts and > uncles, grandparents, godparents. . .And let your children know - - > it's their future, and they can be a powerful voice for change!" > > Puleeease. > > I looked up the sponsor Charles Rangel, and learned that he > is a democrat. Looked up a couple of the cosponsors, > such as Neil Abercrobie, democrat, I already know that > Pete Stark is a wicked democrat. I suspect all these > are democrats. > > Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] - 1/7/2003 > Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] - 1/28/2003 > Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] - 5/19/2004 > Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] - 1/28/2003 > Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] - 1/7/2003 > Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] - 1/28/2003 > Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] - 1/28/2003 > Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] - 7/21/2004 > Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] - 1/28/2003 > Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] - 1/7/2003 > Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 1/7/2003 > Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] - 1/28/2003 > Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] - 1/7/2003 > Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] - 1/28/2003 > > Theory: the democrats trumped up a fakey draft bill > for strictly political reasons. Note the language > in the bill. Note that you never heard more about > it even tho it was introduced over a year and a half > ago. Into the bit bucket with it, Zero. {8-] spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Oct 4 18:38:41 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:38:41 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041001160532.66738.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041001154720.82570.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20041001160532.66738.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04100411387ea12fef@mail.gmail.com> With some twisting of reality here and there you are right on Kerry standing for many wrong-head things. Which is why I plan to vote Badnarik. However, please please do not confuse the importance of making sure Congress knows damn well that things like HR 163 will not fly with the American people with Kerry vs. Bush considerations. We must stand firm in our resolve against each piece of nonsense that is proposed regardless of who wins on (or about) Nov. 2. - s On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 09:05:32 -0700 (PDT), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Trend Ologist wrote: > > > Mike, what Bush or Kerry does from January 2005 to > > January 2009 will profoundly affect what occurs from > > October 1st 2009 to October 1st 2014... certainly > > beyond 2014 as well. > > According to Kerry he will: > - eliminate tax cuts > - send 100,000 more men to Iraq (i.e. draft, sounds like Lyndon Johnson > here) PLUS hunt down and kill every terrorist on Earth (with another > 100,000 troops we don't have?) > - protect our gun rights by banning many types of guns, including > semi-automatic shotguns commonly used in skeet shooting and bird > hunting, .50 caliber rifles commonly used in big game hunting, and > semi-automatic pistols commonly used in self defense. > - eliminate Patriot Act controls on library book borrowing, but keep > Patriot Act banking and licensing controls that violate the First > Amendment rights of millions of religious people who object to the > numerical inventorying of human flesh. > - promote government funding of state controlled stem cell research, > thus out-competing private funding and private researchers via the use > of police force, and ensuring that the government owns the IP created > by this research, thus is able to control its use. Longevity and > enhancement technologies will be rationed only to 'essential personnel' > (i.e. elected officials and their thugs). > - introduce a controversial plan to use zoning and planning ordinances > across the country to economically force tens of millions of people to > abandon living in rural areas and small towns, to migrate them to the > cities where populations can be better controlled (and who they vote > for can be controlled as well). All the abandoned land will be returned > to wilderness for the reintroduction of wolves, grizzlies, mountain > lions, and other species across North America, and used as a land bank > of collateral to back massive welfare state borrowing paid for by > massive taxes on energy and consumption in the guise of protecting us > from "Global Warming", but are really intended to make the EU and Japan > economically competetive with us again.. by dragging us down. > > > ===== > Mike Lorrey > Chairman, Free Town Land Development > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." > -William Pitt (1759-1806) > Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From sjatkins at gmail.com Mon Oct 4 18:51:33 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 11:51:33 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play In-Reply-To: References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041001122552.01b0e470@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04100411514b56ca6e@mail.gmail.com> Actually, all that is needed is to act like sensible, balanced, responsible people again. In some parts of the world this may be a first for us. On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 14:52:49 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: > I agree. The way to make America appear better in the eyes of the > internatioanl community is to tell everyone in the world that we will do as > they think we should. Better yet, let's just say whatever needs to be said > to get people to like us and change our minds whenever someone gets mad at > us. > > "We can already see one example of this when we look at the question of > > torture. Abu Ghraib has largely vanished from U.S. political discussion, > > largely because the administration and its Congressional allies have been > > so effective at covering up high-level involvement. But both the > > revelations and the cover-up did terrible damage to America's moral > > authority. To much of the world, America looks like a place where top > > officials condone and possibly order the torture of innocent people, and > > suffer no consequences." > > By the way. Why is it that people think that "torture" and "abuse" are the > same thing? Torture is what Saddam did. Our prisoners in Abu Ghraib were > abused. I am not condoning this behavior, but it's not like these prisoners > were being beheaded with a knife, having limbs cut off, being electrocuted, > or starved to death. Do you for a moment believe that we never use torture directly or send prisoners elsewhere for torture? Does the training some of our forces receive in such techniques exist just for their information? -s From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 19:22:08 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 12:22:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <948b11e04100411315a4adecc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041004192208.53729.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Spike, > > With all due respect we must act as if this bill is quite real. The bill is as real as any bill which has been tabled by a committee chairman since April of 2003. The thing is dead, like the proverbial Monty Python parrot. It has ceased to be, it has expired, it is no longer signifying life, and so long as the current chairman's party remains in the majority, it should stay that way. Be careful, Samantha, what you wish for. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From megaquark at hotmail.com Mon Oct 4 20:09:09 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 15:09:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] International Interview Message-ID: My other half, who is working on her first degree, is in a class called "Cultural Diversity". She has a project where she has to "interview" someone who has migrated to the US from another country. (I think this is garbage because if they really wanted to teach cultural diversity, they would have them interviewing someone from the Hadza or the !kung). Unfortunately, our little town isn't teeming with people of other nationalities. They are allowing her to do this through email. Is there anyone here who migrated to the US from abroad who wouldn't mind answering a few email questions? Email me offlist if you are interested. I don't think the questions are too tough. :-) Thanks! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu Mon Oct 4 20:19:32 2004 From: Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu (Johnius) Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2004 13:19:32 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer Message-ID: <4161B054.FAA1CB57@Genius.UCSD.edu> Spike wrote: >Yesterday I was cleaning windows while a fly buzzed around >out of reach, bugging me to distraction. He landed, I >zzzitzed him with windex. That fly prompty expired! >Hara Ra: 70% Isopropyl Alchohol Thanks. I've been plagued with black widow spiders around (and sometimes in) my house. I once tried spraying one with WD-40 (good for all sorts of things :-) and that worked, but it took some time. My guess is that the lubricant got into all its breathing pores and suffocated it. Recently I spritzed one with some of my bicycle chain lubricant (White Lightning), which smells like it has an alcohol base. That seemed to kill the spider more quickly. Next time, I think I'll give Windex a try ... J From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 22:49:04 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 15:49:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play In-Reply-To: <948b11e04100411514b56ca6e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041004224904.22243.qmail@web60008.mail.yahoo.com> On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 14:52:49 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: > By the way. Why is it that people think that "torture" and "abuse" are the same thing? Granted there is a whole range of bad things that a jailer or interrogator can do to a "detainee". And you could reasonably set up a scale of badness, with "abuse" lower on the scale than "torture". But I don't think this is really what motivates your comment. You just want some way to weasel out from under the implications of the acts performed at abu Ghraib. We do cherish and strain against any besmirchment of our self-image as God-blessed Americans, now don't we? > Torture is what Saddam did. Yup. That's exactly how it's defined. When "they" do it, it's torture, when "we" do it, it's,... hi jinx, unintentional, unfortunate. They, BY DEFINITION, are the bad guys. So naturally, they do bad things, they torture. We, BY DEFINITION, are the good guys, we do only good things, so it's impossible that we would torture,...how could we? But those photographs--those damned and damning photographs--seem to tell another story. And according to Seymour Hirsch there are more photos and worse photos, and videos. But since we haven't seen them, they don't exist. If a tree falls in the forest, falls on you in the forest, and there is no one there to see it happen, do you still feel the pain? No photos, no pain. Riiiiight. > Our prisoners in Abu Ghraib were abused. I am not condoning this behavior, but it's not like these prisoners were being beheaded with a knife, ... A couple of weeks ago Rumsfeld tried the same grotesquely bogus comparison. --"What do you mean, "bogus"? Anyone can see that this is obviously true."-- Does the detainee who dies during interrogation--the army has gone public with ~30 such deaths--suffer more or less terror and torment than the guy who gets beheaded. Simply put, its hours if not days in the former case vs 20 seconds in the latter case. Then your dead. The real problem with the beheadings--"our" problem--is that the poor schmo getting his head cut off is one of "ours". In addition the horrible and savage act is done deliberately, and in "our" face, while "we" sit around simultaneously furious and utterly helpless. Which, of course, is the point. No amount of aircraft carriers, nukes, or smart bombs can protect you from payback. Suck it up. "We" blast, rip, or burn to death 15-30 thousand civilians and it's no big deal, but "they" saw off one guy's head and all of a sudden it's "the horror, the horror". Welcome back to reality, and your next chance to get it right. The way to end the terror is to put a lease and choke chain on the US foreign policy elite in general, and to put the neocons, Kissinger, Pinochet, and all those ex-banana republican dictators currently living in Miami--put 'em all in the cell block with Noriega and Saddam. Then stay the course. Make it THE WAY THINGS ARE that the law is no cobweb. Best, Jeff Davis "The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them." George Orwell "Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened." Winston Churchill __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 23:31:14 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:31:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Krugman on the state of play In-Reply-To: <20041004224904.22243.qmail@web60008.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041004233114.79736.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jeff Davis wrote: > On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 14:52:49 -0500, Kevin Freels > wrote: > > > By the way. Why is it that people think that > "torture" and "abuse" are the same thing? > > Granted there is a whole range of bad things that a > jailer or interrogator can do to a "detainee". And > you could reasonably set up a scale of badness, with > "abuse" lower on the scale than "torture". But I > don't think this is really what motivates your > comment. You just want some way to weasel out from > under the implications of the acts performed at abu > Ghraib. We do cherish and strain against any > besmirchment of our self-image as God-blessed > Americans, now don't we? > > > Torture is what Saddam did. > > Yup. That's exactly how it's defined. When "they" do > it, it's torture, when "we" do it, it's,... hi jinx, > unintentional, unfortunate. They, BY DEFINITION, are > the bad guys. I had the opportunity to attend a meeting of the NH Civil Liberties Union (can you imagine me there????) yesterday afternoon, where a talk was given by a registered Republican, who is now Dean of the Franklin Pierce Law School in Concord, NH, and was previously the CINCJAG of the Navy, Admiral John Hudson (Ret). Hudson was commenting on the situation with prisoners at gitmo and Iraq. While he confirmed a lot of what I've previously posted to this list, he did clarify with actual White House memos by WH counsel Gonzales to Pres. Bush that the White House had actively sought a legal argument to specifically refuse to recognise that any prisoners met the criteria found in the Geneva Conventions, because they were not individuals in the service of any recognised government (even the Taliban were referred to as a 'failed state' due to its lack of diplomatic recognition around the world). Because of this legal determination by the White House, the 'competent tribunal' requirement of the Conventions needed to determine if an individual prisoner is a legal or illegal combatant (or noncombatant) was never triggered. Hudson referred to this argument as being "too clever for one's own good", which I have some sympathy for, especially on the same logical reasons that Hudson rejects it for: that not taking the high road of treating all prisoners as POWs until determined otherwise by competent tribunal endangers American lives, since it is our military forces who are forward deployed in other countries more than anyone. Of course one can point to instances where US military personnel had been badly abused prior to the Bush administration: Mogadishu, for instance, demonstrated that the enemy already had zero respect for the laws of war before the Bush administration started deciding that terrorist prisoners had no rights to Geneva protections. Whether the Bush administration decided to adopt this policy following the clear examples of Mogadishu and others is something else entirely to debate. One is left in the position of really trying hard to argue for the 'turn the other cheek' argument when one is faced by this example, especially following the visceral destruction of 9/11. It was easier in yesteryear when images of badly abused bodies of military personnel dragged through the streets didn't automatically show up on websites and television broadcasts. The sensationalism of the instant press contributes to the baying for blood (on both sides), rather than to any reasoned or rational debate, or chance for sober minds to try to constrain policy before the mob demands vengance. As list subscribers in the late 1990's may remember, I have spoken on several occasions about how groups seek to apply revolutionary theory to get a free society to willingly surrender its rights through vicious cycles of oppression, atrocity, and more oppression, etc. Some of those here who disagee with me on things these days didn't believe me when I warned of exactly what they are now complaining about. Giving up our liberties is what the islamist world wishes to achieve in the west. Rather than Patriot Acts, the best Homeland Security would be to rescind the NFA of 1934, the GCA of 1968, the FOPA of 1986 and the Brady Bill. Admiral Hirohito warned Tojo against invading the mainland US. He had studied at university here, and had a pretty good idea about mainland society. He said that an invasion would fail because, "there is a rifle behind every blade of grass". There was no rifle (or other arm) behind every blade of grass (or airline seat) on 9/11. The hijacking phenomenon began when the FAA banned citizens from their 2nd amendment rights on aircraft, and it will cease when that ban is lifted. Terrorism will fail to succeed when the populaces is once again broadly armed, when it is the rare individual who is morally scrupulous against use of arms who is unarmed on the streets. Rather than a police society, we need to trust ourselves and our Constitution, and fight the enemy by making ourselves more free once again. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 4 23:38:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 16:38:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] nontoxic bug slayer In-Reply-To: <4161B054.FAA1CB57@Genius.UCSD.edu> Message-ID: <20041004233835.85281.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Johnius wrote: > > Spike wrote: > >Yesterday I was cleaning windows while a fly buzzed around > >out of reach, bugging me to distraction. He landed, I > >zzzitzed him with windex. That fly prompty expired! > >Hara Ra: 70% Isopropyl Alchohol > > Thanks. I've been plagued with black widow spiders > around (and sometimes in) my house. I once tried > spraying one with WD-40 (good for all sorts of things :-) > and that worked, but it took some time. My guess is > that the lubricant got into all its breathing pores > and suffocated it. Recently I spritzed one with some > of my bicycle chain lubricant (White Lightning), which > smells like it has an alcohol base. That seemed to > kill the spider more quickly. Next time, I think > I'll give Windex a try ... J I was painting the red trim on the family cabin a few years ago with a nice thick red paint. However, it just happened to be the ladybug breeding day that year (which, if you've ever seen it, is kindof a smaller scale version of a cicada invasion). It turns out, naturally, that they are attracted to and sexually turned on by the color red. They thus all sought out my nicely painted, and still wet, red trim on the cabin, where they stuck and perished, in congress, assembled, hanging together, as it were....... which gave a rather interesting texture to the trim of the building. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From dfowler282004 at yahoo.com Tue Oct 5 01:17:02 2004 From: dfowler282004 at yahoo.com (devon fowler) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:17:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041005011702.60965.qmail@web50704.mail.yahoo.com> Interesting theory on how we may have chosen big headed mates as a result of the 'cute factor!' That would make perfect sense seeing as how intelligence is certainly not designed and as you said is therefore a fluke of mother nature. My question to you is do you think developing much smarter brains, exponentialy so as >humans would have it, will be conducive to a common good, or altruism or something anything tangibly better than what we have now. I find it unique that we have the opportunity to do amazing things with SI however as I'm sure it's been said many times before what impact will this ultimately have on the bigger picture of human/transhuman/posthuman survival? And is more intelligence going to actually yield better quality of life? Or will it merely make more complex problems and more complex solutions? Also before I forget...I have a theory that our emotions being quite primitive in many ways could one day be made more advanced and more nuanced in variety such that instead of having states of extreme instabilitiy fueled by rage, jealosy, depression, and psychosis so called paradise engineering will create much more emotionally mature and stable beings. Not to mention the pleasure principle that David Pearce mentions in his manifesto. Kevin Freels wrote: It's derived from Darwin. Much as the entire "survival of the fittest" line which Darwin never once mentioned. It would be nice to be able to get into the schols and see exactly what they are teaching. So many people "know" the same misunderstood information, you wonder if it isn;t coming from the schools themselves. As for your brain, mate-selection idea, I kind of like it. I had made some notes about that a while back and never followed up on it. That would go a long way to explain why such an expensive change would occur in terms of energy since the human brain costs far more than we actually get out of it in terns of benefits. Looking at my notes, I also see that it was a possible explanation for the extinction of H. neanderthalensis. Have you had any similar thoughts about that? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 10:55 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity > > > Kevin Freels > > Irriducible Complexity > > > > > > 2. By Darwin, all structures must over any long time be useful for > > survival or they gradually vanish. What is the survival advantage of > > having God? > > > > > According to Darwin, yes, but I am not so sure about that... > > > Did Darwin express this thought or is it a derivative? > The Origin of Species carries some thoughts that are > kinda along these lines, but nearly 2/3 of the book > is actually about mate selection. This is a neglected > part of evolution education which causes many > misunderstandings. Mate selection can lead to many > structures that have no apparent survival advantage, > and may carry survival disadvantages, such as the > peacock's heavy tail plumage. > > Steven Jay Gould gives an example of a species that > apparently went extinct because of mate-selection > characteristics that worked against survival of the > genome: a particular species of elk that developed > monster-huge antlers. The theory is that the does > continued to choose the bucks with the largest antlers > long after they were too big to use for fighting rival > males. Eventually the buck's antlers became so heavy, > the does were not able to support their considerable > heft during the mating process. The results were > predictable. > > I have posted one of my favorite notions here before, > that human brains resulted from mate selection: both > genders selected mates with bulbous heads because the > big-headed were cute. They looked like babies. The > cute tended to mate sooner and more often, giving a > slight reproductive advantage to the large-headed, > resulting in a totally accidentally smart species. > > The punchline to all this is that large brains now > work against our survival, just as the oversized > antlers did for those elk and their ilk. We make > war, we use birth control, we build nukes, all of > which work against human survival. > > Before you reject this notion, consider this. Some > have argued that our large brains contribute to our > survival in the wild, for we outsmart other beasts, > etc, so that large brains have a survival advantage. > The argument continues that humans have little > natural defense: we are not particularly swift runners, > we have no claws, no fangs, etc. > > I would question this to some extent, but even if I > allow these notions, we have another natural defense > that few humans think about: we taste terrible. Evidence: > there are cases where lions or other large carnivores > have slain humans, but do not actually devour same. > Here in Taxifornia, we have mountain lions. Occasionally > one attacks and even slays a human. It is common to > find such a victim with exactly one hunk of meat torn away. > The hunk of meat is often found nearby, undevoured. > The Alaska bear guy who was found dead recently had exactly > one leg more or less eaten. The Australian babe carried > away by the dingo was evidently not devoured either, for > her clothing would have been shredded. > > If any large carnivore attacks a human, surely that beast > was hungry, yet the prey is seldom devoured. My conclusion > is that evidently we taste terrible, and probably > smell bad to most animals too. So humans could likely > survive in the wild alongside large carnivores, even > without actually outsmarting them, like the skunk. > Friends, we are skunks. > > Given that, I would argue we are waaaay smarter than > we need to be to survive, but more to the point, we are > too smart for our own good. We might actually breed > better if we were dumber. We would be far less comfortable > as individuals, of course, but evolution does not work > towards the comfort and survival of the individual. > > In that sense, large brains are analogous to large > antlers. If we manage to grey goo the planet with > runaway nanotech, do let me say I told ya so. In > advance. > > 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 Devon Fowler -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jon.swanson at gmail.com Tue Oct 5 01:36:16 2004 From: jon.swanson at gmail.com (Jon Swanson) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 20:36:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity In-Reply-To: <20041005011702.60965.qmail@web50704.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041005011702.60965.qmail@web50704.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: devon fowler Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 18:17:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity To: ExI chat list Interesting theory on how we may have chosen big headed mates as a result of the 'cute factor!' That would make perfect sense seeing as how intelligence is certainly not designed and as you said is therefore a fluke of mother nature. My question to you is do you think developing much smarter brains, exponentialy so as >humans would have it, will be conducive to a common good, or altruism or something anything tangibly better than what we have now. I find it unique that we have the opportunity to do amazing things with SI however as I'm sure it's been said many times before what impact will this ultimately have on the bigger picture of human/transhuman/posthuman survival? And is more intelligence going to actually yield better quality of life? Or will it merely make more complex problems and more complex solutions? Also before I forget...I have a theory that our emotions being quite primitive in many ways could one day be made ! more advanced and more nuanced in variety such that instead of having states of extreme instabilitiy fueled by rage, jealosy, depression, and psychosis so called paradise engineering will create much more emotionally mature and stable beings. Not to mention the pleasure principle that David Pearce mentions in his manifesto. Kevin Freels wrote: It's derived from Darwin. Much as the entire "survival of the fittest" line which Darwin never once mentioned. It would be nice to be able to get into the schols and see exactly what they are teaching. So many people "know" the same misunderstood information, you wonder if it isn;t coming from the schools themselves. As for your brain, mate-selection idea, I kind of like it. I had made some notes about that a while back and never followed up on it. That would go a long way to explain why such an expensive change would occur in terms of energy since the human brain costs far more than we actually get out of it in terns of benefits. Looking at my notes, I also see that it was a possible explanation for the extinction of H. neanderthalensis. Have you had any similar thoughts about that? ----- Original Message ----- From:! "Spike" To: "'ExI chat list'" Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 10:55 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Intelligent Design and Irriducible Complexity > > > Kevin Freels > > Irriducible Complexity > > > > > > 2. By Darwin, all structures must over any long time be useful for > > survival or they gradually vanish. What is the survival advantage of > > having God? > > > > > According to Darwin, yes, but I am not so sure about that... > > > Did Darwin express this thought or is it a derivative? > The Origin of Species carries some thoughts that are > kinda along these lines, but nearly 2/3 of the book > is actually about mate selection. This is a neglected > part of evolution education which causes many > misunderstandings. Mate selection can lead to many > structures that ha! ve no apparent survival advantage, > and may carry survival disadvantages, such as the > peacock's heavy tail plumage. > > Steven Jay Gould gives an example of a species that > apparently went extinct because of mate-selection > characteristics that worked against survival of the > genome: a particular species of elk that developed > monster-huge antlers. The theory is that the does > continued to choose the bucks with the largest antlers > long after they were too big to use for fighting rival > males. Eventually the buck's antlers became so heavy, > the does were not able to support their considerable > heft during the mating process. The results were > predictable. > > I have posted one of my favorite notions here before, > that human brains resulted from mate selection: both > genders selected mates with bulbous heads because the > big-headed were cute. They looke! d like babies. The > cute tended to mate sooner and more often, giving a > slight reproductive advantage to the large-headed, > resulting in a totally accidentally smart species. > > The punchline to all this is that large brains now > work against our survival, just as the oversized > antlers did for those elk and their ilk. We make > war, we use birth control, we build nukes, all of > which work against human survival. > > Before you reject this notion, consider this. Some > have argued that our large brains contribute to our > survival in the wild, for we outsmart other beasts, > etc, so that large brains have a survival advantage. > The argument continues that humans have little > natural defense: we are not particularly swift runners, > we have no claws, no fangs, etc. > > I would question this to some extent, but even if I > allow these notions, we have ano! ther natural defense > that few humans think about: we taste terrible. Evidence: > there are cases where lions or other large carnivores > have slain humans, but do not actually devour same. > Here in Taxifornia, we have mountain lions. Occasionally > one attacks and even slays a human. It is common to > find such a victim with exactly one hunk of meat torn away. > The hunk of meat is often found nearby, undevoured. > The Alaska bear guy who was found dead recently had exactly > one leg more or less eaten. The Australian babe carried > away by the dingo was evidently not devoured either, for > her clothing would have been shredded. > > If any large carnivore attacks a human, surely that beast > was hungry, yet the prey is seldom devoured. My conclusion > is that evidently we taste terrible, and probably > smell bad to most animals too. So humans could likely > survive in the wild alongside large carnivores, even > without actually outsmarting them, like the skunk. > Friends, we are skunks. > > Given that, I would argue we are waaaay smarter than > we need to be to survive, but more to the point, we are > too smart for our own good. We might actually breed > better if we were dumber. We would be far less comfortable > as individuals, of course, but evolution does not work > towards the comfort and survival of the individual. > > In that sense, large brains are analogous to large > antlers. If we manage to grey goo the planet with > runaway nanotech, do let me say I told ya so. In > advance. > > 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 Devon Fowler _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From matus at matus1976.com Tue Oct 5 01:53:53 2004 From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 21:53:53 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACESHIP ONE WINS $10 Million Ansari X Prise In-Reply-To: <78060-220041014155531970@M2W038.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <000e01c4aa7e$2f26f520$6601a8c0@GREYBOOK> > > MOJAVE DESERT, California (CNN) -- SpaceShipOne climbed into space for the > second time in a week to claim the $10 million Ansari X Prize. > http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/10/04/spaceshipone.attempt.cnn/index. ht > ml > > > This is special for me too because I know Spacecraft designer Burt Rutan > and have been to his home and hanger in Mojave. > > A Toast to our Future in Space! > > Natasha You don't have to know him for this to be a spectacular event! To any extropian this is wonderful news. This is the guy who brought us home built aircraft, give him ten, fifteen years and we will have home built spacecraft, woo hoo! Michael From megaquark at hotmail.com Tue Oct 5 02:10:36 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 21:10:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Gordo is gone Message-ID: (CNN) -- Leroy Gordon Cooper, one of the nation's first astronauts who once set a space endurance record by traveling more than 3.3 million miles aboard Gemini 5 in 1965, died on Monday, NASA said. He was 77. http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/space/10/04/gordon.cooper/index.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Oct 5 03:05:41 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 20:05:41 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041004192208.53729.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005c01c4aa88$35e12c00$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > Spike, > > > > With all due respect we must act as if this bill is quite real... > > The bill is as real as any bill which has been tabled by a committee > chairman since April of 2003. The thing is dead, like the proverbial > Monty Python parrot... > ===== > Mike Lorrey Altho I believe the bill to be mere political grandstanding, I agree with Samantha: we must act as if this bill is real. Vote against or contribute to the opponents of the following government officials, who cosponsored the bill: Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] spike From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Tue Oct 5 08:35:07 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 10:35:07 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACESHIP ONE WINS $10 Million Ansari X Prise In-Reply-To: <000e01c4aa7e$2f26f520$6601a8c0@GREYBOOK> References: <000e01c4aa7e$2f26f520$6601a8c0@GREYBOOK> Message-ID: <7658A73D-16A9-11D9-98B9-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 5 Oct 2004, at 03:53, Matus wrote: > You don't have to know him for this to be a spectacular event! To any > extropian this is wonderful news. This is the guy who brought us home > built aircraft, give him ten, fifteen years and we will have home built > spacecraft, woo hoo! What about a home built space station? Or a home built trip to the moon? Given more-or-less current technology how much more difficult/expensive would it be to get to the moon? best, patrick From Ody777 at comcast.net Tue Oct 5 09:58:46 2004 From: Ody777 at comcast.net (Ody777 at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 09:58:46 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: RE: Re: Intelligent Designand Irriducible Complexity Message-ID: <100520040958.6412.41627056000CC1FF0000190C2200758942C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> ?Spike? wrote (3 Oct): <> That was the general view among evolutionary theorists until recently. But up-to-date theory has started to recognize a role for selection at the group level: ?During the 1960's and 70's most biologists rejected group selection as an important evolutionary force but a positive literature began to grow during the 70's and is rapidly expanding today. We review this recent literature and its implications for human evolutionary biology. We show that the rejection of group selection was based on a misplaced emphasis on genes as "replicators" which is in fact irrelevant to the question of whether groups can be like individuals in their functional organization.? --Wilson, D.S. & Sober, E. (1994). Reintroducing group selection to the human behavioral sciences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 17 (4): 585-654. http://www.bbsonline.org/documents/a/00/00/04/60/ http://www.bbsonline.org/documents/a/00/00/04/60/bbs00000460-00/bbs.wilson.html If you feel like commenting on this article, I?d be most interested. Rob Masters From Ody777 at comcast.net Tue Oct 5 10:41:42 2004 From: Ody777 at comcast.net (Ody777 at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 10:41:42 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode Message-ID: <100520041041.12749.41627A66000565F8000031CD2200762302C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Mike Lorrey wrote (4 Oct): <> However, Gandhi himself apparently believed his tactics could be effective against totalitarian regimes: From http://www.claremont.org/writings/precepts/19991228arnn.html?FORMAT=print : In fact Gandhi, a great man in some respects, did not understand Hitler nor the totalitarianism of which Hitler is one of the two supreme representatives. Gandhi's doctrine of nonviolence would have met with different results, had he been applying that doctrine against such a man and such a regime as Hitler and Nazi Germany. In November 1938, Gandhi went so far as to advise the Jews of Europe to offer only nonviolent resistance to Hitler. As he gave this advice, he also advised Britain, France, and America not to declare war upon Germany. From http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/mar/15arvind.htm : That document was reportedly published in 1940 when Great Britain braced herself to face a German invasion. It urged 'cessation of hostilities' through an 'open letter' to 'every Briton' and said, in part, as follows: '... I want you to fight Nazism without arms. I would like you to lay down the arms you have as being useless for saving you or humanity. You will invite Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini to take what they want of the countries you call your possessions. Let them take possession of your beautiful island, with your many beautiful buildings. You will give all these but neither your souls, nor your minds. If these gentlemen choose to occupy your homes, you will vacate them. If they do not give you free passage out, you will allow yourself, man, woman and child, to be slaughtered, but you will refuse to owe allegiance to them... I am telling His Excellency the Viceroy that my services are at the disposal of His Majesty's Government, should they consider them of any practical use in advancing the object of my appeal.' (Stanley Wolpert's Jinnah of Pakistan , pp. 187-188 as cited on page 144 of Chapter I of Constitutional Law of India , Supplement to Third Edition, 1988, written and published by H M Seervai, a giant in the field of constitutional history.) The author of the above 'open letter' was, not Veer Savarkar, but Mahatma Gandhi. It was a demonstration of his belief in the creed of ahimsa, non-violence. >From a pro-Gandhian site (which seems to indicate that this is an actual quote from Gandhi, but if not, it still shows how one Gandhian pacifist replies to a question on Nazi tyanny): http://www.kamat.com/mmgandhi/hitler.htm Q: "Mr. Gandhi,? I understand the concept of non-violence and civil dis-obedience. Do you really think it would work in all situations? For example, against a monster like Hitler ?" A: Non-violence does not mean making peace. On the other hand, it means fighting bravely and sincerely for truth and doing what is just. Like all fights, there will be a terrible loss and pain. But a satyagrahi (soldier of civil disobedience) must go on. My success with civil disobedience in South Africa and in India has not come easy. A large number of people sacrificed a great deal, including their lives while fighting for truth and justice. The doctrine of Satyagraha works on the principle that you make the so called enemy see and realize the injustice he is engaged in. It can work only when you believe in God and the goodness of the people to see that they are wrong. As a satyagrahi, I? do believe that non-violence is a potent weapon against all evils. I warn you however, that the victory will not come easy- just like it will not come easy with violent methods such as fighting with weaponry. The following does purport to be a real Gandhi quote (but is it?!): http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mohandas_Gandhi "Hitler killed five million [sic] Jews. It is the greatest crime of our time. But the Jews should have offered themselves to the butcher's knife. They should have thrown themselves into the sea from cliffs." --Comment to biographer Louis Fisher (June, 1946). On Gandhi?s apparent naivete about Hitler, see also (from another pro-Gandhi site): http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/fascism/gandhihitler.html (?Mahatma Gandhi?s letter to Hitler?) Rob Masters From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 5 14:37:08 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 15:37:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <100520041041.12749.41627A66000565F8000031CD2200762302C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041005143708.26038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> You're not going to like this, but Hitler & Stalin wanted peace (!), they wanted peace on their terms. Hitler wanted to kill off the 'lesser' races, Stalin wanted to kill off the 'class enemy'. The author of "Pacifism as Mental Illness" was more 'realistic', he knows that war will continue indefinitely, perhaps 'forever'. You take it from here... > On Gandhi?s apparent naivete about Hitler, see also > (from another pro-Gandhi site): > http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/fascism/gandhihitler.html > (?Mahatma Gandhi?s letter to Hitler?) > > > > Rob Masters > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From jonkc at att.net Tue Oct 5 16:57:20 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 12:57:20 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? References: <7a321705040928212810019380@mail.gmail.com><01b101c4a5e8$d8bbf990$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <948b11e04100411315a4adecc@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002801c4aafc$74e43590$eaff4d0c@hal2001> "Samantha Atkins" > I have no doubt that both Bush and Kerry > will in fact push for a draft. I very much doubt either Bush or Kerry will push for a draft, in fact even the sponsors of the bill would probably vote against it if the thought there was any chance of it actually passing. Besides virtually guaranteeing a politician's defeat in the next election it doesn't even make sense militarily. The push is for a smaller faster more highly trained professional army than what the USA had in the Vietnam days, and that seems to be an effective way to go. A couple of hundred thousand resentful ill trained draftees would not improve the situation in Iraq both Bush and Kerry know it. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 5 17:21:23 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 10:21:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <002801c4aafc$74e43590$eaff4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <20041005172123.11343.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > "Samantha Atkins" > > > I have no doubt that both Bush and Kerry > > will in fact push for a draft. > > I very much doubt either Bush or Kerry will push for a draft, in fact > even the sponsors of the bill would probably vote against it if the > thought there > was any chance of it actually passing. Besides virtually guaranteeing > a politician's defeat in the next election it doesn't even make sense > militarily. The push is for a smaller faster more highly trained > professional army than what the USA had in the Vietnam days, and that > seems to be an effective way to go. A couple of hundred thousand > resentful ill trained draftees would not improve the situation in > Iraq both Bush and Kerry know it. Actually, I just heard that Charlie Rangel (D-NY)'s bill is being sent out of committee today for a floor vote today at the GOP behest. Apparently, they want to make this an issue before the election, to paint the Dems as the draft-mongers they are, and tout to voters that they have prevented a draft. The co-sponsors will be forced to defend their bill on C-SPAN before the election. Rangel has been fighting to keep it in committee. So, technically, I was wrong, I admit it, but I think that the strategy being used proves my point that it is really the Dems that are trying to create a draft issue for the election, and the GOP doesn't want one. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 5 17:30:47 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 18:30:47 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041005172123.11343.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041005173047.67619.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Don't start believing your own propaganda, no one is serious about a draft at this time, even if they push for conscription. But during the next decade, who knows? > > > I have no doubt that both Bush and Kerry > > > will in fact push for a draft. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 5 17:39:34 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 18:39:34 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Manditory draft for your child? Get Real In-Reply-To: <20041005173047.67619.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041005173934.64536.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Now, when you read "Iran's Defense Minister Says Iran Has Missiles Of 1,250 Mile Range" you could say it is a matter for serious reflection. But Rangel's bill is such a silly election year ploy I'm surprised anyone over the age of nineteen would take it seriously for more than 10 seconds. > > I have no doubt that both Bush and Kerry > > will in fact push for a draft. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 5 18:39:26 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 11:39:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Manditory draft for your child? Get Real In-Reply-To: <20041005173934.64536.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041005183926.53818.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Now, when you read "Iran's Defense Minister Says Iran > Has Missiles Of 1,250 Mile Range" you could say it is > a matter for serious reflection. But Rangel's bill is > such a silly election year ploy I'm surprised anyone > over the age of nineteen would take it seriously for > more than 10 seconds. Well, correction, Rangel's bill dates back to early 2003. It is true that it was created as a political football by Rangel in an attempt to rally suburban and rural youths and mothers against the war via fearmongering. On that score I'd call it sick and cynical. The Iranian ICBM is indeed a matter of serious reflection, though, indicative of a regime that seems intent on starring in Armageddon, which the Bush administration may be entirely willing to cooperate in sooner, while a Kerry admin might appease and delay the inevitable, giving strength and power to the fanatics in Tehran. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 5 20:08:30 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 21:08:30 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Manditory draft for your child? Get Real In-Reply-To: <20041005183926.53818.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041005200830.39539.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> It wouldn't be surprising if there were to be a general war in the Middle East in a few years, perhaps so many people there hate each other so much it might be the only way to clear the air; a general war is unthinkable, but all too thinkable. If only Ali would turn to Ahmed and say, "you know, I was at the market today buying hummus, and I saw a bottle of DHEA, here-- try some." "Thanks, Ali. I have been thinking about life extension and transhumanism, so maybe we should forget all this 'killing the infidels' business". The Iranian ICBM is indeed a matter of serious reflection, though, indicative of a regime that seems intent on starring in Armageddon, which the Bush administration may be entirely willing to cooperate in sooner, while a Kerry admin might appease and delay the inevitable, giving strength and power to the fanatics in Tehran. ===== Mike Lorrey Chairman, Free Town Land Development "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Oct 6 02:29:08 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 19:29:08 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041005172123.11343.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00ae01c4ab4c$457116c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > --- John K Clark wrote: > > > "Samantha Atkins" > > > > > I have no doubt that both Bush and Kerry > > > will in fact push for a draft. > > > > I very much doubt either Bush or Kerry will push for a draft... > > Actually, I just heard that Charlie Rangel (D-NY)'s bill is being sent > out of committee today for a floor vote today at the GOP behest... > ===== > Mike Lorrey I heard that the draft bill was voted in congress today and was defeated 400-some to 2. Who were the two? What about the other 14 cosponsors? If one sponsors a bill then votes against it, is that not disingenuous? These are the cosponsors, who evidently introduced legislation for some political purpose, but who have (let us fervently hope) ended their careers. Rep Abercrombie, Neil [HI-1] Rep Brown, Corrine [FL-3] Rep Christensen, Donna M. [VI] Rep Clay, Wm. Lacy [MO-1] Rep Conyers, John, Jr. [MI-14] Rep Cummings, Elijah E. [MD-7] Rep Hastings, Alcee L. [FL-23] Rep Jackson, Jesse L., Jr. [IL-2] Rep Jackson-Lee, Sheila [TX-18] Rep Lewis, John [GA-5] Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] Rep Moran, James P. [VA-8] Rep Stark, Fortney Pete [CA-13] Rep Velazquez, Nydia M. [NY-12] Out with them all! They who would draft our babies, shame on them, out with them all! Pete Stark, with all my strength I shall brutally not vote for you. If the notion is to scare young people into opposing the war, I have a better approach. Keep the military all-volunteer, so that there isn't enough soldiers. That will scare the *leaders* into opposing the war. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Oct 6 02:52:48 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 5 Oct 2004 19:52:48 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <00ae01c4ab4c$457116c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <00af01c4ab4f$90729150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > I heard that the draft bill was voted in congress today and was > defeated 400-some to 2. 402 to 2. > Who were the two? "Just two lawmakers, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and Rep. Pete Stark, D-Calif., struck off on their own and voted for the measure." http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/05/politics/main647612.shtml (caveat: the above account is from CBS News, and has not been verified by any reliable source.) I suspected it was our own Pete. He's out. spike From scerir at libero.it Wed Oct 6 06:31:27 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 08:31:27 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Wilczek's philosophy corner References: <100520041041.12749.41627A66000565F8000031CD2200762302C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Message-ID: <005601c4ab6e$1c5548c0$bcb71b97@administxl09yj> Frank Wilczek (2004 Nobel laureate) also wrote papers that have some philosophical flavour. http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0403115 http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0212025 http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-53/iss-8/p22.html From maxm at mail.tele.dk Wed Oct 6 09:04:01 2004 From: maxm at mail.tele.dk (Max M) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 11:04:01 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <20041005143708.26038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041005143708.26038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4163B501.9020109@mail.tele.dk> Trend Ologist wrote: >You're not going to like this, but Hitler & Stalin >wanted peace (!), > Time to invoke Goodwins law here? :-) -- hilsen/regards Max M, Denmark http://www.mxm.dk/ IT's Mad Science From Ody777 at comcast.net Wed Oct 6 10:54:09 2004 From: Ody777 at comcast.net (Ody777 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 10:54:09 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: SPACESHIP ONE WINS $10 Million Ansari X Prise Message-ID: <100620041054.3224.4163CED10000497100000C982200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> On SpaceShipOne and Bert Rutan, "Matus" wrote (4 Oct): <> For insight on the historic significance of SpaceShip One, see Rand Simberg?s excellent essay, ?The Path Not Taken?: http://www.thenewatlantis.com/archive/6/simberg.htm Simberg argues that the U.S. space program took a disastrously wrong turn in the 60s when it abandoned ROCKET PLANE technology in favor of the BALLISTIC MISSILE approach. In the rush win the ?Space Race,? NASA opted for blasting people upward with what were essentially modified ICBMs--since they were already available ?off the shelf.? Meanwhile, rocket planes, which were promising but more experimental (the X-15 program), were stillborn: ?As Tom Wolfe chronicled in The Right Stuff , while Lyndon Johnson was declaring that our nation wouldn?t go to bed by the light of a communist Moon, and while the German refugees from Hitler?s rocket program were in Alabama developing the vehicles that would eventually take us to the Moon, there were rocket planes flying in the Mojave Desert, released from B-52 bombers. They sundered the skies, probing the upper reaches of the atmosphere and even temporarily leaving it. These were the first, tentative space vehicles, and had they not been interrupted by the urgency of beating the Soviets to the Moon, their successors might have continued. They might have flown higher, and faster, and faster yet, until at last they flew fast enough to defy the gravity of the Earth and reach orbit. ?That might have been another road to space, a path not taken?one that might have provided a more incremental, affordable, and reliable approach, instead of one in which we put small capsules on unreliable and expensive munitions, and hoped for the best.? SpaceShipOne is a rocket plane, a return to X-15 technology--and the beauty of that is the prospect of continuing, step-by-step improvement: ?The new private approach is... one with which aviation enthusiasts will be familiar. It?s how aircraft technology advanced rapidly between the two world wars. And it?s the same incremental approach used on the old experimental rocket planes out in the Mojave in the late 1950s and early 1960s, before the Moon-race mentality took over. In this approach, vehicles are tested incrementally, slowly expanding the envelope of performance. The emphasis is on low cost from the outset. As Jeff Greason, president and co-founder of the private company XCOR Aerospace, has explained, it?s easier to figure out how to do something reliably and affordably and then get more performance out of it, than to focus on the ultimate performance first and try to reduce its costs and increase its reliability later. ?Thus the suborbital spacecraft in private development today can be scaled up to reach greater altitudes, extending the performance envelope further with new vehicle designs, while still maintaining low costs per flight. And if there are multiple companies building such vehicles, they?ll be able to learn from each other?s mistakes and innovations as well. Mach 5 can become Mach 7, Mach 7 can become Mach 12, Mach 12 can eventually become Mach 25 and orbit, as experience is gained and designs evolve.? Simberg has a lot more to say about how the space program went off course, but the most exciting thing about reading the article is realizing that, by all indications, we?re now returning to an approach that really makes sense. For more on SpaceShipOne, go to: http://www.scaled.com/projects/tierone/ For information on a company that already has near-term plans to use rocket planes for commercial spaceflights: http://www.virgingalactic.com/index.html Rob Masters From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 6 12:50:54 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 05:50:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: House kills draft bill Message-ID: <20041006125054.10156.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Jacob Levich wrote: > Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 21:51:16 -0400 > To: news at nodraft.info > From: Jacob Levich > Subject: House kills draft bill > > Thanks to all who called their Congressmen. This takes Rangel's bill > off > the table, which is a relief, and once again demonstrates that we're > capable of raising hell when it counts. > > Celebrating would be premature, however. Rangel's bill was a trial > balloon > that has just been exploded for reasons of partisan electoral > strategy -- > but not before it revealed implicit support for a draft among certain > > ostensible liberals (like columnists Sheryl McCarthy and E.J. Dionne) > who > are casting around for a "progressive" argument for reinstating > conscription. > > We've always argued that the impending move to reinstate the draft is > > dictated by military necessity in this time of relentless wars of > aggression. Barring a major change in US foreign policy, that means > pro-draft forces are likely to try again after the election -- > regardless > of who wins. > > So stay vocal and be ready. > > Jake > People Against the Draft > www.nodraft.info > > > Oct. 5, 2004 > House Crushes Military Draft Bill > > By Vicki Allen > > WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The House of Representatives on Tuesday > crushed a > bill to reinstitute the draft as Republicans accused Democrats of > raising > the specter of compulsory military service to turn voters against > President > Bush > (news > > - > web > > sites)'s reelection bid. > > After a bitter debate on Bush's handling of Iraq > (news > > - > web > > sites), the House killed the bill 402-2 as Republicans sought to > stamp out > rumors of an impending draft that have swept college campuses and the > > Internet, worrying young people and parents across the country. > > With the presidential and congressional elections less than a month > away, > the White House also worked to dampen draft rumors that Republicans > said > have been fueled by Democrats. It threatened to veto the bill it > called > "both unnecessary and counterproductive." > > "This campaign is a baseless and malevolent concoction of the > Democrat > party," said House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a Texas Republican. "It > has > one purpose -- to spread fear." > > Rep. John Conyers > (news, > > bio, > > voting > > record), a Michigan Democrat, countered that Bush's Iraq policies > have so > strained U.S. forces, that a draft was possible no matter how > unpopular it > would be. > > "Guess what, we're running out of troops ... Let's not be astounded > that > what follows is a draft. The only problem is that you can't announce > it > until after the election," Conyers said." > > Rep. Charles Rangel > (news, > > bio, > > voting > > record), a New York Democrat, said he offered a bill last winter to > reinstitute the draft to spark debate on a system that he said placed > the > burden of fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan > (news > > - > web > > sites) on lower-income people who make up most of the volunteer U.S. > military. > > DeLay said Republicans pulled up the long-dormant bill "to expose a > fraud" > that he said "has been given voice by the leading Democrats" that > Bush > would move to reimpose the draft after the Nov. 2 election. > > In the Senate, Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, > called > reinstituting the draft "a nonissue" and said it would not be > addressed in > that chamber. > > House Democrats accused Republicans of a dirty election-year trick, > and > used the debate to attack Bush's Iraq policies which they said have > left > the country in chaos and discouraged help from foreign troops. > > "This president's foreign policies are what's scaring the kids of > this > country," said Rep. Tim Ryan > (news, > > bio, > > voting > > record), an Ohio Democrat. > > Some Democrats also said they doubted Bush would have taken the > country to > war if members of wealthy families had been called on to fight it. > > "He would never have been able to say bring 'em on with other > people's > children," Rangel said. > > "This is a rich man's war, and it's a poor man's fight," said Rep. > John > Dingell > (news, > > bio, > > voting > > record), a Michigan Democrat. "We do not have enough troops in the > field to > prevail," he said, while accusing Republicans of ducking debate on > how to > get more forces. > > White House spokesman Scott McClellan said Bush has made it clear he > "strongly supports the all-volunteer military," and "does not believe > we > need a military draft." > > "There are some who have tried to bring this up as a scare tactic, > and that > is highly unfortunate," McClellan said. > > Rep. Jim McDermott > (news, > > bio, > > voting > > record), a Washington Democrat, said, "Every time they get up on > television > and say there's never going to be a draft ... people start calling > our > offices saying when's the draft going to start." > > McDermott said Republicans were worried because new voter > registrations > were going up "and they know those people are going to come out and > vote > against them. So they're trying their best to tamp down this fire, > but they > can't get anyone to believe them any more." (Additional reporting by > Thomas > Ferraro and Susan Cornwell) > > http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=615&u=/nm/20041005/pl_nm/campaign_draft_dc&printer=1 > ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 6 13:26:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 06:26:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <00ae01c4ab4c$457116c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041006132624.90233.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> I should note that Eleanor Norton rescinded her cosponsorship of the bill yesterday before the vote. While this should help convince the public that the draft talk is a sham, I am sure the conspiracy theorists in the monkey cage will continue to spin stories, hoping something sticks to the wall. Now, if a major city suffers a huge WMD attack, I would not be surprised for there to be a draft. Only an idiot could expect otherwise. An attack like that would be like Hannibal marching the elephants on Rome: Americans will develop a Russian sense of xenophobia and will sow the ground with salt, wherever they find the perps or their supporters. Such a situation would force the libertarian commuinity to admit whether they are really NAP/ZAP supporters, or merely pacifists in porcupine clothing. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 6 13:39:47 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 14:39:47 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <20041006132624.90233.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041006133947.14480.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> If WMD were used in a major city, tactical nukes would probably be deployed in retaliation. BTW, sorry my last message was posted 3 times, it must have been monitored by Oliver North. >Now, if a major city suffers a huge WMD attack, I would not be >surprised for there to be a draft. Only an idiot could expect >otherwise. An attack like that would be like Hannibal marching >the >elephants on Rome: Americans will develop a Russian sense >of xenophobia >and will sow the ground with salt, wherever they find the perps or their supporters. Such a situation would force the libertarian commuinity to admit whether they are really NAP/ZAP supporters, or merely pacifists in porcupine clothing. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 6 14:03:59 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 15:03:59 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <4163B501.9020109@mail.tele.dk> Message-ID: <20041006140359.59122.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I mentioned Hitler & Stalin because their names are invoked so much plus there is so much misinformation spread about them. Their principle importance appears to have been to reduce the population in Europe and spur the development of the atomic bomb. So they (as almost everyone knows) had an extremely negative legacy, one that continues more than 51 years after Stalin death. Max M. wrote: Trend Ologist wrote: >You're not going to like this, but Hitler & Stalin >wanted peace (!), Time to invoke Goodwins law here? :-) -- 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 --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at att.net Wed Oct 6 14:10:03 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 10:10:03 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? References: <00ae01c4ab4c$457116c0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <04ef01c4abae$3ea4e670$49fe4d0c@hal2001> "Spike" > What about the other 14 cosponsors? If one sponsors > a bill then votes against it, is that not disingenuous? One sponsor of the bill, Alcee Hastings, has an especially interesting history, in 1977 he was made the first Black Federal Judge from Florida, but in 1988 he was caught conspiring to obtain a $150,000 bribe to grant leniency to two convicted racketeers. He was impeached in the House (413-3) and convicted in the Senate becoming only the seventh Federal Judge to have received that distinction in the history of the country. After that Alcee Hastings embarked on a new career, politics. John K Clark jonkc at att.net From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 6 14:19:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <04ef01c4abae$3ea4e670$49fe4d0c@hal2001> Message-ID: <20041006141916.10346.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- John K Clark wrote: > > One sponsor of the bill, Alcee Hastings, has an especially > interesting history, in 1977 he was made the first Black Federal > Judge from Florida, but in 1988 he was caught conspiring to obtain > a $150,000 bribe to grant leniency to two convicted racketeers. He > was impeached in the House (413-3) and convicted in the Senate > becoming only the seventh Federal Judge to have > received that distinction in the history of the country. After that > Alcee Hastings embarked on a new career, politics. Fox, meet henhouse.... ===== 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 Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Oct 6 14:22:07 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 16:22:07 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <4163B501.9020109@mail.tele.dk> References: <20041005143708.26038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4163B501.9020109@mail.tele.dk> Message-ID: <1A388EA8-17A3-11D9-8092-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 6 Oct 2004, at 11:04, Max M wrote: > Trend Ologist wrote: > >> You're not going to like this, but Hitler & Stalin >> wanted peace (!), >> > > Time to invoke Goodwins law here? Max: I assume you were referring to: http://members.tripod.com/~goodwin_2/law.html and not the Singapore law firm: http://www.goodwinslaw.com/main/default.asp :) best, patrick From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Oct 6 14:31:49 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 16:31:49 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <20041006140359.59122.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041006140359.59122.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <758DDC75-17A4-11D9-8092-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 6 Oct 2004, at 16:03, Trend Ologist wrote: > I?mentioned?Hitler & Stalin?because their names?are invoked so > much?plus there is so much misinformation spread about them. Their > principle importance appears to have been to reduce the population in > Europe and spur the development of the atomic bomb. So they (as almost > everyone knows) had?an extremely?negative?legacy, one?that > continues?more than?51 years after Stalin death. As wikipedia states: > Godwin's Law > > (Redirected from Goodwin's Law) > > Godwin's Law (also Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies) is an adage in > Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The law > states that: > > As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison > involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. > > There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a > comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the > Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress. In > addition, whoever points out that Godwin's Law applies to the thread > is considered to have lost the battle, as it is considered poor form > to invoke the law explicitly. Godwin's Law thus practically guarantees > the existence of an upper bound on thread length in those groups. Many > people understand Godwin's Law to mean this, although (as is clear > from the statement of the law above) this is not the original > formulation. > > Nevertheless, there is also a widely-recognized codicil that any > intentional invocation of Godwin's Law for its thread-ending effects > will be unsuccessful. From kpj at sics.se Wed Oct 6 14:37:23 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 16:37:23 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: Message from Trend Ologist of "Wed, 06 Oct 2004 15:03:59 BST." <20041006140359.59122.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200410061437.i96EbNH02977@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Trend Ologist wrote: | |I mentioned Hitler & Stalin because their names are invoked so much plus + there is so much misinformation spread about them. Their principle + importance appears to have been to reduce the population in Europe and + spur the development of the atomic bomb. So they (as almost everyone + knows) had an extremely negative legacy, one that continues more than 51 + years after Stalin death. According to the English-language Wikipedia article "20th century" : \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ Six overall largest mass killings of the 20th century (measured in numbers of people killed; also see http://www-sul.stanford.edu/depts/ssrg/misc/misery.html) * World War II and regime of Adolf Hitler (1937-1945), over 50 million dead, including the Holocaust, killing two-thirds of the Jewish population of Europe (6?million). * Regime of Mao Zedong and Chinese famine (1949-1976), over 28 million dead. * Regime of Joseph Stalin (1924-1953), over 20 million dead. * World War I (1914-1918), over 15 million dead. * Russian Civil War (1918-1921), over 8.5 million dead. * Armenian Genocide of 1915 by the Turks, over 2 million dead. \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ So it seems Joseph Stalin was third of the mass murderers of the 20th century. Summary: Ideologies are much more dangerous than traditional ethnic violence. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 6 14:43:15 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 07:43:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Manditory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <00af01c4ab4f$90729150$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041006144315.5916.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > I heard that the draft bill was voted in congress today and was > > defeated 400-some to 2. > > 402 to 2. > > > Who were the two? > > "Just two lawmakers, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., and Rep. Pete Stark, > D-Calif., struck off on their own and voted for the measure." I think it would also be incumbent upon us to see the list of those members who did not vote, possibly to avoid having their true opinion on the issue put on record.... ===== 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 Wed Oct 6 15:42:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 08:42:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <758DDC75-17A4-11D9-8092-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <20041006154216.9351.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > On 6 Oct 2004, at 16:03, Trend Ologist wrote: > > > I mentioned Hitler & Stalin because their names are invoked so > > much plus there is so much misinformation spread about them. Their > > principle importance appears to have been to reduce the population > in > > Europe and spur the development of the atomic bomb. So they (as > almost > > everyone knows) had an extremely negative legacy, one that > > continues more than 51 years after Stalin death. > > As wikipedia states: > > > Godwin's Law > > > > Godwin's Law (also Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies) is an adage in > > Internet culture that was originated by Mike Godwin in 1990. The > > law states that: > > > > As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a > > comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one. It is clear that discussing actual history involving Hitler does not invoke Godwin's Law. The law applies to when one is analogizing some other individual or topic with Hitler, esp complaints regarding list/forum/board moderation issues, software licensing/market domination/etc, among other things. There is also debate over the proper application of the law. For example, in an animal rights debate, if an animal rightist made ad hominem attacks on hunters or other meat eaters for their alleged nazi-like genocidal slaughter of poor defenseless Bambi and his friends, this would be a definite Godwin-invocation. It is questionable, though, whether mentioning that Hitler himself, was, in fact, a vegetarian who deplored hunting and meat eating, is a Godwin offending comment. Similarly, calling gun owners a bunch of neo-nazi, racist skinhead idiots would be Godwin invoking, while mentioning that the Nazi regieme did, in fact, enforce rather draconian gun control laws on the German population is questionable as to its Godwin-ness. The distinction lies in whether the statement made is an ad hominem/hyperbole, or just a statement of historical fact. ===== 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 pharos at gmail.com Wed Oct 6 16:58:37 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 17:58:37 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: <200410061437.i96EbNH02977@r2d2.sics.se> References: <20041006140359.59122.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200410061437.i96EbNH02977@r2d2.sics.se> Message-ID: On Wed, 06 Oct 2004 16:37:23 +0200, KPJ wrote: > > * World War II and regime of Adolf Hitler (1937-1945), over 50 million dead, > including the Holocaust, killing two-thirds of the Jewish population of > Europe (6 million). > * Regime of Mao Zedong and Chinese famine (1949-1976), over 28 million dead. > * Regime of Joseph Stalin (1924-1953), over 20 million dead. > * World War I (1914-1918), over 15 million dead. > * Russian Civil War (1918-1921), over 8.5 million dead. > * Armenian Genocide of 1915 by the Turks, over 2 million dead. > \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ > > So it seems Joseph Stalin was third of the mass murderers of the 20th century. > > Summary: Ideologies are much more dangerous than traditional ethnic violence. > Can I nominate the automobile as the greatest mass murderer of the 20thC? Every year more than 1.17 million people die in road crashes around the world. The majority of these deaths, about 70 percent occur in developing countries. Sixty-five percent of deaths involve pedestrians and 35 percent of pedestrian deaths are children. Over 10 million are crippled or injured each year. It has been estimated that at least 6 million more will die and 60 million will be injured during the next 10 years in developing countries unless urgent action is taken. How much is convenient travel really worth? BillK From etcs.ret at verizon.net Thu Oct 7 01:13:19 2004 From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 21:13:19 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Subscribing to Conscription (WAS Gandhi's antipode) Message-ID: <6h39m01k62ockqgsn4hstbpqq6h078uh0f@4ax.com> FWIW I doubt Gandhi ever had an antipode. Zbigniew Brzezinski, maybe, or more likely Karol Wojtyla, but Gandhi - naah. Addressing the topic, it's difficult to believe any responsible official, or even Charlie Rangel, would be able to articulate just what a draft of conscripts was supposed to *do* after completing Basic. Homeland Security might find a use for a few hundred thousand mouthbreathers, but DOD has made it crystal clear that they have learned the Lesson of '75, that unleashing a horde of Kerry dunces is not the way to go. Even a Democrat SecDef would treat the idea of a draft with contempt and would be far more likely to respond to a major provocation by proposing a short disciplinary exercise, followed by a diplomatic solution: the resurrection of the Ottoman empire, minus the Caliphate. I'm sure that Libya and Nigeria would be more than willing to contribute peacekeepers to help Turkey establish Islam With a Human Face in whatever's left of Tehran and Damascus. stencil sends From sjvans at mailhost.mil.ameritech.net Thu Oct 7 01:52:12 2004 From: sjvans at mailhost.mil.ameritech.net (sjvans at mailhost.mil.ameritech.net) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 21:52:12 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Subscribing to Conscription (WAS Gandhi's antipode) Message-ID: <74970-22004104715212781@M2W093.mail2web.com> >Addressing the topic, it's difficult to believe any responsible official, or >even Charlie Rangel, would be able to articulate just what a draft of >conscripts was supposed to *do* after completing Basic. Homeland Security >might find a use for a few hundred thousand mouthbreathers, but DOD has made >it crystal clear that they have learned the Lesson of '75, Well, there is one thing that *might* make a draft worthwhile, and that is doing it Swiss style. A few months of training, perhaps done in summer for the convenience of students, followed by taking battle dress, personal gear, *weapon* and ammunition home. Occasional nationwide training excercises. Actually useful and deployable forces would come from the Regular Army. Sure wouldn't have anything to do with Iraq. This would be far more a social engineering sort of thing, instilling the virtues of a civil society and an understanding the need to defend it and generally how, than solving any real military problem. Building a populous a little less likely to be pushed around, and maybe a little more serious. Or maybe not. Perhaps more importantly, it could be a counterbalance to the professional army. Such have historically had a tendancy to become isolated and removed from the citizenry, making them inclined to take over for themselves. We've done real well so far with civilian control of the military, but who knows what might happen as they get smaller and more professional. It might be important. Or maybe not. A pretty expensive experiment, anyway. Of course, it would never happen. Can you imagine the kittens that some folks would have at the idea of *everyone* having an evil assualt rifle at home? -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 7 01:56:41 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 02:56:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Subscribing to Conscription (WAS Gandhi's antipode) In-Reply-To: <6h39m01k62ockqgsn4hstbpqq6h078uh0f@4ax.com> Message-ID: <20041007015641.83800.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Gee, I like you, you're as cynical as I am. We need to counteract the Rebeccas of Sunny Brook Farm. Addressing the topic, it's difficult to believe any responsible official, or even Charlie Rangel, would be able to articulate just what a draft of conscripts was supposed to *do* after completing Basic. Homeland Security might find a use for a few hundred thousand mouthbreathers, but DOD has made it crystal clear that they have learned the Lesson of '75, that unleashing a horde of Kerry dunces is not the way to go. Even a Democrat SecDef would treat the idea of a draft with contempt and would be far more likely to respond to a major provocation by proposing a short disciplinary exercise, followed by a diplomatic solution: the resurrection of the Ottoman empire, minus the Caliphate. I'm sure that Libya and Nigeria would be more than willing to contribute peacekeepers to help Turkey establish Islam With a Human Face in whatever's left of Tehran and Damascus. stencil sends _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 7 02:16:03 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 03:16:03 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] the latest fashion in prescription dispensing In-Reply-To: <20041007015641.83800.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041007021603.11779.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Rush Limbaugh, that conservative trend setter, has done it again. Not content to invent designations such as 'Feminazi' , he is now popularising the practise of having different doctors dispense medications to one patient. It is time we let go of outdated doctor-patient relationships. Having one doctor write a prescription for a certain medication for one patient is so last-week, so old hat. This is the 21st century, we've got to do the In thing, get with the New, the Now. Now if you are in pain or just want to feel happy all during special days like holidays, you can merely pay your maid or some other servant to locate several doctors who don't know of each other, so they can write prescriptions for one or more medications. It's as easy as 1-2-3. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hal at finney.org Thu Oct 7 02:22:02 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 19:22:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] the latest fashion in prescription dispensing Message-ID: <20041007022202.E8E8057E2A@finney.org> Trend Ologist writes: > It is time we let go of outdated doctor-patient relationships. Having > one doctor write a prescription for a certain medication for one patient > is so last-week, so old hat. This is the 21st century, we've got to do > the In thing, get with the New, the Now. I assume you are being facetious, and you actually believe that people should be legally prevented from making their own decisions about what substances to put into their bodies? Would you extend this to extropian augmentations? Do you think that society should hold veto power over whether you can choose to enhance your intelligence or emotional stability? I know there are those who say that libertarianism is passe in transhumanist thought. To me, it is a fundamental part of extropian philosophy that individuals have the right to enhance their own minds and bodies, even if society disapproves. I'd be curious to hear from those who see themselves as extropian but who believe that these decisions should be made collectively, aiming at maximizing the social welfare. Hal From fortean1 at mindspring.com Thu Oct 7 03:58:13 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 20:58:13 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (Got Caliche?) the Jhai PC Message-ID: <4164BED5.DDD91890@mindspring.com> http://topics.developmentgateway.org/ict/sdm/previewDocument.do~activeDocumentId=446462 The Jhai PC is designed to thrive in harsh environments, it is affordable, it creates its own network as it goes, and it can be powered by a car battery and bicycle crank. It uses OS and supports VoIP -- a low-cost, low-power, voice, email and web communications system with word processing and spread-sheet capabilities. < http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/001344.html > The Navajo Nation do not have complete telephone or electricity coverage in their sixteen million acres. They believe the Jhai PC may well fill in gaps by providing a quick and easy link to their existing computer networks to areas without power or phonelines. So the first real rollout of the equipment may well be in the continental United States. -- "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 Thu Oct 7 04:03:40 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 21:03:40 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (Got Caliche?) Social construction of technology [SCOT] Message-ID: <4164C01C.29E3D201@mindspring.com> < http://apnews.excite.com/article/20041005/D85HAR7O0.html > A vibrating sex toy shut down a regional airport for almost an hour Monday. Editor's Note: The embarrassment of knowing that luggage will go thru an xray scanner causes people to jettison spare parts (some feel good with just a plain brown paper bag 'to go', but certainly, not all). Knowing these are problems inherent in the social construction of technology, there must be a market out there for a Romulan cloaking device, or, for artifacts that dis-assemble to innocuous shapes for private travel. However, there are at least four problems with "SCOT" and this type of material culture: (1) How to market the master of the universe device (it's hard to imagine these transformer action figures advertised on cartoon network); (2) Future archaeologists will have a difficult time with classification and typology; (3) Bill Rathje (of Garbage Project fame) may claim we are running out of landfill space with all the disassembled spare parts going missing into the trash; (4) Since technologies have different meanings for different social groups, how does W. and the D. Homeland Security keep terrorists out of sex shops where they might learn to imitate cloaking techniques and build IEDs (improvised explosive devices) or 'thermo-nukulur' dildos... If you have an answer to any of these vexing problems of social construction and material culture, let us know. -- "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 Thu Oct 7 04:27:16 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 21:27:16 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Rodney and Rael Message-ID: <4164C5A4.F10118C9@mindspring.com> Aging comic Rodney Dangerfield has met with Brigitte Boisseler, the CEO of Clonaid, which is the medical branch of the Raelians, to talk about cloning himself. Dr. Boisselier came to the Dangerfield home in Los Angeles and talked with his wife while Rodney was recovering from brain surgery. The Raelians said they could create a clone of Rodney by taking a swab of cells from his cheek. When asked how much it would cost, they said they would not charge the Dangerfields anything. Rodney, who is almost 82 years old, had a friend videotape the bizarre meeting for use in a future documentary about his life!... http://www.martiansgohome.com/smear/v50/ss031025.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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 7 04:27:36 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:27:36 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] the latest fashion in prescription dispensing In-Reply-To: <20041007022202.E8E8057E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041007042736.91532.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Yes, facetious... but no, people should NOT be prevented from making decisions about what to put into their bodies. The post was rejoicing at how Limbaugh got caught, because if someone else in Florida 'done what Rush done' then they Broke the Law and are to be punished, however Limbaugh is supposedly being persecuted by his enemies. Isn't it good this is coming out into the open? Limbaugh isn't going to be prosecuted for something like this, it would make a martyr of him-- an older person in pain casting about for relief. And if he is fined, one of his countless friends will pay the fine. This is how laws change, slowly & painfully; things don't change by libertarians holding meetings and passing resolutions. I appreciate libertarianism in the philosophical sense, but I'm a liberal, becoming more bourgeois with age. > I assume you are being facetious, and you actually > believe that people > should be legally prevented from making their own > decisions about what > substances to put into their bodies? > > Would you extend this to extropian augmentations? > Do you think that > society should hold veto power over whether you can > choose to enhance > your intelligence or emotional stability? > > I know there are those who say that libertarianism > is passe in > transhumanist thought. To me, it is a fundamental > part of extropian > philosophy that individuals have the right to > enhance their own minds and > bodies, even if society disapproves. I'd be curious > to hear from those > who see themselves as extropian but who believe that > these decisions > should be made collectively, aiming at maximizing > the social welfare. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Thu Oct 7 03:47:54 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2004 20:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Wired article on Drexler Message-ID: <20041007034754.D3C3A57E2A@finney.org> The Wired article on Drexler is now available online, at: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/drexler.html Title is "The Incredible Shrinking Man", and the blurb reads: : K. Eric Drexler was the godfather of nanotechnology. But the MIT : prodigy who dreamed up molecular machines was shoved aside by big : science -- and now he's an industry outcast. By Ed Regis from Wired : magazine. Hal From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 7 05:00:52 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 06 Oct 2004 22:00:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] the latest fashion in prescription dispensing In-Reply-To: <20041007021603.11779.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041007015641.83800.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20041007021603.11779.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041006215516.0292c998@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> As a proactive player in pharmaceutical land, I am lucky to have a doctor which respects this. I bring her the PDR info, she writes a scrip for a trial amount. Since about 3/4 of the meds have intolerable side effects, this is kind of expensive. However, if I need something really out of the ordinary, I sometimes try other docs. However, I friends whose doctors are from the paelozoic or somewhere, and these docs won't prescribe anything the book doesn't tell them to. In one case, my friend can't get scrip for HGH.... but you gotta be proactive to survive these days, IMO "you can merely pay your maid or some other servant to locate several doctors who don't know of each other, so they can write prescriptions for one or more medications. It's as easy as 1-2-3" Trend Ologist ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 7 05:47:31 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 06:47:31 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] medical privacy In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041006215516.0292c998@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041007054731.3259.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> There are two sides to this. Limbaugh's maid got caught procuring meds for him and she didn't want to take the rap alone-- which was only what could be expected. If I send the boy who delivers my newspaper on an errand to pick up a stash of oxycontin for me I can't plead ignorance of the consequences. Though Limbaugh was only looking out for his own interests, he is a public figure who espouses law & order so though he doesn't deserve to be prosecuted he does deserve to be ridiculed for his double standard... the rest of us get heat for our hypocrisies, don't we? Anyway, he stuck his foot in the poop and now he's got to wipe it off. Limbaugh got caught breaking a bad law, the prosecution will push the case until public pressure (Limbaugh is too popular to be hurt over such a small scandal) forces it to be dropped with perhaps a fine, and attention will be drawn to medical privacy issues. The biggest winner will be the maid who will write a book, "Rush Limbaugh's Mule", that she can plug on Larry King Live. In America there is no limit to what you can achieve. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 7 08:01:45 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 01:01:45 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Limboggle In-Reply-To: <20041007054731.3259.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041006215516.0292c998@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <20041007054731.3259.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041007010028.0293c868@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Nah, it's the IRS taking the royalty income tax.... > The biggest winner will be the maid who will write a >book, "Rush Limbaugh's Mule", that she can plug on >Larry King Live. In America there is no limit to what >you can achieve. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Oct 7 08:41:10 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 10:41:10 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: References: <20041006140359.59122.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <200410061437.i96EbNH02977@r2d2.sics.se> Message-ID: On 6 Oct 2004, at 18:58, BillK wrote: > Can I nominate the automobile as the greatest mass murderer of the > 20thC? no. best, patrick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 7 11:53:23 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 04:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Unmitigated gall of the FAA Message-ID: <20041007115323.82838.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20041007/ap_on_sc/space_tourism_regulation&cid=624&ncid=716 I don't think I've ever read such a drippingly patronizing set of statements from public officials in recent years... ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 7 12:53:18 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 05:53:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gandhi's antipode In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041007125318.92992.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Patrick Wilken wrote: > > On 6 Oct 2004, at 18:58, BillK wrote: > > > Can I nominate the automobile as the greatest mass murderer of the > > 20thC? > > no. Patrick is right. The greatest mass murderer is the person who puts their own self-gratification ahead of responsible driving, or responsible anything. S/he who abidcates responsibility for security, safety, or other blissfull benefits of serfdom is the true villian of the modern world. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From megao at sasktel.net Thu Oct 7 14:24:56 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:24:56 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Right to choose Message-ID: <416551B8.5000603@sasktel.net> This snippet of chat from the extropian group touches on the focal point , it's not CDSA or prescriptive access but ........ should any third party have greater power or exclusive rights to dictate what a person should , will or cannot consume than that individual themselves. We are really discussing the rights we have given to the state to override the rights of the individual. It can be argued a sophisticated 21st century citizen should have full right to be protected against the state's more's when dealing with thier own body. The proviso here is that the individual must pay for such non-authorized procedures, augnmentations (mechanical, chemical or otherwise) themselves just as persons wishing cosmetic surgery must. Ownership over one's body is the issue. Even an MD cannot self-prescribe. All one has to do is remove from law , the medical privacy laws from medical choices made when citizens self-prescribe as opposed to the privacy laws when a third party authorized by the state prescribes and an new check and balance based on individual freedoms might result? I think Society/State has come to assume that socialist protections allow borgian assimilation and have not contemplated that just the opposite, an empowerment of individuality might result. Trend Ologist writes: >> It is time we let go of outdated doctor-patient relationships. Having >> one doctor write a prescription for a certain medication for one patient >> is so last-week, so old hat. This is the 21st century, we've got to do >> the In thing, get with the New, the Now. > > I assume you are being facetious, and you actually believe that people should be legally prevented from making their own decisions about what substances to put into their bodies? Would you extend this to extropian augmentations? Do you think that society should hold veto power over whether you can choose to enhance your intelligence or emotional stability? I know there are those who say that libertarianism is passe in transhumanist thought. To me, it is a fundamental part of extropian philosophy that individuals have the right to enhance their own minds and bodies, even if society disapproves. I'd be curious to hear from those who see themselves as extropian but who believe that these decisions should be made collectively, aiming at maximizing the social welfare. 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 megao at sasktel.net Thu Oct 7 14:38:59 2004 From: megao at sasktel.net (Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.) Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 07:38:59 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [medusers] Right to choose .... a new paradigm shift In-Reply-To: <416551B8.5000603@sasktel.net> References: <416551B8.5000603@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <41655503.4000509@sasktel.net> Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc. wrote: > This snippet of chat from the extropian group touches on the focal point > , it's not CDSA or prescriptive > access but ........ should any third party have greater power or > exclusive rights to dictate what a person should , will or cannot > consume than that individual themselves. > > We are really discussing the rights we have given to the state to > override the rights of the individual. It can be argued > a sophisticated 21st century citizen should have full right to be > protected against the state's more's when dealing with thier own body. > The proviso here is that the individual must pay for such non-authorized > procedures, augnmentations (mechanical, chemical or otherwise) > themselves just as persons wishing cosmetic surgery must. Ownership > over one's body is the issue. Even an MD cannot self-prescribe. All > one has to do is remove from law , the medical privacy laws from medical > choices made when citizens self-prescribe as opposed to the privacy laws > when a third party authorized by the state prescribes and an new check > and balance based on individual freedoms might result? > > I think Society/State has come to assume that socialist protections > allow borgian assimilation and have not contemplated that > just the opposite, an empowerment of individuality might result. > > Trend Ologist writes: > > >> It is time we let go of outdated doctor-patient relationships. Having > >> one doctor write a prescription for a certain medication for one > patient > >> is so last-week, so old hat. This is the 21st century, we've got to do > >> the In thing, get with the New, the Now. > > > > > > I assume you are being facetious, and you actually believe that people > should be legally prevented from making their own decisions about what > substances to put into their bodies? > > Would you extend this to extropian augmentations? Do you think that > society should hold veto power over whether you can choose to enhance > your intelligence or emotional stability? > > I know there are those who say that libertarianism is passe in > transhumanist thought. To me, it is a fundamental part of extropian > philosophy that individuals have the right to enhance their own minds and > bodies, even if society disapproves. I'd be curious to hear from those > who see themselves as extropian but who believe that these decisions > should be made collectively, aiming at maximizing the social welfare. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > Space Tourism Faces Safety Regulations > > 2 hours, 15 minutes ago > > Add to My Yahoo! > > Science - AP > > > > By JOHN ANTCZAK, Associated Press Writer > > LOS ANGELES - Thrill seekers are plunking down six figures to ride > rockets that haven't even been built yet, and a new airline called > Virgin Galactic promises to be up and soaring in the next three years. > Still, the budding space tourism industry faces a myriad of safety > concerns -- in the sky and on the ground -- that must be resolved > before any paying passenger takes off. > > Photo > > AP Photo > > > > > > > Missed Tech Tuesday? > > It's cheap and easy to buy components > , > and build > > and customize > > your own PC. > > > > > The rules that will govern the industry in the United States remain > under discussion between federal regulators and rocket developers, and > legislation is still before Congress. > > The pace of negotiations and the ultimate shape of the regulations > could determine whether the sky-high enthusiasm for space tourism -- > fueled by the historic suborbital flights of SpaceShipOne -- grows or > wanes, especially among investors. > > Federal Aviation Administration (news > > - web sites > ) > chief Marion C. Blakey this week visited Xcor Aerospace, a rocket > developer just down the Mojave Airport flight line from SpaceShipOne's > home. She talked of partnership with the new industry and said it was > important for the United States to be the world leader. > > She made clear, however, that broad safety issues are the agency's > topic No. 1. > > "Our first concern will be the safety of the uninvolved public, making > sure that as this grows and develops that we're doing everything we > can to protect the folks on the ground, to make sure that the people > who go into space understand the risks," she said. "It will be a risky > business for many years to come, no doubt." > > The FAA (news > > - web sites > ) > for several years has been studying what the average passenger will > face from G-force and psychological factors, and what type of medical > fitness he or she will require, Blakey said. > > There is also a question of what information a passenger should have, > about safety records, for example, to assess risk and make a > meaningful informed-consent statement. > > Patti Grace Smith, associate administrator for the FAA's office of > commercial space transportation, indicated passenger awareness is one > of the "hurdles" in the way of making space travel as routine as > aviation. > > "The kind of threshold that we will have to figure out how to achieve > is the cognizance issue: How do we know that they understand the risk > that they are taking? How do we know that they understand what they're > doing?" she said. > > Xcor President Jeff Greason, who hopes to build a rocket plane that > can fly off a runway, said talks with the government have come far but > there is much work ahead on the regulatory front. > > Greason said he is in total agreement that it is necessary for > regulators to ensure that potential passengers have adequate > information. But he sees a "critical distinction" between the risk > faced by the uninvolved public and that faced by those who want to fly > into space. > > "The uninvolved public has to be held to a very high level of safety," > he said. "There's no reason they should be exposed to a level of risk > that's different than they see from any other aspect of industrial life. > > "The involved passenger, the people who are deliberately putting their > lives and treasure at risk to open the space frontier they've dreamed > of their entire lives, as long as they know what they're getting into, > I think they have to be allowed to take that risk." > > One of the nation's advantages, he asserted, is that there is still a > "culture of risk acceptance as long as it's only for the participant." > > Blakey believes that passengers through many years of airline travel > have developed an expectation of a certain amount of regulatory > oversight. > > "What that should be in commercial space, we're working with right > now. And as I say, we definitely see that the level of risk is very > different," she said. > > > > > Greason said commercial space transportation, for it to succeed, has > to chart new ground to improve the level of safety set by government > programs such as the space shuttle. > > "That means the classic regulatory prescriptive approach of 'We'll do > it just like all those other successful very safe personal space > transportation vehicles' can't work," he said. "It's a paradoxical, > hard to understand thing, but in order to achieve greater safety, we > have to allow many approaches to be tried, because only in that way > can we find out experimentally those which offer greater safety." > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > click here > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/medusers/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > medusers-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service . > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: addtomyyahoo3.gif Type: image/gif Size: 568 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: thumb.la10610070312.space_tourism_regulation_la106.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 4112 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 999999.gif Type: image/gif Size: 43 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: techwk71_1.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5027 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 7 13:58:43 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 06:58:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Right to choose In-Reply-To: <416551B8.5000603@sasktel.net> Message-ID: <20041007135843.72911.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc." wrote: > This snippet of chat from the extropian group touches on the focal > point > , it's not CDSA or prescriptive > access but ........ should any third party have greater power or > exclusive rights to dictate what a person should , will or cannot > consume than that individual themselves. > > We are really discussing the rights we have given to the state to > override the rights of the individual. We have given powers to the state, which we may rescind. The state has no rights in and of itself. A society may, from time to time, decide to rescind some, or all powers it has delegated to its government. As with the FAA announcement over space regulation I cited earlier, it is when public officials believe they have rights *as officials* over people that tyranny results and evolves out of patronizing attitudes. The FAA has successfully destroyed the domestic civil aviation industry here in the US. If we let them, they will do the same to the civil space industry in its infancy. It is what they are good at. > It can be argued a sophisticated 21st century citizen should have > full right to be protected against the state's mores when dealing > with their own body. As I've argued, we need the equivalent of IP protection for the particular genetic expression that is 'you'. >The proviso here is that the individual must pay for such nonauthorized > procedures, augnmentations (mechanical, chemical or otherwise) > themselves just as persons wishing cosmetic surgery must. Ownership > over one's body is the issue. Even an MD cannot self-prescribe. All > one has to do is remove from law the medical privacy laws from > medical choices made when citizens self-prescribe as opposed to the > privacy laws when a third party authorized by the state prescribes > and an new check and balance based on individual freedoms might > result? An alternative is to remove yourself from the regulatory regieme of the federal government. If you use your expatriation rights under the Expatriation Act of 1867 to rescind your contracts with the US government (based in duress, fraud, incognizance, and misrepresentation) and expat out of US citizenship, regaining full state citizenship, as described in the 14th Amendment, then you only have to worry about your own state's medical regulations. > > I think Society/State has come to assume that socialist protections > allow borgian assimilation and have not contemplated that > just the opposite, an empowerment of individuality might result. On the contrary, socialist protections are guaranteed to result in borgian futures, for the simple reason is that you are setting the fox to guarding the henhouse. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 7 16:14:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Michael Lorrey) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 12:14:39 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Michael invites you to the Free State Project group Message-ID: <200410071614.i97GEdhZ026911@ws573.multiply.com> Personal message from Michael: The Free State Project group now has its own web page on Multiply! I want you to join so you'll be alerted whenever we add new photos, messages, events and other information to the web page. This will make it extremely easy - and fun - to share info and stay in touch with fellow Free State Project members. Group description: The Free State Project is a movement to recruit 20,000 liberty oriented individuals to move to one state to work to maximize personal liberty and limit government to the protection of its citizens and their property against force & fraud. About Multiply: To join the group, you'll first need to register on Multiply, a web site that makes it easy to keep in touch and share information with friends, family and people who share your interests. To accept Michael's invitation and see the Free State Project group web page, please go to the following address to register for Multiply: http://multiply.com/i/OM,ICJwWh,0AHxOMmn+GmQ From nanogirl at halcyon.com Thu Oct 7 21:42:44 2004 From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 14:42:44 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl News~ References: <4160977F.8070009@imminst.org> Message-ID: <00ac01c4acb6$97abf1b0$1db71218@Nano> The Nanogirl News October 7, 2004 NSF funds nano-related coursework for grades 7-12. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has awarded a first-of-its-kind grant to a Northwestern University-led team to train teachers in nanotechnology and help them develop programs for middle and high schools. "This is different from previous (NSF-funded) centers, which focus on research but have also done part-time outreach activity," said Mike Roco, senior nanotech adviser at NSF and an architect of the National Nanotechnology Initiative. NSF this week is expected to officially announce the five-year, $15-million award to Robert Chang, a professor in Northwestern's Department of Materials Science and Engineering. (/27/04) http://www.smalltimes.com/document_display.cfm?document_id=8326 Autonomous Atom Assembly. The ability to use an STM to move and position atoms with lattice site precision provides us with a quantum workbench to study the effects of quantum confinement and the electronic structure of perfect nanostructures. So far, atomic manipulation has been performed manually, or with rudimentary computer assistance. We are working to extend this capability significantly by developing an Autonomous Atom Assembler (AAA). An autonomous atom assembler is an instrument capable of assembling a desired nanostructure from an unknown random collection of atoms without human intervention. (NIST 8/04) http://physics.nist.gov/Divisions/Div841/Gp3/Projects/STM/aaa_proj.html (Event) Foresight Institute Conference Tackles Nanotechnology Applications and Public Policy. Foresight Institute, the leading nanotechnology education and public policy think tank, is sponsoring the 1st Conference on Advanced Nanotechnology: Research, Applications, and Policy, October 22-24, 2004 at the Crystal City Marriott Hotel, Washington DC area. This conference focuses on molecular nanotechnology and what it will mean for the environment, water purification, clean energy, medicine, national security, space exploration, international competitiveness, zero-waste manufacturing and overall societal impacts and other areas. (TMCnet 10/7/04) http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Oct/1080749.htm High-tech tweezers enable nano-assembly lines. "This technique makes possible nano-assembly lines," said Chicago entrepreneur Lewis Gruber. "You can use it to put things together, twist them, rotate them, fix things in locations at the microscopic or atomic level. It makes possible, for the first time, a factory floor under the microscope capable of manufacturing components and assembling them into products at high throughput, just as is done in the industrial world." (Chicago Sun Times 10/5/04) http://www.suntimes.com/output/business/cst-fin-cia05arryx.html Buckyballs at Bat: Toxic nanomaterials get a tune-up. Over the past decade, the development of nanomaterials has progressed rapidly toward their eventual use in products ranging from solar cells to medicines. However, tests of possible toxic effects of these substances on human health and the environment have been slow to get under way. Recently, an experiment raised concern about the soccer-ball-shaped carbon molecules commonly known as buckyballs. Now, other chemists confirm that finding and report an innovation that might disarm potentially toxic buckyballs. (Sciencenews 10/2/04) http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20041002/fob1.asp Nano AIDS shield given a boost. What could be the world's first nanotechnology-based protection against HIV has just been given a huge boost. The Australian biotechnology company Starpharma announced today it had been granted US$5.4 million (A$7.5 million) from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) for its research on an anti-microbial gel which prevents HIV infection of cells. (ABCnet 9/30/04) http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1210693.htm In Search of a Biosensing Biocide. Simple compound is eyed as a lead to a chemical/biological counteragent. Imagine this: a simple lipid molecule forms a bilayer, the bilayers curl up to form nanotubes, and bunches of nanotubes assemble into a "nanocarpet." Furthermore, the nanotubes respond to different substances by changing color, and they kill bacteria to boot! No need to imagine all this--such a molecule has been synthesized, and its remarkable capabilities have been explored by a team at the University of Pittsburgh led by Alan J. Russell, a professor of surgery and of chemical and bioengineering [J. Am. Chem. Soc., published online Sept. 24. (C&E News 10/4/04) http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8240/8240notw2.html Researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the University of Arizona and Cornell University, all in the US, have made a superhard phase of carbon by applying pressure to carbon nanotubes. The material was at least as hard as cubic diamond and retained its properties at room temperature even when the pressure was removed. (nanotechweb 8/23/04) http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/9/14/1 Nanotubes work like radio antennas to convert light into electricity. Radio aerials have been around for over a century, and routinely receive information carried by radio waves into our homes. Now, finally, scientists have built an aerial that can do the same for light waves. The tiny antennas could be used in solar cells, or 'optical computers' that would move data round as light beams. (Nature news 8/20/04) http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040920/full/040920-1.html National Cancer Institute Symposium to be Part of NANO Week. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will present a symposium on the role of nanotechnology in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer Oct. 27 as part of NANO Week. The program, "Overcoming Barriers to Collaboration," will be held at the InterContinental Hotel and MBNA Conference Center on The Cleveland Clinic Foundation campus. It is free to attend, but space is limited to 200 registrants. (Yahoo 9/21/04) http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040921/cltu089_1.html Physicists Create Artificial Molecule On A Chip. Using integrated circuit fabrication techniques, a team of researchers from Yale University has bound a single photon to a superconducting device engineered to behave like a single atom, forming an artificial molecule. It's the first experimental result in a field Yale professors Robert Schoelkopf and Steven Girvin have dubbed circuit quantum electrodynamics. (photonics 8/24/04) http://www.photonics.com/XQ/ASP/url.readarticle/artid.251/QX/readart.htm Researchers demonstrate nanoscale self-assembly. A new processing technique developed by Cornell University researchers promises to usher in lithographic-like self-assembly into single and multidimensional nanoscale structures. The technique enabled 10-nm precision lithography. One-, two- and three-dimensional nanoscale structures self-assembled by combining a block copolymer with a "cascade molecule" called a dendrimer in which atoms are arrayed along a carbon backbone, the researchers said. (EETimes 9/9/04) http://www.eetimes.com/at/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=47101871 Magic clusters double up. Theoretical physicists in Italy and France have discovered a new family of "magic" clusters using computer simulations. The clusters, which consist of a nickel or copper core surrounded by silver atoms, display high levels of structural, thermodynamic and electronic stability. The silver-nickel structures are also magnetic (G Rossi et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 105503). (Physicsweb 8/7/04) http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/9/4/1 Good Vibrations in the Nanoworld. Local defects tune the vibrational modes of carbon nanotubes. Accessing vibrational modes of molecular chains at the site of a specific atom in molecules is no longer a dream. Using a scanning tunneling microscopy technique, the vibrational modes of carbon nanotubes have been mapped with sub-nanometer spatial resolution. This allows the study of the role of local defects and demonstrates the crucial importance of nanotubes for the electronic and mechanical properties of nanotubes. (Max Planck Society 8/27/04) http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20040924/index.html Nanotechnology research funding list now live at Sandia/LANL CINT website. Shortcut to funding sources now available. Nanotech researchers can shorten their search for funding by visiting the Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies (CINT) Internet site (www.sandia.gov/cint or www.lanl.gov/cint). There, a searchable database of federal government nanotechnology funding sources is supplied as a service to the nanoscience community by CINT, a joint project of Sandia and Los Alamos national laboratories supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science. (Sandia 9/30/04) http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2004/micro-nano/database.html Get set for nanotech. Nanotechnology is being called many things: A massive investment opportunity; an incredibly promising next generation electronics technology, and even a threat to humanity. For the electronics sector, fabrication of chips with nanoscale (nm) features is becoming routine. Yet while semiconductor manufacturing is dealing in nanometres, it too is still to be affected by true nanotechnology - or more accurately "molecular nanotechnology". Molecular nanotechnology (referred to as nanotechnology for the rest of this article) means constructing materials and devices virtually one atom at a time. (Ferret 9/27/04) http://www.ferret.com.au/articles/ba/0c0278ba.asp (ETC again) Nanotech 'threatens markets for poor nations' goods'. The introduction of nanotechnologies could threaten markets for goods from developing countries, according to a presentation made yesterday at the 4th World Conference of Science Journalists in Montreal, Canada. The claim was made by Pat Mooney, executive director of the ETC Group, a Canadian organization that researches the socio-economic impacts of new technologies. Highlighting the lack of regulation for emerging technologies, Mooney called for a United Nations convention to evaluate their impacts, not only on health and the environment but also on society at large. (SciDev 10/7/04) http://www.scidev.net/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=readnews&itemid=1647&language=1 Kurzweil's Quest For Eternal Youth Sets Group Abuzz. Inventor Ray Kurzweil takes 250 nutritional supplements a day in his quest to live long enough to reap the benefits he expects from biotechnology. He says he's trying to reprogram his body, as he would his computer...And health is a theme Kurzweil returned to repeatedly; it is the subject of his latest book, "Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever," co-authored with medical doctor Terry Grossman. But it was his broader vision of how biology, nanotechnology and information science are merging that set the backdrop for the conference, which brought together nearly 1,000 scientists and executives from various disciplines to peer into the future. (Washington Post 10/7/04) http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11564-2004Oct6.html $10 million to establish a multidisciplinary research program in cancer nanotechnology. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has awarded scientists from Emory University and the Georgia Institute of Technology two new collaborative research grants, totaling nearly $10 million, to establish a multidisciplinary research program in cancer nanotechnology and to develop a new class of nanoparticles for molecular and cellular imaging. (News-Medical.net 10/6/04) http://www.news-medical.net/?id=5380 Rice Finds 'On-Off Switch' For Buckyball Toxicity. Researchers at Rice University's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology (CBEN) have demonstrated a simple way to reduce the toxicity of water-soluble buckyballs by a factor of more than ten million. The research will appear in an upcoming issue of the journal Nano Letters, published by the American Chemical Society, the world's largest scientific society. One of the first toxicological studies of buckyballs, the research was published online by the journal on Sept. 11. (Sciencedaily 10/6/04) http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/10/041006083717.htm Carbon Nanotechnologies Inc. -- CNI -- Announces the Issue of a U.S. Patent for Composites Containing Single-Wall Carbon Nanotubes. Carbon Nanotechnologies, Inc (CNI) announced today the issue of U.S. Patent 6,790,425 B1 for both pure and composite materials containing derivitized single-wall carbon nanotubes in substantial alignment with one another. This patent paves the way for commercial products with superior performance characteristics, such as plastics with electrical conductivity, improved fibers for bullet-proof vests, plastic parts that are stronger and longer lasting, and flat panel TVs and displays which are brighter, longer lasting, and consume less energy. This technology is part of the intellectual property developed by Nobel-Prize winning scientist Dr. Richard Smalley and licensed exclusively to CNI by Rice University in 2001. (BusinessWire 9/5/04) http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20041005006176&newsLang=en Nanomaterials break out of laboratory into marketplace. Miniature medical machines that can bring sight to the blind and computers that work at the speed of light are no longer the stuff of futuristic novels. Argonne National Laboratory researchers are creating nanomaterials and nanotechnology to make these and other innovations possible, and collaborating with industry to bring new technologies to the marketplace. (nanotechwire 10/4/04) http://nanotechwire.com/news.asp?nid=1166 Gates Backs Education for Tech Growth. Microsoft mogul Bill Gates told hundreds of engineering students Friday that the future of technology could open the door for much more innovative applications than those of the past decade, but the key to further advancements lies in the strength of higher education. In Zellerbach Hall, Gates said that while the last 20 years have seen vast advances in personal computing and communications technology, we can expect to see more developments intertwined with other fields in the future, such as biotechnology and nanotechnology. (The Daily Californian 10/4/04) http://www.dailycal.org/article.php?id=16337 Presidential Candidates Speak Out on Science Policies. With the exception of the debate over stem-cell research, science remains a background topic in the current campaign. Democratic candidate John Kerry has occasionally highlighted US science policy and used it against President Bush, charging that the administration has put politics and ideology ahead of science. "Let scientists do science again," a headline on the Kerry election website says. Bush has responded, primarily through his science adviser, John Marburger, by pointing to the 44% increase in federal R&D since fiscal year 2001 and the record $132 billion in the administration's FY 2005 R&D budget. "Kerry ignores President Bush's record science investments," reads a headline on the Bush reelection website. Kerry answers by noting that most of the R&D money is going for weapons systems and defense spending related to the war in Iraq, not basic science programs. Marburger and other administration officials point to several R&D initiatives, including new nanotechnology centers, the Moon/Mars space initiative, and the program to develop hydrogen fuel technology. (Physics Today 10/3/04) http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-10/p28.html Tiny battlefield in the war on disease Devices as small as genes detect, fight illnesses. To the incredibly tiny gold particles doctors send to search a blood sample for signs of illness, human cells would seem as big as mountains. But the particles' mission is to hunt down something more their size: prostate specific antigen, or PSA, a signal that prostate cancer may be on its way to returning - long before it actually does. Welcome to the new frontier of nanotechnology, where scientists are learning how to make super-small devices - as small as genes and proteins - to diagnose diseases that remain unseen with present equipment and to provide treatments tailored to affect individual cells. "The particles go into a blood sample, and if there are as few as 10 molecules of PSA present they will find them," said Chad Mirkin, director of Northwestern University's Institute for Nanotechnology. "The current test would need 10 million molecules of PSA to record a positive reading." (Monterey Herald 10/1/04) http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/news/nation/9809270.htm Gina "Nanogirl" Miller Nanotechnology Industries http://www.nanoindustries.com Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com/index2.html Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Tech-Aid Advisor http://www.tech-aid.info/t/all-about.html Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com "Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Oct 7 22:23:37 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 17:23:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] that new Kurzweil book Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041007171935.01b90ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Fantastic Voyage : Live Long Enough to Live Forever by Ray Kurzweil, Terry Grossman * Hardcover: 400 pages * Publisher: Rodale Books; (October 27, 2004) * ISBN: 1579549543 * Amazon.com Sales Rank: 114 [Yikes!!!] Editorial Reviews About the Author Ray Kurzweil, Ph.D., is one of the world's leading entrepreneurs, thinkers, and futurists. A recipient of the National Medal of Technology, among many other honors, he is the author of three previous books: The Age of Spiritual Machines, The 10% Solution for a Healthy Life, and The Age of Intelligent Machines. "Terry Grossman, M.D., is a board certified physician of anti-aging medicine who has written several popular articles on natural treatments for ailments. An expert in longevity medicine, he is the author of a leading book on life extension, The Baby Boomer's Guide to Living Forever." Book Description One of the most respected scientists and futurists in America teams up with an expert on human longevity, to show how we can tap today's revolution in biotechnology and nanotechnology to virtually live forever. Startling discoveries in the areas of genomics, biotechnology, and nanotechnology are occurring every day. The rewards of this research, some of it as spectacular as what was once thought of as science fiction, are practically in our grasp. Already it is possible to analyze our individual genetic makeups and evaluate our predisposition for breast cancer or other deadly diseases on a case-by-case basis. And once we've isolated these genes, the ability to repress or enhance them through biotechnology is just around the corner. Soon, for example, it will be feasible for 10% of our red blood cells to be replaced by artificial cells, radically extending our life expectancy and enhancing our physical and even mental abilities beyond what is humanly possible today. In Fantastic Voyage, Ray Kurzweil and Terry Grossman will show us how amazingly advanced we are in our medical technology, and how incredibly far each of us can go toward living as long as we dare imagine. With today's mind-bending array of scientific knowledge, it is possible to prevent nearly 90% of the maladies that kill us, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes, kidney disease, and liver disease. Ray Kurzweil and Terry Grossman start the reader on a fantastic journey to undreamed-of vitality with a comprehensive investigation into the cutting-edge science on diet, metabolism, genetics, toxins and detoxification, the hormones involved with aging and youth, exercise, stress reduction, and more. By following their program, which includes such simple recommendations as drinking alkaline water and taking specific nutritional supplements to enhance your immune system and slow the aging process on a cellular level, anyone will be able to immediately add years of healthy, active living to his life. =========================== That final sentence, and the dubious term `detoxification', had a strange effect on my digestion, but hey. From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 8 01:03:41 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 18:03:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl News~ In-Reply-To: <00ac01c4acb6$97abf1b0$1db71218@Nano> Message-ID: <20041008010341.77089.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gina Miller wrote: > Autonomous Atom Assembly. The ability to use an STM > to move and position atoms with lattice site > precision provides us with a quantum workbench to > study the effects of quantum confinement and the > electronic structure of perfect nanostructures. So > far, atomic manipulation has been performed > manually, or with rudimentary computer assistance. > We are working to extend this capability > significantly by developing an Autonomous Atom > Assembler (AAA). An autonomous atom assembler is an > instrument capable of assembling a desired > nanostructure from an unknown random collection of > atoms without human intervention. (NIST 8/04) > http://physics.nist.gov/Divisions/Div841/Gp3/Projects/STM/aaa_proj.html Which results in a 2D image, but we know how to do 3D printing from lots of 2D prints. And somehow I doubt anyone's going to call "fat fingers" on them until after they've proven they can do it. They even call it an assembler... > (Event) Foresight Institute Conference Tackles > Nanotechnology Applications and Public Policy. > Foresight Institute, the leading nanotechnology > education and public policy think tank, is > sponsoring the 1st Conference on Advanced > Nanotechnology: Research, Applications, and Policy, > October 22-24, 2004 at the Crystal City Marriott > Hotel, Washington DC area. This conference focuses > on molecular nanotechnology and what it will mean > for the environment, water purification, clean > energy, medicine, national security, space > exploration, international competitiveness, > zero-waste manufacturing and overall societal > impacts and other areas. (TMCnet 10/7/04) > http://www.tmcnet.com/usubmit/2004/Oct/1080749.htm > > High-tech tweezers enable nano-assembly lines. "This > technique makes possible nano-assembly lines," said > Chicago entrepreneur Lewis Gruber. "You can use it > to put things together, twist them, rotate them, fix > things in locations at the microscopic or atomic > level. It makes possible, for the first time, a > factory floor under the microscope capable of > manufacturing components and assembling them into > products at high throughput, just as is done in the > industrial world." (Chicago Sun Times 10/5/04) > http://www.suntimes.com/output/business/cst-fin-cia05arryx.html > > Buckyballs at Bat: Toxic nanomaterials get a > tune-up. Over the past decade, the development of > nanomaterials has progressed rapidly toward their > eventual use in products ranging from solar cells to > medicines. However, tests of possible toxic effects > of these substances on human health and the > environment have been slow to get under way. > Recently, an experiment raised concern about the > soccer-ball-shaped carbon molecules commonly known > as buckyballs. Now, other chemists confirm that > finding and report an innovation that might disarm > potentially toxic buckyballs. > (Sciencenews 10/2/04) > http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20041002/fob1.asp > > Nano AIDS shield given a boost. What could be the > world's first nanotechnology-based protection > against HIV has just been given a huge boost. The > Australian biotechnology company Starpharma > announced today it had been granted US$5.4 million > (A$7.5 million) from the US National Institutes of > Health (NIH) for its research on an anti-microbial > gel which prevents HIV infection of cells. > (ABCnet 9/30/04) > http://abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s1210693.htm > > In Search of a Biosensing Biocide. Simple compound > is eyed as a lead to a chemical/biological > counteragent. Imagine this: a simple lipid molecule > forms a bilayer, the bilayers curl up to form > nanotubes, and bunches of nanotubes assemble into a > "nanocarpet." Furthermore, the nanotubes respond to > different substances by changing color, and they > kill bacteria to boot! No need to imagine all > this--such a molecule has been synthesized, and its > remarkable capabilities have been explored by a team > at the University of Pittsburgh led by Alan J. > Russell, a professor of surgery and of chemical and > bioengineering [J. Am. Chem. Soc., published online > Sept. 24. (C&E News 10/4/04) > http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/8240/8240notw2.html > > Researchers at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the > University of Arizona and Cornell University, all in > the US, have made a superhard phase of carbon by > applying pressure to carbon nanotubes. The material > was at least as hard as cubic diamond and retained > its properties at room temperature even when the > pressure was removed. (nanotechweb 8/23/04) > http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/3/9/14/1 > > Nanotubes work like radio antennas to convert light > into electricity. Radio aerials have been around for > over a century, and routinely receive information > carried by radio waves into our homes. Now, finally, > scientists have built an aerial that can do the same > for light waves. The tiny antennas could be used in > solar cells, or 'optical computers' that would move > data round as light beams. (Nature news 8/20/04) > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040920/full/040920-1.html > > National Cancer Institute Symposium to be Part of > NANO Week. The National Cancer Institute (NCI), part > of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), will > present a symposium on the role of nanotechnology in > the diagnosis and treatment of cancer Oct. 27 as > part of NANO Week. The program, "Overcoming Barriers > to Collaboration," will be held at the > InterContinental Hotel and MBNA Conference Center on > The Cleveland Clinic Foundation campus. It is free > to attend, but space is limited to 200 registrants. > (Yahoo 9/21/04) > http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040921/cltu089_1.html > > Physicists Create Artificial Molecule On A Chip. > Using integrated circuit fabrication techniques, a > team of researchers from Yale University has bound a > single photon to a superconducting device engineered > to behave like a single atom, forming an artificial > molecule. It's the first experimental result in a > field Yale professors Robert Schoelkopf and Steven > Girvin have dubbed circuit quantum electrodynamics. > (photonics 8/24/04) > http://www.photonics.com/XQ/ASP/url.readarticle/artid.251/QX/readart.htm > > Researchers demonstrate nanoscale self-assembly. A > new processing technique developed by Cornell > University researchers promises to usher in > lithographic-like self-assembly into single and > multidimensional nanoscale structures. The technique > enabled 10-nm precision lithography. > One-, two- and three-dimensional nanoscale > structures self-assembled by combining a block > copolymer with a "cascade molecule" called a > dendrimer in which atoms are arrayed along a carbon > backbone, the researchers said. (EETimes 9/9/04) > http://www.eetimes.com/at/news/showArticle.jhtml?articleId=47101871 > > Magic clusters double up. Theoretical physicists in > Italy and France have discovered a new family of > "magic" clusters using computer simulations. The > clusters, which consist of a nickel or copper core > surrounded by silver atoms, display high levels of > structural, thermodynamic and electronic stability. > The silver-nickel structures are also magnetic (G > Rossi et al. 2004 Phys. Rev. Lett. 93 105503). > (Physicsweb 8/7/04) > http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/9/4/1 > > Good Vibrations in the Nanoworld. Local defects tune > the vibrational modes of carbon nanotubes. Accessing > vibrational modes of molecular chains at the site of > a specific atom in molecules is no longer a dream. > Using a scanning tunneling microscopy technique, the > vibrational modes of carbon nanotubes have been > mapped with sub-nanometer spatial resolution. This > allows the study of the role of local defects and > demonstrates the crucial importance of nanotubes for > the electronic and mechanical properties of > nanotubes. (Max Planck Society 8/27/04) > http://www.mpg.de/english/illustrationsDocumentation/documentation/pressReleases/2004/pressRelease20040924/index.html > > Nanotechnology research funding list now live at > Sandia/LANL CINT website. Shortcut to funding > sources now available. Nanotech researchers can > shorten their search for funding by visiting the > Center for Integrated Nanotechnologies (CINT) > Internet site (www.sandia.gov/cint or > www.lanl.gov/cint). There, a searchable database of > federal government nanotechnology funding sources is > supplied as a service to the nanoscience community > by CINT, a joint project of Sandia and Los Alamos > national laboratories supported by the U.S. > Department of Energy's Office of Science. (Sandia > 9/30/04) > http://www.sandia.gov/news-center/news-releases/2004/micro-nano/database.html > > Get set for nanotech. Nanotechnology is being called > many === message truncated ===> _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 8 01:39:38 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 18:39:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD [forteana] Rodney and Rael In-Reply-To: <4164C5A4.F10118C9@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041008013938.79099.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Terry W. Colvin" wrote: > Aging comic Rodney Dangerfield has met with Brigitte > Boisseler, the CEO of > Clonaid, which is the medical branch of the > Raelians, to talk about cloning > himself. Dr. Boisselier came to the Dangerfield home > in Los Angeles and > talked with his wife while Rodney was recovering > from brain surgery. The > Raelians said they could create a clone of Rodney by > taking a swab of cells > from his cheek. When asked how much it would cost, > they said they would not > charge the Dangerfields anything. Rodney, who is > almost 82 years old, had a > friend videotape the bizarre meeting for use in a > future documentary about > his life!... > > http://www.martiansgohome.com/smear/v50/ss031025.htm He finally got some respect? ;) From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 8 01:58:10 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2004 18:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (Got Caliche?) Social construction of technology [SCOT] In-Reply-To: <4164C01C.29E3D201@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041008015810.67291.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Terry W. Colvin" wrote: > Knowing these > are problems inherent in > the social construction of technology, there must be > a market out there for a > Romulan cloaking device, or, for artifacts that > dis-assemble to innocuous shapes > for private travel. Memory metal wire. Blow dry it, and it's a wire comb (among many other possibilities). Pull it apart, and it's a garrote or a hacksaw (again, among many other possibilities). > However, there are at least four > problems with "SCOT" and > this type of material culture: (1) How to market the > master of the universe > device (it's hard to imagine these transformer > action figures advertised on > cartoon network); Just like anything else - market the utility, and perhaps the sexiness if you can make it sexy. > (2) Future archaeologists will > have a difficult time with > classification and typology; They can look up our records. We're generating more longer-lasting records than the cultures that our archaeologists study. > (3) Bill Rathje (of > Garbage Project fame) may claim > we are running out of landfill space with all the > disassembled spare parts going > missing into the trash; Recycle. Reuse. If a part can't be used in one of its forms, maybe its other form will find a use, so this would actually seem likely to generate less trash. > (4) Since technologies have > different meanings for > different social groups, how does W. and the D. > Homeland Security keep > terrorists out of sex shops where they might learn > to imitate cloaking > techniques and build IEDs (improvised explosive > devices) or 'thermo-nukulur' > dildos... The more time they spend making fools of themselves like this, the less time they'll have to violate civil rights in ways the average person might confuse for security. Besides, one can already build IEDs out of fertilizer. (Granted, most fertilizer has taggants to see who purchased them these days for that reason, but those can be removed - and, e.g., suicide bombers don't worry about people knowing their identities after the fact. Neither do their victims.) > If you have an answer to any of these > vexing problems of social > construction and material culture, let us know. How's this? ;) From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 8 18:43:02 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:43:02 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Article: "Political Victory: From Here to Maternity" Message-ID: <248570-22004105818432155@M2W061.mail2web.com> After reading this article, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54700-2004Sep1.html and wondered how mormons vote anyway. If they genes reproduce more aggressivley than any other social domain, then how will they vote? Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 8 18:55:52 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 11:55:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Wired article on Drexler Message-ID: <20041008185552.1D27C57E2A@finney.org> Extropians - Glenn Reynolds' InstaPundit blog has a brief mention this morning of the Wired article on Drexler. http://www.instapundit.com He writes: NANO-WARS: Ed Regis has an article in Wired on the nanotechnology industry's rather unfair treatment of Eric Drexler. It's also worth reading this[1] for more background. UPDATE: Daniel Moore[2] thinks that the article is too favorable to Drexler, while I actually think it underplays the intensity and ill-advisedness of the industry's efforts to shape the debate. and links to [1] http://www.techcentralstation.com/052604D.html which is an earlier article by Reynolds on the possibility that the NanoBusiness Alliance may be becoming less hostile to Drexlerian ideas [2] http://dfmoore.mu.nu/archives/2004/10/the_nanotech_debate_continues.php Moore is a 3rd year grad student doing nanotech research at Georgia Tech. Moore's article reflects what I am beginning to see as a consensus in the nanotech research world regarding the Drexler-Smalley debate: First, the article brings up the now famous (in nanotech circles) exchange between Drexler and Nobel Laureate Richard Smalley that took place in the pages of Chemical and Engineering News (located here[3]) The article in Wired glosses over Smalley's disagreements with Drexler, but I remember reading the letters when they first came out. Everyone in my group read them. Our general consensus was that Smalley cleaned Drexler's clock. Smalley brought up some legitimate questions over the science aspect of making and using nanoassemblers that Drexler answered only with some variant of "you shouldn't say somethings impossible in science because you never know." Science and technology do not get advanced with such answers. [3] http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/8148/print/8148counterpoint.html is the text of the letters which constituted the debate. "Smalley cleaned Drexler's clock." And yet, the reviews from nanotech proponents, such as Chris Phoenix's review at , give entirely the opposite impression. What can we conclude from this apparently contradiction? In a way, there is no contradiction. Each side would agree that we don't know if assemblers can work. Moore is unsatisfied and characterizes Drexler's claim as "you shouldn't say something's impossible in science because you never know." Chris is satisfied that "If Smalley's goal is to demonstrate that machine-phase chemistry is fundamentally flawed, he has not been effective". It's the same old burden-of-proof game that I've complained about before. As long as nanotech proponents present the issue as a requirement for science to prove that nanotech is impossible, they can't lose their argument, but they can't make progress either. As Moore writes, "Science and technology do not get advanced with such answers." Hal From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 8 19:40:00 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:40:00 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Washington Post Word Style Invitational Winners of 2003 (and 04) Message-ID: <171550-22004105819400365@M2W097.mail2web.com> A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new definition. Here are the 2003 winners which I enjoyed reading today. (2004 winners are located here http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3013-2004Oct2.html) 1. Intaxication: Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with. 2. Reintarnation: Coming back to life as a hillbilly 3. Bozone: The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future. 4. Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period. 5. Giraffiti: Vandalism spray-painted very, very high. 6. Sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it. 7. Inoculatte: To take coffee intravenously when you are running late. 8. Hipatitis: Terminal coolness. 9. Osteopornosis: A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.) 10. Karmageddon: It's like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it's like, a serious bummer. 11. Decafalon: The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you. 12. Glibido: All talk and no action. 13. Dopeler effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly. 14. Arachnoleptic fit: The frantic dance performed just after you've accidentally walked through a spider web. 15.Beelzebug: Satan in the form of a mosquito that gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot be cast out. 16. Caterpallor: The color you turn after finding half a grub in the fruit you're eating. 17. Ignoranus: A person who's both stupid and an a$$shole. And the pick of the literature: 18. Optorectomy -- Surgery to remove the nerve running from the eyeball to the rectum, which cures a crappy outlook on life. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 8 20:02:53 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:02:53 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? In-Reply-To: <20041008195848.7529.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041008200253.12216.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> How much of a threat is future asian gender imbalance to your grandchildren? Isn't the prospect of WMD holocaust in the Middle East more ominous to you? Paleos fret too much about remote facilitation ("if we don't challenge Row v. Wade, this will soon lead to an expansion of the abortion industry, which will lead to...). Do paleos stay up at night worrying about all this stuff? Don't they have too much going on with their families to spend one minute on such issues? You would think the plumbing of babies in asia would scarcely concern one for more than a moment, like glancing out the window at the rain. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 8 20:11:35 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 15:11:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <171550-22004105819400365@M2W097.mail2web.com> References: <171550-22004105819400365@M2W097.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041008150924.019eb460@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:40 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, Natasha wrote: >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational >which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by >adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new definition. But you left out your new definition. Is it a cup of coffee sipped while reading email in Seattle? Damien Broderick From megaquark at hotmail.com Fri Oct 8 20:17:23 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:17:23 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Article: "Political Victory: From Here to Maternity" References: <248570-22004105818432155@M2W061.mail2web.com> Message-ID: I'm sure it doesn't matter. I'm an atheist despite, and possibly even because of my catholic upbringing. :-) I am secular and libertarian. Meanwhile, one Catholic parent votes republican while the other democrat. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 1:43 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Article: "Political Victory: From Here to Maternity" > After reading this article, > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54700-2004Sep1.html and > wondered how mormons vote anyway. If they genes reproduce more > aggressivley than any other social domain, then how will they vote? > > Natasha > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From joe at barrera.org Fri Oct 8 20:45:42 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:45:42 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <20041008200253.12216.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041008200253.12216.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4166FC76.1010907@barrera.org> Trend Ologist wrote: > How much of a threat is future asian gender imbalance to your > grandchildren? Isn't the prospect of WMD holocaust in the Middle East > more ominous to you? Paleos fret too much about remote facilitation We could intentionally breed more girls here in the U.S., and sell them in the future to a male-dominated asia. It would help the trade imbalance... - Joe From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 8 20:49:59 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:49:59 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Washington Post Word Style Invitational Winners of 2003 (and 04) In-Reply-To: <171550-22004105819400365@M2W097.mail2web.com> References: <171550-22004105819400365@M2W097.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041008134842.02937390@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> This URL does not deliver the page, but instead a search box. Type "style invitational' into the box..... >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational > >Here are the 2003 winners which I enjoyed reading today. (2004 winners are >located here >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3013-2004Oct2.html) ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 8 20:54:35 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:54:35 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <4166FC76.1010907@barrera.org> Message-ID: <20041008205435.17883.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hey you're not supposed to be funnier than me, i want to stake out a niche as extrocomedian. Another proposal: clone Michael Jacksons, sell them to Japan. > We could intentionally breed more girls here in the > U.S., and sell them > in the future > to a male-dominated asia. It would help the trade > imbalance... > > - Joe ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 8 20:58:42 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 13:58:42 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <4166FC76.1010907@barrera.org> References: <20041008200253.12216.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <4166FC76.1010907@barrera.org> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041008135533.029fb298@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Hardly. The Asian gender imbalance is not genetic, it is by various forms of infantacide due to a cultural preference for males. You can't sell females to them. You pay Them by providing Dowries. >Trend Ologist wrote: > >> How much of a threat is future asian gender imbalance to your >> grandchildren? Isn't the prospect of WMD holocaust in the Middle East >> more ominous to you? Paleos fret too much about remote facilitation > >We could intentionally breed more girls here in the U.S., and sell them in >the future >to a male-dominated asia. It would help the trade imbalance... > >- Joe ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 8 20:59:34 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:59:34 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041008135533.029fb298@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041008205934.69917.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Even in Japan? >Hara Ra wrote: > Hardly. The Asian gender imbalance is not genetic, > it is by various forms > of infantacide due to a cultural preference for > males. You can't sell > females to them. You pay Them by providing Dowries. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 8 21:02:47 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:02:47 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette Message-ID: <230140-22004105821247208@M2W065.mail2web.com> Damien - you 'ole hawk-eye. haha N Original Message: ----------------- From: Damien Broderick thespike at satx.rr.com Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 15:11:35 -0500 To: natashavita at earthlink.net, extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] lette At 03:40 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, Natasha wrote: >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational >which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by >adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new definition. But you left out your new definition. Is it a cup of coffee sipped while reading email in Seattle? Damien Broderick -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 8 21:11:24 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:11:24 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Washington Post Word Style InvitationalWinners of 2003 (and 04) Message-ID: <141340-220041058211124957@M2W040.mail2web.com> Original Message: From: Hara Ra >This URL does not deliver the page, but instead a search box. Type "style >invitational' into the box..... >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational > >Here are the 2003 winners which I enjoyed reading today. (2004 winners are >located here >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A3013-2004Oct2.html) Just remove the ")" at the end of the paraenthesis after the ".html" Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 8 21:15:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:15:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041008150924.019eb460@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041008211558.68413.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 03:40 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, Natasha wrote: > > >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style > Invitational > >which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it > by > >adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new > definition. > > But you left out your new definition. Is it a cup of coffee sipped > while reading email in Seattle? No, its an email post that gets you twice as agressive and tense as a normal email, even though its dripping with foamy sweetness. ===== 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 8 21:20:07 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:20:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <4166FC76.1010907@barrera.org> Message-ID: <20041008212007.44623.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Joseph S. Barrera III" wrote: > Trend Ologist wrote: > > How much of a threat is future asian gender > imbalance to your > > grandchildren? Isn't the prospect of WMD > holocaust in the Middle East > > more ominous to you? Paleos fret too much about > remote facilitation > > We could intentionally breed more girls here in the > U.S., and sell them > in the future > to a male-dominated asia. It would help the trade > imbalance... I recall certain sci-fi stories where certain people made humans with artificial wombs, rigged with hormones and stimulants (especially neural stimulants) to speed the embryos to physical adulthood in much less than 18.75 years, while wiring their brains to be close copies of a known good template so as to give them adult-equivalent mental functionality. One could imagine someone in Asia setting up just that sort of service, combined with fake documentation (immigrant from a rural province or Third World country where verifiable documents are lacking), to provide compliant brides for rich men who can not otherwise find a woman (or possibly, rich parents of a young man who would rather further his own career than spend much effort finding a woman, but who want their family line to continue) - and, nearer-term, Asian biotech research explicitly aimed at that end. From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 8 21:51:15 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:51:15 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette Message-ID: <152580-220041058215115966@M2W063.mail2web.com> hey - It's the act of drinking milk while thinking of the past. Gee whiz. N Original Message: ----------------- From: Mike Lorrey mlorrey at yahoo.com Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:15:58 -0700 (PDT) To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] lette --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 03:40 PM 10/8/2004 -0400, Natasha wrote: > > >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style > Invitational > >which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it > by > >adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new > definition. > > But you left out your new definition. Is it a cup of coffee sipped > while reading email in Seattle? No, its an email post that gets you twice as agressive and tense as a normal email, even though its dripping with foamy sweetness. __________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 8 21:11:09 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:11:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) Message-ID: <20041008211109.0BEC057E2B@finney.org> The frustrating thing about this phenomenon is how short sighted the parents seem to be in making these choices. Do they imagine that they are the only ones taking steps to make sure their children are boys? Don't they realize that other people are doing it to? What kind of world do they imagine their children growing up in, if there is going to be a severe imbalance between young men and women? Don't they care about their children's welfare? Now, it's possible that this is a vicious circle; maybe a third-world nation with an excess of men will actually be worse for the women than the men. Western notions of female equality might be shunted aside as females become increasingly valuable. In such a world, women might be victimized and forced into a subservient role as only the most aggressive and dominant men are able to out-compete other men for the few women. If you anticipated that this was the world that your child was going to live in, maybe you would rather have them be a man who faced at worst a life of frustration, than a woman who might be treated as little more than a piece of valuable property. This is pretty speculative, though. Hopefully the countries involved will continue to move towards a more respectful attitude towards women. My guess is that a natural feedback phenomenon will then occur. The pendulum will swing, and these Indian and Chinese families will come to understand the problems with a male-rich world. They will decide that girls will actually have an advantage in such a world, and we will see the ratio swing to equality, or even somewhat in the other direction. I have confidence that most people want the best thing for their children. Hopefully this will curb the worst excesses of gender selection and these nightmare predictions of gender imbalances will never become real. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 8 22:12:01 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 17:12:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <20041008211109.0BEC057E2B@finney.org> References: <20041008211109.0BEC057E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041008170754.01b29760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:11 PM 10/8/2004 -0700, Hal wrote: >I have confidence that most people want the best thing for their children. Of course, and the definition thereof can be anything insane or disgusting or tragedy-of-the-commons. Think clitoridectomizing mothers. Think the Catholic, Mormon, Scientologist parents. Damien Broderick From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 8 21:45:51 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:45:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) Message-ID: <20041008214551.9C3DA57E2D@finney.org> Damien writes: > At 02:11 PM 10/8/2004 -0700, Hal wrote: > >I have confidence that most people want the best thing for their children. > > Of course, and the definition thereof can be anything insane or disgusting > or tragedy-of-the-commons. Think clitoridectomizing mothers. Think the > Catholic, Mormon, Scientologist parents. That's true, but in this particular case, if we assume that women retain basic human rights, it will probably be better to be born as a member of the sex which has a shortage. This should reduce the problem of excess selection of males. The question is whether people will be able to make decisions this far ahead, but I think once they notice that there are so many boy babies around and hardly any girls, it will sink in. I wish someone among all these journalists could manage to find a parent who was actually doing this, and ask them what they were thinking of. Hal From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 8 22:43:41 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 18:43:41 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <20041008214551.9C3DA57E2D@finney.org> References: <20041008214551.9C3DA57E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: <4167181D.3070604@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > > That's true, but in this particular case, if we assume that women retain > basic human rights, it will probably be better to be born as a member of > the sex which has a shortage. This should reduce the problem of excess > selection of males. The question is whether people will be able to make > decisions this far ahead, but I think once they notice that there are > so many boy babies around and hardly any girls, it will sink in. Babies? Why, whatever could be the problem with cute babies? They won't notice a problem until there are lots of unmated males roaming around, doing whatever horrible, naughty things unmated males do, and that's 18 years too late to start giving birth to womenchildren. Besides, why should *I* have a girlchild if I happen to want a boy? Surely all the other parents will notice the problem instead, by your logic, and adjust the imbalance by having girls themselves, even if I don't. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 8 22:15:56 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 15:15:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) Message-ID: <20041008221556.2093757E2A@finney.org> Eliezer writes: > They won't notice a problem until there are lots of unmated males roaming > around, doing whatever horrible, naughty things unmated males do, and > that's 18 years too late to start giving birth to womenchildren. Besides, > why should *I* have a girlchild if I happen to want a boy? Surely all the > other parents will notice the problem instead, by your logic, and adjust > the imbalance by having girls themselves, even if I don't. I believe parents will show more foresight than this. The excess of boys will be very apparent and a major topic of discussion within a few years. Every parent will be aware of the difficulties their child will face, being born a boy into a world with a shortage of girls. They will make the decision on the basis of what is best for the child, not on an abstract desire to improve society. The sex which has a shortage should have greater economic bargaining power. It will actually be better to be a girl than a boy. There will be no traditional dowries; the payments, if any, will go in the opposite direction, with only the boys who have unusually good prospects winning brides. I saw something of this myself; I went to a college which had been all male until four years previously. There was still a greatly imbalanced ratio between the sexes, something like 7 to 1. In that society, the women had many advantages; unattached girls had guys circling around them constantly. Girls could have their choice of boyfriends while the guys were mostly out of luck or had to go off campus. Hal From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 8 23:42:38 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 00:42:38 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041008170754.01b29760@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041008234238.26626.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I don't dislike women, but I got a bad attitude when my mom started reading Gloria Steinem right before she stood up at the dinner table with her face all red to yell " You men! You've turned me into a great big female eunuch!" She's been that way since ' 70. Anyway, if Americans want to teach children that being gay is bad, fine-- the kids are theirs. But what's wrong with Asian kids being taught that gay or bi is good, especially if there might be in the future a shortage of you-know-what? --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Oct 8 23:57:17 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 16:57:17 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <20041008205435.17883.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006b01c4ad92$8e1c8240$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Trend Ologist > > Hey you're not supposed to be funnier than me, i want > to stake out a niche as extrocomedian... Who says we must have only one court jester? {8-] spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 9 00:04:23 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:04:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <006b01c4ad92$8e1c8240$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041009000423.72791.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > > Trend Ologist > > > > > Hey you're not supposed to be funnier than me, i want > > to stake out a niche as extrocomedian... > > Who says we must have only one court jester? Yes, the role of first extropian squirrell was filled long ago, back in the mists of pre-transhuman history ===== 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 spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 00:14:45 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 17:14:45 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Article: "Political Victory: From Here to Maternity" In-Reply-To: <248570-22004105818432155@M2W061.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <006d01c4ad94$fec49e40$6501a8c0@SHELLY> You can count on Mormons to vote waaaay over to the right, way over. The essay is grossly over simplified however, for in the US, minorities reproduce at higher rates than non-minorities. These tend to vote toward the left. This is a far larger impact than the "metros" who are failing to breed. spike > natashavita at earthlink.net > Subject: [extropy-chat] Article: "Political Victory: From > Here to Maternity" > > > After reading this article, > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54700-2004Sep1.html and > wondered how mormons vote anyway. If they genes reproduce more > aggressivley than any other social domain, then how will they vote? > > Natasha > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From vanvidum at msn.com Sat Oct 9 03:01:24 2004 From: vanvidum at msn.com (Paul carbone) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 03:01:24 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Article: "Political Victory: From Here to Maternity" Message-ID: > >After reading this article, >http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A54700-2004Sep1.html and >wondered how mormons vote anyway. If they genes reproduce more >aggressivley than any other social domain, then how will they vote? > >Natasha Well, look at it this way, the confluence of factors in Utah makes it perfect for big conservatives to raise little ones. FIrst, you have conservative parents with (presumably) whatever genetic factors that might predispose someone to being conservative. Next you've got the peer group. The peer group is also raised by conservative parents. So they grow up in that environment with their package of genes, and go to register to vote. This is where the culture comes in. Given that he is sympathetic to conservative ideals, whatever they happen to be, means that he wishes to align himself to those that also support them. Accordingly, he can choose between Democrats or Republicans. He is most likely to choose Republican, given all we know, as he belives they are the party of conservatism. Taken on a large scale, we can expect this process to gradually magnify the conservative elements of American politics, and shunting left-leaning parties gradually out of the mainstream. We may already be seeing this occuring, as college students today have become far more conservative than those of the previous generation, exemplified in increasing opposition to such things as abortion. We'll see if this exerts much influence in another twenty years or so. --Paul ______________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 9 03:48:12 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 04:48:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush best president since Jefferson Davis Message-ID: <20041009034812.10232.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Did you hear what Bush said at the town hall debate in Missouri tonight? He said by refusing to let embryonic stem cells lines be funded he is "defending life". This from a man who enjoyed executing inmates in Texas (his eyes lit up when he talked about signing death warrants). Though Bush talks of being pained at the casualties in Iraq, he appears to be little disturbed, save that the casualties might affect his re-election chances. Bush's grandfather sold ordnance. His wife killed her ex-boyfriend by running into his car. Everything surrounding Bush leads one to the strong impression he is no enemy of death. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Oct 9 04:01:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 21:01:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <20041008205934.69917.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041008135533.029fb298@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <20041008205934.69917.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041008205656.02925e90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> It is a universal fact that at birth 51% of babies are male, but at reproductive age the ratio is nearly 50% (Males are slightly more likely to die.) I would not know the details re Japan (if any Japanese are on the list, kindly tell us), but since sex determination prior to birth is not yet a factor (often done via aminocentosis) there must be some external mechanism. Bear in mind that when something is illegal, the reportage statistics are usually less than the actual values. TrendOlogist wrote: >Even in Japan? > > > >Hara Ra wrote: > > Hardly. The Asian gender imbalance is not genetic, > > it is by various forms > > of infantacide due to a cultural preference for > > males. You can't sell > > females to them. You pay Them by providing Dowries. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 04:31:24 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:31:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041008205656.02925e90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000101c4adb8$d5ea8240$6501a8c0@SHELLY> We usually think of a cube when someone mentions a gaming die, but of course any of the five platonic solids can make a fair die. By thought experiment, we can verify that each face is the same shape and the CG is the same distance from the table with any face downward. Can other shapes be made such that there is equal probability of any face downward? I can think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped solid (four triangular faces and one square face). If the pyramid is tall and skinny, it is less likely to land on the square face. If it is short and flat, the square face is more likely to end downward. So (I think) the intermediate value theorem demands that there is an aspect ratio somewhere between short and tall that would make the square face equally likely to land downward, even if the surface area of the square face is different from the triangular. Also the CG height is different with the square face down than with the triangular faces down. (Is it?) Actually that suggests a class of non-platonic fair dice. A six sided "pyramid" with five triangles and a pentagonal base also would hafta have an intermediate base to height ratio that would fair-ize it. Right? Wouldn't that argument apply to arbitrarily many triangular sides? One could even make a three-sided fair die, if one did not demand the "sides" be flat planes: two curved kinda triangular surfaces with a base that looks sorta like an ellipse but with pointy ends. A two sided fair die is a coin, but that suggests another three sided die: a cylinder, like a really fat coin, equally likely to land on edge as on either side. For that matter one could grind arbitrarily many flat sides on a cylinder, so that the cylinder gets longer and thinner as the number of flat sides gets larger. Other than machining a bunch of these oddball shapes, is there any way to mathematically prove that they would have equal probabilities of landing on any face? spike From bjk at imminst.org Sat Oct 9 05:06:43 2004 From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 00:06:43 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update Message-ID: <416771E3.4060702@imminst.org> IMMINST UPDATE IMMINST FILM PROJECT Adding their support to David Kekich and James Halperin, The Life Extension Foundation graciously donates $5,000 in support of the ImmInst Film Project - http://www.imminst.org/film To support the film with a tax-deductible donation, contact filmmaker Bruce Klein - bjk at imminst.org IMMINST CHAT Oct 10 @ 8PM ET - Jamais Cascio - The Future of Life Extension Writer and consultant Jamais Cascio joins ImmInst to ponder questions about how advances in genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, nanotechnology and more are transforming our social and political systems, and what it means that the living forever may well be within our grasps... http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=63&t=4223 IMMINST FORUM DISCUSSION The Problem with 'Infinite' - Aubrey de Grey ...I would therefore like to make a specific proposal to ImmInst. The problem of the multiple uses of "immortality" can be mitigated by a suitable subtitle, but currently it's being actively exacerbated by the use of the word "infinite" in "for infinite lifespans". I wonder if it would be better to change that to "for unlimited lifespans", with the word "unlimited" always hyperlinked to a page that stresses ImmInst's goal of physical rather than spiritual immortality. What do members think of this sort of approach? http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=106&t=4298&#entry38119 IMMINST FORUM DISCUSSION Pro-Life? - by Annie ...The mentality on this website definitely comes across as "protect life at all costs". Does that mean (I would hope so!!) that most of you who support cryonics are pro-life (in the anti-abortion/death penalty sense of the word)? http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=137&t=4329 IMMINST ARTICLE Who Wants to Live Forever? - Marko Naumanen ...I don't believe in soul or heaven or reincarnation. Even if you could prove me that there is heaven or something after death, I would still want to live forever in this world. Killing yourself just because your bored or tired is unbelievably stupid. Three members thus far post their reasoning for wanting to live longer: http://www.immins.org/why IMMORTALITY NEWS Kurzweil's Quest For Eternal Youth Sets Group Abuzz - by Leslie Walker Kurzweil described a future in which he's convinced immortality -- or a drastically longer life span -- will be possible thanks to emerging technologies. His new book, which will hit stores in a few weeks, outlines a special "longevity program" of diet, exercise and nutritional supplements aimed at slowing the aging process.. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=111&t=3958&#entry38182 EVENTS Oct 22-24 - Foresight Conference on Advanced Nanotechnology Crystal City Marriott Hotel in Washington, DC http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=159&t=4346 Nov 5-7 - Accelerating Change Conference (ACC) Physical Space, Virtual Space, and Interface, Palo Alto, CA http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4299 IMMINST EVENT Dec 4 - ImmInst Social, near Hartford, CT ImmInst Chair, Bruce Klein will speak about the new ImmInst book, "The Scientific Conquest of Death," and the ImmInst Film Project, "Exploring Life Extension." Free rooms available and Life Extension Magazine will have a reporter covering the event: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4220 ABOUT IMMINST Immortality Institute - For Infinite Lifespans Mission - End the Blight of Involuntary Death Members: 1,723 - Full Members: 104 SUPPORT IMMINST New Full Members ? kennita ? jhershierra ? shazam ? armrha ? elrond ? tropicofcarol ? dcp1 ? patic Become an ImmInst Full Member $5/Mth -- $20/Yr Student -- $50/Yr Employed http://www.imminst.org/fullmembers From hal at finney.org Sat Oct 9 04:50:29 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 21:50:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice Message-ID: <20041009045029.3F52457E2A@finney.org> Spike writes: > Can other shapes be made such that there is > equal probability of any face downward? I can > think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped > solid (four triangular faces and one square > face). > ... > A two sided fair die is a coin, but that suggests > another three sided die: a cylinder, like a > really fat coin, equally likely to land on edge > as on either side. For that matter one could > grind arbitrarily many flat sides on a cylinder, > so that the cylinder gets longer and thinner > as the number of flat sides gets larger. That's very interesting. I remember watching people play Dungeons and Dragons when I was a kid, using many different kinds of fancy polyhedral dice. I think they were all regular polyhedra, though. I haven't seen suggestions for fair, non-polyhedral dice. I can suggest a path to analyzing the second case, a polygonal, thick coin, which is simpler because it is more symmetrical. Imagine circumscribing a sphere around the coin, with the center of the sphere at the geometrical center of the coin (which will be the center of mass of the coin), and all of the vertices of the coin on the sphere. Then I would suggest that the probability of landing on a face is the spherical area of that face. I.e. if you think of the face as a polygon drawn on a sphere, the area of that polygon corresponds to the probability of that face. This is because if you imagine the coin randomly oriented in space, and draw a line straight down through the center, the probability of that line falling through a given face is proportional to the spherical area of that face. A coin based on an n sided polygon corresponds to an n+2 sided object. The n edge faces are square, and the top and bottom faces are n-gons. So you need to take the formula for the area of a polygon on the sphere, and adjust the thickness of the coin until the spherical area of each of the two n-gons equals the spherical area of each of the squares. Once upon a time I was pretty familiar with such formula, back in my math contest days, but it would take me a while to do it now, so if anyone else is motivated they might be able to come up with a solution. Hal From scerir at libero.it Sat Oct 9 05:47:28 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 07:47:28 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette References: <171550-22004105819400365@M2W097.mail2web.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041008150924.019eb460@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003b01c4adc3$76b52ef0$4fc51b97@administxl09yj> > >A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational > >which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by > >adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new definition. > But you left out your new definition. "lette" means "bed" here (local dialect). "lu lette" = "the bed" From joe at barrera.org Sat Oct 9 05:52:35 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 22:52:35 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sex selection in Asia? (a modest proposal) In-Reply-To: <20041009000423.72791.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041009000423.72791.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41677CA3.1010900@barrera.org> Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Spike wrote: > > >> Trend Ologist > > > >> Hey you're not supposed to be funnier than me, i want to stake > >> out a niche as extrocomedian... > > > > Who says we must have only one court jester? > > Yes, the role of first extropian squirrell was filled long ago, back > in the mists of pre-transhuman history Natural selection is a bitch. - Joe From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 05:53:33 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:53:33 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <20041009045029.3F52457E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <000201c4adc4$559cc830$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of > "Hal Finney" > Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 9:50 PM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice > > > Spike writes: > > Can other shapes be made such that there is > > equal probability of any face downward? I can > > think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped > > solid (four triangular faces and one square > > face)... > > That's very interesting. I remember watching people play Dungeons > and Dragons when I was a kid, using many different kinds of fancy > polyhedral dice. I think they were all regular polyhedra, though. > I haven't seen suggestions for fair, non-polyhedral dice... > > Once upon a time I was pretty familiar with such formula, back in my > math contest days, but it would take me a while to do it now, so if > anyone else is motivated they might be able to come up with a > solution. Hal I had an idea. Back in the 70s we had a toy called the superball. I don't know if they are still available but I don't see why they wouldn't be. They were made of a special high-elasticity rubber that would rebound about 80% or more each bounce. I think I can carve one of those to any shape with a razor blade. If I can estimate the proper shape by a monte carlo simulation we could try to carve a pyramid shaped die. I might take a ride over to ToysRUs tomorrow. Anyone with kids here know if superballs are still with us? spike From scerir at libero.it Sat Oct 9 06:08:11 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:08:11 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice References: <000101c4adb8$d5ea8240$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <004d01c4adc6$5b621160$4fc51b97@administxl09yj> There are four regular non-convex polyhedra known as the Kepler-Poinsot Polyhedra. http://cage.rug.ac.be/~hs/polyhedra/keplerpoinsot.html Two of them were described by Johannes Kepler in 1619 as being regular. One of them appears on a 16th century drawing by Jamnitzer and the another on a 15th century mosaic, by Paolo Uccello, on the floor of San Marco in Venice. http://www.georgehart.com/virtual-polyhedra/uccello.html http://math.unipa.it/~grim/SiSala2.PDF The other two were described by Louis Poinsot in 1809 but at least one of them appears on a drawing by the same Jamnitzer. In 1810 the French mathematician Augustin-Louis Cauchy proved that the five Platonic and the four Kepler-Poinsot polyhedra are the only possible regular polyhedra. References: http://www.arxiv.org/abs/math-ph/0303071 From hal at finney.org Sat Oct 9 05:29:36 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 22:29:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette Message-ID: <20041009052936.BCD9B57E2A@finney.org> > A friend of mind told me about the Washington Post's Style Invitational > which asked readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by > adding, subtracting, or changing one lette, and supply a new definition. I created one somewhat accidentally: drexterous: skillful in the design of nanotech devices Of course Extropians are way ahead of this game, because a great example is the word Extropy! Hal From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 06:15:31 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 2004 23:15:31 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <20041009052936.BCD9B57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Of course Extropians are way ahead of this game, because a > great example is the word Extropy! > > Hal Sextropy: the belief that the future will bring more and better marital relations through technology. spike From joe at barrera.org Sat Oct 9 06:25:20 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:25:20 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush best president since Jefferson Davis In-Reply-To: <20041009034812.10232.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041009034812.10232.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41678450.6010206@barrera.org> Trend Ologist wrote: > His wife killed her ex-boyfriend by running into his car. Talk about a story straight out of a David Lynch movie... - Joe From scerir at libero.it Sat Oct 9 06:29:39 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:29:39 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette References: <20041009052936.BCD9B57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <005f01c4adc9$5b2b69a0$4fc51b97@administxl09yj> Extopy = Outsideness? Extopians = ? From joe at barrera.org Sat Oct 9 06:28:33 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:28:33 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <000201c4adc4$559cc830$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000201c4adc4$559cc830$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <41678511.5050201@barrera.org> Spike wrote: > I had an idea. Back in the 70s we had a toy called the superball. I > don't know if they are still available but I don't see why they > wouldn't be. They were made of a special high-elasticity rubber that > would rebound about 80% or more each bounce. > > I think I can carve one of those to any shape with a razor blade. If > I can estimate the proper shape by a monte carlo simulation we could > try to carve a pyramid shaped die. I might take a ride over to > ToysRUs tomorrow. I have a cat toy made of that material, in the shape of a dodecahedron. It's pink. It cost about $1.20. I bought it because I'm a math geek (and because I have a cat). - Joe From joe at barrera.org Sat Oct 9 06:30:38 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 23:30:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> Spike wrote: > Sextropy: the belief that the future will bring more and better > marital relations through technology. How about extramarital relations? (Or would that be exsextropy?) - Joe From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 9 08:05:52 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 04:05:52 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> Message-ID: <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Oct 9 08:10:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 01:10:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009010736.029349e0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, the solid angle approach is interesting, but I wonder about the vertices and polygon edges. If you draw a line from an edge to the center, are the angles of the two adjoining faces to this line the same? One way to avoid this is to think of a jumping jack. Make a shape which is just the set of lines to the vertices. Here we meed Bucky Fuller - I suspect the solutions to the geodesic domes is an equal spherical angle approach, so spiky geodesic domes may do the job. From a physics point of view, resting on a face represents a lowest possible potential energy solution. This leads to two conditions: All faces are the same distance from the center and all faces use the same amount of solid angle. Also, the figure must be convex, so it completely rests on any face. So, a drastic simplification can be done. Skip the faces. Use a marked sphere. Color it any way you want, with any color having an equal total area to all other colors. Colored regions do NOT have to be contiguious. (like the state of Hawaii). Unequal areas could make a single sphere for games like craps. A sphere full of water could use a tiny bubble to indicate which area is on top. If there is a dispute, roll it again. Multidice of different colors could be use. Three cubes, red, green, blue and base 6 notation in the order R,G,B provide 6^3 equally probable results. Nice problem, stupid mickeymouse solutions (sigh) > > Spike writes: > > > Can other shapes be made such that there is > > > equal probability of any face downward? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From kpj at sics.se Sat Oct 9 12:45:55 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:45:55 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: Message from hal@finney.org ("Hal Finney") of "Fri, 08 Oct 2004 21:50:29 PDT." <20041009045029.3F52457E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <200410091245.i99Cjuw23296@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Hal Finney wrote: | |That's very interesting. I remember watching people play Dungeons |and Dragons when I was a kid, using many different kinds of fancy |polyhedral dice. I think they were all regular polyhedra, though. I happen to have a kit of those there. Let's see... 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d12, 2d10, 1d20 NOTES ----- (1) "1d6" is 1 dice with 6 sides, etc.) (2) 2d10 can be used as a "percent dice" (1d100 = 1d10 * 10 + 1d10 - 1). From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 9 13:03:37 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 06:03:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <000101c4adb8$d5ea8240$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041009130337.11702.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > We usually think of a cube when someone mentions > a gaming die, but of course any of the five platonic > solids can make a fair die. By thought experiment, > we can verify that each face is the same shape and > the CG is the same distance from the table with > any face downward. > > Can other shapes be made such that there is > equal probability of any face downward? I can > think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped > solid (four triangular faces and one square > face). If the pyramid is tall and skinny, it > is less likely to land on the square face. If > it is short and flat, the square face is more > likely to end downward. So (I think) the > intermediate value theorem demands that there > is an aspect ratio somewhere between short and > tall that would make the square face equally > likely to land downward, even if the surface > area of the square face is different from > the triangular. Also the CG height is different > with the square face down than with the triangular > faces down. (Is it?) You might instead look at a solid of two triangles and three squares. This might be easier to optimize by adjusting the squares into rectangles. Has anyone done a physical analysis of the die-rolling capabilities of non-perfect solids? Gamers use a ten sided die to get 1 in 5 odds, btw. > > Actually that suggests a class of non-platonic > fair dice. A six sided "pyramid" with five > triangles and a pentagonal base also would > hafta have an intermediate base to height ratio > that would fair-ize it. Right? Wouldn't that > argument apply to arbitrarily many triangular > sides? Actually, what these sorts of die might be good at is to roll for 'gripping hand' type scenarios, where one of several options is far more probable than the others. > > One could even make a three-sided fair die, if > one did not demand the "sides" be flat planes: two > curved kinda triangular surfaces with a base that > looks sorta like an ellipse but with pointy ends. Yeah, thought of that one long ago. Found a seed that was in that configuration and used it in a game. > > A two sided fair die is a coin, but that suggests > another three sided die: a cylinder, like a > really fat coin, equally likely to land on edge > as on either side. For that matter one could > grind arbitrarily many flat sides on a cylinder, > so that the cylinder gets longer and thinner > as the number of flat sides gets larger. > > Other than machining a bunch of these oddball > shapes, is there any way to mathematically > prove that they would have equal probabilities > of landing on any face? Why machine them? Get yourself a jack knife and some balsa wood. Better yet, aren't you carving some pumpkins 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!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 9 13:24:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 06:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush best president since Jefferson Davis In-Reply-To: <41678450.6010206@barrera.org> Message-ID: <20041009132456.14079.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Joseph S. Barrera III" wrote: > Trend Ologist wrote: > > > His wife killed her ex-boyfriend by running into his car. > > Talk about a story straight out of a David Lynch movie... Hey, thats what he gets for returning a book late... did he think his sweet talking was gonna get him out of the consequences? W was smarter than that, he never checked a book out. Though you have to wonder: how would a librarian, and a guy who doesn't crack open books if he can help it, ever happen to meet??? Reading lessons? ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 9 13:33:51 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 06:33:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <200410091245.i99Cjuw23296@r2d2.sics.se> Message-ID: <20041009133351.74547.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- KPJ wrote: > It appears as if Hal Finney wrote: > | > |That's very interesting. I remember watching people play Dungeons > |and Dragons when I was a kid, using many different kinds of fancy > |polyhedral dice. I think they were all regular polyhedra, though. > > I happen to have a kit of those there. Let's see... > > 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d12, 2d10, 1d20 BTW: I found a Palm application that simulates 4,6, 8, 10, 12, 20, and 100 sided dice. It is called "Dice Man". It is by Bits 'n Bolts Software, and can be found at http://www.bitsnbolts.com as freeware. Have fun! You might contact them about allowing the user to create any sided die they need. This might be accomplished by adding a division modifier to the plus and minus. Then you could divide the d10 by two and get a 5d simulated. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 15:10:49 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:10:49 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <000a01c4ae12$29597770$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > > Sextropy: the belief that the future will bring more > and better marital relations through technology. > > spike Orgasmic chemistry: a field of science that promotes sextropy. spike {8^D (this is fun) From kpj at sics.se Sat Oct 9 15:21:13 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 17:21:13 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Lorrey of "Sat, 09 Oct 2004 06:33:51 PDT." <20041009133351.74547.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200410091521.i99FLD823666@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Mike Lorrey wrote: | |> I happen to have a kit of those there. Let's see... |> |> 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 1d12, 2d10, 1d20 | |BTW: I found a Palm application that simulates 4,6, 8, 10, 12, 20, and |100 sided dice. It is called "Dice Man". It is by Bits 'n Bolts |Software, and can be found at http://www.bitsnbolts.com as freeware. |Have fun! You might contact them about allowing the user to create any |sided die they need. This might be accomplished by adding a division |modifier to the plus and minus. Then you could divide the d10 by two |and get a 5d simulated. In the Olden Days during the 2nd millenium when I was into AD&D we wrote a BASIC program on a timesharing system to print out simulated dice values using pseudorandom numbers. The printing was done overnight since machines were much slower then and microchips, and thus personal computers, had not been invented yet. Today, some people use their wearables to play Dungeon & Dragons immersed in the real world (augmented reality). No dice needed. From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 15:38:02 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 10:38:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009103629.01bfdec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 04:05 AM 10/9/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote: >Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. Singurarity: The infrequency of smarter-than-human intelligence. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 15:43:28 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 10:43:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <000a01c4ae12$29597770$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <000a01c4ae12$29597770$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:10 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: >Orgasmic chemistry: a field of science that promotes sextropy. > >spike > >{8^D (this is fun) Bad Spike, no biscuit. Broke the rules. One addition, deletion or change only. Damien Brodericq From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 15:50:57 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:50:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> Message-ID: <000e01c4ae17$c47d66d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Joseph S. Barrera III > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] lette > > Spike wrote: > > > Sextropy: the belief that the future will bring more and better > > marital relations through technology. > > How about extramarital relations? > (Or would that be exsextropy?) - Joe How about when a bug has improper relations with his sister. Would that be insecst? Or when a person leaves his or her native land, seeking more and better amorous activity abroad, is that person a sexpatriate? {8^D spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 15:56:16 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:56:16 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> Message-ID: <000f01c4ae18$82bfea00$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Eliezer Yudkowsky > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] lette > > Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky Singhilarity: the act of making fun of the entire notion of singularity. spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 9 15:56:19 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 08:56:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009103629.01bfdec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041009155619.97360.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 04:05 AM 10/9/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote: > > >Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. > > Singurarity: The infrequency of smarter-than-human intelligence. But only when spoken without a japlish accent... Cingularity(tm): Emergent phenomena occuring on cellular communications networks Singuhilarity: 1. When the Eschaton gets a sense of humor. 2. When Eli plays Hako Sot with extropes. 3. The current discussion. Trainshumanism: The belief in the progress of mankind through mass transit. Posthumane: The period of time when good deeds get the punishment they so richly deserve. Nuckular Power: The energy that President Bush gets from giving gitmo prisoners noogies. ===== 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 spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 16:21:13 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 09:21:13 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <200410091521.i99FLD823666@r2d2.sics.se> Message-ID: <001201c4ae1b$fef75ab0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Spike > Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice > > Can other shapes be made such that there is > equal probability of any face downward? I can > think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped > solid (four triangular faces and one square > face). If the pyramid is tall and skinny, it > is less likely to land on the square face. If > it is short and flat, the square face is more > likely to end downward. So (I think) the > intermediate value theorem demands that there > is an aspect ratio somewhere between short and > tall that would make the square face equally > likely to land downward, even if the surface > area of the square face is different from > the triangular... spike Wait, I am now realizing this whole problem is a lot more complicated than I first imagined. With the above example, the fairness of the square-base pyramid would depend on having a level surface upon which one rolls the die. Imagine a family of pyramid shaped dice with progressively more triangular faces. As the number of faces increases, the probability of landing on any given triangular face goes down, so the probability of landing on the polygonal base must be adjusted downward, so the thing gets taller. Right? So if one imagines rolling a tall die on an inclined surface, it is easy to see that it might be exactly *impossible* to make it stand on its base, yet it could still land with equal probability on any triangular face. spike From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 9 16:49:35 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 09:49:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <001201c4ae1b$fef75ab0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041009164935.89276.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > Can other shapes be made such that there is > > equal probability of any face downward? I can > > think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped > > solid (four triangular faces and one square > > face). If the pyramid is tall and skinny, it > > is less likely to land on the square face. If > > it is short and flat, the square face is more > > likely to end downward. So (I think) the > > intermediate value theorem demands that there > > is an aspect ratio somewhere between short and > > tall that would make the square face equally > > likely to land downward, even if the surface > > area of the square face is different from > > the triangular... spike > > Wait, I am now realizing this whole problem is a > lot more complicated than I first imagined. With > the above example, the fairness of the square-base > pyramid would depend on having a level surface > upon which one rolls the die. Imagine a family > of pyramid shaped dice with progressively more > triangular faces. As the number of faces increases, > the probability of landing on any given triangular > face goes down, so the probability of landing on > the polygonal base must be adjusted downward, so > the thing gets taller. Right? So if one imagines > rolling a tall die on an inclined surface, it is > easy to see that it might be exactly *impossible* > to make it stand on its base, yet it could still > land with equal probability on any triangular face. And that is why they prefer regular solids: because many real surfaces are slightly irregular. In fact, for some rolls, they don't even roll the dice per se, but rather put them in a container with a hole and roll the container until the dice come out. I've also seen a percentile die (00-99) which was one ten sided die inside another, mostly transparent ten sided die; the external one yielded one digit while the internal one yielded the other. From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 9 17:08:00 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:08:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041009170800.91841.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:10 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: > >Orgasmic chemistry: a field of science that > promotes sextropy. > > Bad Spike, no biscuit. Broke the rules. One > addition, deletion or change only. Like the difference between George Bush and George W. Bush? bullot: a ballot which only gives you farcical choices, or the chief voting implement when everyone is armed and refuses to acknowledge the other side's victory (which can lead to a ballot with what most view as only farcical choices) veef: artificial beef made in a vat (and vegan friendly) electrion: the fundamental particle of political hype From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 9 17:12:57 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 13:12:57 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <20041009155619.97360.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041009155619.97360.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41681C19.9070200@pobox.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Damien Broderick wrote: > >>At 04:05 AM 10/9/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote: >> >>>Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. >> >>Singurarity: The infrequency of smarter-than-human intelligence. > > Cingularity(tm): Emergent phenomena occuring on cellular communications > networks Pingularity: The exponential decrease in network response times as we approach the Eschaton. Kingularity: A Singularity involving a Bostromian singleton. Ringularity: See Ringularity. Tingularity: A transcendence that feels really, really good. Lingularity: A Tingularity produced by oral action. See also Fingularity. Some religious conservatives consider this a Sinularity if performed outside of Singumarity. ...okay, I'd better stop this now before it gets silly. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 17:13:30 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:13:30 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <20041009170800.91841.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041009170800.91841.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009121252.01bb1ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:08 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Adrian wrote: >veef: artificial beef made in a vat (and vegan >friendly) No, no--that's `beev'. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 9 17:17:55 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009121252.01bb1ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041009171755.27056.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:08 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Adrian wrote: > >veef: artificial beef made in a vat (and vegan > >friendly) > > No, no--that's `beev'. I thought that was beaver meat textured to taste like beef. From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 9 17:26:20 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:26:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <005f01c4adc9$5b2b69a0$4fc51b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <20041009172620.63791.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- scerir wrote: > Extopy = Outsideness? > Extopians = ? Nature lovers, what else? From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 17:27:27 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 12:27:27 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <20041009171755.27056.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009121252.01bb1ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041009171755.27056.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009122617.01b4bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:17 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Adrian wrote: > > No, no--that's `beev'. > >I thought that was beaver meat textured to taste like >beef. Steady on--this is a family list! Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 9 17:41:59 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 10:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009122617.01b4bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041009174159.30057.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:17 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Adrian wrote: > > > No, no--that's `beev'. > > > >I thought that was beaver meat textured to taste > like > >beef. > > Steady on--this is a family list! I said "beaver", not "Beaver". As in, the one that's been used as a resource animal (for fur and food) for centuries. ;P fadily: the unfortunate trend of people getting married and having babies for the glamor and excitement, then divorcing and neglecting the children once it gets boring From hibbert at mydruthers.com Sat Oct 9 17:47:24 2004 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 10:47:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <000201c4adc4$559cc830$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000201c4adc4$559cc830$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <4168242C.2040804@mydruthers.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > BTW: I found a Palm application that simulates 4,6, 8, 10, 12, > 20, and 100 sided dice. It is called "Dice Man". It is by Bits > 'n Bolts Software, and can be found at http://www.bitsnbolts.com > as freeware. Have fun! You might contact them about allowing > the user to create any sided die they need. This might be > accomplished by adding a division modifier to the plus and minus. > Then you could divide the d10 by two and get a 5d simulated. I use DicePro from Rival Game Labs (http://www.rivalgamelabs.com/dicepro.htm). It lets you save multiple pre-set combinations of dice. in addition to the d4-d100 listed above, you can make any intermediate integer number of sides, averaging dice (233445), as well as specialty dice for several specific games. You can also add modifiers (2d6+3, best 2 out of 3d8). There's an amazing variety of stuff there. Chris -- C. J. Cherryh, "Invader", on why we visit very old buildings: "A sense of age, of profound truths. Respect for something hands made, that's stood through storms and wars and time. It persuades us that things we do may last and matter." Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com http://mydruthers.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 18:06:38 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 13:06:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> In the Australian national federal election, the conservatives have been returned to office. At 77% of the vote counted last night, the Green had scored 7% of the primary vote, up 2%. The racist & brainless One Nation party got 1.1%, down 3.2%. On TV in the USA, Kerry gave what Barbara and I regarded as a deftly supple, concise and principled extempore reply about abortion and govt funding. To our astonishment, Bush rose and candidly admitted he couldn't understand it. ABCNews begged to differ with our assessment and implicitly endorsed Bush's stupidity: Sigh. Damien Broderick From starman2100 at cableone.net Sat Oct 9 18:10:10 2004 From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 11:10:10 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Technovelgy.com Message-ID: <1097345410_26473@mail.cableone.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com Sat Oct 9 19:54:33 2004 From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:54:33 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01093933@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Googling for "fair dice polyhedra" brings up the following page listing all fair dice. http://www.mathpuzzle.com/Fairdice.htm It mentions the square-pyramid die at the end, but I won't spoil the answer for you :) Acy -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Spike Sent: Friday, 08 October, 2004 23:31 To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice We usually think of a cube when someone mentions a gaming die, but of course any of the five platonic solids can make a fair die. By thought experiment, we can verify that each face is the same shape and the CG is the same distance from the table with any face downward. Can other shapes be made such that there is equal probability of any face downward? I can think of one: a five sided pyramid shaped solid (four triangular faces and one square face). If the pyramid is tall and skinny, it is less likely to land on the square face. If it is short and flat, the square face is more likely to end downward. So (I think) the intermediate value theorem demands that there is an aspect ratio somewhere between short and tall that would make the square face equally likely to land downward, even if the surface area of the square face is different from the triangular. Also the CG height is different with the square face down than with the triangular faces down. (Is it?) Actually that suggests a class of non-platonic fair dice. A six sided "pyramid" with five triangles and a pentagonal base also would hafta have an intermediate base to height ratio that would fair-ize it. Right? Wouldn't that argument apply to arbitrarily many triangular sides? One could even make a three-sided fair die, if one did not demand the "sides" be flat planes: two curved kinda triangular surfaces with a base that looks sorta like an ellipse but with pointy ends. A two sided fair die is a coin, but that suggests another three sided die: a cylinder, like a really fat coin, equally likely to land on edge as on either side. For that matter one could grind arbitrarily many flat sides on a cylinder, so that the cylinder gets longer and thinner as the number of flat sides gets larger. Other than machining a bunch of these oddball shapes, is there any way to mathematically prove that they would have equal probabilities of landing on any face? spike From kurt at metatechnica.com Sat Oct 9 20:11:01 2004 From: kurt at metatechnica.com (Kurt Schoedel) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 13:11:01 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Asian sex selection Message-ID: According to current statistics there are 130 boys being born to 100 girls in China and S. Korea. Its about 120/100 for India, but some parts of India have 160 boys to 100 girls. Japan has no gender imbalance and a slight majority of Japanese parents to be prefer having a girl to having a boy. This may be a longterm problem. Mostly, it just means that men will marry later than they do now. In much of developed Asia (Japan, Taiwan, S. Korea and increasingly China) the average age of marriage is in the early 30's. Of all the people I know and have been around, noone get married in their 20's, except for ethnic Malay people (in S.E. Asia). The Chinese typically have one kid and the Koreans and Japanese usually don't have any (its too expensive and too much hassle) because they would rather save their money to retire early and have a good time. There is also the phenomenon of the "lady-boy" (katoey), which is becoming more prevalent through out Asia. If the gender imbalance increases, expect to see many more lady-boys in Asia. Also, there are alot more gay men as well. Asia is becoming an increasingly funky place. Kurt Schoedel MetaTechnica From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 9 20:12:13 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 13:12:13 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] lette > > > At 08:10 AM 10/9/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: > > >Orgasmic chemistry: a field of science that promotes sextropy. > > > >spike > > > >{8^D (this is fun) > > Bad Spike, no biscuit. Broke the rules. One addition, > deletion or change only. > > Damien Brodericq Rules schmules. Wordplay is about bending rules. If I were to be strict about the single-substitution rule, I would be stuck with a with one of the four choices: rules-sules, -cules, -hules, or -mules. Three of these make no word, whereas the fourth suggests a singleminded dedication to a single task, which works on two levels but still hasn't the punch of the simple, devastating rules-schmules. spike From natashavita at earthlink.net Sat Oct 9 20:17:18 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 16:17:18 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette Message-ID: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 20:22:46 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:22:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009151828.019ecec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:12 PM 10/9/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: >Rules schmules. Wordplay is about bending rules. Au contraire. Word play is about observing constraints with wit and, if possible, brilliantly. That's why Eliezer's post was so wickedly and gratifyingly funny. It's the same with limericks, where almost *nobody* has clue one on the scansion of just about the simplest verse form ever to make us laugh. It's like Bush struggling to grasp the meaning of a subordinate clause, although luckily not as consequential. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 20:26:13 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:26:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> References: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009152433.019dd400@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 04:17 PM 10/9/2004 -0400, Natasha wrote: >Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. Okay, I give in. Anything anyone says for any reason is hilarious. Damien Broderick From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 9 20:35:57 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 16:35:57 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> References: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <41684BAD.8020806@pobox.com> natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. Hmph. Sounds sexist to me. :P (Seriously, it is sexist if you contrast Queenularity to Kingularity. I just chose the latter term because it obeyed the latte rules. Remember, the sexism rules work both ways.) Also, Bostrom's "singleton" can have ethics, and it can even have a universal direct democracy; "singleton" just means that at the level of authority where, say, military force gets used, there's only one decision process, rather than many competing militaries. A Friendly AI fits the description; so does any unified world government. See http://www.nickbostrom.com/fut/singleton.html and http://www.nickbostrom.com/fut/evolution.html -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 9 20:52:25 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 15:52:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009154629.01a6eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:12 PM 10/9/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: < Rules schmules. Wordplay is about bending rules. If I were to be strict about the single-substitution rule, I would be stuck with a with one of the four choices: rules-sules, -cules, -hules, or -mules. > Oh, bugger, I can't leave this alone, can I? `Rules schmules' *isn't* bending a rule, for the luvadog, it's *using* a well-known rule or template from Yiddish humor. Would that retort have been even mildly witty if Spike had written `Rules schools', or `Rules bananas', or `Rubes chew asphalt', or `84Z*pq'? Damien Broderick From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 9 21:11:07 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 17:11:07 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009154629.01a6eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041009154629.01a6eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <416853EB.60607@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 01:12 PM 10/9/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: > > < Rules schmules. Wordplay is about bending rules. If I > were to be strict about the single-substitution rule, > I would be stuck with a with one of the four choices: > rules-sules, -cules, -hules, or -mules. > > > Oh, bugger, I can't leave this alone, can I? > > `Rules schmules' *isn't* bending a rule, for the luvadog, it's *using* a > well-known rule or template from Yiddish humor. > > Would that retort have been even mildly witty if Spike had written > `Rules schools', or `Rules bananas', or `Rubes chew asphalt', or `84Z*pq'? Fules! If you substitute numbers for letters, that is a l3tt3. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From dgc at cox.net Sat Oct 9 21:16:38 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 17:16:38 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01093933@amazemail2.amazeent.com> References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE01093933@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Message-ID: <41685536.6060000@cox.net> It is trivially easy to make a polyhedron with any even number of faces 2N, N>2 such that the sides are all the same shape and the polyhedron is auto-isomorphic. Simply take two n-sided regular pyramids and glue them base-to-base. D&D 8-sided dice had this configuration. In the real world, this works for small N, but will eventually fail on a non-smooth surface when you can no longer decide that only one face is contacting the surface. For odd numbers, as always, number two faces with each number. Of course, if you just need to rapidly generate uniform random numbers from 1 to 2^^N, you can flip N distinguishable coins. If you need to play Monopoly but have lost the dice, use a penny, a nickel, and a dime. Discard all tails (0) and all heads (7). Flip the coins twice for two dice. This will teach your children two things: 1) Binary counting 2) Don't lose the dice. It upsets you father. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 9 21:21:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 14:21:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <416853EB.60607@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041009212139.71745.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > > Fules! If you substitute numbers for letters, that is a l3tt3. No, it is merely 'L33T. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 9 21:35:27 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 17:35:27 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> References: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <4168599F.8090607@pobox.com> natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. Sangularity: A Singularity involving bloody revolution. Stingularity: A Singularity enforced with whips. Okay, too depressing. Not to mention the poor Spingularity. Let's go back to Tingularity outside Singumarity, also known as Swingularity. (It's a good thing I made an even number of lettes, for otherwise I would have violated Singuparity.) -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (How do you like my .sigularity?) From kpj at sics.se Sat Oct 9 12:51:58 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 14:51:58 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] alt dot fair dice In-Reply-To: Message from "Spike" of "Fri, 08 Oct 2004 22:53:33 PDT." <000201c4adc4$559cc830$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <200410091251.i99Cpwt23316@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Spike spake thusly: | |I had an idea. Back in the 70s we had a toy called |the superball. I don't know if they are still available |but I don't see why they wouldn't be. They were made |of a special high-elasticity rubber that would rebound |about 80% or more each bounce. The superballs appeared on sale here in (Stockholm, Sweden) a few weeks ago. Ah.. that explains all the disco music on the radio. Apparently we live in the '70s here. /Stu From alito at organicrobot.com Sun Oct 10 03:27:12 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 13:27:12 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Sat, 2004-10-09 at 13:06 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > In the Australian national federal election, the conservatives have been > returned to office. At 77% of the vote counted last night, the Green had > scored 7% of the primary vote, up 2%. The racist & brainless One Nation > party got 1.1%, down 3.2%. > No need for spin, Damien. The greens did well, but not that well considering that the Democrats (the traditional third party by now) vote completely collapsed (5% => 1%). They also lost their only MP. One Nation vote is way down but the new Family First Party, probably the most socially conservative party around now, picked up 2%, even though they run in only 2/3 of the electorates, and what's worse, they seem to now hold the balance of power in the senate (but counting for that hasn't finished). alejandro From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Oct 10 04:32:38 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 23:32:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections In-Reply-To: <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009232753.01aedec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:27 PM 10/10/2004 +1000, alejandro wrote: >On Sat, 2004-10-09 at 13:06 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > > At 77% of the vote counted last night, the Greens had > > scored 7% of the primary vote, up 2%. Sorry, should have provided the source of that preliminary estimate. ABC (Oz) news. http://www.abc.net.au/elections/ >No need for spin, Damien. Spin? What spin? I just copied down some numbers from the website: 77.7% Counted. Sun Oct 10 12:03AM AEST Party Vote Swing Predict The predictions in this table take account of historical data in all seats and forecast an overall election outcome. Liberal 40.7% +3.3 National 5.9% +0.2 Labor 38.2% +0.3 Greens 7.0% +2.0 Democrats 1.1% -4.2 One Nation 1.1% -3.2 Others 6.0% +1.6 I'm in Texas, '000s of kilometers from the scene of the crime. Damien Broderick From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Oct 10 04:33:56 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 14:33:56 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc> Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: > On Sat, 2004-10-09 at 13:06 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > > In the Australian national federal election, the conservatives have been > > returned to office. > > .. the new Family First Party, probably the most socially conservative > party around now, picked up 2%, even though they run in only 2/3 > of the electorates, and what's worse, they seem to now hold the > balance of power in the senate (but counting for that hasn't finished). We could be in for some very interesting times in politics in Australia over the next three years with the coalition actually having the power to get laws through both houses of federal parliament in their own right or with either a single vote from one democrat or a family first party. This could be a good thing in that the government will be able to govern. It will be very hard for the government to blame anyone else for bad decisions or for playing a spoiling role. It may also be possible to see to what extent religion (which infiltrates all political parties) effects policy especially policy relating to GM, stem cells laws etc. Brett Paatsch From hal at finney.org Sun Oct 10 03:59:07 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2004 20:59:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Robin Hanson: The Next Really Big Enormous Thing Message-ID: <20041010035907.0545D57E2A@finney.org> This was posted to WTA-talk, and I thought there would be interest in it here. As always Robin is provocative, and it is good to see his ideas get a wider airing. One thing I wonder about is Robin's other essay http://hanson.gmu.edu/fastgrow.html, where he concludes, "It seems hard to escape the conclusion that it just takes a lot of time for the world economy to absorb even very broadly applicable technologies like the computer, especially if the criteria of interest is raising the rate of return on the marginal investment project worldwide. Thus it seems unlikely that a single new technology could quickly knock the economy into a high demand mode with very high growth rates." It would be interesting to hear from Robin how to reconcile the difficulty he notes here in kicking the economy into a new growth mode with his prediction that uploads or some other computer technology could do just that. Hal === Robin Hanson: The Next Really Big Enormous Thing Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University http://www.futurebrief.com/robinhanson.asp [16](read his bio) A postcard summary of life, the universe and everything might go as follows. The universe appeared and started expanding. Life appeared somewhere and then on Earth began making larger and smarter animals. Humans appeared and became smarter and more numerous, by inventing language, farming, industry, and computers. The events in this summary are not evenly distributed over the history of the universe. The first events are relatively evenly distributed: the universe started fourteen billion years ago, life appeared by four billion years ago, and on Earth animals started growing larger and smarter about half a billion years ago. But the other events are very recent: our species appeared two million years ago, farming started ten thousand years ago, industry started two hundred years ago, and computers started a few decades ago. Do we over-emphasize these recent events relative to their fundamental importance, because they are about our species and us? Are these events just arbitrary markers, chosen from thousands in a long history of relatively continuous change? I think not, and here is why: most of these events separate a chain of distinct exponential growth modes. (Exponential growth is where a quantity doubles after some time duration, then continues to double again and again after similar durations.) The growth rates of these modes have varied enormously. The slowest growth mode started first. Our fourteen billion year old universe is expanding, and that expansion is becoming exponential due to a mysterious "dark energy." The distance between the galaxies is predicted to double every ten billion years. We don't know enough about the history of non-animal life in the universe to identify its growth rates, but we can see that for the last half billion years the size of animals on Earth has grown exponentially. While the size of the typical animal is largely unchanged, the variation among animal size has greatly increased. Because of this, the mass of the largest animal has doubled about every seventy million years, and the mass of the largest brain has doubled about three times every hundred million years. So the largest brains have doubled about three hundred times faster than the distance between galaxies. Humans (really "our human-like ancestors") began with some of the largest brains around, and then tripled their size. Those brains, and the innovations they embodied, seem to have enabled a huge growth in the human niche - it supported about ten thousand humans two million years ago, but about four million humans ten thousand years ago. While data is scarce, this growth seems exponential, doubling about every two hundred and twenty five thousand years, or one hundred and fifty times faster than animal brains grew. (This growth rate for the human niche is consistent with faster growth for our ancestors - groups might kill off other groups to take over the niche.) About ten thousand years ago, those four million humans began to settle and farm, instead of migrating to hunt and gather. The human population on Earth then began to double about every nine hundred years, or about two hundred and fifty times faster than hunting humans doubled. Since the industrial revolution began a few hundred years ago, the human population has grown even faster. Before the industrial revolution total human wealth grew so slowly that population quickly caught up, keeping wealth per person at a near subsistence level. But in the last century or so wealth has grown faster than population, allowing for great increases in wealth per person. Economists' best estimates of total world product (average wealth per person times the number of people) show it to have been growing exponentially over the last century, doubling about every fifteen years, or about sixty times faster than under farming. And a model of the whole time series as a transition from a farming exponential mode to an industry exponential mode suggests that the transition is not over yet - we are slowly approaching a real industry doubling time of about six years, or one hundred and fifty times the farming growth rate. A revised postcard summary of life, the universe, and everything, therefore, is that an exponentially growing universe gave life to a sequence of faster and faster exponential growth modes, first among the largest animal brains, then for the wealth of human hunters, then farmers, and then industry. It seems that each new growth mode starts when the previous mode reaches a certain enabling scale. That is, humans may not grow via culture until animal brains are large enough, farming may not be feasible until hunters are dense enough, and industry may not be possible until there are enough farmers. Notice how many "important events" are left out of this postcard summary. Language, fire, writing, cities, sailing, printing presses, steam engines, electricity, assembly lines, radio, and hundreds of other "key" innovations are not listed separately here. You see, most big changes are just a part of some growth mode, and do not cause an increase in the growth rate. While we do not know what exactly has made growth rates change, we do see that the number of such causes so far can be counted on the fingers of one hand. While growth rates have varied widely, growth rate changes have been remarkably consistent -- each mode grew from one hundred and fifty to three hundred times faster than its predecessor. Also, the recent modes have made a similar number of doublings. While the universe has barely completed one doubling time, and the largest animals grew through sixteen doublings, hunting grew through nine doublings, farming grew through seven and a half doublings, and industry has so far done a bit over nine doublings. This pattern explains event clustering - transitions between faster growth modes that double a similar number of times must cluster closer and closer in time. But looking at this pattern, I cannot help but wonder: are we in the last mode, or will there be more? If a new growth transition were to be similar to the last few, in terms of the number of doublings and the increase in the growth rate, then the remarkable consistency in the previous transitions allows a remarkably precise prediction. A new growth mode should arise sometime within about the next seven industry mode doublings (i.e., the next seventy years) and give a new wealth doubling time of between seven and sixteen days. Such a new mode would surely count as "the next really big enormous thing." The suggestion that the world economy will soon double every week or two seems so far from ordinary experience as to be, well, "crazy." Of course similar predictions made before the previous transitions would have seemed similarly crazy. Nevertheless, it is hard to take this seriously without at least some account of how it could be possible. Now we cannot expect to get a very detailed account. After all, most economics has been designed to explain the actual social worlds that we have seen so far, and not all the possible social worlds that might exist. Even then we are still pretty ignorant about the causes of the previous transitions. But we do want at least a sketchy account. It turns out to be hard to create such an account using things like space colonization or new energy sources, mainly because we now pay only a small fraction of our budget on things like land and energy. But we pay seventy percent of world income for human labor, so anything that can lower this cost can have a huge impact. I am thus drawn to consider scenarios involving robotics or artificial intelligence. While machines have sometimes displaced human workers, they have much more often helped humans be more productive at tasks that machines cannot do. Machines have thus on net raised the value, and hence the cost, of human labor. And because people are essential, the limited rate of human population growth has limited the economic growth rate. Once we have machines that can do almost all the tasks that people can do, however, this picture changes dramatically. Since the number of machines can grow as fast as the economy needs them, human population growth no longer limits economic growth. In fact, simple growth models which assume no other changes can easily allow a new doubling time of a month, a week, or even less. Now admittedly, progress in robotics and artificial intelligence has been slow over the decades, primarily because it is so hard to write the software. And at these rates it could be centuries before we have software that can do almost all tasks that people do. The "upload" approach, however, of scanning human brains then simulating them in detail in computers, seems likely to succeed within the next half century or so. The transition from farming to industry seems to have been more gradual than the transition from hunting to farming. Even such a "gradual" transition, however, would be very dramatic. Assume that a new transition was as gradual as the one to industry, and that the world economic growth rate was six percent in both 2039 and 2040, plus or minus a typical yearly fluctuation of half a percent. If so, then in 2041, the increase in the growth rate might be the size of a typical fluctuation, and then in 2042 the growth rate would be a noticeably different eight percent. Growth would then be 14% in 2043, 50% in 2044, 150% in 2045, and 500% in 2046. Within five years the change would go from barely noticeable to overwhelming. This is disturbing because human wages should fall quickly with the falling price of machines. So while humans who owned shares in the firms that made machines would get very rich, those whose only source of income was their labor could die of starvation. And if people wait to see the transition happen before they believe it is real, they might not have time to arrange for other sources of income. If we stand back from all the big events and innovations we have seen in the last century and look at the overall world economic growth rate, it seems surprisingly steady. All those events and innovations contribute to growth, but have not much changed the overall growth rate. From this, one might expect such steady growth to continue for a long time. Looking further back in time, however, we see that once in a while something has changed the growth rate by enormous factors in a relatively short time. We might do well to not ignore such a speeding freight train until it actually hits us. For more information see my papers: [17]Long-Term Growth As A Sequence of Exponential Modes [18]Economic Growth Given Machine Intelligence [19]If Uploads Come First This essay is original and was specifically prepared for publication at Future Brief. A brief biography of Dr. Hanson can be found at our main [20]Commentary page. Other essays written by Dr. Hanson can be found at his [21]web site. Other websites are welcome to link to this essay, with proper credit given to Future Brief and Dr. Hanson. This page will remain posted on the Internet indefinitely at this web address to provide a stable page for those linking to it. References 15. http://www.futurebrief.com/RobinHanson.pdf 16. http://www.futurebrief.com/robinbio.asp 17. http://hanson.gmu.edu/longgrow.pdf 18. http://hanson.gmu.edu/aigrow.pdf 19. http://hanson.gmu.edu/uploads.html 20. http://www.futurebrief.com/commentary.asp 21. http://hanson.gmu.edu/vita.html 22. http://www.futurebrief.com/RobinHanson.pdf 23. http://www.futurebrief.com/brief.asp From alito at organicrobot.com Sun Oct 10 05:37:50 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:37:50 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections In-Reply-To: <028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> <028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <1097386670.4183.159.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 14:33 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote: > It may also be possible to see to what extent religion (which infiltrates > all political parties) effects policy especially policy relating to GM, > stem cells laws etc. > FFP position on stem cells is quite clear: http://www.familyfirst.org.au/hot_topics/stem_cells.php (short summary: they agree with Harradine) alejandro From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 10 05:40:34 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:40:34 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <000a01c4ae12$29597770$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <000a01c4ae12$29597770$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009223832.029044f0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Sextroscope: A devich which discerns amount and type of desire Sextrope: User of a sextroscope > > > > Sextropy: the belief that the future will bring more > > and better marital relations through technology. > > > > spike > >Orgasmic chemistry: a field of science that promotes sextropy. > >spike ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 10 05:38:03 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:38:03 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009223642.0295c750@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Sniggerlarity: Smarter than human Intelligince laughing back. At 01:05 AM 10/9/2004, you wrote: >Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. > >-- >Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ >Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 10 05:42:12 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:42:12 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009103629.01bfdec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <000301c4adc7$61534200$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <4167858E.3050101@barrera.org> <41679BE0.9010506@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041009103629.01bfdec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009224105.0295dc18@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Songularity: The point at which the StupidoSphere implodes. >>Snigularity: The act of mocking smarter-than-human intelligence. > >Singurarity: The infrequency of smarter-than-human intelligence. > >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 Sun Oct 10 05:46:53 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:46:53 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> References: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009224604.0294b150@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Popeularity: Same with Rules and Repression >Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. > >Natasha ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 10 05:48:32 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:48:32 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009151828.019ecec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041009151828.019ecec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009224720.028fa810@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> limerlack: A failed limerick which broke the rules >It's the same with limericks, where almost *nobody* has clue one on the >scansion of just about the simplest verse form ever to make us laugh. > >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 Sun Oct 10 05:50:21 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 09 Oct 2004 22:50:21 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009154629.01a6eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009104039.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000801c4ae3c$441d2cd0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.1.1.0.20041009154629.01a6eec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041009224923.0294c390@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Are we getting all schmucked up? >`Rules schmules' *isn't* bending a rule, for the luvadog, it's *using* a >well-known rule or template from Yiddish humor. > >Damien Broderick ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Oct 10 06:19:07 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:19:07 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> <028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc> <1097386670.4183.159.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <02b001c4ae91$0cb165e0$b8232dcb@homepc> Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: > On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 14:33 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote: > > It may also be possible to see to what extent religion (which infiltrates > > all political parties) effects policy especially policy relating to GM, > > stem cells laws etc. > > > > FFP position on stem cells is quite clear: > http://www.familyfirst.org.au/hot_topics/stem_cells.php > > (short summary: they agree with Harradine) So do some of the liberals and the nationals including Costello (treasurer and heir apparent), Abbott (health), Anderson (deputy PM), McGuaran (science minister) just to name a few off the top of my head. John Howard himself is on record as stating that he believes that life begins at conception. An intellectually untenable but politically understandable and conservative position. Howard can, I think, be persuaded intellectually. He is bright enough to get it, and competent enough politically that if he gets it he can lead others where he wants to go. Howard, like Keating had become very frustrated at senate obstructionism. He had considered a double dissolution and even a referendum on senate reform to try and get around it. He didn't go that way because it would have been harmful to have tried and failed. Now, to his surprise I am sure, his desired outcome has fallen into his lap. I suspect he will find it very hard to retire and make way for Peter Costello given the opportunity to do some serious reforming without the obstruction of the senate. I think Costello would be more conservative than Howard in religious terms (Abbot definately would be) and less able to put a more enlightened view to his co-religious effectively on stem cells. Brett From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 10 06:36:04 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:36:04 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Queenularity In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009152433.019dd400@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041010063604.67240.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Queenularity: the first gay presidency. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 10 06:41:04 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:41:04 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <20041009132456.14079.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041010064104.86533.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Laura Bush's boyfriend dumps her for not wanting to have an abortion, then soon afterwards she runs into his car, killing him instantly. Quite a coincidence. > Talk about a story straight out of a David Lynch movie... ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 10 06:44:01 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:44:01 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <20041010063604.67240.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041010064401.47373.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Queenularity: the first gay presidency. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 10 07:01:15 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 08:01:15 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] voting against Bush is pro-choice Message-ID: <20041010070115.90777.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Think of voting against Bush as aborting the Bush dynasty, as sticking a rusty coat hanger into the hack presidency of the son of Reagan's vice president. Bush's presidency is basically about nostalgia for the Gipper and for the '80s. ABORT THE BUSH DYNASTY. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From etcs.ret at verizon.net Sun Oct 10 11:21:51 2004 From: etcs.ret at verizon.net (stencil) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:21:51 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <200410091800.i99I0B009545@tick.javien.com> References: <200410091800.i99I0B009545@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <8e6im09vi30sd3h7o18bqtj1akn4n3lqje@4ax.com> On Sat, 9 Oct 2004 12:00:11 -0600, in extropy-chat Digest, Vol 13, Issue 15 Eliezer wrote: > >...okay, I'd better stop this now before it gets silly. > >-- Yeh. Evolition - expressing your will by genetically modifying your offspring. Evolation - expressing God's will by genetically modifying your offspring. Evolotion - radioactive K-Y jelly employed to facilitate evolation. Evolusion - the belief that one is an improvement on one's parents. stencil sends From alito at organicrobot.com Sun Oct 10 14:11:59 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 00:11:59 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] QRIO on rollerskates Message-ID: <1097417520.3816.198.camel@alito.homeip.net> Continuing on the ?bercool robot video series: QRIO on rollerskates http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/9999/rollerbot.wmv (from an IROS overview in new scientist: http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996507 ) From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Oct 10 14:22:19 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 07:22:19 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Mandatory draft for your child? References: <20041006141916.10346.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006301c4aed4$8d0ebe70$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > --- John K Clark wrote: > > > > One sponsor of the bill, Alcee Hastings, has an especially > > interesting history, in 1977 he was made the first Black Federal > > Judge from Florida, but in 1988 he was caught conspiring to obtain > > a $150,000 bribe to grant leniency to two convicted racketeers. He > > was impeached in the House (413-3) and convicted in the Senate > > becoming only the seventh Federal Judge to have > > received that distinction in the history of the country. After that > > Alcee Hastings embarked on a new career, politics. > Fox, meet henhouse.... Henhouse, meet fox ... "...of 535 members of Congress, only one has a child serving with the military in Iraq.": http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002058054_pitts10.html Olga From kpj at sics.se Sun Oct 10 16:06:38 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 18:06:38 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: Message from Adrian Tymes of "Sat, 09 Oct 2004 10:26:20 PDT." <20041009172620.63791.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200410101606.i9AG6cl23734@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if scerir wrote: |> Extopy = Outsideness? |> Extopians = ? Extopians: out of topic Extropians. Extropains: what you get by reading these bad jokes. From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Oct 10 17:31:11 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 10:31:11 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Abstruse Theorist Dies References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040929225841.01c1aec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000a01c4aeee$efcfa9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Jacques Derrida is dead. He was "known as the father of deconstruction, the method of inquiry that asserted that all writing was full of confusion and contradiction," so this may be of so interest to this group, who've had quite a go of deconstruting some words of lette: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/10/obituaries/10derrida.html?hp&ex=1097467200&en=bf0e4a5d1d77ff19&ei=5094&partner=homepage Olga From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 10 18:31:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:31:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Mandatory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <006301c4aed4$8d0ebe70$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041010183152.51217.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Fox, meet henhouse.... > > Henhouse, meet fox ... > > "...of 535 members of Congress, only one has a child serving with the > military in Iraq.": > > http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002058054_pitts10.html > Since my original post on the bbs apparently isn't copying to the list... It is rather telling, Olga, when a newspaper uses Michael Moore as a 'reliable source'. According to this article: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20040913-9999-1m13duncan.html There are as many as eight members of Congress with children who have served, are serving, or are on their way to, Iraq, including Joe Biden, D-NJ. One has three kids in the military, and another has a child on active duty and another at the Naval Academy. While this is still less than 2% of the entire congress, it is above average for the general population, where the US population is currently 290 million and the entire US military is 1.336 million, less than 1/2 of 1% are currently serving in the military in some capacity. As there are now 120,000 US military personnel in Iraq, the per capita military people in Iraq is 0.0005. Even if only one member of congress had a child serving in Iraq, that would still be 0.0020, or four times greater than the US population's per capita committment as a whole. This analysis shows why agitprop radicals like Michael Moore are such lying bastards. Congress is doing more than 'its fair share'. It is also rather telling that you believe a newspaper that uses a nasty, lying SOB like Michael Moore as a reliable source. ===== 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 jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 10 18:47:08 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Embryonic stem cells Message-ID: <20041010184708.99631.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com> Like Columbus' "discovery" of America, Watson and Crick's Eureka moment set in motion a tsunami of transformation. Witness now the first ripples of change, as that wave of the future sweeps, in the remote and abyssal darkness of the origin of all things, against those promontories that mark the awakening of consciousness. And it's just the beginning of the beginning. Lovely. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/mscc-esc100404.php Embryonic stem cells correct congenital heart defect in mouse embryos Can signal neighbor cells to repair NEW YORK, NY - A study published in the October 8 issue of Science describes a previously unsuspected capacity of embryonic stem cells to influence neighboring defective cells and restore their capacity to function normally. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Sun Oct 10 18:47:39 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 11:47:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Origins of life Message-ID: <20041010184739.33361.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> Though the struggle may be long and hard, the old world view grounded in superstition cannot but inevitably give way to the superior "fitness" of modernity. Science works, religion doesn't. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/sri-cov100704.php Component of volcanic gas may have played a significant role in the origins of life on Earth Carbonyl sulfide forms peptide bonds Scientists at The Scripps Research Institute and the Salk Institute for Biological Studies are reporting a possible answer to a longstanding question in research on the origins of life on Earth--how did the first amino acids form the first peptides? Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From jonkc at att.net Sun Oct 10 19:22:24 2004 From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 15:22:24 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Abstruse Theorist Dies References: <6.1.1.1.0.20040929225841.01c1aec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <000a01c4aeee$efcfa9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <002401c4aefe$7f77f270$a9ef4d0c@hal2001> NOTE: This essay is completely meaningless and was randomly generated by the Postmodernism Generator. =============================== Feminism, Predialectic Marxism and Social Rrealism by Barbara J. G. Tilton Department of Deconstruction, University of Illinois "Culture is meaningless," says Sartre. Several theories concerning the submodern paradigm of consensus exist. It could be said that in Queer, Burroughs deconstructs capitalist situationism; in Port of Saints, although, he examines social realism. Any number of discourses concerning not construction, but preconstruction may be found. However, the primary theme of Hubbard's[1] critique of the dialectic paradigm of narrative is the role of the reader as observer. Many discourses concerning Lyotardist narrative exist. In a sense, the economy of capitalist situationism depicted in Burroughs's The Ticket that Exploded is also evident in Junky, although in a more postcultural sense. The subject is interpolated into a Lyotardist narrative that includes consciousness as a totality. 2. Burroughs and social realism In the works of Burroughs, a predominant concept is the concept of dialectic language. Thus, Scuglia[2] suggests that we have to choose between Lyotardist narrative and preconceptual rationalism. The characteristic theme of the works of Burroughs is the difference between class and sexual identity. "Society is fundamentally unattainable," says Lacan. But the premise of capitalist situationism implies that sexuality may be used to disempower minorities. Any number of depatriarchialisms concerning the role of the participant as writer may be discovered. In a sense, Foucault uses the term 'social realism' to denote a self-fulfilling paradox. If capitalist situationism holds, we have to choose between cultural subdialectic theory and deconstructive theory. It could be said that Abian[3] states that the works of Burroughs are an example of mythopoetical capitalism. A number of deconstructions concerning social realism exist. Therefore, the subject is contextualised into a capitalist situationism that includes art as a totality. If Marxist socialism holds, we have to choose between social realism and submodern narrative. ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. Hubbard, J. E. ed. (1971) The Genre of Reality: Lyotardist narrative and social realism. Schlangekraft 2. Scuglia, P. (1985) Social realism in the works of Burroughs. Oxford University Press 3. Abian, H. C. G. ed. (1990) Deconstructing Baudrillard: Social realism and Lyotardist narrative. Schlangekraft From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Oct 10 23:39:24 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:39:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Queenularity In-Reply-To: <20041010063604.67240.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009152433.019dd400@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041010163902.03666b90@mail.earthlink.net> Hhahahahah! a hahahah! ahahah! At 07:36 AM 10/10/04 +0100, you wrote: >Queenularity: the first gay presidency. > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! >Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Oct 10 23:47:01 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:47:01 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <41684BAD.8020806@pobox.com> References: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041010164137.036604f0@mail.earthlink.net> At 04:35 PM 10/9/04 -0400, you wrote: >natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: >>Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. > >Hmph. Sounds sexist to me. The most powerful chess piece, able to move in any direction in a straight line, which can get there faster than a curved line. Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kpj at sics.se Sun Oct 10 22:08:06 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 00:08:06 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: Message from Natasha Vita-More of "Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:47:01 PDT." <5.2.0.9.0.20041010164137.036604f0@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <200410102208.i9AM86B24893@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Natasha Vita-More wrote: | |At 04:35 PM 10/9/04 -0400, you wrote: |>natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: |>>Queenularity: A Singularity involving ethics and democracy. |> |>Hmph. Sounds sexist to me. | |The most powerful chess piece, able to move in any direction in a straight |line, which can get there faster than a curved line. You are undoubtedly aware of the fact that the word "queen" is actually a mis-translation from Arabic of "vizier" (also spelled visier, vezir, wizier), a minister or councillor of state in various Muslim states. Merriam-Webster Online: http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=vizier From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Oct 10 23:05:47 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:05:47 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings [was: Mandatory draft for your child?] References: <20041010183152.51217.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006a01c4af1d$adb6b080$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > It is also rather telling that you believe a newspaper that uses a > nasty, lying SOB like Michael Moore as a reliable source. I hardly believe anything I read in the newspapers, but I take note of the various "truths" propounded by the dailies. I think Michael Moore is towards one end of the spectrum, and George Bush is towards the other end (including exhibiting some of those nasty, lying SOB qualities himself). George Bush cannot admit he's wrong about anything (maybe, as he believes he has a special pipeline to god, that would be like saying god is wrong? - and if that's the case, which man-in-the-looking-glass is calling whom a "terrorist"?). Commercial break: http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html I was so heartened to hear Kerry mention "atheists" in the second debate (and I've heard him mention atheists before, as well). Atheists - as in, yes, they are real people who are also citizens of the USA and whose viewpoints need to be considered. To even *acknowledge* the existence of nontheists in America is almost a kiss-of-death in politics, so I think Kerry exhibited quite a bit of courage in this respect. One of my consistently favorite columnists is Mark Morford of the San Francisco Chronicle (I know I've mentioned him here before): http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html Mike, forget about Michael Moore for a minute (I'm not actually a fan of his, and haven't even seen his movie) ... what do you think of Morford (e.g., the October 5 column)? I don't agree with Morford's views 100% of the time, but I just love his facility with words and phrases - and he makes me think. Someone whom I really enjoy reading and who *doesn't* write for dailies is Richard Dawkins: http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/index.shtml See ya lette, Olga From emlynoregan at gmail.com Sun Oct 10 23:52:57 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 09:22:57 +0930 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections In-Reply-To: <02b001c4ae91$0cb165e0$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> <028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc> <1097386670.4183.159.camel@alito.homeip.net> <02b001c4ae91$0cb165e0$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <710b78fc04101016524ab8502f@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, 10 Oct 2004 16:19:07 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote: > Now, to his surprise I am sure, his desired outcome has fallen into > his lap. I suspect he will find it very hard to retire and make way > for Peter Costello given the opportunity to do some serious > reforming without the obstruction of the senate. > > I think Costello would be more conservative than Howard in > religious terms (Abbot definately would be) and less able to > put a more enlightened view to his co-religious effectively on > stem cells. > > Brett Hmm... to me, it seems we've just returned a pathological liar to office, and removed his last shred of accountability (the senate). Bad times ahead, and we wont even know what's going on. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Oct 11 00:04:57 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:04:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings [was: Mandatory draft for your child?] In-Reply-To: <006a01c4af1d$adb6b080$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <004c01c4af25$f212ddf0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Olga Bourlin >Mike, forget about Michael Moore for a minute (I'm not actually a fan of >his, and haven't even seen his movie) ... See if you can find on video Michael Moore's first two movies, "Roger and Me" and "Pets or Meat." I was amazed at how a novelty-format movie, a bitterly comical documentary, could be simultaneously hilarious and tragic as all hell. Moore comes across as an angry whiney socialist who is actually extremely funny. His later stuff comes across as merely an angry whiney socialist. Caveat: I viewed the second movie with a liberal friend who utterly failed to see the humor among the wreckage of human lives. You do need to be in the mood for this kind of thing. Its been well over a decade since Ive seen the films, so I do not know how the humor has held up. spike From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Oct 11 00:09:09 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:09:09 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Mandatory draft for your child? Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ECFB@tpeex05> Should we use a better formula (maybe Bayesian inference) to estimate the probability of a US parent having (at least) one child serving in Iraq? An easier and more accurate estimate is counting first how many parents we have in US. I guess there should be less than 290 million divided by 4 (assume the average family members are 4). Then Congress is roughly the same as 'its fair share'. (Note: I have no special preference to M. Moore.) 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: Monday, October 11, 2004 2:32 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Mandatory draft for your child? --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > Fox, meet henhouse.... > > Henhouse, meet fox ... > > "...of 535 members of Congress, only one has a child serving with the > military in Iraq.": > > http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002058054_pitts10.html > Since my original post on the bbs apparently isn't copying to the list... It is rather telling, Olga, when a newspaper uses Michael Moore as a 'reliable source'. According to this article: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20040913-9999-1m13duncan.html There are as many as eight members of Congress with children who have served, are serving, or are on their way to, Iraq, including Joe Biden, D-NJ. One has three kids in the military, and another has a child on active duty and another at the Naval Academy. While this is still less than 2% of the entire congress, it is above average for the general population, where the US population is currently 290 million and the entire US military is 1.336 million, less than 1/2 of 1% are currently serving in the military in some capacity. As there are now 120,000 US military personnel in Iraq, the per capita military people in Iraq is 0.0005. Even if only one member of congress had a child serving in Iraq, that would still be 0.0020, or four times greater than the US population's per capita committment as a whole. This analysis shows why agitprop radicals like Michael Moore are such lying bastards. Congress is doing more than 'its fair share'. It is also rather telling that you believe a newspaper that uses a nasty, lying SOB like Michael Moore as a reliable source. ===== 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 _______________________________________________ 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 Mon Oct 11 00:16:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:16:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings [was: Mandatory draft for your child?] In-Reply-To: <006a01c4af1d$adb6b080$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041011001613.59094.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Could you post that link? It looks like you double copied the Doonesbury bit.. --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Mike Lorrey" > > > It is also rather telling that you believe a newspaper that uses a > > nasty, lying SOB like Michael Moore as a reliable source. > > I hardly believe anything I read in the newspapers, but I take note > of the > various "truths" propounded by the dailies. I think Michael Moore is > towards one end of the spectrum, and George Bush is towards the other > end > (including exhibiting some of those nasty, lying SOB qualities > himself). > George Bush cannot admit he's wrong about anything (maybe, as he > believes he > has a special pipeline to god, that would be like saying god is > wrong? - and > if that's the case, which man-in-the-looking-glass is calling whom a > "terrorist"?). > > Commercial break: > http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html > > I was so heartened to hear Kerry mention "atheists" in the second > debate > (and I've heard him mention atheists before, as well). Atheists - as > in, > yes, they are real people who are also citizens of the USA and whose > viewpoints need to be considered. To even *acknowledge* the > existence of > nontheists in America is almost a kiss-of-death in politics, so I > think > Kerry exhibited quite a bit of courage in this respect. > > One of my consistently favorite columnists is Mark Morford of the San > Francisco Chronicle (I know I've mentioned him here before): > > http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html > > Mike, forget about Michael Moore for a minute (I'm not actually a fan > of > his, and haven't even seen his movie) ... what do you think of > Morford > (e.g., the October 5 column)? I don't agree with Morford's views > 100% of > the time, but I just love his facility with words and phrases - and > he makes > me think. > > Someone whom I really enjoy reading and who *doesn't* write for > dailies is > Richard Dawkins: > http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/index.shtml > > See ya lette, > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 00:18:29 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Mandatory draft for your child? In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ECFB@tpeex05> Message-ID: <20041011001829.13460.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> There are 32 people in the average american family? --- Walter_Chen at compal.com wrote: > Should we use a better formula (maybe Bayesian inference) to estimate > the > probability of a US parent having > (at least) one child serving in Iraq? > An easier and more accurate estimate is counting first how many > parents we > have in US. > I guess there should be less than 290 million divided by 4 (assume > the > average family members are 4). > Then Congress is roughly the same as 'its fair share'. > (Note: I have no special preference to M. Moore.) > > 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: Monday, October 11, 2004 2:32 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Mandatory draft for your child? > > > > --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > > > Fox, meet henhouse.... > > > > Henhouse, meet fox ... > > > > "...of 535 members of Congress, only one has a child serving with > the > > military in Iraq.": > > > > > http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2002058054_pitts10.html > > > Since my original post on the bbs apparently isn't copying to the > list... > > It is rather telling, Olga, when a newspaper uses Michael Moore as a > 'reliable source'. According to this article: > http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/military/20040913-9999-1m13duncan.html > > There are as many as eight members of Congress with children who have > served, are serving, or are on their way to, Iraq, including Joe > Biden, > D-NJ. One has three kids in the military, and another has a child on > active duty and another at the Naval Academy. > > While this is still less than 2% of the entire congress, it is above > average for the general population, where the US population is > currently 290 million and the entire US military is 1.336 million, > less > than 1/2 of 1% are currently serving in the military in some > capacity. > As there are now 120,000 US military personnel in Iraq, the per > capita > military people in Iraq is 0.0005. Even if only one member of > congress > had a child serving in Iraq, that would still be 0.0020, or four > times > greater than the US population's per capita committment as a whole. > This analysis shows why agitprop radicals like Michael Moore are such > lying bastards. Congress is doing more than 'its fair share'. > > It is also rather telling that you believe a newspaper that uses a > nasty, lying SOB like Michael Moore as a reliable source. > > ===== > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Oct 11 00:30:23 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 17:30:23 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings [was: Mandatory draft for your child?] References: <20041011001613.59094.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001301c4af29$7f9752c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > Could you post that link? It looks like you double copied the Sorry, yes, here it is: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/search/fastfind.cgi?jump=1&word_option=and&word=morford Olga From trichrom at optusnet.com.au Mon Oct 11 00:37:13 2004 From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:37:13 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net><028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc><1097386670.4183.159.camel@alito.homeip.net><02b001c4ae91$0cb165e0$b8232dcb@homepc> <710b78fc04101016524ab8502f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000b01c4af2a$7e048850$e40fecdc@turtle> Hard to say isn't it? Lots of issues to pick from but none seemed clear to me that he lied... I guess that is one of the reasons the election went the way it did. Iraq: their is a layer of secuity regarding strategic decision's similair to that which is often referred to as 'operational security' from government. Public doesn't need to know the details of the WMD threat. My guess would be Iraq had an active bio-weapon's program which are easier to hide and move, even under the constant surveillance of the UN and US/UK forces. This would be likely to counter the growing military capability of at least Iran. Given Iraq's inability to play by UN rule's, intelligence information might have taken new seriousness given the engagement of US forces in the region and Iraq's capbility to deploy such weapons themselves or deploy them via sympathetic groups. Public doesnt need to know these things before or during operation's but should be told afterwards (once it doesnt interfere with current or planned operations). The lasso around Iraq for the last 12 years surely should have indicated to people that any WMD threat would be very well hidden... if people want to believe Saddam's regime was sitting idle during those years based on the fact that they (US/UK/UN) cannot find anything now is a personal choice I wouldn't think is the wisest. It is a fact that security/military decisions cannot have the same transperancy as other political area's. Children Overboard: does anything think that was anything more than miscommunication just because concerns might have been raised with the PM? Any number of people involved in the actual incident could have leaked the story quietly at any time - but instead, by the nature of how we all found out it didn't actually happen the way stated, the error was clearly in someone protecting their career by adjusting the fact's before it reached the PM - their is nothing to indicate it was a lie by the PM that I've read. Tampa: nothing strange there. I can't comment on broad policy issue's, but the job of PM would have to be the defined as the 'most trusted' position in the country. That's who we elect to run the country and they have to stand up to arguably the harshest scrutiny throughout their professional career's to be in the job. I think a pathological liar would be found out within the first 5 years in politics even if tightly integrated in a support group. That's something the media and opposition political parties seem to keep an eye on. I let out a sigh of relief at the result, and then went back to my foreboding about the state of the world and it's destructives motivators - best of not very good choices in my opinion. RobKPO ----- Original Message ----- From: Emlyn To: ExI chat list Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 9:52 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections Hmm... to me, it seems we've just returned a pathological liar to office, and removed his last shred of accountability (the senate). Bad times ahead, and we wont even know what's going on. -- 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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 02:18:05 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 03:18:05 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] a Queenularity we'd like to see In-Reply-To: <20041011021614.57145.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011021805.4599.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:gayhitler.jpg ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 02:29:19 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:29:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] (no subject) In-Reply-To: <20041010064104.86533.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011022919.74559.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> So which Bush daughter is the illegitimate one? --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Laura Bush's boyfriend dumps her for not wanting to > have an abortion, then soon afterwards she runs into > his car, killing him instantly. Quite a coincidence. > > > > Talk about a story straight out of a David Lynch > movie... > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > http://uk.messenger.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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Oct 11 02:34:57 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:34:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] (no subject) References: <20041011022919.74559.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000601c4af3a$e6618050$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > So which Bush daughter is the illegitimate one? http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/laura.asp Olga From fortean1 at mindspring.com Mon Oct 11 02:34:52 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:34:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Two more Derrida obits!] Message-ID: <4169F14C.D32AFC1B@mindspring.com> Father of Deconstructionism Dies, If 'Death' Means Anything by Scott Ott (2004-10-10) -- French President Jacques Chirac announced today that Jacques Derrida, the father of the intellectual movement called deconstructionism, died yesterday of pancreatic cancer, "if indeed 'death' can be said to mean anything beyond the biases of culture, language, religion and philosophy." "Of course, we can't assert anything positively about Monsieur Derrida's recent failure to exist," said Mr. Chirac, "We can't even state that he ever did exist, since he may have been a mere metaphysical projection of our own prejudices against absolutes. However, in as much as we may categorically claim anything--Mr. Derrida will not likely be showing up for work tomorrow. Although, who is to say?" Mr. Derrida's many books and teachings spawned legions of American college professors whose stock-in-trade is to "deconstruct" literature and philosophy in order to demonstrate that, for example, the so-called classics of Western literature are so distorted by their authors' cultural prejudices as to render them useful only for literary deconstruction. "Monsieur Derrida bequeathed a magnificent legacy to the global intellectual community," said Mr. Chirac. "He has provided us all with the intellectual infrastructure to prevent us from seeking after truth. Thanks to him we know it is fruitless to assert anything with conviction, or to say that any ideology is less true than any other. They are all equally trifling. Their value, if any, lies only in the sport they provide for college professors." In lieu of flowers, friends of Mr. Derrida are urged to devote their lives to convincing at least one young person that there is nothing to which it is worth devoting one's life. ************************************************************ October 11, 2004 Is Derrida dead? A conceptual foundation for the deconstruction of mortality Can there be any certainty in the death of Jacques Derrida ? The obituarists' objective attempts to place his life in a finite context are, necessarily, subject to epistemic relativism, the idea that all such scientific theories are mere "narrations" or social constructions. Surely, a postmodernist deconstruction of their import would inevitably question the foundational conceptual categories of prior science - among them, Derrida's own existence - which become problematised and relativised. This conceptual revolution has profound implications for the content of future postmodern and liberatory science of mortality. Is God dead? It was, perhaps, Alan D. Sokal who most heuristically challenged the dogma imposed by the long post-Enlightenment hegemony over the Western intellectual outlook in his brilliant exegesis of Derridian principles Transgressing the Boundaries: Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity. Dr Sokal's inclusive review of the literature (see especially Hamill, Graham. The epistemology of expurgation: Bacon and The Masculine Birth of Time. In Queering the Renaissance, pp. 236-252. And also Doyle, Richard. Dislocating knowledge, thinking out of joint: Rhizomatics and the importance of being multiple), and his eerily exact summary of the complementarity principle (Instead of a simple "either/or" structure, deconstruction attempts to elaborate a discourse that says neither "either/or" nor "both/and" nor even "neither/nor" while at the same time not abandoning these logics either) make his reading of Derrida irrefutable. We know only two things. We do not know. And M. Derrida is in no position to enlighten us. < http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,542-1303821,00.html > Larry 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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 02:47:42 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 03:47:42 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <20041011022919.74559.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011024742.92569.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> If Hillary had accidentally (on-purpose, say) killed her boyfriend not long after he'd dumped her, conservative rags would have printed cartoons of her in the early '90s driving an auto, with "Hillary Healthcare" printed on the side, into another car with a person labeled "healthcare consumer" flying out of the car with his neck bent. All through the '90s Hillary would never have been allowed to forget it if she had been involved in a fatal accident; she'd never have been elected senator. To this day 'Ted Kennedy' implies "Chappaquiddick". > > Talk about a story straight out of a David Lynch > > movie... ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 11 02:59:49 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:59:49 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] lette In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20041010164137.036604f0@mail.earthlink.net> References: <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> <90300-220041069201718997@M2W072.mail2web.com> <5.2.0.9.0.20041010164137.036604f0@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041010195312.02937390@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> highularity - taking some acid and meeting Leary's Ghost hiuyoularity - encountering a Wal Mart greeter Heyularity - being targeted by an enforcer of some kind Blessularity - what priests do lairulaiarity - reading this thread And courtesy of Natasha: >Maxularity - The philosophical outlook on the singularity based on reason, >truth and maximizing extropy. so, natashularity - being a total maxularian ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 05:00:43 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 06:00:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041010195312.02937390@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011050043.85248.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Mike, I understand your qualms concerning Kerry, and why libertarians want to vote for Badnarik. Bush appears to defend death rather than life, he worries about fetuses & killing embryos in a petrie dish, but he's killed thousands of civilians in Iraq? He has executed dozens in Texas? Bush has a microscopic definition of what defensible life is. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Mon Oct 11 05:35:56 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:05:56 +0930 Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011050043.85248.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041010195312.02937390@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <20041011050043.85248.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc04101022355429a0c2@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 06:00:43 +0100 (BST), Trend Ologist wrote: > Mike, > I understand your qualms concerning Kerry, and why > libertarians want to vote for Badnarik. > Bush appears to defend death rather than life, he > worries about fetuses & killing embryos in a petrie > dish, but he's killed thousands of civilians in Iraq? > He has executed dozens in Texas? "Yeah, but they were all bad." I think another republican said this... -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 05:54:01 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 06:54:01 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04101022355429a0c2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041011055401.78916.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> It could be those on death row in Texas were "all bad", and all the embryos in a dish are good? Does Bush actually care about the embryos? So what about spermatozoa? They are life, aren't they? Shouldn't Bush care about defending the lives of sperm? > "Yeah, but they were all bad." I think another > republican said this... > Emlyn ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Mon Oct 11 06:09:31 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 23:09:31 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <20041011024742.92569.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006d01c4af58$e5902af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Trend Ologist > Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... > > All through the '90s Hillary would never have been > allowed to forget it if she had been involved in a > fatal accident; she'd never have been elected senator... Ja. I doubt Laura Bush could be elected to the senate. Of course she isn't actually running for any public office and is not trying to "fix" our medical system. > To this day 'Ted Kennedy' implies "Chappaquiddick"... This one has puzzled me for some time. I googled the story about the Chappaquiddick incident, and read what some of those involved said about it. Clearly the young Kennedy was driving drunk at the time of the accident, but didn't alert the authorities until several hours later, giving him time to sober up and his passenger time to drown in the overturned car. Today that would carry a charge of vehicular manslaughter. With that on his record, how did he ever manage to win an election? spike From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 06:22:33 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 23:22:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] QRIO on rollerskates In-Reply-To: <1097417520.3816.198.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <20041011062233.88975.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Is it just me, or does the bot seem to be walking on a pad projecting between the wheels in the second half? --- Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: > Continuing on the ?bercool robot video series: > > QRIO on rollerskates > http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/9999/rollerbot.wmv > > (from an IROS overview in new scientist: > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996507 > ) > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 06:41:42 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:41:42 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush & death In-Reply-To: <006d01c4af58$e5902af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041011064142.96312.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Spike, your point concerning Ted Kennedy being elected senator even after he was involved in manslaughter is relevant and was anticipated; yet you know Ted is a Kennedy and in Mass. Kennedys get a pass, though there is no good reason he should be excused. However there are many books about Hillary and Ted, but Laura Bush breaks a young guys neck in a car accident and there wasn't even an investigation of any sort? If you or I did such a thing we'd be in serious trouble, even if we were teenagers. Of course its all extremely minor to voting in this election, but when I vote I look at what a candidate represents: it seems Bush and his family represent death. Death in Iraq, death on a Texas road, and at the debate with Gore four years ago, Bush's eyes lit up when he spoke of executions, "we're going to fry those guys!", he proclaimed. Most of all, Bush speaks of innocent microscopic life needing protection. So what is the hidden moral? That the world is overpopulating, so microscopic life is more valuable than large, space occupying humans? > Ja. I doubt Laura Bush could be elected to the > senate. > Of course she isn't actually running for any public > office > and is not trying to "fix" our medical system. > > > To this day 'Ted Kennedy' implies > "Chappaquiddick"... > > This one has puzzled me for some time. I googled > the > story about the Chappaquiddick incident, and read > what > some of those involved said about it. Clearly the > young Kennedy was driving drunk at the time of the > accident, but didn't alert the authorities until > several > hours later, giving him time to sober up and his > passenger > time to drown in the overturned car. Today that > would > carry a charge of vehicular manslaughter. With that > on > his record, how did he ever manage to win an > election? > > spike ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Oct 11 06:43:26 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 23:43:26 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... References: <006d01c4af58$e5902af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <002001c4af5d$9cfaadb0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Spike" > > To this day 'Ted Kennedy' implies "Chappaquiddick"... > > This one has puzzled me for some time. I googled the > story about the Chappaquiddick incident, and read what > some of those involved said about it. Clearly the > young Kennedy was driving drunk at the time of the > accident, but didn't alert the authorities until several > hours later, giving him time to sober up and his passenger > time to drown in the overturned car. Today that would > carry a charge of vehicular manslaughter. With that on > his record, how did he ever manage to win an election? He was a Kennedy: http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Lane/7250/thoughts/jfk.html Olga From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 07:03:23 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:03:23 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] last word on Laura... Message-ID: <20041011070323.11107.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> ...because it's as off-topic as you can get. It doesn't rig true that someone could smash into a car, throw the smashee in the air breaking his neck, but the smasher doesn't even lose her drivers license? No investigation? That's it, you're free to go home? Everything adds up in my mind to think Bush is the ultimate teflon president, nothing sticks at all, while the Clintons had a flashlight shined up their every orifice. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From alito at organicrobot.com Mon Oct 11 07:55:30 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:55:30 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] QRIO on rollerskates In-Reply-To: <20041011062233.88975.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041011062233.88975.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1097481330.3796.5.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 23:22 -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Is it just me, or does the bot seem to be walking on a > pad projecting between the wheels in the second half? > What do you mean by a pad between the wheels? between the wheels of one skate, or between skates? I don't see anything strange in the video. There doesn't seem to me to be anything connecting the skates to each other. alejandro > --- Alejandro Dubrovsky > wrote: > > > Continuing on the bercool robot video series: > > > > QRIO on rollerskates > > > http://www.newscientist.com/data/images/ns/9999/rollerbot.wmv > > > > (from an IROS overview in new scientist: > > > http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99996507 > > ) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Oct 11 09:21:27 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:21:27 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Greens do well in Oz elections In-Reply-To: <710b78fc04101016524ab8502f@mail.gmail.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041009130006.01bdbec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <1097378832.3816.156.camel@alito.homeip.net> <028c01c4ae82$5ab55030$b8232dcb@homepc> <1097386670.4183.159.camel@alito.homeip.net> <02b001c4ae91$0cb165e0$b8232dcb@homepc> <710b78fc04101016524ab8502f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Emyln/Damien: Having been outside Australia now for 3.5 years I don't have a strong sense of why Howard was re-elected. In simple terms was it because the Australian economy is going well and people were worried that Labour would (potentially) make things worse? best, patrick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 12:59:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 05:59:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <20041011024742.92569.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011125946.58190.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > If Hillary had accidentally (on-purpose, say) killed > her boyfriend not long after he'd dumped her, > conservative rags would have printed cartoons of her > in the early '90s driving an auto, with "Hillary > Healthcare" printed on the side, into another car with > a person labeled "healthcare consumer" flying out of > the car with his neck bent. > All through the '90s Hillary would never have been > allowed to forget it if she had been involved in a > fatal accident; she'd never have been elected senator. > To this day 'Ted Kennedy' implies "Chappaquiddick". To this day, Hillary implies "Vince Foster".... oops, so solly, that was such a slow pitch.... ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 13:02:38 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 06:02:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <006d01c4af58$e5902af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041011130238.24251.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > > To this day 'Ted Kennedy' implies "Chappaquiddick"... > > This one has puzzled me for some time. I googled the > story about the Chappaquiddick incident, and read what > some of those involved said about it. Clearly the > young Kennedy was driving drunk at the time of the > accident, but didn't alert the authorities until several > hours later, giving him time to sober up and his passenger > time to drown in the overturned car. Today that would > carry a charge of vehicular manslaughter. With that on > his record, how did he ever manage to win an election? JFK.... RFK.... MJK (Mary Jo Kopeckney)... "Oh, the boy has had enough, lets give him a seat in congress." Yeah, that sounds like Massachusetts liberalism. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From Ody777 at comcast.net Mon Oct 11 13:11:21 2004 From: Ody777 at comcast.net (Ody777 at comcast.net) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:11:21 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Greens do well in Oz elections Message-ID: <101120041311.21106.416A867900086FA8000052722200758942C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Damien Broderick wrote (9 Oct): < Sigh. Damien Broderick>> It would be helpful if you would explain your assertions here. ?Bush rose and candidly admitted he couldn?t understand it?: couldn?t understand what? What did he say? ?Bush?s stupidity?: Why do you think he was stupid? As to Kerry?s statement ?that he was a Roman Catholic but... could not let his faith influence his decision,? I?d be really interested in knowing how he reconciled that contradiction. As a Roman Catholic, he has signed on to the belief that abortion is homicide. How could he possibly ignore that in his practical decisions on abortion? If he gave a ?supple, concise and principled? explanation of how to resolve this profound problem, I?d like to know what the explanation was. More details, please. Rob Masters From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 13:18:10 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 06:18:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011050043.85248.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011131810.3639.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Mike, > I understand your qualms concerning Kerry, and why > libertarians want to vote for Badnarik. > Bush appears to defend death rather than life, he > worries about fetuses & killing embryos in a petrie > dish, but he's killed thousands of civilians in Iraq? > He has executed dozens in Texas? Bush has a > microscopic definition of what defensible life is. If you lack a moral compass that allows you to distinguish, try this one on for size: the unborn are innocent. Murderers, islamofascists, and terrorists are not. Is he being excessively pedantic about cells in a petri dish? Probably. He is not, however, being pedantic about the wrongness of government funding such activity with the money of taxpayers who are morally opposed 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Mon Oct 11 15:04:31 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:04:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings Message-ID: Olga: >Sorry, yes, here it is: >http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/search/fastfind.cgi?jump=1&word_option=and&word=morford Oh my, thank you, Olga! I read the first Morford article, that you posted a couple of weeks ago. Wonderful stuff. Now, check this by Morford ... "Does God Hate Florida? After four brutal hurricanes, why aren't Bush evangelicals talking about the Almighty's wrath?" http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/10/01/notes100104.DTL It reminds of something I saw last week. Please do the following exercise. In the state of Florida, color the counties of the 2000 presidential election, of the counties that voted for Gore, and those which voted for Bush. Then, when done, plot the path of the three hurricanes; Ivan, Charley, and Frances... It's not perfect, but notice that the hurricanes tended to ram through the Bush counties, and for the most part avoided the Gore counties. Now where did I see this presentation? At the Cassini 'Saturn Workshop' in Capri, Italy, last week, from one of the Titan talks. And some people think that scientists do not have a (ok strange) sense of humor.... 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 fauxever at sprynet.com Mon Oct 11 14:20:50 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 07:20:50 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Christopher Reeve Is Dead References: Message-ID: <002101c4af9d$8287a330$6600a8c0@brainiac> http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/11/arts/11WIRE-REEVE.html?oref=login&hp Olga From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 15:20:19 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Christopher Reeve Is Dead In-Reply-To: <002101c4af9d$8287a330$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041011152019.50561.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/11/arts/11WIRE-REEVE.html?oref=login&hp The Singularity - or, at least, spinal cord regneration, like he was lobbying for - did not arrive soon enough for him. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 15:28:34 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:28:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] QRIO on rollerskates In-Reply-To: <1097481330.3796.5.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <20041011152834.641.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: > On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 23:22 -0700, Adrian Tymes > wrote: > > Is it just me, or does the bot seem to be walking > on a > > pad projecting between the wheels in the second > half? > > > What do you mean by a pad between the wheels? > between the wheels of one > skate, or between skates? In the middle of each foot, which would place it between the four wheels on each foot. > I don't see anything > strange in the video. > There doesn't seem to me to be anything connecting > the skates to each > other. Besides the foot, of course. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 15:30:11 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041011153011.79892.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > Olga: > >Sorry, yes, here it is: > >http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/search/fastfind.cgi?jump=1&word_option=and&word=morford > > Oh my, thank you, Olga! I read the first Morford article, that you > posted a couple of weeks ago. > > Wonderful stuff. Now, check this by Morford ... > > "Does God Hate Florida? > After four brutal hurricanes, why aren't Bush evangelicals talking > about the Almighty's wrath?" > > http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/10/01/notes100104.DTL > > It reminds of something I saw last week. > > Please do the following exercise. > > In the state of Florida, color the counties of the 2000 presidential > election, of the counties that voted for Gore, and those which voted > for Bush. Then, when done, plot the path of the three hurricanes; > Ivan, Charley, and Frances... > > It's not perfect, but notice that the hurricanes tended to ram > through the Bush counties, and for the most part avoided the > Gore counties. By a very tortured and fabricated plot of Frances. Hurricanse do not follow multipl S curves on land (one might call it a "W" curve...;)). Nor did the eye come ashore at Palm Beach county like that depicted, though it was close. Try to check the facts scientifically. Now, I found this postcard to be rather entertaining: http://tinyurl.com/5lyzl http://groups.yahoo.com/group/extro-freedom/files/Plywood_State.jpg ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Mon Oct 11 15:31:17 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:31:17 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Christopher Reeve - A Magnificant Activist 1952 - 2004 Message-ID: <210780-2200410111153117370@M2W043.mail2web.com> Friends, A great loss for all transhumanity in the fight for therapeutic stem cell cloning and other advances in overcoming our limitations. http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/10/11/obit.reeve/index.html http://www.apacure.com/ ?On behalf of the entire Board of Directors and staff of the Christopher Reeve Paralysis Foundation, we are deeply saddened and shocked by the sudden death of our Chairman, Christopher Reeve,? Kathy Lewis. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 15:33:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 08:33:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041011153339.22999.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> > Olga: > >Sorry, yes, here it is: > >http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/search/fastfind.cgi?jump=1&word_option=and&word=morford > "Pause here. Think about that. A hundred years, everyone now alive, dead. Everyone. You. Me. Bush. Your kids. All dead. Guaranteed." I don't think Morford is our type of 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 Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com Mon Oct 11 16:01:40 2004 From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:01:40 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011131810.3639.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041011131810.3639.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <416AAE64.7090307@dsl.pipex.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: >If you lack a moral compass that allows you to distinguish, try this one on for size: the unborn are innocent. Murderers, islamofascists, and terrorists are not. Is he being excessively pedantic about cells in a petri dish? Probably. He is not, however, being pedantic about the wrongness of government funding such activity with the money of taxpayers who are morally opposed to it. > > If the government didn't fund activities that x number of taxpayers are morally opposed to, where x is (at least) the number of taxpayers opposed to stem cell research, I doubt there would be a death penalty. There would certainly be no Iraq war (or at least no government funding for it). And that's assuming x is very high. The whole notion seems rather silly, if I may say so. BM From amara at amara.com Mon Oct 11 17:18:12 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:18:12 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] volcanic gas- origins of life? Message-ID: Filling in some parts from what Jeff Davis pointed extropy-chat to: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/sri-cov100704.php >Component of volcanic gas may have played a significant role in the >origins of life on Earth >Carbonyl sulfide forms peptide bonds >Scientists at The Scripps Research Institute and the Salk Institute >for Biological Studies are reporting a possible answer to a >longstanding question in research on the origins of life on Earth--how >did the first amino acids form the first peptides? [...] >what came before the stromatolites? [...] >This latest study is an advance because previous attempts to >demonstrate the formation of peptides on early Earth depended on >reaction schemes that were less plausible or were not as efficient. >Next, the team plans to examine carbonyl sulfide's reactive properties >further and see if the gas can bring about other chemical reactions >that are relevant to prebiotic chemistry. Looking up the paper, to see the abstract and some details: Science, Vol 306, Issue 5694, 283-286 , 8 October 2004 Carbonyl Sulfide-Mediated Prebiotic Formation of Peptides Luke Leman,1 Leslie Orgel,2 M. Reza Ghadiri1* Almost all discussions of prebiotic chemistry assume that amino acids, nucleotides, and possibly other monomers were first formed on the Earth or brought to it in comets and meteorites, and then condensed nonenzymatically to form oligomeric products. However, attempts to demonstrate plausibly prebiotic polymerization reactions have met with limited success. We show that carbonyl sulfide (COS), a simple volcanic gas, brings about the formation of peptides from amino acids under mild conditions in aqueous solution. Depending on the reaction conditions and additives used, exposure of -amino acids to COS generates peptides in yields of up to 80% in minutes to hours at room temperature. ------------ (plug for recent volcano photographs :-) ) While we are on the subject of volcanoes, here is a new page of Etna volcano photographs from an expedition of stromboli.net guys one week ago. You will see a reference to 'wavelets' and some very nice QuickTime movies are here too... Skylights and lava falls in Valle del Bove http://www.educeth.ch/stromboli/etna/etna04/etna0410-en.html Amara (my own: http://www.amara.com/photo/etna.html ) -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "And chase down any of those noble gases or whatever that crud is." -- Apollo 12 Astronaut Alan Bean From alito at organicrobot.com Mon Oct 11 16:32:17 2004 From: alito at organicrobot.com (Alejandro Dubrovsky) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 02:32:17 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] QRIO on rollerskates In-Reply-To: <20041011152834.641.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041011152834.641.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1097512337.3759.16.camel@alito.homeip.net> On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 08:28 -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Alejandro Dubrovsky > wrote: > > > On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 23:22 -0700, Adrian Tymes > > wrote: > > > Is it just me, or does the bot seem to be walking > > on a > > > pad projecting between the wheels in the second > > half? > > > > > What do you mean by a pad between the wheels? > > between the wheels of one > > skate, or between skates? > > In the middle of each foot, which would place it > between the four wheels on each foot. > Well, yes, they are rollerskates. That's what those things are, a frame connecting four wheels. Or am i being obtuse again? (not in purpose, honestly) To me, this means they were trying to show they weren't cheating. alejandro From amara at amara.com Mon Oct 11 18:04:03 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:04:03 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Nature and Science asks questions of the presidential candidates Message-ID: http://www.sciencemag.org/sciext/candidates2004/ On 2 November 2004, U.S. voters will decide whether to give Republican President George W. Bush a second term or put Democrat John Kerry in the White House. Continuing a presidential election tradition, Science has asked each candidate to lay out his views on more than a dozen science-related issues facing the nation. Their answers, along with an accompanying editorial by Science Editor-in-Chief Donald Kennedy, can be found by following the links below. [Note: These features are free to all visitors of Science Online.] http://www.nature.com/news/specials/uselection/index.html In the build-up to the US presidential election, science is making a sizeable impact on the political agenda. But what will another four years of George W. Bush mean for science, compared with a term under Democratic challenger John Kerry? To find out, Nature has asked the two candidates 15 questions about their science policies. Their answers are displayed below in our interactive feature, along with in depth analyses of the key issues, an investigation of electronic voting and our correspondents' lively and opinionated blog. -- ******************************************************************** 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/ ******************************************************************** "Solar wind doesn't like to roll up much. (Pause) Little rascal, doesn't want to roll up. (I'll) just wrap it around here best I can, without getting any dirt on it." -- Apollo 12 Astronaut Alan Bean From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 17:04:03 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:04:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] QRIO on rollerskates In-Reply-To: <1097512337.3759.16.camel@alito.homeip.net> Message-ID: <20041011170403.94088.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alejandro Dubrovsky wrote: > On Mon, 2004-10-11 at 08:28 -0700, Adrian Tymes > wrote: > > --- Alejandro Dubrovsky > > wrote: > > > On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 23:22 -0700, Adrian Tymes > > > wrote: > > > > Is it just me, or does the bot seem to be > walking > > > on a > > > > pad projecting between the wheels in the > second > > > half? > > > > > > > What do you mean by a pad between the wheels? > > > between the wheels of one > > > skate, or between skates? > > > > In the middle of each foot, which would place it > > between the four wheels on each foot. > > Well, yes, they are rollerskates. That's what those > things are, a frame > connecting four wheels. Or am i being obtuse again? > (not in purpose, > honestly) > To me, this means they were trying to show they > weren't cheating. I meant that the pad seemed to be between the wheels of each skate, as you put it - but in the middle as opposed to at the sides of the skates. ("Between" could mean, for example, "one between the leftmost wheels and another between the rightmost wheels".) From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 17:05:05 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:05:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <416AAE64.7090307@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <20041011170505.23548.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Moss wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >If you lack a moral compass that allows you to distinguish, try this > one on for size: the unborn are innocent. Murderers, islamofascists, > and terrorists are not. Is he being excessively pedantic about cells > in a petri dish? Probably. He is not, however, being pedantic about > the wrongness of government funding such activity with the money of > taxpayers who are morally opposed to it. > > > > If the government didn't fund activities that x number of taxpayers > are morally opposed to, where x is (at least) the number of taxpayers > opposed to stem cell research, I doubt there would be a death > penalty. There would certainly be no Iraq war (or at least no > government funding for it). And that's assuming x is very high. The > whole notion seems rather silly, if I may say so. On the contrary. There is majority support for the death penalty, and certainly there was majority support for the war up until the "oops, no WMD" declaration, at least. You'd also have to distinguish between people who actually pay taxes and those who do 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!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Mon Oct 11 16:27:35 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 09:27:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? Message-ID: <20041011162735.C5F3957E2A@finney.org> Mike Lorrey wrote: > If you lack a moral compass that allows you to distinguish, try this > one on for size: the unborn are innocent. I would prefer that "innocent" be applied to entities capable of moral actions. A table is not innocent. An amoeba is not innocent. And an embryo is not innocent. None of these are moral actors. None of them are such that we can make moral judgements about their actions. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Oct 11 17:31:20 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:31:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011113603.01c59b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 01:11 PM 10/11/2004 +0000, Rob Masters wrote: ><supple, concise and principled extempore reply about abortion and govt >funding. To our astonishment, Bush rose and candidly admitted he couldn't >understand it. > > >It would be helpful if you would explain your assertions here. > >"Bush rose and candidly admitted he couldn't understand it": couldn't >understand what? What did he say? See transcript below. >"Bush's stupidity": Why do you think he was stupid? See transcript below. >As to Kerry's statement "that he was a Roman Catholic but... could not let >his faith influence his decision," I'd be really interested in knowing how >he reconciled that contradiction. As a Roman Catholic, he has signed on >to the belief that abortion is homicide. How could he possibly ignore >that in his practical decisions on abortion? You're asking about a man's private conscience. What I don't understand is how people who truly believe abortion is homicide can refrain from demanding that everyone knowingly involved, always and without exception, be charged with murder. Actually it seems to be only a small contingent of crazies who think so. Pragmatically, most people really don't equate abortion with murder. >If he gave a "supple, concise and principled" explanation of how to >resolve this profound problem, I'd like to know what the explanation was. > >More details, please. There's a full transcript at http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004c.html Here's the relevant section, with my summaries and comments: ================== DEGENHART: Senator Kerry, suppose you are speaking with a voter who believed abortion is murder and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person? KERRY: I would say to that person exactly what I will say to you right now. First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today. But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that. ============================= [This is the key move. Kerry reminds us that moral objections to funding abortion are a matter of faith and not fact. He might have said the same to a Jew or Muslim outraged that tax money is spent subsidizing pig farming, or to Adventists aghast that hospitals are funded *with their money* to transfuse blood, or to Flat Earthers shocked, shocked I say, to learn that the schools *they are forced to fund* teach that planets are spherical.] ============================== But I can counsel people. I can talk reasonably about life and about responsibility. I can talk to people, as my wife Teresa does, about making other choices, and about abstinence, and about all these other things that we ought to do as a responsible society. But as a president, I have to represent all the people in the nation. And I have to make that judgment. ============================== [He'll do what he can to make sure unwanted pregnancies don't occur, but he knows that a large proportion of those who get pregnant unwillingly do wish to seek abortion, and they have no ethical objection to doing so, and that his own prejudice against abortion (or pork-eating, or blood-transfusions, etc) must remain his private opinion, *because he represents everyone, not just those who share his untestable opinions*.] ============================= Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise. ============================= [Funding of abortion has to be made available since abortion is not illegal, but without tax funding the poor will be unable to take advantage of this extremely consequential option *should they choose to do so*, and this is inequitable.] ============================= That's why I think it's important. That's why I think it's important for the United States, for instance, not to have this rigid ideological restriction on helping families around the world to be able to make a smart decision about family planning. You'll help prevent AIDS. You'll help prevent unwanted children, unwanted pregnancies. You'll actually do a better job, I think, of passing on the moral responsibility that is expressed in your question. And I truly respect it. ============================= [Here Kerry drifts into circumlocution, but that's almost imposed on him by the nature of the debate. He's saying: `Altough I'm a Catholic, I do recognize that many abortions might be avoided if only people used contraception, but the US imposes a sectarian and partisan ideological ban here and indeed on the rest of the world by blocking education and funding for contraception, especially condoms.'] ============================== GIBSON: Mr. President, minute and a half. BUSH: I'm trying to decipher that. ====================================== [Here we have Bush proudly claiming not to be able to understand Kerry's quite clear statements above. Is the man a moron, or is he pretending to be a moron in order to appeal to the stupid and attention-span-impaired in the audience?] ====================================== My answer is, we're not going to spend taxpayers' money on abortion. This is an issue that divides America, but certainly reasonable people can agree on how to reduce abortions in America. I signed the partial-birth -- the ban on partial-birth abortion. It's a brutal practice. It's one way to help reduce abortions. My opponent voted against the ban. ======================= [Bush jumps to the most disturbing form of pre-birth termination as if this characterizes Kerry's central position.] ======================= I think there ought to be parental notification laws. He's against them. I signed a bill called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. In other words, if you're a mom and you're pregnant and you get killed, the murderer gets tried for two cases, not just one. My opponent was against that. These are reasonable ways to help promote a culture of life in America. I think it is a worthy goal in America to have every child protected by law and welcomed in life. I also think we ought to continue to have good adoption law as an alternative to abortion. And we need to promote maternity group homes, which my administration has done. Culture of life is really important for a country to have if it's going to be a hospitable society. Thank you. GIBSON: Senator, do you want to follow up? Thirty seconds. KERRY: Well, again, the president just said, categorically, my opponent is against this, my opponent is against that. You know, it's just not that simple. No, I'm not. ========================== [Kerry goes wrong again in populist terms; the silly fellow tries to show the complexity of the issue.] ========================== I'm against the partial-birth abortion, but you've got to have an exception for the life of the mother and the health of the mother under the strictest test of bodily injury to the mother. Secondly, with respect to parental notification, I'm not going to require a 16-or 17-year-old kid who's been raped by her father and who's pregnant to have to notify her father. So you got to have a judicial intervention. And because they didn't have a judicial intervention where she could go somewhere and get help, I voted against it. It's never quite as simple as the president wants you to believe. GIBSON: And 30 seconds, Mr. President. BUSH: Well, it's pretty simple when they say: Are you for a ban on partial birth abortion? Yes or no? ================================== [Bush *doesn't want to know*. Or he's too stupid to grasp the idea that this disturbing procedure is conducted (according to Kerry) *only to save the mother's life or health*. `It's pretty simple', indeed. It's pretty simplistic. It's the stupidity, stupid.] ================================ ================================ Now it's true that the exchange drifted away from the original question about federal funding, and into contraception and the very legitimacy of abortion. It's easy to get confused on these topics. Olga referenced Richard Dawkins' page, where I found an astonishing lapse of logic in Dawkins' recent essay on state funding of religious schools. He was as incensed by that as Ms. Degenhart was by state funding of abortion. He wrote: `How, then, can it be sane to advocate the existence of sectarian religious schools? And who can justify the spending of taxpayers' money on them?' The obvious answer to the final supposedly killer question is: `Those sectarian taxpayers who pay that quantum of the education budget justify it!' It's as if Dawkins, in his fury (which I share) against indoctrinating schools, fails to notice that the parents and relatives who want to send their kids to sectarian schools *are also taxpayers*. The answer to Ms. Degenhart might have been: `Think of your tax contribution as going to support all those causes you favor, causes that people not of your faith dislike or couldn't care less about. The money supporting abortion doesn't come from you, but from the 52% (roughly##) of the taxpayers who do support abortion; by the way, they also have to shoulder the burden of all those Catholics and others who actually do have abortions but feel guilty about doing so. But your conscience is clear; your tax dollars are being spent on faith-based health initiatives, immense tax-free status for religions, and other partisan expenditures.' I'm not suggesting that Kerry should have replied like that. Such honesty would have created outrage, and Bush would have shaken his head in bafflement and muttered, `I'm trying to decipher that.' Oh, wait, he *did* say that. ## < A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll of 1,006 adults last weekend found that 68% support the ban on the so-called partial-birth abortions. But the poll found Americans much more closely divided on the question of a more complete ban: 48% identified themselves as "pro-choice" and 45% as "pro-life." > Damien Broderick From hal at finney.org Mon Oct 11 17:04:41 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:04:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] volcanic gas- origins of life? Message-ID: <20041011170441.38FDF57E2A@finney.org> Amara Graps writes: > Filling in some parts from what Jeff Davis pointed extropy-chat to: > > http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/sri-cov100704.php > ... > Looking up the paper, to see the abstract and some details: > > Science, Vol 306, Issue 5694, 283-286 , 8 October 2004 > > Carbonyl Sulfide-Mediated Prebiotic Formation of Peptides > Luke Leman,1 Leslie Orgel,2 M. Reza Ghadiri1* > > ... We show that carbonyl sulfide (COS), a simple > volcanic gas, brings about the formation of peptides from amino acids > under mild conditions in aqueous solution. Depending on the reaction > conditions and additives used, exposure of -amino acids to COS > generates peptides in yields of up to 80% in minutes to hours at room > temperature. It seems strange that only now would people be doing testing to see how reactions would occur in the presence of what I gather is a relatively common gas in the atmosphere of the early earth. I watched the PBS show Origins a few weeks ago, and they were still talking about the 1953 Urey-Miller experiment in which an atmosphere thought to mimic that of the prebiotic Earth was exposed to a spark gap (meant to simulate lightning); after a few days testing showed the presence of amino acids. The problem is that the gases used in that experiment are no longer thought to represent a good model of Earth's atmosphere. That makes the experiments somewhat meaningless as evidence of anything other than that amino acids can form in some hypothetical conditions that as far as we know never occured anywhere but in that experiment. Yet people still point to this experiment as evidence of how life originated. Why don't we hear about people running revised versions of that experiment with a more accurate mixture of gases, including the one used in this experiment, carbonyl sulfide? Is it that there is still too much uncertainty about what was present and their relative concentrations? Or is it that the revised versions don't work, they don't get the nice pat results of Urey/Miller with amino acids all laid out for us? One page I found that sheds some light on this is by Leslie E. Orgel, http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/2948/orgel.html. He describes Miller's work and then discusses some followups: "Since then, workers have subjected many different mixtures of simple gases to various energy sources. The results of these experiments can be summarized neatly. Under sufficiently reducing conditions, amino acids form easily. Conversely, under oxidizing conditions, they do not arise at all or do so only in small amounts." ... "Doubt has arisen because recent investigations indicate the earth's atmosphere was never as reducing as Urey and Miller presumed. I suspect that many organic compounds generated in past studies would have been produced even in an atmosphere containing less hydrogen, methane and ammonia. Still, it seems prudent to consider other mechanisms for the accumulation of the constituents of proteins and nucleic acids in the prebiotic soup." It seems strange that the question of the effects of today's best models of the early atmosphere must be disclaimed with an "I suspect". Apparently the work has not been done. And now in this new research, someone throws in a new gas and gets a new result, the formation of peptides (chains of amino acids). I can't help wondering, what might happen if you put in yet other gases that would have been present? And how meaningful is it to leave out gases that might have significant effects? I realize that it makes the experiment easier to have just a few gases, but who knows whether some gas you are leaving out of the experiment might totally change the results? In general, the quality of work in this area seems to leave much to be desired. Granted, it is an extremely difficult and frustrating problem, the origin of life, and perhaps not one that gets much funding. But it surely is of great philosophical interest. And when you look at how much money NASA is spending on Mars probes whose purpose is largely to shed light on this area, it would seem easy to spare a few billion for Earthly lab experiments, which is probably about a thousand times more than is currently being spent. Hal From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Mon Oct 11 17:49:33 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 01:49:33 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] A long post which starts out OT, but hopefully ends up where list members may wish to comment (especially Mr Spike) In-Reply-To: <20041011162735.C5F3957E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041011174937.A67FDDAEC@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Below are some posts to various "left leaning" email lists as a result of the Australian election last weekend, where the conservatives have been returned with a bigger majority and the balance of power may reside with a right wing party of Christian fundamentalists. Some pieces are written by me, some by others. I'm an Australian. I have attempted to collate and expose, within a few extracts, the futility of arguments regarding Left/Right, Marx, Trotsky, Capitalist systems, Communism, Socialism, Democracy et al, when the biggest issue we all face collectively is limited resources. I'm pinning my hopes on humanity to deliver (and permit the widespread use of) good biotech and nanotech, while resisting my loss of faith in human nature as a collective, which seems to me rather akin to slightly more intelligent sheep, eating all the grass to the ground and pointing blame on other sheep. Much of the content within is based on recent events in Australia. Very soon, I predict the same results will occur in the US. As an expat Australian, I'm keen to hear what you think of all this, Mr Spike (nee DB). Can science one day over-rule (overcome?) the fatal flaws in almost (nay, all) existing political and economical systems?? Can extropians forsee humanity surviving all the political upheavels we are about to face? And which political and economical systems will best suit extropians? Surely not capitalism??? At least, not once the technology has been paid in full! Or will extropians be a new type of ruling class, a lifestyle only available to the mega rich and fiercly controlled /restricted by them? To those of you who take the time, thanks for reading.... Sean ------------------------------- Capitalism (Australia) Pty Ltd has now concluded its triennial job interviews. John Howard had his contract renewed as Administrative Assistant. Mark Latham is the new filing clerk and secretary of the office social club. That's all that can be intelligently said about the facts of the outcome. Journalists and other commentators will spend vast amounts of time analysing the office politics of the Australian corporation but this is only a manifestation what they do for a living. It has no other useful meaning. [I looked at Jakarta post and Radio Surabaya yesterday and the Indonesian media didn't even report the election let alone the outcome.] The only places that showed any interest are the major Anglo-Saxon partners in the coalition to attack Iraq because they want to see in it some hope that they too will be re-elected.. . If the senate goes their way as looks likely, the Coalition will control everything subject only to corporate veto. Everything they stand for will be implemented without parliamentary opposition and with the stamp of democratic legitimacy. Their worst case scenario is a reliance on the support of people who believe that the universe was created in six days about 6000 years ago by an entity whose literal word is to be found in a book compiled over many centuries before the emergence of rational scientific reason. About 52.62% of Australians (on a two party preferred basis) supported the Coalition. Labor was supported by a minority of about 47.38% Australians. The allocation of parliamentary seats to the majority is said by professional political commentators to constitute a "train wreck" or a "rout" or a "landslide" which it is - but only in terms of the number of seats won. The (narrow) majority said on Saturday 9th October 2004 that their predominant emotion is fear. Fear of minor fluctuations in economic circumstances, fear of change, fear of other people and other places, and fear of god. This (slender) majority of actual human beings strongly affirmed their support for the capitalist system and its particular values. That the interests of individuals are best maintained by wealth-accumulating corporations whose economic interests it is the coalition's job to serve. That the interests of the individual transcend those of the community. That you get the best personal result by living in a society where small amounts of wealth trickle down from those who have a lot and that you get your share by crawling over others. That nothing matters apart from short term individual material well-being. That the future is now and that "history is bunkum". One thing is clear from all that. The Australia (or the Australian myth) many of us cherished is, for the time being, finished. Society and community don't matter as issues for a coalition government. The future doesn't matter. The environment, education, health, art or egalitarianism don't matter. International peaceful co-existence and the rule of law don't matter. Truth doesn't matter. At the end of the day -government doesn't matter. All that matters domestically is your mortgage and the ability to service the loans you have taken out to fund a lifestyle that far exceeds that of most people on the planet. All that matters internationally is the ability to attack anyone and destroy anything in pursuit of the economic interests of global corporations and the debt funded lifestyles of the developed capitalist world. Those of us who support progressive ideas should, on some levels, be pleased with some of the outcome of this election. We should go back to our ideological roots and think about what the election really means rather than to cogitate on the post mortems by professional commentators and journalists who are just picking over the intellectual rubbish associated with corporate ideas of what constitutes democracy. Despite the massive and overwhelming support of the corporations and their corporate media the conservatives could only muster a narrow two-party preferred majority of actual human beings. The importance of that simple fact should not be underestimated. The coalition will control everything and so will be responsible for everything in the eyes of Australians. [of course though, the corporate media can be expected to find scapegoats if things don't go Howard's way but that's a question for a later comment.] There is a really big minority of people amongst whom many individuals have stood up for issues of principle that transcend mere day-to-day selfish material concerns. Therefore, there is a chance that we will see an increasingly polarised society that is impervious to the propaganda of the coalition and its corporate media mouthpieces. There are very many people who might be reasonably expected to act on principle once the Coalition's "reform" machine gets rolling in July 2005. Many workers already secretly hate the corporations and their bosses and everything they stand for - insecure , shitty jobs, with low wages and lousy conditions that reflect an inequality of bargaining power. I see evidence of this every day in the industries I deal with. The industrial relations policies of the coalition will alienate them even more; so the sooner they start implementing them the better. Working people will become even more immune to the gibberish published by the corporate media about freeing up the labour market, and flexibility and all that stuff. It is reality that matters and not the versions of it published by the corporate media. We have also seen the exposure of this elements of working class society who might be amenable to appeals of the "Brownshirt" view of history and I think it's important to have a clear assessment of who we're dealing with in our society. It is good to know who is fickle and easily led, and on what basis. It's good to see the emergence of the Christian right and all those other right wing elements who have come into the light of day. We can quantify them and taken collectively they constitute no more than 52.62% of the population. Many, many people have been totally alienated by the corporate media and its commentators over the last few years. They can see right through it and them. They don't believe anything that the newspapers or television say and just see them as mouthpieces of the corporations. Even with several simultaneous wars, terrorism, economic fear mongering, and a steady diet of distractions based on reality TV, imported cultural product and sport, they can't deliver more than a narrow majority of people for the coalition. They have to turn this into a "landslide" somehow. More people will go to the internet [with all its problems] in search of alternative reports of reality. The credibility of the mass media is utterly compromised amongst very large numbers of people. and this is a good, positive thing. It will motivate us to build and refine alternative means of communication that are not reliant on corporate media. The beautiful irony of this is that it is the corporations themselves that have, in pursuit of profit, created the means by which large numbers of people can exchange information without needing to buy newspapers. International competition for energy will continue unabated. Oil prices will escalate rapidly. The indebtedness of developed nations trying to maintain lifestyles based on international mal-apportionment of wealth will continue. Increased military intervention will be necessary to protect the interests of western corporations and they will have to try and recruit our children to fight for them. We will resist The environment will continue to degrade. None of these external factors will be controllable by the coalition and, in fact, they will be compelled by their own ideology to contribute to the difficulties. Just at the moment, thing are going along fine economically but I suspect it is an unsustainable illusion based on a rosy corporate media view of the world. People will continue to borrow and consume. It seems to me that prudent people with brains should act as quickly as possible to reduce their dependence on debt and to curtail their spending The level of fear in Australia is so palpable amongst the "aspirational class" [ greatly loved by the coalition and Labor] that it must be evidence of considerable economic vulnerability. At the first sign of negative economic impact this group of people will absolutely panic and I suspect thing will happen very quickly when the time comes. The coalition will not be able to control things once it starts. The progressive elements in society have to abandon this notion of applying to be the site managers of capitalism. We've forgotten our underlying ideology if we think this will be possible except on the terms allowed by the corporate bosses. It goes nowhere. All progressive people should act to get organised to exploit the opportunities offered by the defeat of Labor in Australia. (by Peter Woodward) -----Original Message----- From: chen9692000 [mailto:chen9692000 at yahoo.com] In Australia at present - we have a conservative victory of historic proportions, a weak and divided Left (however, you define it - not that any on this list ever does) and the discontent over neoliberalism being manifest in right break around "one nation" and "family first" and a left break around the "Greens". These are, in electoral terms (which are not the only ones), the dynamics which socialists have to orient to. My purpose in doing a thumbnail sketch of the Senate results was not parliamentary cretinism but to use it as a rough guide to the social currents that exist. So far in the face of the argument I have been told, insults notwithstanding - that what you intend to do is more of the same. Since this hasn't made an impact for socialist ideas in the last 15 years (while the Greens have grown) what makes you think that it will be any different in the next 15? To answer the charge that this is bad strategy it is not enough to show that you have been active - of course you have- the question is whether this has been effective? How this should be measured and so on? If you can't show how the balance of forces will eventually change and how you intend to participate (when you make quite clear that you intend to remain OUTSIDE the actually existing social forces) then you really are just saying that you will continue with the same old tactics and await some catastrophe that will bring the working class to you. I don't mean this is your conscious project - its not- but it seems to me the unwillingness to analyse the situation - and I'll grant that some of what I say is simplistic (it is only 48 hours since polls closed) but what we need is clear analysis so we can assess what to do next (and preferably without the cheap shots). Shane -------------------------------------------------------------- Here's a piece Beverly Hill copied to another email list earlier today: October 11, 2004 By Clive Hamilton Executive Director of The Australia Institute. It was not the extraordinary public spending spree of the election campaign that sank Labor but the sustained private consumption binge that Australians have been on for the past decade. Booming house prices coupled with unprecedented levels of consumer debt have left most Australians absorbed by their own material circumstances, with little room left for thoughts of building a better society. Driven not by financial need but by the very aspirations that Mark Latham has lauded, Australian households are in debt up to their necks, and that has meant hundreds of thousands of people have looked at their partners across the kitchen table and said: "If interest rates go up by a couple of per cent then we're stuffed." Having the bank foreclose on you must be one of life's more unpleasant experiences, especially if you have measured your success and place in society by the pile of things you own. Sure, the economists said that interest rates were no more likely to go up under Labor than the Coalition, but why take the risk if nothing else really matters to you? And that is where we have got to in Australia after 20 years of creeping affluenza, an era in which materialism and the attendant self-absorption have invaded the daily consciousness of most Australians. So the Coalition victory reflects nothing more than the narrow-mindedness and preoccupation with self that characterises modern Australia after two decades of market ideology and sustained growth. Private greed always drives out the social good. Not even engagement in a dangerous foreign war, exposed as being based on lies, and the threat of terrorist attacks can bounce people out of their financial preoccupations. It has been particularly disquieting to witness the total disengagement of large numbers of young people who seemed barely aware that an election was on. Clueless and unconcerned to the last, they had mumble about voting for John Howard simply because they could not think of a reason for doing otherwise. The depoliticisation of our education systems coupled with the mindless narcissism of consumer culture in which these young people have grown means that, while despair for the future of democracy is warranted, we should expect nothing more. Ironically, Labor actually put out some policies during the election campaign that differentiated it from the conservatives, policies that were aimed at a fairer society that took away some of the more outrageous middle-class handouts of the Howard years. The schools policy was the best example, but even this was a victim of Labor's schizoid campaign. In the dreams of aspirational voters, Mark Latham's ladder of opportunity leads to Cranbrook or The King's School. Building a better society through a fairer distribution of educational resources is not so appealing if you hope to benefit personally from the prevailing injustice. In fact, it does not look like injustice, but "opportunity". Of course, the relentless promotion of self-interest and the rejection of the politics of social progress is no more than we should expect from the Liberal Party. It is, after all, the essence of liberalism. Liberals have always maintained that asserting individual freedoms, not building a better society, is the object of politics, although one of the founders of liberalism, John Stuart Mill, could see the danger of ending up where we are today. In 1865 he wrote that he was not persuaded that "the trampling, crushing, elbowing, and treading on each other's heels are the most desirable lot of humankind". These qualities of the aspirational society he saw as the "disagreeable symptoms of one of the phases of industrial progress", regrettably a phase that has been much more enduring than Mill could have imagined. A Newspoll survey commissioned two years ago by The Australia Institute found that nearly two thirds of Australians believe that they "cannot afford to buy everything they really need". Even among those in the top income group - the richest people in one of the world's richest countries - half say they cannot afford all they need. This sense of deprivation in a country that enjoys extraordinary affluence is constantly re-created by the advertisers and social pressure, and endlessly reinforced by politicians of both sides who talk ad nauseam of "struggling families" and devise policies that pander to the imagined woes of the middle classes. As long as Australians are preoccupied with house prices, credit card debts, interest rates, tax cuts and getting ahead - in other words, as long as they define their success in life by money - Labor will never win, except by mimicking the Liberal Party. But there is cause for hope. Not far beneath the surface most Australians have a gnawing doubt about the value of a money-driven life. The Newspoll survey also found that 83 per cent of Australians believe that our society is "too materialistic - that is too much emphasis on money and not enough on the things that really matter". For they suspect that the money society is at the root of the decline in values - the disposable relationships, instant gratification, moral laxity, selfishness, corporate greed and the loss of civic culture. It is in showing the link between the money society and the decline in values, and then painting a picture of a new society that is less selfish and materialistic and more devoted to the "things that really matter", that a new politics can be forged. ____________________________________________ In another post where somebody alluded to the economy being in good shape at the moment, I added: Just at the moment, things are not really going fine economically, at all, in my opinion. Quite the opposite....it's just not fully evident yet. Sitting at the pointy end, working in an office which completes valuations of well over 5000 properties a year in order for people to obtain mortgages, we are seeing a complete lack of "reality awareness" among the public (especially those who are buying property). People are paying ridiculous, unsustainable prices for houses which in many cases are a second or third investment property they are hoping to negative gear. Due to an undersupply of building products and labour, demand has grown exponentially for established houses, as these appeal at the moment to "investors" and (out of necessity) also appaeal to those who would normally buy a block and build. This is unlikely to change for some time, but at the moment, if you have two identical blocks of land, each worth $100,000.....but one of those blocks has a house worth no more than $150,000 on it, the block with the house will sell for anywhere from $275,000 to $300,000. This is not sustainable and corrections must occur. When they do occur, we will see catastrophic results, as many of the borrowers whose "deals" we assess are borrowing up to 95% of the value on a second or third "investment", with no prospects of finding tenants! Our job is to ratify such deals, based on this stupid, dumb beast of thing called "The Market". When something goes wrong later, valuers then get sued, hence $100,000 per annum PI premiums. Australia's recent property buyers (in the laast 3 years) are generally walking aalong a cliff edge within a millimetre of the fall of their financial lives. All that lower interest rates do is encourage people to borrow more! In real terms, the short to medium term "housing owner" financial status does not change when purchasing during extended periods of lower rates, as prices go up to reflect the increased demand. Everyone still borrows to the hilt, just as they alwsys have and always will. "Oh wow!" they excaim, "the Liberals have made my house worth three times as much!" Relative to what, exactly???? It's all a dream, a mirage... I've been a property valuer for nearly 25 years. I've seen values go backwards twice BIG TIME. In the last two years, I have heard the oddest rationalisations uttered by complete fools as they pay premiums to buy into the Big Australian Dream. And nowadays, domestic Australia rides up and down on the back of the domestic property market. Once that collapses (as it surely must), chaos ensues...aaah, well...at least we arent all herded together building pyramids all our lives for some vain king or queen. I could go on, but as a slave in a deadline orientated business which only exists so there is an entity to sue, I have to get back to work...at least I enjoy the computing administration element of my employment. Here's something to ponder, which is also akin to many other industries and professions (such as musicians): In 1978, I received a fee of $500 (500 1978 dollars) for a typical house valuation. Today, the fee ranges from $175 to $230 (in 2004 dollars) for exactly the same work, but with far more liability attached and logarithmically higher insurance fees etc. How does my employer make money? By sheer numbers. Turnaround. Work fast, cut corners, take chances, don't do the job thoroughly. We are defacto risk managers. Churn churn churn, 10 hours a day. It's despicable, really.... Sean --------------------------------------------- What is my point in adding these to pieces to the last paragraph of Shane's rebuttal at the top? My point is, some socialists may well go on with the same type of activism/efforts for another 15 years, with perhaps the same minor percentile results, but eventually capitalism will eat itself....and be replaced by another system due to the desire for change within the masses. A minority does not grow by persuasion, it grows by NEED. It grows by filling a void, a gap, which may be growing due to the shrinkage or decay of a competing system. No amount of activism will serve any useful purpose to the cause unless the time has come for mass acceptance of the cause promoted by the activist/s. Capitalism is in the endgame stages, or (at least) "the beginning of the end" (no apologies to WC). Globalisation, Corporatisation and Conservatism - the three Cs of endgame capitalism, will be taken to the fullest extreme by the ruling class and their dreaming greedy aspirants, but the failure will be a 4th C - Catastrophe. It wont be pretty....and it's just around the corner. Ironically, the changing nature of the political structures in countries such as China may play a BIG role. Check this post sent to me a while back by a mate of mine: (I may have already posted this to the GL list, so apologies if you have read this (and visited the links) previously: Mark my words, it's going to happen soon that there will be a big hassle over oil and energy generally. China is going to be the big thing. There was a big attack on Iraq's infrastructure yesterday that has stopped all production from it's northern fields. Iraq at full production should do about 1.8 million barrels per day and it has world's 2nd largest reserves.. Current global DAILY consumption is 82 Million barrels! The sums are all wrong. Something will happen especially in the context of the US election. The US are no way going to allow downgrading of their economic status over oil. www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_oil_con http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2004030851648 I just worked out that people in the USA are currently paying about 68 cents Australian for a litre of petrol. Their gallon is only 3.7854118 litres and the exchange rate is about 70 cents. They are paying between $1.80 and $1.86 US per US gallon. They think this is high and their "human rights" view of "lifestyle" is based on low fuel prices for gas guzzling vehicles. Imagine what would happen if their fuel went to say Australian prices of $1.10 a Litre (approx $4 a gallon?!). They currently use about 19 million barrels a day; about 4 times the daily consumption of the next closest country which is either Japan or China depending on who you're listening to. Much of China's industry is on reduced output due to energy shortage but their economy is still growing in spades. I just read that if China used the same energy per capita as the US then their consumption would be 80 Million barrels a day which just about equates to current global daily consumption! There is war in the middle east and there have been big problems (over Chavez) in Venezuela, which has the world's 5th largest reserves and is a major exporter to US. I jut heard in passing last night on a news item that there has been a big drop recently in US reserves. As long ago as the 70's Kissinger said that the US was prepared to go to war to protect its resources and lifestyle. No matter which way you look at it, all this arithmetic means only one outcome - ongoing and increasing war unless some alternative source of energy materialises soon or the US makes lifestyle sacrifices like driving smaller cars....Alternatively they can put the brakes on China somehow? There are BIG CHANGES afoot, and I want to be around to witness the results, but there will be dreadful struggles along the way. Marxists, Trots et al - yep, all make compelling sense on a variety of levels. But we STILL have a world where 30% of the population don't have a water supply....and our resources are running out fast. Things are NOT going to get better and socialism (of any dimension) is NOT going to become omnipotent any time soon. But the time MAY come when society will be ready to choose similar structures. Despite the FUD, I have placed my hopes in technology. I have lost my hope/faith in human nature, as history shows the true colours of human nature. Like dumb sheep, we will eat the grass to the ground, all the while accusing each other of eating too much grass. Politics of any persuasion will hardly matter. In my view, most political systems ultimately become tools of the ruling class, no matter how the system/s begin. They just tinker around with the upward trickle of money and power. So my hopes lie with biotech and nanotech - new sources of re-sources... (deliberate sic). But that hope is tempered by warnings from the likes of Sun Microsystems co-founder Bill Joy. His white paper, published in Wired Magazine some time ago, is essential reading.... You can find Bill Joy's paper here: www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/joy_pr.html If you'd like me to email you a pdf of his paper, so you can easily print it out and read it later, just send me an email. I disagree with Bill Joy. I think the future DOES need us, and it does need those who still yearn for better political systems to replace those based on capitalist objectives. There are other factors of course - I fully comprehend the existence and usefulness of this list, GLW, the socialist and enviromental cause and the ongoing struggle against the Right and the ruling class. But the approaching zeitgeist is not easily recognised, nor is it easily defined in paradigm shift terms. Yet nothing changes the fact that the rug is being pulled from under many of us as we speak.....and reality may be that fighting hard for minority political causes such as those described within Shane's rebuttal is not the smartest way for any human to spend his/her time over the next 10 years. Instead, adjustment to the inevitable may be a smarter option, without ever losing hope that the time may come. Sean From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 17:50:12 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 18:50:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011170505.23548.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011175012.15807.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No, not probably. Let's have it clear: Bush is being excessively pedantic about cells in a dish. >Is he being excessively pedantic about cells > in a petri dish? Probably. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 17:52:32 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 10:52:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011113603.01c59b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041011175232.94616.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Nice analysis, but you missed one point: --- Damien Broderick wrote: > Bush *doesn't want to know*. Or he's too stupid to > grasp the idea that > this disturbing procedure is conducted (according to > Kerry) *only to save > the mother's life or health*. Or he doesn't think that matters, putting the life of the partially-born (which would be miserable and short without a mother, especially if one averages in the factors that usually correlate with a birth that endangers the mother) on equal status as the life of the mother (which might be much better, not to mention longer, without the presumably unwanted child - presumably, since she's getting an abortion anyway). From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 11 18:13:02 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:13:02 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <20041011125946.58190.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011181302.21939.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> You're right concerning Ted Kennedy, and there is reason to believe Hillary may have been involved in some way with Foster's death (and her husband might have raped Juanita Broadderick). My point is there was no investigation at all of Laura Bush after she accidentally (on-purpose?) killed her ex-boyfriend. She didn't lose her license or registration, no slap on the wrist whatsoever; nothing. Now that's Teflon. The First Lady's accident was 41 years ago so its significance for today is zero, but it makes me wonder even more about the Bushs. They are not just some innocent family, they are immensely ambitious, power-hungry. They include a former president, an incumbent one, the governor of Florida (and he too wants to run for president). This is not planning our lives around technologies that haven't been developed yet. This is here & now. There's an election in three weeks so I want to know as much about the Bushs as I know about the Clintons. >To this day, Hillary implies "Vince Foster".... oops, so solly, that >was such a slow pitch.... --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Oct 11 18:15:19 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:15:19 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011113603.01c59b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011113603.01c59b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011131220.01d0dcd0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:31 PM 10/11/2004 -0500, I wrote: >Adventists aghast that hospitals are funded *with their money* to transfuse blood Oops. I probably should have written `Jehovah's Witnesses'. The former theologian Spike Jones will be down on me like a wolf on the fold. I do find this softening of position: http://www.ajwrb.org/newsmedia/press.shtml So even silly ideas can become modified under the pressures of reality. Damien Broderick From dwish at indco.net Mon Oct 11 18:26:00 2004 From: dwish at indco.net (Dustin Wish with INDCO Networks) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:26:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011113603.01c59b10@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <200410111743.i9BHh0S9009893@br549.indconet.com> >First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life >and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. I hope the priest taught him a lesson in the backroom....lol Squeal Kerry, Squeal..... Dustin Wish System Engineer & Programmer INDCO Networks Pres. OSSRI Pres. WTA Arkansas ******************************************************** "Get your feet off my desk, get out of here, you stink, and we're not going to buy your product.!" Atari Pres. to Steve Jobs when ask to buy the new product made in their garage. *********************************************** -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien Broderick Sent: Monday, October 11, 2004 12:31 PM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding At 01:11 PM 10/11/2004 +0000, Rob Masters wrote: ><supple, concise and principled extempore reply about abortion and govt >funding. To our astonishment, Bush rose and candidly admitted he couldn't >understand it. > > >It would be helpful if you would explain your assertions here. > >"Bush rose and candidly admitted he couldn't understand it": couldn't >understand what? What did he say? See transcript below. >"Bush's stupidity": Why do you think he was stupid? See transcript below. >As to Kerry's statement "that he was a Roman Catholic but... could not let >his faith influence his decision," I'd be really interested in knowing how >he reconciled that contradiction. As a Roman Catholic, he has signed on >to the belief that abortion is homicide. How could he possibly ignore >that in his practical decisions on abortion? You're asking about a man's private conscience. What I don't understand is how people who truly believe abortion is homicide can refrain from demanding that everyone knowingly involved, always and without exception, be charged with murder. Actually it seems to be only a small contingent of crazies who think so. Pragmatically, most people really don't equate abortion with murder. >If he gave a "supple, concise and principled" explanation of how to >resolve this profound problem, I'd like to know what the explanation was. > >More details, please. There's a full transcript at http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2004c.html Here's the relevant section, with my summaries and comments: ================== DEGENHART: Senator Kerry, suppose you are speaking with a voter who believed abortion is murder and the voter asked for reassurance that his or her tax dollars would not go to support abortion, what would you say to that person? KERRY: I would say to that person exactly what I will say to you right now. First of all, I cannot tell you how deeply I respect the belief about life and when it begins. I'm a Catholic, raised a Catholic. I was an altar boy. Religion has been a huge part of my life. It helped lead me through a war, leads me today. But I can't take what is an article of faith for me and legislate it for someone who doesn't share that article of faith, whether they be agnostic, atheist, Jew, Protestant, whatever. I can't do that. ============================= [This is the key move. Kerry reminds us that moral objections to funding abortion are a matter of faith and not fact. He might have said the same to a Jew or Muslim outraged that tax money is spent subsidizing pig farming, or to Adventists aghast that hospitals are funded *with their money* to transfuse blood, or to Flat Earthers shocked, shocked I say, to learn that the schools *they are forced to fund* teach that planets are spherical.] ============================== But I can counsel people. I can talk reasonably about life and about responsibility. I can talk to people, as my wife Teresa does, about making other choices, and about abstinence, and about all these other things that we ought to do as a responsible society. But as a president, I have to represent all the people in the nation. And I have to make that judgment. ============================== [He'll do what he can to make sure unwanted pregnancies don't occur, but he knows that a large proportion of those who get pregnant unwillingly do wish to seek abortion, and they have no ethical objection to doing so, and that his own prejudice against abortion (or pork-eating, or blood-transfusions, etc) must remain his private opinion, *because he represents everyone, not just those who share his untestable opinions*.] ============================= Now, I believe that you can take that position and not be pro- abortion, but you have to afford people their constitutional rights. And that means being smart about allowing people to be fully educated, to know what their options are in life, and making certain that you don't deny a poor person the right to be able to have whatever the constitution affords them if they can't afford it otherwise. ============================= [Funding of abortion has to be made available since abortion is not illegal, but without tax funding the poor will be unable to take advantage of this extremely consequential option *should they choose to do so*, and this is inequitable.] ============================= That's why I think it's important. That's why I think it's important for the United States, for instance, not to have this rigid ideological restriction on helping families around the world to be able to make a smart decision about family planning. You'll help prevent AIDS. You'll help prevent unwanted children, unwanted pregnancies. You'll actually do a better job, I think, of passing on the moral responsibility that is expressed in your question. And I truly respect it. ============================= [Here Kerry drifts into circumlocution, but that's almost imposed on him by the nature of the debate. He's saying: `Altough I'm a Catholic, I do recognize that many abortions might be avoided if only people used contraception, but the US imposes a sectarian and partisan ideological ban here and indeed on the rest of the world by blocking education and funding for contraception, especially condoms.'] ============================== GIBSON: Mr. President, minute and a half. BUSH: I'm trying to decipher that. ====================================== [Here we have Bush proudly claiming not to be able to understand Kerry's quite clear statements above. Is the man a moron, or is he pretending to be a moron in order to appeal to the stupid and attention-span-impaired in the audience?] ====================================== My answer is, we're not going to spend taxpayers' money on abortion. This is an issue that divides America, but certainly reasonable people can agree on how to reduce abortions in America. I signed the partial-birth -- the ban on partial-birth abortion. It's a brutal practice. It's one way to help reduce abortions. My opponent voted against the ban. ======================= [Bush jumps to the most disturbing form of pre-birth termination as if this characterizes Kerry's central position.] ======================= I think there ought to be parental notification laws. He's against them. I signed a bill called the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. In other words, if you're a mom and you're pregnant and you get killed, the murderer gets tried for two cases, not just one. My opponent was against that. These are reasonable ways to help promote a culture of life in America. I think it is a worthy goal in America to have every child protected by law and welcomed in life. I also think we ought to continue to have good adoption law as an alternative to abortion. And we need to promote maternity group homes, which my administration has done. Culture of life is really important for a country to have if it's going to be a hospitable society. Thank you. GIBSON: Senator, do you want to follow up? Thirty seconds. KERRY: Well, again, the president just said, categorically, my opponent is against this, my opponent is against that. You know, it's just not that simple. No, I'm not. ========================== [Kerry goes wrong again in populist terms; the silly fellow tries to show the complexity of the issue.] ========================== I'm against the partial-birth abortion, but you've got to have an exception for the life of the mother and the health of the mother under the strictest test of bodily injury to the mother. Secondly, with respect to parental notification, I'm not going to require a 16-or 17-year-old kid who's been raped by her father and who's pregnant to have to notify her father. So you got to have a judicial intervention. And because they didn't have a judicial intervention where she could go somewhere and get help, I voted against it. It's never quite as simple as the president wants you to believe. GIBSON: And 30 seconds, Mr. President. BUSH: Well, it's pretty simple when they say: Are you for a ban on partial birth abortion? Yes or no? ================================== [Bush *doesn't want to know*. Or he's too stupid to grasp the idea that this disturbing procedure is conducted (according to Kerry) *only to save the mother's life or health*. `It's pretty simple', indeed. It's pretty simplistic. It's the stupidity, stupid.] ================================ ================================ Now it's true that the exchange drifted away from the original question about federal funding, and into contraception and the very legitimacy of abortion. It's easy to get confused on these topics. Olga referenced Richard Dawkins' page, where I found an astonishing lapse of logic in Dawkins' recent essay on state funding of religious schools. He was as incensed by that as Ms. Degenhart was by state funding of abortion. He wrote: `How, then, can it be sane to advocate the existence of sectarian religious schools? And who can justify the spending of taxpayers' money on them?' The obvious answer to the final supposedly killer question is: `Those sectarian taxpayers who pay that quantum of the education budget justify it!' It's as if Dawkins, in his fury (which I share) against indoctrinating schools, fails to notice that the parents and relatives who want to send their kids to sectarian schools *are also taxpayers*. The answer to Ms. Degenhart might have been: `Think of your tax contribution as going to support all those causes you favor, causes that people not of your faith dislike or couldn't care less about. The money supporting abortion doesn't come from you, but from the 52% (roughly##) of the taxpayers who do support abortion; by the way, they also have to shoulder the burden of all those Catholics and others who actually do have abortions but feel guilty about doing so. But your conscience is clear; your tax dollars are being spent on faith-based health initiatives, immense tax-free status for religions, and other partisan expenditures.' I'm not suggesting that Kerry should have replied like that. Such honesty would have created outrage, and Bush would have shaken his head in bafflement and muttered, `I'm trying to decipher that.' Oh, wait, he *did* say that. ## < A USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll of 1,006 adults last weekend found that 68% support the ban on the so-called partial-birth abortions. But the poll found Americans much more closely divided on the question of a more complete ban: 48% identified themselves as "pro-choice" and 45% as "pro-life." > Damien Broderick _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 18:52:20 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:52:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <20041011181302.21939.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011185220.77328.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > You're right concerning Ted Kennedy, and there is reason to believe > Hillary may have been involved in some way with Foster's death (and > her husband might have raped Juanita Broadderick). My point is there > was no investigation at all of Laura Bush after she accidentally > (on-purpose?) killed her ex-boyfriend. She didn't lose her license or > registration, no slap on the wrist whatsoever; nothing. Now that's > Teflon. > The First Lady's accident was 41 years ago so its significance for > today is zero, but it makes me wonder even more about the Bushs. They > are not just some innocent family, they are immensely ambitious, > power-hungry. 41 years ago Laura wasn't Laura Bush, she was 17 year old Laura Welch (who likely had no idea who the Bushs were), riding in a car with another 17 year old girl. Two chatty teenage girls driving in a car... hmmm sounds like a prescription for an accident, or at least negligent driving. Now, you don't know WHAT happened to her after the accident, you only know that you don't know anything. Concluding she got off scot free is a leap. Laura has never been an ambitious woman, unlike Hillary, and has not tried to inject her own politics into legislation, unlike Hillary, outside of trying to promote the idea that kids should read more (big shocker, coming from a librarian). Watch out for that nefarious Laura Bush led Wide Spread Librarian Conspiracy to make you read... oh no... ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 19:04:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:04:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011175012.15807.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011190456.56289.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > > No, not probably. Let's have it clear: Bush is being excessively > pedantic about cells in a dish. Depends on your faith. If you have a faith that says they are nothing, then government shouldn't spend your tax dollars preventing you, or others, from doing what you want with them. If you have a faith that says they are something, then government shouldn't spend your tax dollars so others can do what they want with them. THis is a balanced application of the equal protection principle. We don't force christian scientists to accept blood transfusions for themselves of their kids (we can't, that is what the Constitution says), as doing so would be forcing them to violate the precepts of their religion. We can't force the Amish to participate in the Social Security System, because they take care of their own and they have a religious opposition to the inventorying of human flesh. Similarly, if you want to protect your ability, as a transhumanist, to clone, to augment, to genetically engineer yourself or your progeny, free of government interference, then you MUST respect similar sentiments against force put forth by people of other faiths and practices. You need to understand this and accept this very clear, tolerance based principle, or else the luddites will have the door open to end and destroy transhumanism. We CANNOT support government spending of the tax money of others on programs we support, any more than we can allow government to regulate those practices which we see as necessary to our future. ===== 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 Mon Oct 11 19:11:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:11:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding In-Reply-To: <20041011175232.94616.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011191152.80557.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > Nice analysis, but you missed one point: > > --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > Bush *doesn't want to know*. Or he's too stupid to > > grasp the idea that > > this disturbing procedure is conducted (according to > > Kerry) *only to save > > the mother's life or health*. > > Or he doesn't think that matters, putting the life of > the partially-born (which would be miserable and > short without a mother, especially if one averages in > the factors that usually correlate with a birth that > endangers the mother) on equal status as the life of > the mother (which might be much better, not to mention > longer, without the presumably unwanted child - > presumably, since she's getting an abortion anyway). Damien is apparently unaware of the radicals involved in the debate. It was left to the doctors judgement as to whether the mother's life was in danger. To many radical feminazi doctors, a danger to the mother's future earnings in having to spend time at home, caring for children, away from a productive career, is a "danger to the mother's life" (i.e. her lifestyle). Never is a doctors decision reviewed by a medical ethics board or a grand jury. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 19:14:26 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:14:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011162735.C5F3957E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041011191426.80794.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > > I would prefer that "innocent" be applied to entities capable of > moral actions. A table is not innocent. An amoeba is not innocent. >And an embryo is not innocent. None of these are moral actors. None of > them are such that we can make moral judgements about their actions. A sociopath is therefore not a moral actor? "Okay people, jail is out, all sociopaths can now go free, so sorry to take up your time, please go back to your completely amoral killing sprees..." ===== 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 Mon Oct 11 18:37:08 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:37:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are useless and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try to tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. Along these lines I thought it might be useful to have a little refresher on what we are about. Extropianism has gone through considerable change in the past few years. The very words have changed: extropianism and extropians are out; extropy and transhumanism are in. We used to communicate via the extropians list; it is now extropy-chat. What used to be called the Extropian Principles are now the Principles of Extropy. I'm not sure what word to use any more to address subscribers to this list. However much has stayed the same, and the new Principles of Extropy look pretty familiar, from (where longer discussions of each one are available too): : The Principles of Extropy in Brief : : Perpetual Progress : : Extropy means seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, : an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, : biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. : Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities : as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in healthy : directions without bound. : : Self-Transformation : : Extropy means affirming continual ethical, intellectual, and : physical self-improvement, through critical and creative thinking, : perpetual learning, personal responsibility, proactivity, and : experimentation. Using technology - in the widest sense to seek : physiological and neurological augmentation along with emotional and : psychological refinement. : : Practical Optimism : : Extropy means fueling action with positive expectations - individuals : and organizations being tirelessly proactive. Adopting a rational, : action-based optimism or "proaction", in place of both blind faith and : stagnant pessimism. : : Intelligent Technology : : Extropy means designing and managing technologies not as ends in : themselves but as effective means for improving life. Applying science : and technology creatively and courageously to transcend "natural" : but harmful, confining qualities derived from our biological heritage, : culture, and environment. : : Open Society : : Extropy means supporting social orders that foster freedom of : communication, freedom of action, experimentation, innovation, : questioning, and learning. Opposing authoritarian social control and : unnecessary hierarchy and favoring the rule of law and decentralization : of power and responsibility. Preferring bargaining over battling, : exchange over extortion, and communication over compulsion. Openness : to improvement rather than a static utopia. Extropia ("ever-receding : stretch goals for society") over utopia ("no place"). : : Self-Direction : : Extropy means valuing independent thinking, individual freedom, personal : responsibility, self-direction, self-respect, and a parallel respect : for others. : : Rational Thinking : : Extropy means favoring reason over blind faith and questioning over : dogma. It means understanding, experimenting, learning, challenging, : and innovating rather than clinging to beliefs. In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 Principles of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how important you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part of your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you agree with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. To get the ball rolling I will put them in order for me: 1. Rational Thinking 2. Self-Direction 3. Open Society 4. Intelligent Technology 5. Self Transformation 6. Perpetual Progress 7. Practical Optimism For a brief discussion, rational thinking is very important to me as a basic method for dealing with life. Self direction and open society are consistent with my individualistic political philosophy. I am always interested in new technologies and their possible future uses. Self transformation and perpetual progress are more long term goals as we develop new technologies. Likewise practical optimism is a useful guideline but doesn't come into play much on a day to day basis. If enough people are interested we could try combining our results into an overall ranking of the Principles. Hal From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 19:27:07 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] defending life? In-Reply-To: <20041011191426.80794.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041011192707.94562.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Hal Finney wrote: > > I would prefer that "innocent" be applied to > entities capable of > > moral actions. A table is not innocent. An > amoeba is not innocent. > >And an embryo is not innocent. None of these are > moral actors. None > of > > them are such that we can make moral judgements > about their actions. > > A sociopath is therefore not a moral actor? Legally, no. True sociopaths, completely unable to judge morality, are legally insane, and are given the same degree of rights as animals (i.e., none) since they are judged to have lost the use of human mental capability. Usually, attempts are made to restore said capability, but until it has been restored... I believe Hal was applying a similar argument to the term "innocent" in general: only a human being capable of deciding right from wrong is innocent, and should be afforded the protections we accord to innocents. Sociopaths and newborns are two examples of human beings outside of this class. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 19:29:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 12:29:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041011192947.82773.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Ah, the litmus test begins. Somebody hand out the snipe bags, the snark guns, and the bottles of Chlorine 37, weez gonna hunt us a boojum tonight. At least one person has decided that purveyors of uncomfortable truths, while not explicitly violating Godwins Law, need to be swept out of sight via public caning with rolled up copies of the Extropy Principles (Policially Correct Version 3.x, of course). Nothing like a witch hunt before an election to get the blood flowing. --- Hal Finney wrote: > We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are > useless > and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate > traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, > moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try to > tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. > > Along these lines I thought it might be useful to have a little > refresher > on what we are about. Extropianism has gone through considerable > change in the past few years. The very words have changed: > extropianism > and extropians are out; extropy and transhumanism are in. We used to > communicate via the extropians list; it is now extropy-chat. What > used > to be called the Extropian Principles are now the Principles of > Extropy. > I'm not sure what word to use any more to address subscribers to this > list. > > However much has stayed the same, and the new Principles of Extropy > look > pretty familiar, from (where > longer > discussions of each one are available too): > > : The Principles of Extropy in Brief > : > : Perpetual Progress > : > : Extropy means seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, > : an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, > : biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. > : Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and > possibilities > : as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in > healthy > : directions without bound. > : > : Self-Transformation > : > : Extropy means affirming continual ethical, intellectual, and > : physical self-improvement, through critical and creative thinking, > : perpetual learning, personal responsibility, proactivity, and > : experimentation. Using technology - in the widest sense to seek > : physiological and neurological augmentation along with emotional > and > : psychological refinement. > : > : Practical Optimism > : > : Extropy means fueling action with positive expectations - > individuals > : and organizations being tirelessly proactive. Adopting a rational, > : action-based optimism or "proaction", in place of both blind faith > and > : stagnant pessimism. > : > : Intelligent Technology > : > : Extropy means designing and managing technologies not as ends in > : themselves but as effective means for improving life. Applying > science > : and technology creatively and courageously to transcend "natural" > : but harmful, confining qualities derived from our biological > heritage, > : culture, and environment. > : > : Open Society > : > : Extropy means supporting social orders that foster freedom of > : communication, freedom of action, experimentation, innovation, > : questioning, and learning. Opposing authoritarian social control > and > : unnecessary hierarchy and favoring the rule of law and > decentralization > : of power and responsibility. Preferring bargaining over battling, > : exchange over extortion, and communication over compulsion. > Openness > : to improvement rather than a static utopia. Extropia > ("ever-receding > : stretch goals for society") over utopia ("no place"). > : > : Self-Direction > : > : Extropy means valuing independent thinking, individual freedom, > personal > : responsibility, self-direction, self-respect, and a parallel > respect > : for others. > : > : Rational Thinking > : > : Extropy means favoring reason over blind faith and questioning over > : dogma. It means understanding, experimenting, learning, > challenging, > : and innovating rather than clinging to beliefs. > > > In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I > thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 Principles > of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how important > you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part > of > your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you agree > with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. > Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. > > To get the ball rolling I will put them in order for me: > > 1. Rational Thinking > 2. Self-Direction > 3. Open Society > 4. Intelligent Technology > 5. Self Transformation > 6. Perpetual Progress > 7. Practical Optimism > > For a brief discussion, rational thinking is very important to me as > a > basic method for dealing with life. Self direction and open society > are consistent with my individualistic political philosophy. I am > always interested in new technologies and their possible future uses. > Self transformation and perpetual progress are more long term goals > as > we develop new technologies. Likewise practical optimism is a useful > guideline but doesn't come into play much on a day to day basis. > > If enough people are interested we could try combining our results > into > an overall ranking of the Principles. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Mon Oct 11 20:05:26 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 22:05:26 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy References: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <001001c4afcd$a6a368a0$7abc1b97@administxl09yj> 1. Rational Thinking 2. Self Transformation 3. Open Society 4. Intelligent Technology 5. Self-Direction 6. Perpetual Progress 7. Practical Optimism s. On the first day God created the cow. God said "You must go to the field with the farmer all day long and suffer under the sun, have calves and give milk to support the farmer. I will give you a life span of sixty years." The cow said, "That's a pretty tough life you want me to live for sixty years. Let me have twenty years and I'll give back the other forty." And God agreed. On the second day, God created the dog. God said, "Sit all day by the door of your house and bark at anyone who comes in or walks past. I will give you a life span of twenty years." The dog said, "That's too long to be barking. Give me ten years and I'll give back the other ten." So, God agreed. On the third day God created the monkey. God said, "Entertain people, do monkey tricks, make them laugh I'll give you a twenty year life span." The monkey said, "How boring, monkey tricks for twenty years? I don't think so. The dog gave you back ten, so that's what I'll do too, it is okay?" And God agreed again. On the fourth day God created man. God said "You are created in my image, eat, sleep, play, have sex, enjoy. Do nothing, just enjoy. I'll give you twenty years." Man said, "What? Only twenty years? No way. Tell you what, I'll take my twenty, and the forty the cow gave back, and the ten the dog gave back and the ten the monkey gave back. That makes eighty." "Okay" - said God - "You've got a deal." And that is why for the first twenty years we eat, sleep, play, have sex, enjoy, and do nothing. For the next forty years, we slave in the sun to support our family. For the next ten years we do monkey tricks to entertain our grandchildren. And for the last ten years we sit in front of the house and bark at everybody. From extropians at perception.co.nz Mon Oct 11 20:03:08 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:03:08 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011192947.82773.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> <20041011192947.82773.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041012090255.05df3760@127.0.0.1> and there are a lot of people on the list who -aren't- from America, and therefore aren't particularly fussed about the minute details of the election.. or, more specifically, have heard more than enough about the politics from other sources. if we wanted to be on a US politics mailing list, we would be. We're interested in extropy/ians, which is why we're here. I think Hal is right. Simon At 08:29 12/10/2004, you wrote: >Ah, the litmus test begins. Somebody hand out the snipe bags, the snark >guns, and the bottles of Chlorine 37, weez gonna hunt us a boojum >tonight. At least one person has decided that purveyors of >uncomfortable truths, while not explicitly violating Godwins Law, need >to be swept out of sight via public caning with rolled up copies of the >Extropy Principles (Policially Correct Version 3.x, of course). Nothing >like a witch hunt before an election to get the blood flowing. > >--- Hal Finney wrote: > >> We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are >> useless >> and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate >> traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, >> moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try to >> tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. >> >> Along these lines I thought it might be useful to have a little >> refresher >> on what we are about. Extropianism has gone through considerable >> change in the past few years. The very words have changed: >> extropianism >> and extropians are out; extropy and transhumanism are in. We used to >> communicate via the extropians list; it is now extropy-chat. What >> used >> to be called the Extropian Principles are now the Principles of >> Extropy. >> I'm not sure what word to use any more to address subscribers to this >> list. >> >> However much has stayed the same, and the new Principles of Extropy >> look >> pretty familiar, from (where >> longer >> discussions of each one are available too): >> >> : The Principles of Extropy in Brief >> : >> : Perpetual Progress >> : >> : Extropy means seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, >> : an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, >> : biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. >> : Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and >> possibilities >> : as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in >> healthy >> : directions without bound. >> : >> : Self-Transformation >> : >> : Extropy means affirming continual ethical, intellectual, and >> : physical self-improvement, through critical and creative thinking, >> : perpetual learning, personal responsibility, proactivity, and >> : experimentation. Using technology - in the widest sense to seek >> : physiological and neurological augmentation along with emotional >> and >> : psychological refinement. >> : >> : Practical Optimism >> : >> : Extropy means fueling action with positive expectations - >> individuals >> : and organizations being tirelessly proactive. Adopting a rational, >> : action-based optimism or "proaction", in place of both blind faith >> and >> : stagnant pessimism. >> : >> : Intelligent Technology >> : >> : Extropy means designing and managing technologies not as ends in >> : themselves but as effective means for improving life. Applying >> science >> : and technology creatively and courageously to transcend "natural" >> : but harmful, confining qualities derived from our biological >> heritage, >> : culture, and environment. >> : >> : Open Society >> : >> : Extropy means supporting social orders that foster freedom of >> : communication, freedom of action, experimentation, innovation, >> : questioning, and learning. Opposing authoritarian social control >> and >> : unnecessary hierarchy and favoring the rule of law and >> decentralization >> : of power and responsibility. Preferring bargaining over battling, >> : exchange over extortion, and communication over compulsion. >> Openness >> : to improvement rather than a static utopia. Extropia >> ("ever-receding >> : stretch goals for society") over utopia ("no place"). >> : >> : Self-Direction >> : >> : Extropy means valuing independent thinking, individual freedom, >> personal >> : responsibility, self-direction, self-respect, and a parallel >> respect >> : for others. >> : >> : Rational Thinking >> : >> : Extropy means favoring reason over blind faith and questioning over >> : dogma. It means understanding, experimenting, learning, >> challenging, >> : and innovating rather than clinging to beliefs. >> >> >> In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I >> thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 Principles >> of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how important >> you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part >> of >> your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you agree >> with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. >> Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. >> >> To get the ball rolling I will put them in order for me: >> >> 1. Rational Thinking >> 2. Self-Direction >> 3. Open Society >> 4. Intelligent Technology >> 5. Self Transformation >> 6. Perpetual Progress >> 7. Practical Optimism >> >> For a brief discussion, rational thinking is very important to me as >> a >> basic method for dealing with life. Self direction and open society >> are consistent with my individualistic political philosophy. I am >> always interested in new technologies and their possible future uses. >> Self transformation and perpetual progress are more long term goals >> as >> we develop new technologies. Likewise practical optimism is a useful >> guideline but doesn't come into play much on a day to day basis. >> >> If enough people are interested we could try combining our results >> into >> an overall ranking of the Principles. >> >> Hal >> _______________________________________________ >> 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!? >Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! >http://vote.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 20:22:57 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:22:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041012090255.05df3760@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <20041011202257.53433.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Dawson wrote: > and there are a lot of people on the list who -aren't- from America, > and therefore aren't particularly fussed about the minute details > of the election.. or, more specifically, have heard more than enough > about the politics from other sources. > > if we wanted to be on a US politics mailing list, we would be. We're > interested in extropy/ians, which is why we're here. > > I think Hal is right. I thought Hal was right when the radical lefties started posting. I see that 'discussion' is only a one way street, apparently. ===== 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 jef at jefallbright.net Mon Oct 11 20:26:14 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:26:14 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <416AEC66.8090300@jefallbright.net> Hal Finney wrote, regarding the Principles of Extropy at >In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I >thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 Principles >of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how important >you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part of >your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you agree >with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. >Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. > > > Here's my ordering of the list: 1. Practical Optimism 2. Rational Thinking 3. Self-Direction 4. Open Society 5. Intelligent Technology 6. Self Transformation 7. Perpetual Progress I went through the exercise and compared with Hal's ordering, and was not surprised to find that my list is in the same order as his -- except for one item. Hal's last item is my first. This seems to indicate we have high congruence of belief in the value of rationality and the subsequent ordering of items of personal and social progress. The difference between my list and Hal's is that I first identify myself as The Practical Optimist, and then see the rest of the categories as goals and milestones along my chosen path. I find great strength in the underlying belief that it doesn't matter where I find myself or what happens "to me" because in any case, being (1) a practical optimist, I apply (2) rationality to my decision-making process, valuing my own (3) self-direction within (4) an open society of similar entities, using (5)increasingly intelligent technology for (6) self-transformation within a framework of (7) perpetual progress. - Jef http://www.jefallbright.net From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Mon Oct 11 20:35:13 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:35:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Christopher Reeve - A Magnificant Activist 1952 - 2004 Message-ID: <1097526913.79826a60namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Indeed. I was hoping he'd walk again by the end of the decade, what a great achievement that would have been, both for him and for medical science... -Nicq From hibbert at mydruthers.com Mon Oct 11 21:08:13 2004 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 14:08:13 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <416AF63D.3030809@mydruthers.com> It's hard to argue with Hal's ordering. I had to shuffle the list in order to find out what I'd do starting from scratch. Turns out that I swapped 2 & 3, and moved intelligent technology down two positions. Minor differences. My rationale: I value critical thinking about objectives above all. My secondary domain is pancrit.org to reflect that value. I spend some of my free time trying to figure out how to create a real money Idea Futures market, because I think it will promote clear thinking about policy alternatives. The open society has proven itself to be the only known mechanism that allows people who disagree to peacefully live together in an advancing society. It only works when individuals are free to direct their own lives and choose their own future. Our advancing technology will continue to give everyone more choices over time. 1 Rational Thinking 2 Open Society 3 Self-Direction 4 Self Transformation 5 Perpetual Progress 6 Intelligent Technology 7 Practical Optimism Chris -- Currently reading: Ward & Brownlee, Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe; Iain M. Banks, Look to Windward; On my Clie: Alexandar Dumas, The Count of Monte Cristo Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com http://mydruthers.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Mon Oct 11 21:20:06 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:20:06 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: <82130-220041011121206996@M2W035.mail2web.com> Hal writes: >We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are useless >and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate >traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, >moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try to >tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. Agreed. >Along these lines I thought it might be useful to have a little refresher >on what we are about. Extropianism has gone through considerable >change in the past few years. The very words have changed: extropianism >and extropians are out; extropy and transhumanism are in. We used to >communicate via the extropians list; it is now extropy-chat. What used >to be called the Extropian Principles are now the Principles of Extropy. >I'm not sure what word to use any more to address subscribers to this >list. Good points. After much press and public mention from a variety of domains and with a variety of inferences - both positive and negative - ExI's Board discussed and decided to focus on the "philosophy of extropy." This was done to promote the networking and educational efforts of Extropy Institute rather than a "club" mentality. Further, extropians are not out, but what occurred was an action to establish presence, if you will, over a growing futurist movement which became occupied with competitive forces which neglected to reference Extropy Institute and its members as being the original home of transhumanity. (Reference: "Extropy: The Journal of Transhumanist Thought" dating back several decades) I think most of this is known, as it has been discussed frequently, but in a nutshell opposers to the philosophy of Extropy took the word "transhumanism and transhumanist" (Reference: "Philosophies of life, such as extropy, that seek the continuation and acceleration of the evolution of intelligent life beyond its currently human form and human limitations by means of science and technology, guided by life-promoting principles and values." More) and created their own group based on the ideas of its original proponents. Extropy Institute saw this as a violation and took a stand. In doing so, it has made it known that it is the original transhumanist organization and the catalyst of the transhumanist movement (Reference: Extro 1 Conference Silicon Valley 1994). With that said, let me add my views on marketing and going mainstream: The public gets confused quite easily. If you toss out too many words, it will most likely use them incorrectly. The world "extropy" is a strong and solid word and has a positive, progress-oriented, and implies critical thinking via its definition. Watering it down with "isms" and "ians" caused journalist to groupthink in a less than futurist fashion about the ideas continued in the term extropy. Our idea is to use "extropy" as a stand-alone - something that I believe, in deference to all who support the philosophy, it has earned the value of. I hope this explains a few things for better understanding. >However much has stayed the same, and the new Principles of Extropy look >pretty familiar, from (where longer >discussions of each one are available too): Excellent! Thanks for such a creative idea, Natasha : The Principles of Extropy in Brief : : Perpetual Progress : : Extropy means seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, : an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, : biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. : Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities : as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in healthy : directions without bound. : : Self-Transformation : : Extropy means affirming continual ethical, intellectual, and : physical self-improvement, through critical and creative thinking, : perpetual learning, personal responsibility, proactivity, and : experimentation. Using technology - in the widest sense to seek : physiological and neurological augmentation along with emotional and : psychological refinement. : : Practical Optimism : : Extropy means fueling action with positive expectations - individuals : and organizations being tirelessly proactive. Adopting a rational, : action-based optimism or "proaction", in place of both blind faith and : stagnant pessimism. : : Intelligent Technology : : Extropy means designing and managing technologies not as ends in : themselves but as effective means for improving life. Applying science : and technology creatively and courageously to transcend "natural" : but harmful, confining qualities derived from our biological heritage, : culture, and environment. : : Open Society : : Extropy means supporting social orders that foster freedom of : communication, freedom of action, experimentation, innovation, : questioning, and learning. Opposing authoritarian social control and : unnecessary hierarchy and favoring the rule of law and decentralization : of power and responsibility. Preferring bargaining over battling, : exchange over extortion, and communication over compulsion. Openness : to improvement rather than a static utopia. Extropia ("ever-receding : stretch goals for society") over utopia ("no place"). : : Self-Direction : : Extropy means valuing independent thinking, individual freedom, personal : responsibility, self-direction, self-respect, and a parallel respect : for others. : : Rational Thinking : : Extropy means favoring reason over blind faith and questioning over : dogma. It means understanding, experimenting, learning, challenging, : and innovating rather than clinging to beliefs. In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 Principles of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how important you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part of your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you agree with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. To get the ball rolling I will put them in order for me: 1. Rational Thinking 2. Self-Direction 3. Open Society 4. Intelligent Technology 5. Self Transformation 6. Perpetual Progress 7. Practical Optimism For a brief discussion, rational thinking is very important to me as a basic method for dealing with life. Self direction and open society are consistent with my individualistic political philosophy. I am always interested in new technologies and their possible future uses. Self transformation and perpetual progress are more long term goals as we develop new technologies. Likewise practical optimism is a useful guideline but doesn't come into play much on a day to day basis. If enough people are interested we could try combining our results into an overall ranking of the Principles. Hal _______________________________________________ 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Oct 11 21:27:49 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:27:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> References: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011162235.019fe5d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:37 AM 10/11/2004 -0700, Hal wrote: >We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are useless >and off topic. Apologies if some of my recent posts have offended against topic discipline, or seemed to. Elements of the second Bush/Kerry debate did seem to me worth a few moments' analysis to see what was going on in the rhetoric, because this reflects the real-world context in which transhumanists have to live and express our own message. If the names had been reversed, I'd have made the same paraphrases and summary, I hope. Damien Broderick [not a USian voter] From natashavita at earthlink.net Mon Oct 11 21:50:56 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:50:56 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: <113100-2200410111215056156@M2W051.mail2web.com> Damien, I though Hal meant just political posts that don't focus on extropy (I'm guilty of this, I'm afraid:-( ) Not your recent posts which I think are time sensitive. [Not registered USist voter, but thinking about USisms] Natasha >Apologies if some of my recent posts have offended against topic >discipline, or seemed to. Elements of the second Bush/Kerry debate did >seem >to me worth a few moments' analysis to see what was going on in the >rhetoric, because this reflects the real-world context in which >transhumanists have to live and express our own message. If the names had >been reversed, I'd have made the same paraphrases and summary, I hope. Damien Broderick [not a USian voter] _______________________________________________ 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 kpj at sics.se Mon Oct 11 21:56:41 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 23:56:41 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: Message from Mike Lorrey of "Mon, 11 Oct 2004 13:22:57 PDT." <20041011202257.53433.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200410112156.i9BLugn15938@r2d2.sics.se> Simon Dawson wrote: | |if we wanted to be on a US politics mailing list, we would be. We're |interested in extropy/ians, which is why we're here. | |I think Hal is right. Mike Lorrey : | |I thought Hal was right when the radical lefties started posting. I see |that 'discussion' is only a one way street, apparently. Extropians were supposed to be "up" -- not "left" or "right". The "left" and "right" monikers are _so_ 18th century. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 11 22:54:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 15:54:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <200410112156.i9BLugn15938@r2d2.sics.se> Message-ID: <20041011225400.75025.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- KPJ wrote: > Simon Dawson wrote: > | > |if we wanted to be on a US politics mailing list, we would be. We're > |interested in extropy/ians, which is why we're here. > | > |I think Hal is right. > > Mike Lorrey : > | > |I thought Hal was right when the radical lefties started posting. I > see > |that 'discussion' is only a one way street, apparently. > > Extropians were supposed to be "up" -- not "left" or "right". And certainly not DOWN on anything besides government in general. > > The "left" and "right" monikers are _so_ 18th century. Depends. Even in upsville, there are left libertarians and right libertarians. ===== 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 trichrom at optusnet.com.au Mon Oct 11 23:15:47 2004 From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:15:47 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy References: <20041011202257.53433.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002801c4afe8$4068a5d0$e40fecdc@turtle> I agree with Hal, people using the forum for blatant political opinionship doesnt go to the list's purpose. I guess politic's is a harder thing to discuss and as already mentioned would best be served by a political discussion list elsewhere. I know I have blocked a few people due to my percieved analysis of their 'worth' (to my inbox) based on the oppossing political bluntness/dumbness here which is a shame as I have no idea if their extropian commentary will subsequantly be of better value! Probably not though... Here's mine: 1. Self Transformation 2. Self-Direction 3. Rational Thinking 4. Intelligent Technology 5. Open Society 6. Perpetual Progress 7. Practical Optimism RobKPO ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Lorrey To: ExI chat list Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 6:22 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy I thought Hal was right when the radical lefties started posting. I see that 'discussion' is only a one way street, apparently. ===== 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 11 23:30:17 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 16:30:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041011233017.86680.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> 1. Practical Optimism 2. Rational Thinking Without RT, it's hard to get most of the others, although RT itself can be derailed if not guided by PO. (One can rationally think about how to destroy the human race if one thinks it needs destroying, for example. But a practical optimist will see that this would not, in fact, help.) 3. Perpetual Progress A logical goal, if one accepts PO and RT. We want things to get better? Then let us make them better - and then better yet. We might not be able to skip directly to perfection (partly since nothing is perfect for all the conditions we may experience), but we can certainly aim to improve on the status quo. 4. Self-Direction This is important in part to counterbalance that last example: whose definition of "perfect" are we aiming for? But it is not above PP: one should be free to define progress for oneself, but for example, an ecoluddite might define "progress" as the elimination of humanity's footprint from the Earth by any means available - clearly not a sustainable vision, short of a complete genocide of the human race or the complete and permanent evacuation of Earth by the same. 5. Self Transformation 6. Intelligent Technology 7. Open Society These are means to the above ends. Effective, perhaps, but not the same as end goals in and of themselves. ST is essential to make sure that all can participate in the manner they prefer. IT is a great aid towards progress, but if not achieved in and of itself, it is a likely outcome of 1-5. OS is kind of symbiotic with the others: it helps achieve them, but the others (especially IT) tend towards creating it if it does not already exist. BTW, note that the only goal - the self-justifying element - is number 3 on the list, and everything else justifies itself from there. (1 and 2 because they lead to 3; 4-7 support 3 once accepted.) From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Oct 11 23:33:23 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 07:33:23 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED06@tpeex05> I have one question: Is Extropy related to any ideas from Seth or Jane Roberts? Are they in agreement or in conflict? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of RobKPO Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 7:16 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy I agree with Hal, people using the forum for blatant political opinionship doesnt go to the list's purpose. I guess politic's is a harder thing to discuss and as already mentioned would best be served by a political discussion list elsewhere. I know I have blocked a few people due to my percieved analysis of their 'worth' (to my inbox) based on the oppossing political bluntness/dumbness here which is a shame as I have no idea if their extropian commentary will subsequantly be of better value! Probably not though... Here's mine: 1. Self Transformation 2. Self-Direction 3. Rational Thinking 4. Intelligent Technology 5. Open Society 6. Perpetual Progress 7. Practical Optimism RobKPO ----- Original Message ----- From: Mike Lorrey To: ExI chat list Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 6:22 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy I thought Hal was right when the radical lefties started posting. I see that 'discussion' is only a one way street, apparently. ===== 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 _______________________________________________ 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 Oct 12 00:25:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011233017.86680.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041012002546.64827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> 1. Boundless Expansion 2. Self Transformation 3. Dynamic Optimism 4. Intelligent Technology 5. Spontaneous Order ;) Have a nice 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!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Oct 12 00:54:40 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 17:54:40 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Moore, Morford, Doonesbury & Dawkings References: <20041011153339.22999.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003401c4aff6$0e7e2460$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > "Pause here. Think about that. A hundred years, everyone now alive, > dead. Everyone. You. Me. Bush. Your kids. All dead. Guaranteed." > > I don't think Morford is our type of people. Not many people have heard of "us." I only myself heard of "us" a few years ago, and that's only because I'm married to a wonderfully strange man. ;-) I have to tell you, when I first heard of "us" - I rolled my eyes (and I thought, "Sheesh, get serious!"). I have introduced the subject of "us" to a few people since then, and have seen that same rolling-of-the-eyes directed at me. So now I keep a few "The Spike(s)" around, and have given the book to a few of my good friends, rather than try to sputter and explain what "we" are all about. I didn't expect Morford to necessarily have heard of us (and if he hasn't - maybe someday he will). But I just think Morford's writing "floats like a butterfly, stings like a bee ..." (i.e., I find him very entertaining, and a good antidote to Bill O'Reilly et al...). I know Morford sounds somewhat like a liberal, but he's actually got a libertarian outlook at times. Olga From sentience at pobox.com Tue Oct 12 02:11:45 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 22:11:45 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041012002546.64827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041012002546.64827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <416B3D61.1070502@pobox.com> I hate to answer so predictably, but: 1. Rational Thinking. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Oct 12 03:58:18 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2004 20:58:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041011131220.01d0dcd0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00b101c4b00f$b5eb47f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Bush and Kerry on abortion funding > > At 12:31 PM 10/11/2004 -0500, I wrote: > > Adventists aghast that hospitals are funded *with their money* to > transfuse blood > > Oops. I probably should have written `Jehovah's Witnesses'. > The former theologian Spike Jones will be down on me like a wolf on the > fold. ... Jehovah's Witnesses are known for their rejection of blood transfusion, > even when it is necessary to save life... I saw the earlier comment and was in the middle of a reply when I decided to check if someone else had caught the error. Turns out the author himself had done so. I was coming down upon Damien not as the wolf on the fold but rather more as the three-toed sloth, comes down gently, like... well, whatever it is that the three toed sloth gently comes down gradually upon in order to eventually devour with no great haste or ferocity. Rutabagas? Four religious groups, Jehovah's Witness, Christian Science, Seventh Day Adventist and Later Day Saints, are often confused with each other, but usually, as in the case of Damien, it is done clearly without malice. An oversimplified summary: Jehovah's Witness = no transfusions, Christian Science = no doctors, LDS = Mormon = huge white families, all American values, SDA = Seventh Day Adventist = no war, vegetarian, church on Saturday. I would argue that in many ways Seventh Day Adventist is highly compatible with extropian principles, for we owe a great debt to the early SDA John Harvey Kellogg, a shining example of a forward thinking proto-extropian. As a young doctor, businessman and inventor in the 1880s, Kellogg looked at the typical breakfast table and realized there was not one food item present that would contribute to good health. So he invented some. Several actually, the most famous being corn flakes. Perhaps even more brilliantly, he figured out how to tell god to tell the prophetess Ellen White to tell the proletariat to purchase and devour his corn flakes, which caused him to earn so much money that any good capitalist would stand and salute. Kellogg also inadvertently launched a new industry in Battle Creek Michigan, by making his breakfast foods without sugar or sweeteners. Competitors merely took the recipes, sweetened the concoctions to make them far more palatable, making them better sellers, giving birth to the even more profitable Post cereals. But I digress. Kellogg was a forward thinking doctor who was always eager to experiment with the newest technologies available. In this way I nominate him as an outstanding proto-extropian. Perpetual Progress: Kellogg was always looking for ways to do things better in medical science. He set the precedent for experimentation that lives on to this day in hospitals such as the highly esteemed Loma Linda medical center in southern Taxifornia, where the Baby Fae baboon heart transplant was attempted, and where mechanical hearts are still being developed to this day. They also have some of the world's most advanced proton-accelerator treatment for prostate cancer. The latest inverted food pyramid is one Kellogg figured out over a century ago. Self-Transformation: Kellogg's big thing was daily exercise, which was cutting edge stuff at the dawn of the 20th century. That physical fitness is such well-established dogma today is a tribute to Kellogg and others who were pushing it back then. Practical Optimism: Kellogg preached to anyone who would listen and plenty who wouldn't that a person who paid attention to health principles could live to be 90. He lived to 91. Intelligent Technology: Kellogg held 30 patents for food products, medical equipment, exercise gear, diverse things such as peanut butter, a vapor inhaler, the electric blanket, etc. Open Society: ok, Kellogg didn't say anything about open society that I know of. Self-Direction: Kellogg might have actually preferred the proletariat would take direction from him as opposed to their own misguided selves. Moving right along... Rational Thinking: Kellogg showed thru his writing that he was a forward thinker and a rational thinker, traits that are often absent in today's highly restricted medical sciences. Doctors are forced by the medical malpractice industry to practice only the most accepted cookbook methods. Kellogg carefully reasoned out new treatments and recorded his theories and findings. The precedent is seen in experiments like the afore mentioned Baby Fae heart transplant. The reasoning was that a baby's immune system is not developed at birth, therefore perhaps an immunologically incompatible organ could be introduced in such a way that the immune system could learn to accept it, obviating the need for immunosuppressants, which would cause a baby's life to be short anyway. Didn't work, but an intriguing idea that merited an attempt or two. Kellogg's ideas weren't always right either: he did some things like a radon inhaler for treating asthma. It surely did eventually rid the patient of asthma. After they were slain. He recorded the outcomes carefully, and consequently he stopped delivering megadoses of radiation to the ailing lungs of the eerily glowing patients, forthwith. So, Kellogg scores 5 out of 7, not bad for a guy who was born in 1852. In Kellogg's tradition, SDA doctors and medical centers will seriously consider cryonics as a form of medical treatment. In a recent meeting of my alma mater, I introduced several of the participants to the notion of cryonics. I found them far more open and receptive to the idea than is found in the general public. You and I may one day go to Loma Linda, Florida Hospital, or one of the other SDA medical centers to be frozen upon our ultimate demise, assuming the apocalypse or the singularity do not intervene. As a parting shot, the SDA church is (finally!) holding serious talks on how to deal with the evolution issue. They are trying to decide what are they to do about the fact that most of the smarter Adventists have quietly accepted Darwin's heresy, in spite of their parents' most sincere efforts and staggering expense in private schooling to keep their larvae on the straight and narrow creationist road. The shocking truth is that the *average* typical American is a creationist! Or might as well be. Adventist historian Ron Numbers, in his excellent book The Creationists, shows that when people are randomly selected and given questionnaires about evolution, their answers demonstrate so little basic understanding of evolution, answers that are clearly and repeatedly self- contradictory, it is almost meaningless to label the person either creationist or evolutionist. Fellow Americans, we know not jack about evolution. Sad. Adventists are forced to confront creationism, so they must spend more than three minutes of a lifetime thinking about life's origins. If one thinks, there is a good chance one will eventually accept Darwin's breakthrough heresy. If Kellogg were alive today, he would be leading the heretical charge. > So even silly ideas can become modified under the pressures of reality... > Damien Broderick Well said, sir, well said indeed. {8-] spike From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 12 06:03:11 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 07:03:11 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] if Hillary had killed a boyfriend... In-Reply-To: <20041011185220.77328.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041012060311.81238.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Okay, well if some really bad dirt is dug up on Kerry, like he had an affair with both Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot, then I wont vote for him. But if Kerry is elected, no matter who is elected, America will rally around him because they're afraid of dirty bombs blowing up a city or two, and all that. Things aren't business as usual any more. It wont work when Kerry's enemies say he "will ruin the economy", or "bungle the war effort"; that trick was tried with Clinton, and it is old. > 41 years ago Laura wasn't Laura Bush, she was 17 > year old Laura Welch > (who likely had no idea who the Bushs were), riding > in a car with > another 17 year old girl. Two chatty teenage girls > driving in a car... > hmmm sounds like a prescription for an accident, or > at least negligent > driving. > > Now, you don't know WHAT happened to her after the > accident, you only > know that you don't know anything. Concluding she > got off scot free is > a leap. Laura has never been an ambitious woman, > unlike Hillary, and > has not tried to inject her own politics into > legislation, unlike > Hillary, outside of trying to promote the idea that > kids should read > more (big shocker, coming from a librarian). Watch > out for that > nefarious Laura Bush led Wide Spread Librarian > Conspiracy to make you > read... oh no... > > ===== > 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!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Oct 12 07:19:39 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 09:19:39 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <416B3D61.1070502@pobox.com> References: <20041012002546.64827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> <416B3D61.1070502@pobox.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520410120019b437068@mail.gmail.com> I tried to put the principles in order, but could not manage to agree with myself after a few minutes, so I guess I support all principles without focusing on one or two. The principle that I (try to, it is not always easy) follow in daily life is practical optimism. It can ve a very constructive and effective approach to life but you have to be wired in a certain way. When mood control technology becomes operational one of the first things I will be looking for will be a practical optimism booster. One good things is that the principles, all all them, are worded in such a careful and "diplomatic" way to make them difficult to disagree with on the basis of rational arguments. Not so for too extreme interpretations of some specific principles. From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Oct 12 08:49:05 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 10:49:05 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <82130-220041011121206996@M2W035.mail2web.com> Message-ID: Agreed. We are all human beings living in this age and as such we are all interested in contemporary politics. There are more appropriate places on the net to discuss politics. I definitely do not think we should ban politics from this list, but perhaps we should stay a bit more focused. Broken disk time: instead of discussing politics on transhumanist fora, lets also discuss transhumanism on political fora. G. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of natashavita at earthlink.net Sent: 11 October 2004 23:20 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Hal writes: >We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are useless >and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate >traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, >moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try to >tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 23/04/2004 From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Oct 12 09:06:02 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 02:06:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: References: <82130-220041011121206996@M2W035.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041012020412.0294ab88@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Yah my mouse finger get tired of deleting all these political posts. If I saw any really new ideas I'd be a lot more interested. >Agreed. We are all human beings living in this age and as such we are all >interested in contemporary politics. There are more appropriate places on >the net to discuss politics. I definitely do not think we should ban >politics from this list, but perhaps we should stay a bit more focused. >Broken disk time: instead of discussing politics on transhumanist fora, lets >also discuss transhumanism on political fora. >G."Giu1i0 Pri5c0" ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From amara at amara.com Tue Oct 12 13:03:08 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:03:08 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: Walter_Chen at compal.com: >I have one question: Is Extropy related to any ideas from Seth or Jane >Roberts? :-) Well ... No to the _way_ that their ideas are discovered. I don't think that all of their ideas are in conflict though. I don't know enough of the ideas to be an authority on this topic, however. I just have read small passages at web sites .... >Are they in agreement or in conflict? The ideas, or the way that the ideas are acquired? As far-fetched as the Extropy ideas sound sometimes, the ideas don't include channeling as a viable way. Never mind, though. Every person is a potential teacher, and if you have some good filters, you can pick up some useful stuff. A couple of decades ago, I lived for some years with a guy who read alot of the Seth/Jane Roberts books, and I know that he was not crazy. He was a good filter for me too. I'll filter a few quotes for you from my own Extropian perspective (which could easily be different from another Extropian perspective, YMMV), if you want. I think that these are good from Seth/Jane Roberts: http://www.secretoflife.com/seth/s_quotes.html "Therefore, as always, make of this voice what you choose to make of it. Make of me what you choose to make of me, but recognize within yourselves the vitality of your being. And look to no man or no idea or no woman or no dogma, but the vitality of your own being, and trust it. And that which offends your soul, turn away from, but trust yourself" http://www.secretoflife.com/seth/s_quotes2.html "The self has no boundaries except those it accepts out of ignorance" "If you are in poor health, you can remedy it. If your personal relationships are unsatisfactory, you can change them for the better. If you are in poverty, you can find yourself surrounded by abundance... Each of you, regardless of position, status, circumstances, or physical condition, is in control or your own experience." "You must learn to listen to the voice of the inner self and work with it" "You create your reality according to your beliefs and expectations, therefore you should examine these carefully. If you do not like some aspect of your world, then examine your own expectations" 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/ *********************************************************************** "Treat people as if they are what they ought to be, and you will help them become what they are capable of being. --Ashleigh Brilliant From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Oct 12 12:18:25 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:18:25 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Another stupid apology of death and disease In-Reply-To: <3967556.1097582082780.JavaMail.root@bla31.blogger.com> References: <3967556.1097582082780.JavaMail.root@bla31.blogger.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041012051836f6330c@mail.gmail.com> >From the Times, the usual stupid apology of death and disease, even more disgusting since the article, "We should fear the disturbing future where man becomes superman" was inspired by the death of Christopher Reeve. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8122-1305837,00.html "To be human is to inhabit a world of vulnerability and limits. The weakness of flesh, and its end in death, frame all human endeavour. Human virtues, certainly as most moral thinkers have understood them, are responses to the fraught nature of our existence." Then my dog is much more human than me: she is much more stupid and will have a much shorter life. A fly is more human than both. The "human dignity" that apologists of death want for us all, is the dignity of flies. "For some scientists the promise inherent in stem-cell research, the cloning of human embryos and the whole burgeoning field of biotechnology, is the prospect of remaking man. The frailties that make up the human condition can, progressively, be eliminated by the manipulation of life's building blocks. Not just life-threatening disease, but all manner of infirmities and imperfections can, potentially, be engineered out of existence. The prospect, if not of Superman, certainly of superior models of man, beckons. The comic- book myth of transcending human constraints has become a modern scientific aspiration." Here the author is right, transcending human constraints has become a modern scientific aspiration. "Have we not learnt from those in the past century who wished to remake man, and saw in the lure of genetics the chance to create their own superman? I fear that once we trample over respect for the vulnerable and voiceless in our desire to eliminate frailty, we no longer make weakness our enemy, but make enemies of the weak." Here the author tries to scare the reader by making a subliminal analogy with things, like eugenics and nazi, that carry a negative connotation (without having anything to do with the actual issue), and tries to appeal to the social sensibility of the reader with a similarly misguided argument. We do not want to make enemies of the weak, we want to make the weak strong. Period. From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Oct 12 12:42:09 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:42:09 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Like Amara, I am also sort of fond of some of Roberts' Seth writings, but I would not say these have anything to do with extropian thinking. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Amara Graps Sent: 12 October 2004 15:03 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Walter_Chen at compal.com: >I have one question: Is Extropy related to any ideas from Seth or Jane >Roberts? :-) Well ... No to the _way_ that their ideas are discovered. I don't think that all of their ideas are in conflict though. I don't know enough of the ideas to be an authority on this topic, however. I just have read small passages at web sites ... --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.667 / Virus Database: 429 - Release Date: 23/04/2004 From kpj at sics.se Tue Oct 12 13:43:26 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 15:43:26 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: Message from hal@finney.org ("Hal Finney") of "Mon, 11 Oct 2004 11:37:08 PDT." <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <200410121343.i9CDhQA14528@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Hal Finney wrote: | |1. Rational Thinking |2. Self-Direction |3. Open Society |4. Intelligent Technology |5. Self Transformation |6. Perpetual Progress |7. Practical Optimism ... | |If enough people are interested we could try combining our results into |an overall ranking of the Principles. 1. Self-Direction - or you will be a slave, a borg droid. 2. Open Society - or it all becomes an excercise of futility. 3. Rational Thinking - or you have religion, not science. 4. Practical Optimism - or you will never find it worth while. 5. Self-Transformation - or you will stagnate, become reactionary. 6. Intelligent Technology - the way to do it 7. Perpetual Progress - the thing to do Without those above those below becomes meaningless to a free individual. (I prefer to be a free man in a low-tech society to a slave in a high-tech.) From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Oct 12 14:17:45 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 07:17:45 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Christopher Reeve and God(s) References: <20041010183152.51217.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00ae01c4b066$3e8ff0f0$6600a8c0@brainiac> I got this in another emailing this morning: The Freethought of the Day, featuring a quote by Christopher Reeve, can be found at: http://ffrf.org/day/?day=12&month=10 Olga From Ody777 at comcast.net Tue Oct 12 14:44:45 2004 From: Ody777 at comcast.net (Ody777 at comcast.net) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:44:45 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Bush and Kerry on abortion funding Message-ID: <101220041444.11151.416BEDDD000595BA00002B8F2200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Damien Broderick wrote (11 Oct): <> Yes, but the problem is that Kerry HIMSELF is in the position of the Jew or Muslim with regard to pig farming or the Adventist with regard to blood transfusions. I repeat: ?How could he possibly ignore that in his practical decisions on abortion?? I have never understood how a politician can be a member of a church that says abortion is homicide, yet insist that his commitment to the church will have no effect on his policies. If Kerry came right out and said, ?I disagree with the Church on this: abortion is NOT homicide,? that would make a lot more sense to me. But he seems to want to have his cake and eat it too. Would an Adventist who sincerely agreed with all the doctrines of his religion be a good person to put in charge of administering policies on blood transfusions? You wrote: <> Faith and not fact? What would you think of a politician who said, ?I consider murder a moral crime--but my opinion on that is just a matter of faith, not fact. I wouldn?t try to impose it on anybody.? Thanks for a very eloquent and thoughtful response, but I don?t think you?ve hit the main point. The various other issues Kerry raised, and which you discuss (his responsibility to ?represent all the people,? the unfairness of abortion being available to the rich and not to the poor, etc.) are irrelevant. (But to follow up on one of those digressions: if Kerry has to ?represent all the people,? that includes pro-lifers, right? So if the pro-lifers were in the majority, would he favor outlawing abortion? Is he implying that the issue should be decided by a mere opinion poll?) Like Bush, I find it hard to ?decipher? Kerry?s response to the question. Maybe that means I?m stupid too. Rob Masters From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Oct 12 15:05:18 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 23:05:18 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED0D@tpeex05> Thanks for the reply. I am seeking a theory that can explain the life and the universe (better to explain the meaning of life also). I found also the idea of David Bohm who talked about an integrated theory of mind and matter. Bohm's idea is quite interesting. There may be some similar principles between mind and matter. Seems that you are a physicist. Maybe you can comment. Thanks. Walter. ---------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Amara Graps Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 9:03 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy Walter_Chen at compal.com: >I have one question: Is Extropy related to any ideas from Seth or Jane >Roberts? :-) Well ... No to the _way_ that their ideas are discovered. I don't think that all of their ideas are in conflict though. I don't know enough of the ideas to be an authority on this topic, however. I just have read small passages at web sites .... >Are they in agreement or in conflict? The ideas, or the way that the ideas are acquired? As far-fetched as the Extropy ideas sound sometimes, the ideas don't include channeling as a viable way. Never mind, though. Every person is a potential teacher, and if you have some good filters, you can pick up some useful stuff. A couple of decades ago, I lived for some years with a guy who read alot of the Seth/Jane Roberts books, and I know that he was not crazy. He was a good filter for me too. I'll filter a few quotes for you from my own Extropian perspective (which could easily be different from another Extropian perspective, YMMV), if you want. I think that these are good from Seth/Jane Roberts: http://www.secretoflife.com/seth/s_quotes.html "Therefore, as always, make of this voice what you choose to make of it. Make of me what you choose to make of me, but recognize within yourselves the vitality of your being. And look to no man or no idea or no woman or no dogma, but the vitality of your own being, and trust it. And that which offends your soul, turn away from, but trust yourself" http://www.secretoflife.com/seth/s_quotes2.html "The self has no boundaries except those it accepts out of ignorance" "If you are in poor health, you can remedy it. If your personal relationships are unsatisfactory, you can change them for the better. If you are in poverty, you can find yourself surrounded by abundance... Each of you, regardless of position, status, circumstances, or physical condition, is in control or your own experience." "You must learn to listen to the voice of the inner self and work with it" "You create your reality according to your beliefs and expectations, therefore you should examine these carefully. If you do not like some aspect of your world, then examine your own expectations" 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/ *********************************************************************** "Treat people as if they are what they ought to be, and you will help them become what they are capable of being. --Ashleigh Brilliant _______________________________________________ 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 Oct 12 15:13:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:13:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Bush and Kerry on abortion funding In-Reply-To: <101220041444.11151.416BEDDD000595BA00002B8F2200763704C9C9C9970BB1@comcast.net> Message-ID: <20041012151352.14394.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Ody777 at comcast.net wrote: > > > Yes, but the problem is that Kerry HIMSELF is in the position of the > Jew or Muslim with regard to pig farming or the Adventist with regard > to blood transfusions. I repeat: ?How could he possibly ignore that > in his practical decisions on abortion?? > > I have never understood how a politician can be a member of a church > that says abortion is homicide, yet insist that his commitment to the > church will have no effect on his policies. If Kerry came right out > and said, ?I disagree with the Church on this: abortion is NOT > homicide,? that would make a lot more sense to me. But he seems to > want to have his cake and eat it too. This is the key problem that some here are either incognizant of or willfully ignoring: for a politician to ignore one of his own ethical principles demonstrates both a severe lack of the integrity that conservatives seek in a leader, and a distinct degree of hypocrisy, which liberals seem to deplore as the only valid sin in their ethos. Else, he is just lying about being a devout Catholic, which would not be anything new for a politician to claim. Now, I don't know of many religions which say that abortion is NOT homicide, they either say it is or that they do not know. They mostly all pretty much agree on that. What many disagree on is whether that homicide rises to the criminal level of manslaughter or murder. Many do recognise the principle of putting the mother's life first, a form of self defense, as a legitimate reason to abort, though many have legitimate concerns about it occuring during the third trimester or at birth. However, that is not what we are talking about with stem cell research. We are talking about small clusters of cells, when not even the most basic notochord has developed. It is pretty obvious that if destroying a fetus at any point is legitimate, doing so as a small cluster of cells is so. But we cannot force that opinion on others. If we are to hold to principles of individual liberty, and the sanctity of the individual mind against the intrusions of government, then it has to be accepted that any activity government engages in, short of national security, cannot be funded through force. When government starts dictating how people sin, through how their money is spent once it is confiscated by that government, then government dictates religious beliefs (or lack thereof) to all. Neither theism nor atheism can survive when individuals beliefs can be dictated by 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Tue Oct 12 16:41:06 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:41:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Science in K-12 Education Message-ID: <1097599266.7b2c0560namacdon@ole.augie.edu> >The shocking truth is that the *average* typical American >is a creationist! Or might as well be. Adventist historian >Ron Numbers, in his excellent book The Creationists, shows that >when people are randomly selected and given questionnaires about >evolution, their answers demonstrate so little basic understanding >of evolution, answers that are clearly and repeatedly self- >contradictory, it is almost meaningless to label the person either >creationist or evolutionist. Fellow Americans, we know not >jack about evolution. Sad. Mainly because scientific education in the K-12 years is abysmal. Science classes bore all but a few hard-core nerds to tears, quickly chasing them into service industry jobs, business, the arts, or technician-troll level CS work. Same goes for history, I might add- many of my fellow students don't see much "practical" reason to gain a solid foundation in real historical knowledge, and instead either ignore it completely, or embrace a picture of history imbibed in their Sunday-school classes. I didn't learn to appreciate science or history in my classes. I learned about both on my computer- playing SimEarth, SimLife, and Civilization... which lead me to reading Sagan, Dawkins, Gould, Diamond, and various historical works that were far more interesting than anything ever thrown at me in school. It's a damn shame that Maxis is busy making junk entertainment like "The Sims" rather than updating their amazing educational software. SimEarth, SimLife, and SimAnt not only taught ecology and genetics, but made it fun. Most "educational" software is designed for hand-holding and has, by definition, gained a bad reputation- not these games. We need more like them. -Nicq From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 12 17:16:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 10:16:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Science in K-12 Education In-Reply-To: <1097599266.7b2c0560namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Message-ID: <20041012171656.9113.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nicholas Anthony MacDonald wrote: > > Mainly because scientific education in the K-12 years is abysmal. > Science classes bore all but a few hard-core nerds to tears, quickly > chasing them into service industry jobs, business, the arts, or > technician-troll level CS work. Same goes for history, I might add- > many of my fellow students don't see much "practical" reason to gain > a solid foundation in real historical knowledge, and instead either > ignore it completely, or embrace a picture of history imbibed in > their Sunday-school classes. > Have you wondered why kids learn the history in the bible so well, but can't remember what state Lincoln was born in? It is primarily because of the lack of singing in public school, where such activity is either relegated to music class or seen as brainwashing. The educational establishment needs to accept that song is how human knowledge has been passed down verbally since early in our evolution. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 12 18:44:47 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:44:47 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... References: <20041012171656.9113.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000601c4b08b$8cf02e70$90be1b97@administxl09yj> It seems interesting. http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/kitp25/ Son et lumi?re! From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Oct 12 18:46:15 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:46:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Science in K-12 Education In-Reply-To: <1097599266.7b2c0560namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Message-ID: <20041012184615.52575.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nicholas Anthony MacDonald wrote: > I didn't learn to appreciate science or history in > my classes. I learned about both on my computer- > playing SimEarth, SimLife, and Civilization... which > lead me to reading Sagan, Dawkins, Gould, Diamond, > and various historical works that were far more > interesting than anything ever thrown at me in > school. It's a damn shame that Maxis is busy making > junk entertainment like "The Sims" rather than > updating their amazing educational software. > SimEarth, SimLife, and SimAnt not only taught > ecology and genetics, but made it fun. Most > "educational" software is designed for hand-holding > and has, by definition, gained a bad reputation- not > these games. We need more like them. And it's surprising that more schools aren't using these types of games as official cirriculum, since they do demonstrably teach certain concepts better than traditional methods. I still remember, in high school, a substitute teacher running a (non-computer) game that I later learned was similar to CONTACT/COTI. (Too bad I didn't stay in touch with the teacher, else I could have asked if this was deliberate.) Students were put in groups of 4-5, and asked to design a world that humans would colonize, including describing the initial colonist society (and how they got along with the native primitive sentients - and what those sentients were like). It was designed to get across the concept of thinking about how things interact - for instance, if the natives prefer seawater to freshwater, then they would logically prefer coastal land (conveniently leaving the inlands for humanity, assuming an Earth-like water cycle). But so far as I could tell, teachers trying ideas like that were denied tenure (and thus, a seat at the table when discussing changes to cirricula) precisely because they were trying ideas like that, regardless of how well they worked. From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com Tue Oct 12 19:00:44 2004 From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:00:44 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <00b101c4b00f$b5eb47f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <00b101c4b00f$b5eb47f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> Spike wrote: >The shocking truth is that the *average* typical American >is a creationist! Or might as well be. Adventist historian >Ron Numbers, in his excellent book The Creationists, shows that >when people are randomly selected and given questionnaires about >evolution, their answers demonstrate so little basic understanding >of evolution, answers that are clearly and repeatedly self- >contradictory, it is almost meaningless to label the person either >creationist or evolutionist. Fellow Americans, we know not >jack about evolution. Sad. > > An interesting question might be: In lieu of actual knowledge, is it better to have unjustified true belief or justified untrue belief (given a pop philosophical notion of justification [and knowledge])? I.e., who would you prefer, someone who believes evolution to be true (a true belief) but knows none of the arguments and none of the evidence, just the raw fact "evolution is true," or someone who believes creationism is true (an untrue belief) but has read the Bible from cover to cover and has a bookshelf full of books on creation science, intelligent design, etc? I submit that as long as the proles believe that evolution is true, the details don't matter. BM From amara.graps at gmail.com Tue Oct 12 19:18:47 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:18:47 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Science in K-12 Education Message-ID: Nicholas Anthony MacDonald: >Mainly because scientific education in the K-12 years is abysmal. >Science classes bore all but a few hard-core nerds to tears, quickly >chasing them into service industry jobs, business, the arts, And then they arrive in my class ... the disillusioned, the bored, the severely-math-challenged ... the curious, the fun-seeking, the I-can-take-the-world-by-the-tail, liberal arts youngsters who choose my Astronomy 100 class for their only Science class in their four years of university. Wanna join? :-) The next semester starts January 24. Amara (from last semester) http://www.amara.com/astro100/astro100syllabus.html -- 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Oct 12 19:33:17 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 12:33:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <20041012193317.72612.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Bryan Moss wrote: > An interesting question might be: In lieu of actual > knowledge, is it > better to have unjustified true belief or justified > untrue belief (given > a pop philosophical notion of justification [and > knowledge])? I.e., who > would you prefer, someone who believes evolution to > be true (a true > belief) but knows none of the arguments and none of > the evidence, just > the raw fact "evolution is true," or someone who > believes creationism is > true (an untrue belief) but has read the Bible from > cover to cover and > has a bookshelf full of books on creation science, > intelligent design, etc? > > I submit that as long as the proles believe that > evolution is true, the > details don't matter. How about: they don't necessarily have the justification on hand and memorized, but they know where and how they can find it should it become an issue. Everyone has thus far had only a finite time to learn things, and not everyone is a biologist, educator, or some other profession where the details of evolution matter. But if they are challenged by those who preach untruth, they should know how to form defenses against it as needed (and not to accept the new thing as fact until after checking it out, and seeing what others have to say about it). From sentience at pobox.com Tue Oct 12 20:36:57 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:36:57 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> References: <00b101c4b00f$b5eb47f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <416C4069.9060403@pobox.com> Bryan Moss wrote: > > An interesting question might be: In lieu of actual knowledge, is it > better to have unjustified true belief or justified untrue belief (given > a pop philosophical notion of justification [and knowledge])? I.e., who > would you prefer, someone who believes evolution to be true (a true > belief) but knows none of the arguments and none of the evidence, just > the raw fact "evolution is true," or someone who believes creationism is > true (an untrue belief) but has read the Bible from cover to cover and > has a bookshelf full of books on creation science, intelligent design, etc? I would account this as negative knowledge or anti-knowledge, making it more difficult to absorb the real details when it comes time to learn them. I prefer the blank slate, not because blind belief in evolution counts for much, but because it will be easier for the one to learn real science later. In Bayesian terms, confessed ignorance is better than a strong confidence in an incorrect prediction. It *is* possible to do worse than a hypothesis of maximum entropy, though only humans and contemporary AI programs perform so poorly that you can increase performance by injecting noise into the algorithms. > I submit that as long as the proles believe that evolution is true, the > details don't matter. Proles? I suppose that as long as you believe that, it isn't worth my time to try and explain my own lofty position to you. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Tue Oct 12 20:51:35 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 15:51:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Science in K-12 Education Message-ID: <1097614295.7a108be0namacdon@ole.augie.edu> >And then they arrive in my class ... the disillusioned, the bored, the >severely-math-challenged ... the curious, the fun-seeking, the >I-can-take-the-world-by-the-tail, liberal arts youngsters who choose my >Astronomy 100 class for their only Science class in their four years of >university. >Wanna join? :-) Sounds like fun, though I'll have to pass. :) I already handled my undergrad science requirements in the honors chem and bio section, grinding in the lab alongside the premed majors... no "biology for liberal arts majors" or "rocks for jocks" for me, thank you very much... -Nicq From sjatkins at gmail.com Tue Oct 12 21:36:08 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:36:08 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [Atheist-Politics] Ignorance Isn't Strength In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008175710.02151030@popmail.voicenet.com> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041008175710.02151030@popmail.voicenet.com> Message-ID: <948b11e04101214364582e11a@mail.gmail.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gene Ehrich Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2004 17:58:19 -0400 Subject: [Atheist-Politics] Ignorance Isn't Strength To: Atheist Politics , politics-for-elders at yahoogroups.com, opinions-without-malice at yahoogroups.com October 8, 2004 OP-ED COLUMNIST Ignorance Isn't Strength By PAUL KRUGMAN first used the word "Orwellian" to describe the Bush team in October 2000. Even then it was obvious that George W. Bush surrounds himself with people who insist that up is down, and ignorance is strength. But the full costs of his denial of reality are only now becoming clear. President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney have an unparalleled ability to insulate themselves from inconvenient facts. They lead a party that controls all three branches of government, and face news media that in some cases are partisan supporters, and in other cases are reluctant to state plainly that officials aren't telling the truth. They also still enjoy the residue of the faith placed in them after 9/11. This has allowed them to engage in what Orwell called "reality control." In the world according to the Bush administration, our leaders are infallible, and their policies always succeed. If the facts don't fit that assumption, they just deny the facts. As a political strategy, reality control has worked very well. But as a strategy for governing, it has led to predictable disaster. When leaders live in an invented reality, they do a bad job of dealing with real reality. In the last few days we've seen some impressive demonstrations of reality control at work. During the debate on Tuesday, Mr. Cheney insisted that "I have not suggested there's a connection between Iraq and 9/11." After the release of the Duelfer report, which shows that Saddam's weapons capabilities were deteriorating, not advancing, at the time of the invasion, Mr. Cheney declared that the report proved that "delay, defer, wait wasn't an option." From a political point of view, such exercises in denial have been very successful. For example, the Bush administration has managed to convince many people that its tax cuts, which go primarily to the wealthiest few percent of the population, are populist measures benefiting middle-class families and small businesses. (Under the administration's definition, anyone with "business income" - a group that includes Dick Cheney and George Bush - is a struggling small-business owner.) The administration has also managed to convince at least some people that its economic record, which includes the worst employment performance in 70 years, is a great success, and that the economy is "strong and getting stronger." (The data to be released today, which are expected to improve the numbers a bit, won't change the basic picture of a dismal four years.) Officials have even managed to convince many people that they are moving forward on environmental policy. They boast of their "Clear Skies" plan even as the inspector general of the E.P.A. declares that the enforcement of existing air-quality rules has collapsed. But the political ability of the Bush administration to deny reality - to live in an invented world in which everything is the way officials want it to be - has led to an ongoing disaster in Iraq and looming disaster elsewhere. How did the occupation of Iraq go so wrong? (The security situation has deteriorated to the point where there are no safe places: a bomb was discovered on Tuesday in front of a popular restaurant inside the Green Zone.) The insulation of officials from reality is central to the story. They wanted to believe Ahmad Chalabi's promises that we'd be welcomed with flowers; nobody could tell them different. They wanted to believe - months after everyone outside the administration realized that we were facing a large, dangerous insurgency and needed more troops - that the attackers were a handful of foreign terrorists and Baathist dead-enders; nobody could tell them different. Why did the economy perform so badly? Long after it was obvious to everyone outside the administration that the tax-cut strategy wasn't an effective way of creating jobs, administration officials kept promising huge job gains, any day now. Nobody could tell them different. Why has the pursuit of terrorists been so unsuccessful? It has been obvious for years that John Ashcroft isn't just scary; he's also scarily incompetent. But inside the administration, he's considered the man for the job - and nobody can say different. The point is that in the real world, as opposed to the political world, ignorance isn't strength. A leader who has the political power to pretend that he's infallible, and uses that power to avoid ever admitting mistakes, eventually makes mistakes so large that they can't be covered up. And that's what's happening to Mr. Bush. E-mail: krugman at nytimes.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ________________________________ Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Atheist-Politics/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: Atheist-Politics-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 12 21:43:14 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:43:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: [Atheist-Politics] Ignorance Isn't Strength In-Reply-To: <948b11e04101214364582e11a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041012214314.2930.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Gene Ehrich > For example, the Bush administration has managed to > convince many people that its tax cuts, which go primarily to the > wealthiest few percent of the population, are populist measures > benefiting middle-class families and small businesses. http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20041011/pl_afp/nobel_economics_us_taxes_041011212152 Nobel laureate calls for steeper tax cuts in US Mon Oct 11, 5:21 PM ET Politics - AFP WASHINGTON (AFP) - Edward Prescott, who picked up the Nobel Prize for Economics, said President George W. Bush (news - web sites)'s tax rate cuts were "pretty small" and should have been bigger. "What Bush has done has been not very big, it's pretty small," Prescott told CNBC financial news television. "Tax rates were not cut enough," he said. Lower tax rates provided an incentive to work, Prescott said. Prescott and Norwegian Finn Kydland won the 2004 Nobel Economics Prize for research into the forces behind business cycles. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Oct 12 23:53:10 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 07:53:10 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED0F@tpeex05> Really interesting! Are there any other text files (such as .pdf; not audio files) we can download to read? 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: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 2:45 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... It seems interesting. http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/kitp25/ Son et lumi?re! _______________________________________________ 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 hal at finney.org Tue Oct 12 23:59:30 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 16:59:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... Message-ID: <20041012235930.BA73857E2A@finney.org> Scerir pointed to: > http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/kitp25/ But he didn't say what it is the future of... It is a conference on The Future of Physics! And it was held at UC Santa Barbara, just a couple of miles from where I live. I did not try to crash it, but there was quite a bit in the local news about it this weekend because the director of the UCSB Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics is David Gross, who just won the Nobel Prize for his work on quantum theory. The conference program has audio and video of the talks available to download, as well as the slides in an easy-to-view format. Most of them appear to be very technical however. I watched one of the first ones, Where do we Stand? by Steven Weinberg. It was a summary of the current state of physics. Most of it was over my head but I was surprised that he spent about ten minutes on the anthropic principle, its implications and applications. Anthropic reasoning in physics is anything that is built around the assumption that conditions have to be such that observers can exist to observe them. The example given by Weinberg is the size of the cosmological constant, which is equivalent (or at least related) to the inherent gravitational energy of the vacuum. It turns out that this energy density is about the same as the energy density of the matter of the universe, but there is no known theoretical reason to explain this rough match. In fact current theory does little to constrain the vacuum energy density and this would suggest that it would more plausibly be extremely high, at black-hole density levels. However, if it were much higher than we observe it at, the universe as we know it could not have existed for long enough for stars to form and life to evolve. If you imagine that there are a lot of universes and they each have a random vacuum energy density, then in most of them life will never form. Only in the ones where it is about the size that we actually see could life evolve. This can be viewed as a sort of explanation of why the cosmological constant is the size it is. Weinberg went on to mention that many physicists hate anthropic reasoning, including Gross, the Nobelist who runs the Institute. They want to hold out hope that physics will advance to the point that it can explain exactly why the cosmological constant has the value it does, along with other such values. The idea of saying that it was essentially an accident is not acceptable to them. However Weinberg explained that physicists might have to lower their sights and accept that some things just can't be explained by theory. He pointed out that his had happened in the past. At one time, European scientists thought that the arrangement of the continents on the Earth ought to follow some simple geometrical rules. When Columbus was planning his voyage to Asia there were those who tried to use simple symmetry arguments to argue about the size of the oceans based on the known size of Asia. Another famous case was Kepler's attempt to explain the sizes of the planetary orbits using regular solids of various types, nesting solids and spheres together in different ways to try to make them come out to the sizes of the orbits. Today we know that the positions of the continents, and the spacings of the planets, have no such simple explanations, and are essentially accidental outcomes of complex processes. It might be, Weinberg suggested, that the cosmological constant and perhaps some other physical constants could turn out the same. I find anthropic reasoning fascinating because of its connection to the possibility that other universes exist, and in particular the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics which suggests that these other worlds include ones that have alternate versions of ourselves. Cosmologists tend to be more open to the MWI than most physicists, because they have to deal with an early universe that had no conscious observers around to make measurements, which keeps them from using certain alternative quantum interpretations. If you look at the slides for James Hartle's talk at the conference, , you see this laid out explicitly. He concludes, "We are all Schrodinger Cats in Hawking's wave function of the universe." That's pretty cool! Hal From Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Oct 13 01:40:33 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:40:33 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED11@tpeex05> Another interpretation is from Bohm: *************************************** A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter (http://members.aol.com/Mszlazak/BOHM.html) - an article by David Bohm. ABSTRACT: The relationship of mind and matter is approached in a new way in this article. This approach is based on the causal interpretation of the quantum theory, in which an electron, for example, is regarded as an inseparable union of a particle and a field. This field has, however, some new properties that can be seen to be the main sources of the differences between the quantum theory and the classical (Newtonian) theory. These new properties suggest that the field may be regarded as containing objective and active information, and that the activity of this information is similar in certain key ways to the activity of information in our ordinary subjective experience. The analogy between mind and matter is thus fairly close. This analogy leads to the proposal of the general outlines of a new theory of mind, matter, and their relationship, in which the basic notion is participation rather than interaction. Although the theory, can be developed mathematically in more detail the main emphasis here is to show qualitatively how it provides a way of thinking that does not divide mind from matter, and thus leads to a more coherent understanding of such questions than is possible in the common dualistic and reductionistic approaches. These ideas may be relevant to connectionist theories and might perhaps suggest new directions for their development. ... ... The question of the relationship of mind and matter has already been explored to some extent in some of my earlier work in physics (Bohm, 1980). In this work, which was originally aimed at understanding relativity and quantum theory on a basis common to both, I developed the notion of the enfolded or implicate order. The essential feature of this idea was that the whole universe is in some way enfolded in everything and that each thing is enfolded in the whole. From this it follows that in some way, and to some degree everything enfolds or implicates everything, but in such a manner that under typical conditions of ordinary experience, there is a great deal of relative independence of things. The basic proposal is then that this enfoldment relationship is not merely passive or superficial. Rather, it is active and essential to what each thing is. It follows that each thing, is internally related to the whole, and therefore, to everything else. The external relationships are then displayed in the unfolded or explicate order in which each thing is seen, as has already indeed been indicated, as relatively separate and extended, and related only externally to other things. The explicate order, which dominates ordinary experience as well as classical (Newtonian) physics, thus appears to stand by itself. But actually, it cannot be understood properly apart from its ground in the primary reality of the implicate order. ... ************************************************************ Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of hal at finney.org Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 8:00 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] the future of ... Scerir pointed to: > http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/kitp25/ But he didn't say what it is the future of... It is a conference on The Future of Physics! And it was held at UC Santa Barbara, just a couple of miles from where I live. I did not try to crash it, but there was quite a bit in the local news about it this weekend because the director of the UCSB Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics is David Gross, who just won the Nobel Prize for his work on quantum theory. The conference program has audio and video of the talks available to download, as well as the slides in an easy-to-view format. Most of them appear to be very technical however. I watched one of the first ones, Where do we Stand? by Steven Weinberg. It was a summary of the current state of physics. Most of it was over my head but I was surprised that he spent about ten minutes on the anthropic principle, its implications and applications. Anthropic reasoning in physics is anything that is built around the assumption that conditions have to be such that observers can exist to observe them. The example given by Weinberg is the size of the cosmological constant, which is equivalent (or at least related) to the inherent gravitational energy of the vacuum. It turns out that this energy density is about the same as the energy density of the matter of the universe, but there is no known theoretical reason to explain this rough match. In fact current theory does little to constrain the vacuum energy density and this would suggest that it would more plausibly be extremely high, at black-hole density levels. However, if it were much higher than we observe it at, the universe as we know it could not have existed for long enough for stars to form and life to evolve. If you imagine that there are a lot of universes and they each have a random vacuum energy density, then in most of them life will never form. Only in the ones where it is about the size that we actually see could life evolve. This can be viewed as a sort of explanation of why the cosmological constant is the size it is. Weinberg went on to mention that many physicists hate anthropic reasoning, including Gross, the Nobelist who runs the Institute. They want to hold out hope that physics will advance to the point that it can explain exactly why the cosmological constant has the value it does, along with other such values. The idea of saying that it was essentially an accident is not acceptable to them. However Weinberg explained that physicists might have to lower their sights and accept that some things just can't be explained by theory. He pointed out that his had happened in the past. At one time, European scientists thought that the arrangement of the continents on the Earth ought to follow some simple geometrical rules. When Columbus was planning his voyage to Asia there were those who tried to use simple symmetry arguments to argue about the size of the oceans based on the known size of Asia. Another famous case was Kepler's attempt to explain the sizes of the planetary orbits using regular solids of various types, nesting solids and spheres together in different ways to try to make them come out to the sizes of the orbits. Today we know that the positions of the continents, and the spacings of the planets, have no such simple explanations, and are essentially accidental outcomes of complex processes. It might be, Weinberg suggested, that the cosmological constant and perhaps some other physical constants could turn out the same. I find anthropic reasoning fascinating because of its connection to the possibility that other universes exist, and in particular the Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics which suggests that these other worlds include ones that have alternate versions of ourselves. Cosmologists tend to be more open to the MWI than most physicists, because they have to deal with an early universe that had no conscious observers around to make measurements, which keeps them from using certain alternative quantum interpretations. If you look at the slides for James Hartle's talk at the conference, , you see this laid out explicitly. He concludes, "We are all Schrodinger Cats in Hawking's wave function of the universe." That's pretty cool! 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Oct 13 02:04:39 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:04:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED11@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED11@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041012205725.01a3bec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> > >Another interpretation is from Bohm: >*************************************** >A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter >(http://members.aol.com/Mszlazak/BOHM.html) >- an article by David Bohm. Well, not quite *new*: Bohm has been dead for 12 years. These topics are probably more relevant to this list than the political rants are, but newcomers to the list should be aware that they have been talked to death here over the years. A good place to start searching the history might be Anders Sandberg's huge repository of fact and fun at http://www.nada.kth.se/~asa/ See also essays by Nick Bostrom at http://www.nickbostrom.com/ and Eliezer Yudkowsky's endlessly updated analysis of the world and AI at http://yudkowsky.net/beyond.html and other transhumanist sites. Damien Broderick From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 13 02:12:56 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 03:12:56 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century Message-ID: <20041013021256.11737.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> It's foolishness to think anyone in Bush's position has regard for embryos; third semester fetuses, perhaps, but not microscopic cells. Bush isn't a theologian or philosopher, he is a politician... politicians want power even more than life itself. Which segues into the main fault line of libertarianism: the sad fact is we want power more than self-ownership. The will to power is vastly more important to most than liberty. You are doing what you believe in being libertarians, in using FSP to attempt to change New Hampshire, and you can have fun doing it. Yet the time frame is longer than you think. Libertarianism is a 22nd century, not 21st century, philosophy. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sahynepu at concentric.net Wed Oct 13 02:35:01 2004 From: sahynepu at concentric.net (Sahyinepu) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 21:35:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <7B4C5817-1CC0-11D9-9F17-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> 1. Perpetual Progress 2. Rational Thinking 3. Self-Direction 4. Self-Transformation 5. Intelligent Technology 6. Open Society 7. Practical Optimism On Monday, October 11, 2004, at 01:37 PM, Hal Finney wrote: > We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are useless > and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate > traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, > moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try to > tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. > > Along these lines I thought it might be useful to have a little > refresher > on what we are about. Extropianism has gone through considerable > change in the past few years. The very words have changed: extropianism > and extropians are out; extropy and transhumanism are in. We used to > communicate via the extropians list; it is now extropy-chat. What used > to be called the Extropian Principles are now the Principles of > Extropy. > I'm not sure what word to use any more to address subscribers to this > list. > > However much has stayed the same, and the new Principles of Extropy > look > pretty familiar, from (where > longer > discussions of each one are available too): > > : The Principles of Extropy in Brief > : > : Perpetual Progress > : > : Extropy means seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and effectiveness, > : an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, > : biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. > : Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and possibilities > : as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in > healthy > : directions without bound. > : > : Self-Transformation > : > : Extropy means affirming continual ethical, intellectual, and > : physical self-improvement, through critical and creative thinking, > : perpetual learning, personal responsibility, proactivity, and > : experimentation. Using technology - in the widest sense to seek > : physiological and neurological augmentation along with emotional and > : psychological refinement. > : > : Practical Optimism > : > : Extropy means fueling action with positive expectations - individuals > : and organizations being tirelessly proactive. Adopting a rational, > : action-based optimism or "proaction", in place of both blind faith > and > : stagnant pessimism. > : > : Intelligent Technology > : > : Extropy means designing and managing technologies not as ends in > : themselves but as effective means for improving life. Applying > science > : and technology creatively and courageously to transcend "natural" > : but harmful, confining qualities derived from our biological > heritage, > : culture, and environment. > : > : Open Society > : > : Extropy means supporting social orders that foster freedom of > : communication, freedom of action, experimentation, innovation, > : questioning, and learning. Opposing authoritarian social control and > : unnecessary hierarchy and favoring the rule of law and > decentralization > : of power and responsibility. Preferring bargaining over battling, > : exchange over extortion, and communication over compulsion. Openness > : to improvement rather than a static utopia. Extropia ("ever-receding > : stretch goals for society") over utopia ("no place"). > : > : Self-Direction > : > : Extropy means valuing independent thinking, individual freedom, > personal > : responsibility, self-direction, self-respect, and a parallel respect > : for others. > : > : Rational Thinking > : > : Extropy means favoring reason over blind faith and questioning over > : dogma. It means understanding, experimenting, learning, challenging, > : and innovating rather than clinging to beliefs. > > > In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I > thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 Principles > of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how important > you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part of > your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you agree > with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. > Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. > > To get the ball rolling I will put them in order for me: > > 1. Rational Thinking > 2. Self-Direction > 3. Open Society > 4. Intelligent Technology > 5. Self Transformation > 6. Perpetual Progress > 7. Practical Optimism > > For a brief discussion, rational thinking is very important to me as a > basic method for dealing with life. Self direction and open society > are consistent with my individualistic political philosophy. I am > always interested in new technologies and their possible future uses. > Self transformation and perpetual progress are more long term goals as > we develop new technologies. Likewise practical optimism is a useful > guideline but doesn't come into play much on a day to day basis. > > If enough people are interested we could try combining our results into > an overall ranking of the Principles. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 13 02:41:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 19:41:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013021256.11737.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013024124.42930.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > It's foolishness to think anyone in Bush's position > has regard for embryos; third semester fetuses, > perhaps, but not microscopic cells. Bush isn't a > theologian or philosopher, he is a politician... > politicians want power even more than life itself. Bush is also a born again christian. If you don't know any such people of that type personally, you have no hope of comprehending where they come from. Frankly, you haven't demonstrated to me in any sort of way that Bush keeping government funding out of stem cell research helps in any way to keep a hold on power. > Which segues into the main fault line of > libertarianism: the sad fact is we want power more > than self-ownership. The will to power is vastly more > important to most than liberty. The will to power is a sad substitute that most feel is their only option because they are denied liberty. > You are doing what you > believe in being libertarians, in using FSP to attempt > to change New Hampshire, and you can have fun doing > it. Yet the time frame is longer than you think. > Libertarianism is a 22nd century, not 21st century, philosophy. Thinking that it takes a century, in the information age, for a political philosophy to ascend is so 19th century. By 2010, NH will have a Libertarian Governor. By 2015 the Red Sox will move across the NH border. By 2020 the NH economy will be growing at least twice as fast as any other state in the US, and other states will start figuring out that their states suck because they are not doing what we are doing. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 13 03:16:38 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 04:16:38 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013024124.42930.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013031638.43689.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Second & third trimester unborn children (or fetuses) are certainly quite important to Bush and other born again christians, however cells in a lab are a very low priority for anyone but religious extremists. Does anyone actually shed tears for tiny cells? That is very hard to believe. It's not Bush's position on federal funding of stem cell research that concerns me most, it is his hankering after power. Bush was trained as a businessman, then later he was trained as a politician, Bush is an ambitious self seeker motivated by money & power not so much for himself but for his family, secondarily for the Republican party; tertiary in Bush's estimation is the conservative movement as a whole. The Bush administration is not a non profit organisation, the Republican Party is not a charity. These are not soft-headed nuns or monks weeping in front of an altar for zygotes. > Bush is also a born again christian. If you don't > know any such people > of that type personally, you have no hope of > comprehending where they > come from. Frankly, you haven't demonstrated to me > in any sort of way > that Bush keeping government funding out of stem > cell research helps in > any way to keep a hold on power. > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Oct 13 03:47:02 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:47:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013031638.43689.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041013024124.42930.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> <20041013031638.43689.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041012223700.01a61640@pop-server.satx.rr.com> > Does >anyone actually shed tears for tiny cells? That is >very hard to believe. This is surely a pragmatic refutation--and one of my personal favorites--of all the hand-wringing. Does anyone call for the baptism of blastocysts before they are opened up for their stem cells? Are the dear little remains given proper Christian burial, with service and weeping relatives? If the blastocyst is severed into cells, each of which is totipotent and therefore potentially a separate individual human person (presumably with its own soul), is each portion given a *separate* ceremonial burial, with its own tombstone? These might strike devout Christians as grisly, blasphemous and grossly unseemly questions, but I'm certain Thomas Aquinas and his tonsured colleagues sat up late into the candle-lit night tussling with similar ridiculous profundities. George Bush, meanwhile, surely hops instead into bed for a good snooze, and the bishops and prelates assembled do the same, celibately of course. Damien Broderick From amara.graps at gmail.com Wed Oct 13 05:13:16 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 07:13:16 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] US Justice Dept. wants new antipiracy powers Message-ID: >From boing-boing (http://www.boingboing.net/) : "At a press conference in Los Angeles today, Atttorney General John Ashcroft announced an expansion of Department of Justice powers to combat intellectual property theft. Some say the approach appears to be modeled after the war on drugs." and then to the source: http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5406654.html Justice Dept. wants new antipiracy powers By Declan McCullagh CNET News.com October 12, 2004, 4:42 PM PT The U.S. Justice Department recommended a sweeping transformation of the nation's intellectual-property laws, saying peer-to-peer piracy is a "widespread" problem that can be addressed only through more spending, more FBI agents and more power for prosecutors. In an extensive report released Tuesday, senior department officials endorsed a pair of controversial copyright bills strongly favored by the entertainment industry that would criminalize "passive sharing" on file-swapping networks and permit lawsuits against companies that sell products that "induce" copyright infringement. "The department is prepared to build the strongest, most aggressive legal assault against intellectual-property crime in our nation's history," Attorney General John Ashcroft, who created the task force in March, said at a press conference in Los Angeles on Tuesday afternoon. In an example of the Justice Department's hunger for new copyright-related police powers, the report asks Congress to introduce legislation that would permit wiretaps to be used in investigating serious intellectual-property offenses and that would create a new crime of the "importation" of pirated products. It also suggests stationing FBI agents and prosecutors in Hong Kong and Budapest, Hungary, to aid local officials and "develop training programs on intellectual-property enforcement." [see article for more] From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Wed Oct 13 05:27:36 2004 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 22:27:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <20041012193317.72612.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013052737.41614.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> *MYSTICISM ALERT!* Is rational thought the result of evolution or is evolution the result of rational thought? No matter how accurate your maps are they never become the territory they represent. Creationism and evolution are both ridiculously low resolution maps of the ultimate truth. To think otherwise is just conceit. If mankind were to create life in a test tube tomorrow this would be just as much evidence for Intelligent Design perhaps more so than for abiogenesis. After all you are merely showing that the purposeful creation of life is statistically more likely than the accidental development thereof. I think the real question is whether you believe in infinity. If you do then the infinite recursion of creationism is no longer a paradox. The rational mind is merely a tool to simulate certain aspects of what IS. The question is is this rationality a property of your mind or the property of the universe as a whole? ===== The Avantguardian "He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind." __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From sentience at pobox.com Wed Oct 13 05:48:25 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 01:48:25 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <20041013052737.41614.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041013052737.41614.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <416CC1A9.6000008@pobox.com> The Avantguardian wrote: > Creationism and evolution > are both ridiculously low resolution maps of the > ultimate truth. Suppose I flip, one million times, a coin biased toward 90% heads. To say that the coin comes up heads 9 times out of 10 is a ridiculously low-resolution map compared to the actual sequence. In Bayesian terms, the final probability our hypothesis assigns to the actual sequence will probably be around ((0.9)^900,000)*((0.1)^100,000), an infinitesimally tiny number. This tiny number is a terribly long way from 1.0, the unattainable Truth, the score of correctly stating the exact sequence in advance as your sole prediction. Nonetheless, the hypothesis that the coin comes up heads 1 time out of 10, also a ridiculously low-resolution map, scores far worse than the hypothesis that the coin comes up heads 9 times out of 10. The 1/10 hypothesis will score far worse than the hypothesis of maximum entropy (that we are entirely uncertain, 50/50, whether the coin comes up head or tails on any given flip). And so creationism and evolution are both ridiculously low-resolution maps, but evolution scores vastly better than the hypothesis of maximum entropy while creationism scores vastly worse. In an uncertain universe, this is the closest we come to defining a "correct hypothesis" and "incorrect hypothesis". -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From scerir at libero.it Wed Oct 13 06:36:00 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 08:36:00 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the future of ... References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED11@tpeex05> Message-ID: <006b01c4b0ef$07e77c60$19b51b97@administxl09yj> Walter wrote: > Another interpretation is from Bohm: > 'A new theory of the relationship > of mind and matter' If you wish to read what the problem is there (because of linearity) try http://kh.bu.edu/qcl/pdf/albert_d1983066c6d7c.pdf [Caveat: Albert is/was a 'manyworlder', so holomovements, wholeness, quantum potentials in polar form, and related non-linearities are out, in his paper] s. "We do not see the world as it is, we see the world as we are" - The Talmud From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 13 12:26:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 05:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013031638.43689.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013122613.58991.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Second & third trimester unborn children (or fetuses) > are certainly quite important to Bush and other born > again christians, however cells in a lab are a very > low priority for anyone but religious extremists. Does > anyone actually shed tears for tiny cells? That is > very hard to believe. I know people who have named miscarried fetuses and even had them buried with headstones, and they were not even what I'd call bible thumpers, so apparently your mind isn't quite that open. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Oct 13 13:53:09 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 09:53:09 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century Message-ID: <62790-220041031313539592@M2W031.mail2web.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Second & third trimester unborn children (or fetuses) > are certainly quite important to Bush and other born > again christians, however cells in a lab are a very > low priority for anyone but religious extremists. Does > anyone actually shed tears for tiny cells? That is > very hard to believe. Yes. Having had an eutopic pregnancy and fought for my own life as well during this mishap, I will say that tears are indeed shed. Natasha Vita-More -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 13 14:53:31 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 07:53:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <7B4C5817-1CC0-11D9-9F17-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20041013145331.5316.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> I would argue that, in keeping with Moore's Law, that it is time for some consideration for crafting version 4 of the Principles. I've been thinking a bit about it recently, and here are my own ideas... 1. Unbound Progress - Regulation and restraint upon the development, expansion, and survival of humanity is tantamount to murder or genocide. 2. Self-Production (combines 3 & 4) - That the individual has ultimate control over their own standards and practices of direction, transformation, reproduction, and state of existence. No outside entity may override these save to prevent them from infringing on the standards and practices of other individuals. 3. Consilient Intelligence - The merging of intelligent technologies and intelligent biologies, within open and free markets. 4. Open Privacy - Every individual sentient has ultimate command over what degree to which they are exposed to and influential upon, the rest of society. The more influence an individual has upon, or seeks to have upon, society, the more incumbent it is for them to operate with an 'open hands' policy. 5. Diligent Optimism - An attitude of optimism which allows no oxymoronic cynicist restraints of "pragmatism" or "practicality" but is guided by an eye to that which is most diligently effective toward the acheivement of the other Principles. 6- Reasoned Intelligence - Reasoned thought outweighs rationalizations, excuses, and faulty or circular logic. Proper reasoning does not self contradict itself or objective reality. --- Sahyinepu wrote: > 1. Perpetual Progress > 2. Rational Thinking > 3. Self-Direction > 4. Self-Transformation > 5. Intelligent Technology > 6. Open Society > 7. Practical Optimism > > On Monday, October 11, 2004, at 01:37 PM, Hal Finney wrote: > > > We have a lot of political posts here, which in my opinion are > useless > > and off topic. There are any number of places on the net to debate > > traditional politics: liberal vs conservative, left wing vs right, > > moderate vs extreme. If we have to debate politics, we should try > to > > tie the issues back to something specific to this mailing list. > > > > Along these lines I thought it might be useful to have a little > > refresher > > on what we are about. Extropianism has gone through considerable > > change in the past few years. The very words have changed: > extropianism > > and extropians are out; extropy and transhumanism are in. We used > to > > communicate via the extropians list; it is now extropy-chat. What > used > > to be called the Extropian Principles are now the Principles of > > Extropy. > > I'm not sure what word to use any more to address subscribers to > this > > list. > > > > However much has stayed the same, and the new Principles of Extropy > > > look > > pretty familiar, from > (where > > longer > > discussions of each one are available too): > > > > : The Principles of Extropy in Brief > > : > > : Perpetual Progress > > : > > : Extropy means seeking more intelligence, wisdom, and > effectiveness, > > : an open-ended lifespan, and the removal of political, cultural, > > : biological, and psychological limits to continuing development. > > : Perpetually overcoming constraints on our progress and > possibilities > > : as individuals, as organizations, and as a species. Growing in > > healthy > > : directions without bound. > > : > > : Self-Transformation > > : > > : Extropy means affirming continual ethical, intellectual, and > > : physical self-improvement, through critical and creative > thinking, > > : perpetual learning, personal responsibility, proactivity, and > > : experimentation. Using technology - in the widest sense to seek > > : physiological and neurological augmentation along with emotional > and > > : psychological refinement. > > : > > : Practical Optimism > > : > > : Extropy means fueling action with positive expectations - > individuals > > : and organizations being tirelessly proactive. Adopting a > rational, > > : action-based optimism or "proaction", in place of both blind > faith > > and > > : stagnant pessimism. > > : > > : Intelligent Technology > > : > > : Extropy means designing and managing technologies not as ends in > > : themselves but as effective means for improving life. Applying > > science > > : and technology creatively and courageously to transcend "natural" > > : but harmful, confining qualities derived from our biological > > heritage, > > : culture, and environment. > > : > > : Open Society > > : > > : Extropy means supporting social orders that foster freedom of > > : communication, freedom of action, experimentation, innovation, > > : questioning, and learning. Opposing authoritarian social control > and > > : unnecessary hierarchy and favoring the rule of law and > > decentralization > > : of power and responsibility. Preferring bargaining over battling, > > : exchange over extortion, and communication over compulsion. > Openness > > : to improvement rather than a static utopia. Extropia > ("ever-receding > > : stretch goals for society") over utopia ("no place"). > > : > > : Self-Direction > > : > > : Extropy means valuing independent thinking, individual freedom, > > personal > > : responsibility, self-direction, self-respect, and a parallel > respect > > : for others. > > : > > : Rational Thinking > > : > > : Extropy means favoring reason over blind faith and questioning > over > > : dogma. It means understanding, experimenting, learning, > challenging, > > : and innovating rather than clinging to beliefs. > > > > > > In order to get people to think about these principles a bit, I > > thought it might be fun to take a poll. Try to rank the 7 > Principles > > of Extropy in order of how much you agree with them and how > important > > you think they are. Those that are, or could be, an important part > of > > your personal philosophy you would rank high. Others that you > agree > > with but seem like rather obvious platitudes could be ranked lower. > > Any that you think are questionable or harmful would come last. > > > > To get the ball rolling I will put them in order for me: > > > > 1. Rational Thinking > > 2. Self-Direction > > 3. Open Society > > 4. Intelligent Technology > > 5. Self Transformation > > 6. Perpetual Progress > > 7. Practical Optimism > > > > For a brief discussion, rational thinking is very important to me > as a > > basic method for dealing with life. Self direction and open > society > > are consistent with my individualistic political philosophy. I am > > always interested in new technologies and their possible future > uses. > > Self transformation and perpetual progress are more long term goals > as > > we develop new technologies. Likewise practical optimism is a > useful > > guideline but doesn't come into play much on a day to day basis. > > > > If enough people are interested we could try combining our results > into > > an overall ranking of the Principles. > > > > Hal > > _______________________________________________ > > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Oct 13 16:07:54 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:07:54 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <62790-220041031313539592@M2W031.mail2web.com> References: <62790-220041031313539592@M2W031.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013105654.019ec650@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 09:53 AM 10/13/2004 -0400, Natasha wrote: >--- Trend Ologist wrote: > > > Second & third trimester unborn children (or fetuses) > > are certainly quite important to Bush and other born > > again christians, Note the above qualification > > however cells in a lab are a very > > low priority for anyone but religious extremists. Does > > anyone actually shed tears for tiny cells? That is > > very hard to believe. > >Yes. Having had an eutopic [ectopic?] pregnancy and fought for my own >life as well >during this mishap, I will say that tears are indeed shed. and Mike commented: >I know people who have named miscarried fetuses and even had them >buried with headstones, and they were not even what I'd call bible >thumpers Spontaneous abortion of foetuses more than several months developed can certainly be shattering, especially when a baby is desperately sought. But I think the point Trend and I were making is that it's extremely unlikely that this emotional attachment carries over to a clump of a hundred or so cells on a petri dish. The `miscarried fetuses' Mike mentions were surely not salvaged somehow within a week of conception and tearfully laid to rest with full ceremony? The only exception I can think of is the failure of an early implanted in vitro conceptus, where so much anxiety and uncomfortable preparation has been expended by the hopeful, hormone-drenched mother-to-be, and that's almost exactly a counter-instance because of its special and `unnaturally' induced physical prelude. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Oct 13 16:08:44 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:08:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013122613.58991.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041013031638.43689.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <20041013122613.58991.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013105746.01b5d280@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 05:26 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, you wrote: >--- Trend Ologist wrote: > > > Second & third trimester unborn children (or fetuses) > > are certainly quite important to Bush and other born > > again christians, however cells in a lab are a very > > low priority for anyone but religious extremists. Does > > anyone actually shed tears for tiny cells? That is > > very hard to believe. >, so apparently your mind isn't quite that open. > > >===== >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!? >Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! >http://vote.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 Oct 13 17:36:51 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:36:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013105654.019ec650@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041013173651.49134.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > Spontaneous abortion of foetuses more than several months developed > can certainly be shattering, especially when a baby is desperately > sought. But I think the point Trend and I were making is that it's > extremely unlikely that this emotional attachment carries over to > a clump of a hundred or so cells on a petri dish. The `miscarried > fetuses' Mike mentions were surely not salvaged somehow within a > week of conception and tearfully laid to rest with full ceremony? > The only exception I can think of is the failure of an early > implanted in vitro conceptus, where so much anxiety and uncomfortable > preparation has been expended by the hopeful, hormone-drenched > mother-to-be, and that's almost exactly a counter-instance because of > its special and `unnaturally' induced physical prelude. Or they could be people who have been trying to conceive naturally for a very long time and finally one takes but fails. People can get fixated in a moment, and people who regard such things as sacred likely would be more so. It is extremely inappropriate to be so judgemental and bigoted toward the fixations, religious or otherwise, of others. If our opinions are to ever be given any respect, credit, or place in public debate, we need to show similar respect for others. They often look at our ideas like we look on theirs. Quite a number of people who check out transhumanism comment on how intolerant of conflicting ideas its adherents tend to be, especially toward the religious. Keeping the religious opinions out of government spending also requires that we keep our own theoretical opinions out of it as well. It isn't the job of government to fund non-defense research. ===== 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 Wed Oct 13 17:42:07 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:42:07 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041013145331.5316.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <7B4C5817-1CC0-11D9-9F17-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> <20041013145331.5316.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041013103759.0293d188@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> As in Genetic Programming, the recombinant stage..... ;) And, may I add a version of the 'lost principle' 7. Intelligent Self Organization - Creating situations which self organize combined with intelligent and compassionate oversight incorporating the other Principles. >1. Unbound Progress - Regulation and restraint upon the development, >expansion, and survival of humanity is tantamount to murder or >genocide. > >2. Self-Production (combines 3 & 4) - That the individual has ultimate >control over their own standards and practices of direction, >transformation, reproduction, and state of existence. No outside entity >may override these save to prevent them from infringing on the >standards and practices of other individuals. > >3. Consilient Intelligence - The merging of intelligent technologies >and intelligent biologies, within open and free markets. > >4. Open Privacy - Every individual sentient has ultimate command over >what degree to which they are exposed to and influential upon, the rest >of society. The more influence an individual has upon, or seeks to have >upon, society, the more incumbent it is for them to operate with an >'open hands' policy. > >5. Diligent Optimism - An attitude of optimism which allows no >oxymoronic cynicist restraints of "pragmatism" or "practicality" but is >guided by an eye to that which is most diligently effective toward the >acheivement of the other Principles. > >6- Reasoned Intelligence - Reasoned thought outweighs rationalizations, >excuses, and faulty or circular logic. Proper reasoning does not self >contradict itself or objective 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 Wed Oct 13 17:40:06 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:40:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <20041013052737.41614.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013174006.81370.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- The Avantguardian wrote: > If > mankind were to create life in a test tube tomorrow > this would be just as much evidence for Intelligent > Design perhaps more so than for abiogenesis. Point of order: actually, mankind created life in a test tube many months ago. From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Oct 13 18:08:25 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 13:08:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013173651.49134.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013105654.019ec650@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041013173651.49134.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013130130.019e49b8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:36 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Mike wrote: >--- Damien Broderick wrote: > > the point Trend and I were making is that it's > > extremely unlikely that this emotional attachment carries over to > > a clump of a hundred or so cells on a petri dish. Note again: Trend and I are talking about a tiny clump of undifferentiated cells. >The `miscarried > > fetuses' Mike mentions were surely not salvaged somehow within a > > week of conception and tearfully laid to rest with full ceremony? > >Or they could be people who have been trying to conceive naturally for >a very long time and finally one takes but fails. How would they *know*? Watch the bouncing ball: *a clump of a hundred or so cells on a petri dish* ...or in a uterus, for that matter, or on its way there: http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_emer2.htm < Pregnancy typically begins about 12 days after conception, after the blastocyst has fully implanted itself in the lining of the womb. Abortions are defined as medical interventions after pregnancy begins. Since the emergency contraception pills are taken within 3 days of intercourse or an IUD is inserted within 5 days, no pregnancy has had a chance to start. Thus, emergency contraception is not a form of abortion. > Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 13 18:43:13 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 11:43:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013130130.019e49b8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041013184313.43695.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 10:36 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Mike wrote: > > >--- Damien Broderick wrote: > > > > the point Trend and I were making is that it's > > > extremely unlikely that this emotional attachment carries over to > > > a clump of a hundred or so cells on a petri dish. > > Note again: > Trend and I are talking about a tiny clump of undifferentiated cells. > > >The `miscarried > > > fetuses' Mike mentions were surely not salvaged somehow within a > > > week of conception and tearfully laid to rest with full ceremony? > > > >Or they could be people who have been trying to conceive naturally > for > >a very long time and finally one takes but fails. > > How would they *know*? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pregnancy "The blastocyst also secretes a hormone called human chorionic gonadotropin which in turn, stimulates the corpus luteum in the mother's ovary to continue producing progesterone, which acts to maintain the lining of the uterus so that the embryo will continue to be nourished. The glands in the lining of the uterus will swell in response to the blastocyst, and capillaries will be stimulated to grow in that region. This allows the blastocyst to receive vital nutrients from the mother. Pregnancy tests detect the presence of human chorionic gonadotropin." > > Watch the bouncing ball: > > *a clump of a hundred or so cells on a petri dish* > > ...or in a uterus, for that matter, or on its way there: > http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_emer2.htm > > < Pregnancy typically begins about 12 days after conception, after > the blastocyst has fully implanted itself in the lining of the womb. > Abortions are defined as medical interventions after pregnancy > begins. > Since the emergency contraception pills are taken within 3 days of > intercourse or an IUD is inserted within 5 days, no pregnancy has had > a chance to start. Thus, emergency contraception is not a form of > abortion. > Sounds like self-serving spin to me. Try this on for size: http://www.swmedicalcenter.com/16197.cfm "Pregnancy begins with conception" http://sheknows.com/about/look/22.htm "Pregnancy begins with sex." Wikipedia also says: "Pre-implantation At this point, there exists a single totipotent cell with the potential to create an entire human being. Mitotic cell division is the next process to occur, where each cell doubles to produce another diploid cell. The zygote divides to produce two smaller cells, called blastomeres, roughly every 20 hours. These cells get progressively smaller until about 4 divisions have taken place resulting in 16 individual cells. This cluster of 16 cells, called a morula, leaves the fallopian tube and makes its way to the uterus." This says 80 hours or a little over 3 days. The blastocele implants 24-48 hours later (i.e. 4-5 days following conception), whereupon it becomes a blastocyst AFTER implantation. Ergo, it becomes a blastocyst after it is implanted, after 5 days, and it emits chemicals which are detectable by simple pregnancy tests. That is how "they know".... at the longest term, the sperm takes two days to get itself to its destination, so it would be 7 days at the outside, not 12. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From max at maxmore.com Wed Oct 13 20:07:35 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:07:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <7B4C5817-1CC0-11D9-9F17-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> References: <20041011183708.D56EC57E2A@finney.org> <7B4C5817-1CC0-11D9-9F17-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041013145229.038d3af0@mail.earthlink.net> I'm glad to see some discussion of the Principles of Extropy. Thanks for kicking this off, Hal, and keep that feedback and input coming! Although I don't see the relevance of Moore's Law to the Principles (Mike's comment), I *have* been giving thought to a version 4 for quite some time. That's why feedback now is especially welcome. I'd like to *reduce* the number of principles, focusing on the core ideas, perhaps with a second "lower" level of principles. I haven't been following the list closely enough to comment on whether the political posts have generally been "useless and off topic". Hal's suggestion that such discussions be tied back to something specifically extropic is surely good advice. To make one thing clear -- Hal's post was his personal view, and not any kind of official proposal to restrict political discussions here. Talk of a "witch hunt" is mere hyperbole. 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 Wed Oct 13 22:22:59 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:22:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FEC to regulate internet Message-ID: <20041013222259.75994.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041013/D85MHF6G0.html Still think that voting for Kerry is good idea? Just wait until he gets in office and his special interest buddies and their left wing media get the FEC to clamp down on internet political speech. Mark my words: there will be gnashing and anguish (or, more likely, apologia and excuse making) from those who vote for him on this list. See the story: "A recent federal court ruling says the FEC must extend some of the nation's new campaign finance and spending limits to political activity on the Internet. Long reluctant to step into online political activity, the agency is considering whether to appeal. But vice chairwoman Ellen Weintraub said the Internet may prove to be an unavoidable area for the six-member commission, regardless of what happens with the ruling. "I don't think anybody here wants to impede the free flow of information over the Internet," Weintraub said. "The question then is, where do you draw the line?" Former Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean made the most pronounced splash online when he stunned his rivals by raking in tens of millions of dollars through Web-a-thons, a far cheaper fund-raising method than traditional dinners and cocktail parties. And Internet message boards, known as blogs, have become as common a place for people to air their political views as talk shows and newspaper editorial pages. The Internet also is where political players do what they can no longer do on television or radio. The National Rifle Association, for example, has started an online newscast and talk show to air its views on presidential and congressional candidates. The Internet is exempt from a ban on the use of corporate money for radio and TV ads targeting federal candidates close to elections, part of the new campaign finance law that took effect this election cycle. The November Fund, an anti-trial lawyer group partly funded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, is posting Internet ads criticizing Democratic vice presidential nominee John Edwards, a North Carolina senator and former personal-injury lawyer. The FEC exempted such ads from the law's ban on coordination between candidates and groups that raise or spend corporate money. Last month, U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly struck down the coordination exemption, ruling that it "severely undermines" the law. Fred Wertheimer, president of the campaign watchdog group Democracy 21 and member of the legal team that successfully sued to overturn that and several other FEC rules interpreting the law, said campaign finance laws should apply to the Internet because substantial amounts of money are being spent on online at election time. The laws may not always apply to the Internet as they would to other venues, Wertheimer said, "but by the same token the Internet cannot become a major avenue for evading and circumventing campaign finance laws on the grounds that people just want the Internet free from regulation of any kind." Max Fose, a Republican Internet consultant who helped Arizona Sen. John McCain, a sponsor of the new campaign finance law, raise millions of dollars online for his 2000 presidential bid, is wary of the judge's ruling. "Whenever there's something new and emerging and it's still developing, to place restrictions on it I think is going to hurt how political candidates and elected officials look to use the Internet, to not only be elected but look to get voters involved," Fose said." ===== 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Oct 13 22:36:01 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:36:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FEC to regulate internet In-Reply-To: <20041013222259.75994.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013223601.37376.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > "A recent federal court ruling says the FEC must > extend some of the > nation's new campaign finance and spending limits to > political activity > on the Internet. Emphasis: campaign finance and spending limits. They're regulating the money, not the 'net. If you aren't paid to give an opinion, this doesn't apply. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 13 22:53:41 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:53:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FEC to regulate internet In-Reply-To: <20041013223601.37376.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013225341.13923.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > "A recent federal court ruling says the FEC must > > extend some of the > > nation's new campaign finance and spending limits to > > political activity > > on the Internet. > > Emphasis: campaign finance and spending limits. > They're regulating the money, not the 'net. If you > aren't paid to give an opinion, this doesn't apply. Paid by who? What separates a paid reporter with a bias from a party pundit with an opinion? Is Ann Coulter's opinion column going to be classified as regulatable political speech? What about that of any other pundit of any political stripe? Meanwhile, Michael Moore's toxically false movies are not considered political speech by the courts. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Wed Oct 13 22:33:23 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 15:33:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FEC to regulate internet Message-ID: <20041013223323.7CDF157E2C@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041013/D85MHF6G0.html > > Still think that voting for Kerry is good idea? Just wait until he gets > in office and his special interest buddies and their left wing media > get the FEC to clamp down on internet political speech. Mark my words: > there will be gnashing and anguish (or, more likely, apologia and > excuse making) from those who vote for him on this list. See the story: I don't see much difference between either of the major party candidates on this issue. The net is as much a tool of the left as the right these days, as witnessed by the insurgent success of the Dean candidacy and such groups as moveon.org. Most election "reforms" which put limits on campaign spending and advertising are bipartisan. The truth is that both major parties have a shared interest in keeping other candidates out of the public eye, and in mutually reducing their own costs. Extending spending limitations to the net could advance both of these goals. What I find interesting is the role of money in elections. Why is it that to a large degree, the side which spends more tends to win? Why does a voter choose to vote for the side which spent more? Is this a rational action on the part of the voter? And what does this tell us about the kinds of institutions which will best reflect people's preferences on policy matters? At the core of the question is the paradox of voting. In national elections, the chance of a voter swinging the election is essentially zero. Most elections just aren't that close. And in the rare case that they are very close, almost a tie, the Florida debacle demonstrated that elections become nondeterministic. Things go to the courts and the impact of one vote more or less will only have a small, probabilistic influence on the outcome. The bottom line is that if the only benefit of voting is changing the probability that your candidate will get elected, it is almost certainly not worthwhile to vote. The change in probability is so small that the costs and inconvenience of going to the voting booth would be much larger than the benefits. To get around this problem our social institutions try to provide other motivations for voting. We publish propaganda to try to make people feel good about participating, about doing their "civic duty". Some countries even mandate voting. Given that these incentives have worked for a voter, and he is going to drag himself into the voting booth, the question is then how much effort he should put into deciding how to vote. And here again the same sort of reasoning suggests that the answer is, not much. His vote almost certainly won't matter anyway, so why should he spend time to study the issues and the candidates? The same propaganda that encourages voting also encourages informed voting, so if his motivation for participation is due to this influence, that might also encourage him to spend time to get informed. However if he is voting because it is legally required, this would be a smaller effect. I would predict that the electorate in countries with voluntary voting would be relatively more informed and interested than the electorate in countries with mandatory voting. I don't know if this turns out to be true or not. Even among people who want to be informed and make a good choice, it's hard to say how much time they should spend at it. Knowing who is right and wrong on complicated questions of policy is extremely difficult. The mere fact that so many people on all sides are very convinced of the correctness of their cause is a fundamental paradox. Even the experts disagree. Here's a quote from a poll of professional economists, via Brad DeLong's blog: "A third of the economists reckon the economy is in good or very good shape; about half give a neutral response, and one in five deems the economy to be weak. They are almost equally split about how much responsibility the Bush administration deserves for the state of today's economy. Just over a third assign some or all credit or blame to the president; another third think he has had little or nothing to do with it." Given this uncertainty, and the fundamental unimportance of any one person's vote, it is hard to justify spending huge amounts of time in trying to make a better decision. Most people seem to fall back on some simple heuristics: choose a party and follow their recommendations; ask your friends. And apparently, listen to whichever side has more advertising. It could be that this last method, of voting for the issue with the greatest volume, that is, the position that you hear advocated more often, is based on tribal instincts. In small tribes, the position that you would hear most often is probably the one held by most people, and on that basis is probably more likely to be correct. It could be that in modern society this is no longer such a good rule but our instincts still guide us in this way. When we hear a given argument made over and over again, it has an impact. The same effect is used in all advertising, but political advertising is a little different because the personal cost of being wrongly influenced is so much less. If you buy something because it was advertised and it turns out to be a waste, you eventually learn from this and become skeptical. But such feedback is much less available in political advertising. You don't experience such negative consequences from voting unwisely, because for one thing your vote doesn't mean much. An interesting difference is that product advertising tends to go on for a while, so if you buy something and it's junk, you'll probably still see ads for it. Each time you see one you'll be angry about how you were fooled and manipulated. But political ads end when the election is held. No one remembers two or four years later what ads were running and how they were influenced by them. I think this is one area our institutions could be better: do more to help people remember the political ads which led them to vote the way they did. It would be great if, when a policy fails or a politician is found to be dishonest, the media would dig out their old ads and run them over and over again, reminding people of what fools they were to fall for that stuff. People talk about accountability in government, but ultimately it is the voters who are accountable. Yet they are never held to account. They never have their noses rubbed in it when they make a mistake. Voting would be a more effective institution if we had more mechanisms for people to directly feel the impact of their votes, and to learn which sources of information are reliable and which are not to be trusted. Hal From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Oct 13 23:16:14 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 16:16:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FEC to regulate internet In-Reply-To: <20041013225341.13923.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041013231614.28660.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > "A recent federal court ruling says the FEC must > > > extend some of the > > > nation's new campaign finance and spending > limits to > > > political activity > > > on the Internet. > > > > Emphasis: campaign finance and spending limits. > > They're regulating the money, not the 'net. If > you > > aren't paid to give an opinion, this doesn't > apply. > > Paid by who? The candidates and political parties, mostly. I will grant that this definition itself can be a source of concern, though, and has long been a target for exploitation by political activists. > What separates a paid reporter with a > bias from a party > pundit with an opinion? The source of funding. One might wonder if Fox should count as political, but for example, an Associated Press editorial is a far cry from an official statement by either the DNC or the RNC. > Is Ann Coulter's opinion > column going to be > classified as regulatable political speech? Depends. Who pays her bills? > What > about that of any > other pundit of any political stripe? Same question. > Meanwhile, Michael Moore's toxically false movies > are not considered > political speech by the courts. Not *paid* political speech, because it wasn't funded by the candidates or the parties. The power of the press belongs to those who own presses; in that sense, the FEC is trying to regulate Democrat-owned and Republican-owned presses. (And technically Green-owned, Libertarian-owned, and so forth, although they tend to operate well underneath caps set up for the big parties.) Whether or not this is right is a separate question. But let's ask the correct question, please - it is not, as the subject implies, that the FEC intends to regulate the entire internet, including the vast majority that has nothing directly to do with elections. (Emphasis on "directly": for example, while oil-company-funded studies of possibilities for increasing oil production do unquestionably have political consequences, they fall outside the FEC's jurisdiction.) From brentn at freeshell.org Thu Oct 14 00:14:28 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:14:28 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] FEC to regulate internet In-Reply-To: <20041013222259.75994.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: (10/13/04 15:22) Mike Lorrey wrote: >http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041013/D85MHF6G0.html > >Still think that voting for Kerry is good idea? Just wait until he gets >in office and his special interest buddies and their left wing media >get the FEC to clamp down on internet political speech. Mark my words: >there will be gnashing and anguish (or, more likely, apologia and >excuse making) from those who vote for him on this list. See the story: I find it typical and amusing that you'd seek to lay the blame on this on something Kerry -might- do. What possible motive would the Democrats have for stifling a medium that still supports them preferentially by a nearly 2:1 margin? If you're going to spout BS, at least try to do so believably next time. That being said, there is a world of difference between the NRA and a blog like Eschaton or the Daily Kos, which do not donate money to candidates at all. While I would prefer that all paid political speech be unregulated, but fully disclosed, I fail to see how regulating politically-oriented organizations (i.e. 527s, the Catholic Church, etc.) on the web is any different from regulating them in the print or broadcast world. B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Oct 14 01:26:43 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 18:26:43 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013105654.019ec650@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003701c4b18c$e044f590$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > > Spontaneous abortion of foetuses more than several months developed can > certainly be shattering, especially when a baby is > desperately sought... the failure of an > early implanted in vitro conceptus, where so much anxiety and > uncomfortable preparation has been expended by the hopeful, hormone-drenched > mother-to-be, and that's almost exactly a counter-instance > because of its special and `unnaturally' induced physical prelude. > > Damien Broderick Speaking as one who has been thru this five times, Damien may have understated his case. The medications women must take to undergo fertility treatments cause them to focus their entire existence upon procreation. The emotional impact upon the woman appears to me worse than losing an adored grandparent. spike From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 14 02:43:43 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 03:43:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013130130.019e49b8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041014024343.20220.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> It is certain conservatives are exercised concerning partial birth abortions. It's almost certain they care about 2nd & 3rd trimester abortions, and they probably care about first trimester abortions. But it's inconceivable that they have any regard for clumps of microscopic cells. I don't think a man with so much going on as president Bush cares at all about clumps of cells that haven't developed brains. That's like Johnny Unitas worrying about the health of a cockroach in his locker room. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 14 03:34:22 2004 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:34:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates Message-ID: <20041014033422.5347.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com> I was surprised that Bush actually managed to maintain some semblance of perspicacity against Kerry's ivy league eloquence. But the Bush quote that got my goat (not however, my vote): "We have unleashed the armies of compassion" This brought an Orwellian chill to my spine. This hidden subtext whether intended or not immediately flooded my mind. "Yes, my fellow Americans... it is time to cry "havok!" and unleash the armies of compassion to free the world. Free them from their lives, their property, and the suffering that these things entail." ===== The Avantguardian "He stands like some sort of pagan god or deposed tyrant. Staring out over the city he's sworn to . . .to stare out over and it's evident just by looking at him that he's got some pretty heavy things on his mind." __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 14 03:55:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 20:55:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates In-Reply-To: <20041014033422.5347.qmail@web60510.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041014035546.22827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- The Avantguardian wrote: > I was surprised that Bush actually managed to maintain > some semblance of perspicacity against Kerry's ivy > league eloquence. But the Bush quote that got my goat > (not however, my vote): > > "We have unleashed the armies of compassion" Other election news: Tennessee Democrats are putting up posters of a kid with a Bush face running on a track, with the caption, "Voting for Bush is like running in the Special Olympics... Even if you win, you are still retarded." Possibly one of the most vile things I've seen this election. Round here in NH, the John Lynch campaign against Gov. Craign Benson hit new lows with widespread campaign sign sabotage last night against Benson signs, and signs for others. I also see that Bill O'Reilly might be a minor October surprise, with a $60 million sexual harassment lawsuit by a former producer against him, with a preceding suit against the producer and her lawyer for attempted extortion. Her suit is on SmokingGun, O'Reilly's is on DrudgeReport. Promises to make the Clarence Thomas hearings look tame. Reports also of the FBI tracking 25 Chechen rebels who crossed over the Mexican border in late July and are thought to be hiding out somewhere in the four corners area. Prayer mats facing Mecca were found at the border. Whether these are trial ballons or real remains to be seen. Michael Badnarik and the Arizona Libertarian Party lost its lawsuit against the Debates Commission and Arizona State over the exclusion of Badnarik from the debates. The ALP is a major party in Arizona, so exclusion of their candidate from the debates would constitute the debates being a partisan campaign contribution to the other candidates. The judge ruled that the parties were properly served for the hearing, but the suit wasn't brought soon enough to prevent the debate from occuring if Badnarik was excluded, ignoring the fact that the parties prevented this by having the original server, Michael Badnarik himself, arrested outside the St Louis debate. The judge did leave open the possibility that the ALP could still sue for monetary damages in a continuing case after 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Oct 14 04:10:56 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 23:10:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013184313.43695.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013130130.019e49b8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041013184313.43695.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041013230734.01a030c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:43 AM 10/13/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote: >Sounds like self-serving spin to me. Like self-ser... Like... Ack! >Try this on for size: > >[...] >http://sheknows.com/about/look/22.htm > >"Pregnancy begins w ithsex. I love it! The very distillation of True Knowledge! Quant suff! < Pregnancy begins with sex -- and for some women, it ends with some sexual feelings, too. How can birth be pleasurable? Is it really as far-fetched as it may sound? Diana Korte and Roberta Scaer, authors of A Good Birth, A Safe Birth: Choosing and Having the Childbirth Experience You Want, explain. Glorious experience? "It's a glorious experience. I know there are a lot of people who say, 'Oh, I hated being pregnant.' I felt exhilarated and really wonderful. ...[My second birth] was two days of labor, but not bad, not hard -- it was easy." Actress Demi Moore, Oprah Winfrey Show, 1991 > Okay, you win, Mike--who am I to dispute with Demi and Oprah? Damien Broderick From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Oct 14 04:19:58 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 21:19:58 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates References: <20041014035546.22827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001101c4b1a5$1123de20$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > Other election news: > Tennessee Democrats are putting up posters of a kid with a Bush face > running on a track, with the caption, "Voting for Bush is like running > in the Special Olympics... Even if you win, you are still retarded." > Possibly one of the most vile things I've seen this election. Vile? Hey, whatever happened to "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words can never hurt me." ...? And "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." ...?" Election or no election, this is what's *really* vile (and this doesn't even include the Iraqi civilian deaths): http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/2004.10.html > I also see that Bill O'Reilly might be a minor October surprise, with a > $60 million sexual harassment lawsuit by a former producer against him, > with a preceding suit against the producer and her lawyer for attempted > extortion. Her suit is on SmokingGun, O'Reilly's is on DrudgeReport. > Promises to make the Clarence Thomas hearings look tame. Oh, dear, O'Reilly. Couldn't happen to a nicer guy. Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Thu Oct 14 05:38:51 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 22:38:51 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] non-obituary In-Reply-To: <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <001101c4b1b0$1be54ff0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Have you ever seen an obituary that took you by surprise, because you assumed the person had passed away a long time ago? You might say something like "Wilber Bumpersnort is dead? I didn't even know he was alive!" Occasionally we run across a happier piece of news, that one we thought long gone is not just alive, but apparently in good health. For a bit of cheerful news, I learned today that Hans Bethe is with us still, at the age of 98. Ernst Mayr, the evolutionary biologist and geneticist, turned the big triple digit mark in July. Albert Hofmann, the guy who invented LSD, is still tuning in and turning on, but has not dropped out, will turn 99 in less than 3 months. spike From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Oct 14 12:40:41 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:40:41 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates In-Reply-To: <20041014035546.22827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041014035546.22827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4250429E-1DDE-11D9-9A15-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 14 Oct 2004, at 05:55, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Tennessee Democrats are putting up posters of a kid with a Bush face > running on a track, with the caption, "Voting for Bush is like running > in the Special Olympics... Even if you win, you are still retarded." > Possibly one of the most vile things I've seen this election. Mike: What's your point? That some democratic supporters are vile? No contest there, but the same is true of Republican supporters. Just go to Google and type in "special olympics" plus "john kerry" and you'll get lots of pro-bush sites saying equally vile things. Should we get equally mad about those vile bush voters, or should we just dismiss them as nasty wackos that have nothing to do with Bush's campaign? best, patrick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 14 13:18:58 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 06:18:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates In-Reply-To: <001101c4b1a5$1123de20$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041014131858.68832.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Mike Lorrey" > > > Other election news: > > Tennessee Democrats are putting up posters of a kid with a Bush > face > > running on a track, with the caption, "Voting for Bush is like > running > > in the Special Olympics... Even if you win, you are still > retarded." > > Possibly one of the most vile things I've seen this election. > > Vile? Hey, whatever happened to "Sticks and stones may break my > bones, but words can never hurt me." ...? > > And "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." ...?" Ah, its evident Olga, along with the rest of liberalentsia, is blinded by the fact that I meant it was vile to treat Special Olympics kids so coarsely. Especially after so much Democratic politically correct fluff about the word 'retarded' being offenseive the the 'differently abled'. Is this another case of do what I say, not what I do, liberal hypocrisy. Try to drop the partisan blinders, dear. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 14 13:59:24 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:59:24 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates In-Reply-To: <20041014131858.68832.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041014135924.58368.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Politicos are by definition hypocrites, just as soldiers are by definition killers. You were in Iraq in 1991 to help kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, but you concern yourself with the rights of brainless zygotes & blastocysts? I can't get over it. >Is this another case of do what I say, not what I do, liberal >hypocrisy. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ARTILLO at comcast.net Thu Oct 14 14:05:44 2004 From: ARTILLO at comcast.net (ARTILLO at comcast.net) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:05:44 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidential Debates Message-ID: <101420041405.13195.416E87B80004340C0000338B2200748184B1B4B4B7ABADBE@comcast.net> > Other election news: > Tennessee Democrats are putting up posters of a kid with a Bush face > running on a track, with the caption, "Voting for Bush is like running > in the Special Olympics... Even if you win, you are still retarded." > Possibly one of the most vile things I've seen this election. I certainly didn't think it was *vile*, in fact when I read that I laughed my a$$ off, as it was one of the funniest things that I've seen to come out of this election year yet! I also thought it was pretty funny when Kerry was compared to Herman Munster in the Jib-Jab cartoon, and the multitude of songs that were made out of Dean's YEAAAGHHH scream! I sincerely hope that our sense of humor is not completely killed off by such a volatile election year! If we can't laugh at how ridiculous the political climate has become over the years, then what CAN we laugh about? There are so so many things that I think are *vile* about this election year and American politics in general that it would take up a lot of bandwidth, and a lot of it has already been discussed here ad infinitum so I will spare the list the nuances of my laundry list for now! Arti -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Thu Oct 14 17:29:05 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:29:05 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) Message-ID: some large pieces from this wonderful article about the Dr. Strangelove Movie ........ "that was a documentary!" Amara http://www.iht.com/bin/print.php?file=543243.html Truth stranger than 'Strangelove' Fred Kaplan NYT Wednesday, October 13, 2004 Dr. Strangelove," Stanley Kubrick's 1964 film about nuclear-war plans run amok, is widely heralded as one of the greatest satires in American political or movie history. For its 40th anniversary, Columbia TriStar is releasing a two-disc special-edition DVD next month. One essential point should emerge from all the hoopla: "Strangelove" is far more than a satire. In its own loopy way, the movie is a remarkably fact-based and specific guide to some of the oddest, most secretive chapters of the cold war. As countless histories relate, Kubrick set out to make a serious film based on a grim novel, "Red Alert," by Peter George, a Royal Air Force officer. But the more research he did (reading more than 50 books, talking with a dozen experts), the more lunatic he found the whole subject, so he made a dark comedy instead. The result was wildly iconoclastic: Released at the height of the cold war, not long after the Cuban missile crisis, before the escalation in Vietnam, "Dr. Strangelove" dared to suggest that our top generals might be bonkers and that our well-designed system for preserving the peace was in fact a doomsday machine. What few people knew, at the time and since, was just how accurate this film was. Its premise, plotline, some of the dialogue, even its wildest characters eerily resembled the policies, debates and military leaders of the day. The audience had almost no way of detecting these similarities: Nearly everything about the bomb was shrouded in secrecy back then. There was no Freedom of Information Act and little investigative reporting on the subject. It was easy to laugh off "Dr. Strangelove" as a comic book. [...] The most popular guessing game about the movie is whether there was a real-life counterpart to the character of Dr. Strangelove (another Sellers part), the wheelchaired ex-Nazi who directs the Pentagon's weapons research and proposes sheltering political leaders in well-stocked mineshafts, where they can survive the coming nuclear war and breed with beautiful women. Over the years, some have speculated that Strangelove was inspired by Edward Teller, Henry Kissinger or Werner Von Braun. But the real model was almost certainly Herman Kahn, an eccentric, voluble nuclear strategist at the RAND Corporation, a prominent Air Force think tank. In 1960, Kahn published a 652-page tome called "On Thermonuclear War," which sold 30,000 copies in hardcover. According to a special-feature documentary on the new DVD, Kubrick read "On Thermonuclear War" several times. But what the documentary doesn't note is that the final scenes of "Dr. Strangelove" come straight out of its pages. [...] Toward the end of the film, officials uncover General Ripper's code and call back the B-52s, but they notice that one bomber keeps flying toward its target. A B-52 is about to attack the Russians with a few H-bombs; General Turgidson recommends that we should "catch 'em with their pants down," and launch an all-out, disarming first-strike. Such a strike would destroy 90 percent of the U.S.S.R.'s nuclear arsenal. "Mr. President," he exclaims, "I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed, but I do say no more than 10-20 million killed, tops!" If we don't go all-out, the general warns, the Soviets will fire back with all their nuclear weapons. The choice, he screams, is "between two admittedly regrettable but nevertheless distinguishable postwar environments - one where you get 20 million people killed and the other where you get 150 million people killed!" Kahn made precisely this point in his book, even producing a chart labeled, "Tragic but Distinguishable Postwar States." When Strangelove talks of sheltering people in mineshafts, President Muffley asks him, "Wouldn't this nucleus of survivors be so grief-stricken and anguished that they'd, well, envy the dead?" Strangelove exclaims that, to the contrary, many would feel "a spirit of bold curiosity for the adventure ahead." Kahn's book contains a long chapter on mineshafts. Its title: "Will the Survivors Envy the Dead?" One sentence reads: "We can imagine a renewed vigor among the population with a zealous, almost religious dedication to reconstruction." -- ******************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ ******************************************************************** "I try to make everyone's day a little more surreal." --Calvin From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Oct 14 20:34:43 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 13:34:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] A more advanced neural interface chip Message-ID: <20041014203443.15248.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041011/full/041011-9.html Now if only they'd disclose how much it cost, and open up training on installing the chip. I'm sure there are several people who'd be willing to have this installed even if they had to fund their own participation, and even if it required extensive customization by experts (thus, high labor costs) at this time. From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Oct 14 23:17:25 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 18:17:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041014181531.01a58938@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://mostlyfiction.com/authorqa/wright.htm Greg West: What kind of a kid were you? John C. Wright: Introverted, bookish, rude, irreligious, un-athletic, smart and smart-mouthed: a typical product of popular culture in America. Greg West: When you say you were irreligious does this mean you were actively skeptical or simply indifferent and amoral? John C. Wright: My moral character has always been sterling. I mean that I was skeptical. For many years I had been an atheist, and a vehement, argumentative, proselytizing atheist at that. I saw no other possible option for belief for a logical thinker. My recent conversion to Christianity was a miracle, prompted by a supernatural revelation, which has satisfied my skepticism in this area, and saved my life. To my surprise, I find that I am still a perfectly logical thinker. I hold that it is insufficient to argue that since human reasoning discovers no evidence of a Divine Being, such a being necessarily does not exist. The proper conclusion is that humans, without the assistance and intervention of a divine being, cannot come to knowledge of Him: a conclusion I think even atheists will allow. Greg West: When did this conversion take place? John C. Wright: I had a heart attack and was near death. It happened this November just past, late in 2003 AD. My conversion happened long after I wrote THE GOLDEN AGE, LAST GUARDIAN OF EVERNESS, or ORPHANS OF CHAOS. It was also after I wrote the short story LAST OF ALL SUNS, a story which prompted one editor to ask whether I was a Christian: I was a vehement anti-Christian at the time of that writing, but, like all good authors, I wrote the story according to its own internal logic, and logic demanded an ending more cheerful and supernatural than the world view of a Stoic or a natural philosopher would allow. Greg West: What was the nature of this supernatural revelation? John C. Wright: That is a strange and private matter. Let us pretend that I was visited by three ghosts, like Scrooge, and, like him, returned from the travail a better man. ========================== Take care--it could happen to *you*. Damien Broderick From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Oct 15 00:04:46 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:04:46 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041014181531.01a58938@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041014181531.01a58938@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <416F141E.80401@jefallbright.net> Damien Broderick wrote: > http://mostlyfiction.com/authorqa/wright.htm > > > Greg West: > When did this conversion take place? > > John C. Wright: > I had a heart attack and was near death. It happened this November > just past, late in 2003 AD. > ---snip--- > > Greg West: > What was the nature of this supernatural revelation? > > John C. Wright: > That is a strange and private matter. Let us pretend that I was > visited by three ghosts, like Scrooge, and, like him, returned from > the travail a better man. > > ========================== > > Take care--it could happen to *you*. > An overwhelming desire to find ultimate meaning can tip one over the edge. Once tipped, they will appear as rational as before, except for a tendency toward selective observation of information which confirms the new belief set. I was dismayed earlier this year to find that Robert Wright (no relation to John C Wright) also appears to be going down the path in search of "Ultimate Meaning". The selective observation effect, in his case, had Wright believing that Daniel Dennett was also succumbing to the power of the pods, but Dennett strongly denies Wright's interpretation. http://www.nonzero.org/replytodennett.htm Stay away from the pods. - Jef From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 15 00:18:18 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:18:18 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041014181531.01a58938@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041015001818.43176.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Bookish? the 'typical product of our culture' leans more towards local yokel ...they can read sports statistics, romance novels, etc. Women are actively encouraged to play dumb because it supposedly makes them more feminine. > John C. Wright: > Introverted, bookish, rude, irreligious, > un-athletic, smart and > smart-mouthed: a typical product of popular culture > in America. > > Greg West: > When you say you were irreligious does this mean you > were actively > skeptical or simply indifferent and amoral? > > John C. Wright: > My moral character has always been sterling. I mean > that I was skeptical. > For many years I had been an atheist, and a > vehement, argumentative, > proselytizing atheist at that. I saw no other > possible option for belief > for a logical thinker. My recent conversion to > Christianity was a miracle, > prompted by a supernatural revelation, which has > satisfied my skepticism in > this area, and saved my life. To my surprise, I find > that I am still a > perfectly logical thinker. I hold that it is > insufficient to argue that > since human reasoning discovers no evidence of a > Divine Being, such a being > necessarily does not exist. The proper conclusion is > that humans, without > the assistance and intervention of a divine being, > cannot come to knowledge > of Him: a conclusion I think even atheists will > allow. > > Greg West: > When did this conversion take place? > > John C. Wright: > I had a heart attack and was near death. It happened > this November just > past, late in 2003 AD. > > My conversion happened long after I wrote THE GOLDEN > AGE, LAST GUARDIAN OF > EVERNESS, or ORPHANS OF CHAOS. It was also after I > wrote the short story > LAST OF ALL SUNS, a story which prompted one editor > to ask whether I was a > Christian: I was a vehement anti-Christian at the > time of that writing, > but, like all good authors, I wrote the story > according to its own internal > logic, and logic demanded an ending more cheerful > and supernatural than the > world view of a Stoic or a natural philosopher would > allow. > > Greg West: > What was the nature of this supernatural revelation? > > John C. Wright: > That is a strange and private matter. Let us pretend > that I was visited by > three ghosts, like Scrooge, and, like him, returned > from the travail a > better man. > > ========================== > > Take care--it could happen to *you*. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Oct 15 00:20:08 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 09:50:08 +0930 Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <20041013174006.81370.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041013052737.41614.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> <20041013174006.81370.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc041014172023ac00b2@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:40:06 -0700 (PDT), Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- The Avantguardian > wrote: > > If > > mankind were to create life in a test tube tomorrow > > this would be just as much evidence for Intelligent > > Design perhaps more so than for abiogenesis. > > Point of order: actually, mankind created life in a > test tube many months ago. > > What? When? Huh? -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Oct 15 01:07:35 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:07:35 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041014181531.01a58938@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <0ae501c4b253$5b53e130$b8232dcb@homepc> Damien Broderick wrote: > Take care--it could happen to *you*. Phenomena such as belief in the supernatural (heaven, reincarnation, happy hunting ground, nirvana) must itself have a basis in something. In my late teens while wondering how so many people including some very intelligent ones could be so wrong in their worldviews (conflicting religious ones could not all be right) I figured that in all of us are tensions between the need to be rational (which helps us understand the world and each other) and the need to deny mortality with pleasing to ourselves delusions. As we get older or closer to dying (no atheists in foxholes) I figured the trade off would shift more and more to the pleasing delusion side. I can't see I have a lot of necessarily persuasive evidence for this view (it doesn't seen falsifiable) but I still think its true. I wondered how I would fare as I aged. I wondered if I would be able to stave off a natural bias towards pleasing unconventional religiosity. Nowadays when I consider cryonics and drextech (the hugh amounts of work and life effort expended in writing Nanosystems and Nanomedicine) I think I see in them the same sort of bias towards unconventional religiosity. The authors of Nanosystems and Nanomedicine are very intelligent clearly. But massive amounts of work spent and intelligence applied doesn't make something true (or false). The pyramids were build by intelligent people who did not want to die either. The size of a work, and the intelligence and ingenuity manifest in it is evidence of something, but not necessarily the veracity of the ideas behind it perhaps, but rather evidence of the desire of the creators of the work great desire to avoid their own mortality. Brett Paatsch From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Oct 15 01:28:51 2004 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:58:51 +0930 Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> References: <00b101c4b00f$b5eb47f0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <416C29DC.8030204@dsl.pipex.com> Message-ID: <710b78fc041014182830225ffa@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 20:00:44 +0100, Bryan Moss wrote: > Spike wrote: > > >The shocking truth is that the *average* typical American > >is a creationist! Or might as well be. Adventist historian > >Ron Numbers, in his excellent book The Creationists, shows that > >when people are randomly selected and given questionnaires about > >evolution, their answers demonstrate so little basic understanding > >of evolution, answers that are clearly and repeatedly self- > >contradictory, it is almost meaningless to label the person either > >creationist or evolutionist. Fellow Americans, we know not > >jack about evolution. Sad. > > > > > > An interesting question might be: In lieu of actual knowledge, is it > better to have unjustified true belief or justified untrue belief (given > a pop philosophical notion of justification [and knowledge])? I.e., who > would you prefer, someone who believes evolution to be true (a true > belief) but knows none of the arguments and none of the evidence, just > the raw fact "evolution is true," or someone who believes creationism is > true (an untrue belief) but has read the Bible from cover to cover and > has a bookshelf full of books on creation science, intelligent design, etc? > > I submit that as long as the proles believe that evolution is true, the > details don't matter. > > BM > I would far prefer the person who believes Creationism is true, with supporting evidence (be it flaky). This person has gone to great trouble to find out about the origins of life, and to defend an hypothesis which they obviously feel is under siege. So even though it's not a search for the truth, it implies an environment where this defense is necessary. And, as Spike said (?) if people actually spend some time thinking about this stuff, even for what we might think are the wrong reasons, then some of them will find out the truth, whatever that may be, despite themselves. OTOH, people who support evolution but know zero about it have what is either a weak belief or an unfounded strong belief. In the case of a weak belief, their heads can be turned by the first bible thumper who comes along with some pseudo evidence. In the case of an unfounded strong belief, it being true is almost beside the point. It implies that this person is not a rational thinker, not someone who investigates his/her own assumptions. So the set of beliefs this person holds are likely to correlate on the larger scale very weakly if at all with reality. If we can't have a world where people just seek truth and don't let their ego get in the way, then I'd rather see us in a world of people who examine their premises, and find evidence necessary for their positions, than one full of boneheads who accept positions without question because someone on TV (or on extropy-chat) told them to. Better to be wrong for the right reasons than right for the wrong reasons; in the former case, being wrong is the abberration, in the latter, being right is. -- Emlyn http://emlynoregan.com * blogs * music * software * From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 15 02:18:21 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 03:18:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <0ae501c4b253$5b53e130$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041015021821.77836.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Every pleasure is an escape from dead-end reality. Getting intoxicated from alcohol or marijuana is an escape from reality & mortality. Films, music, art, are escapist. Attending church is comparable to going to a play. The priests and pastors appears in front of altars as if actors whose job is to transport you to another place (Jerusalem, say); another time (1st century CE). ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Fri Oct 15 02:24:45 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:24:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god Message-ID: <1097807085.7e2b8980namacdon@ole.augie.edu> "I was dismayed earlier this year to find that Robert Wright (no relation to John C Wright) also appears to be going down the path in search of "Ultimate Meaning". The selective observation effect, in his case, had Wright believing that Daniel Dennett was also succumbing to the power of the pods, but Dennett strongly denies Wright's interpretation." Except Robert Wright's search for "ultimate meaning" is of a very different character than John Wright. Robert Wright is engaged in a philosophical "search", while John just happened to have a near death experience and decide that Jesus was to blame. I haven't heard about Robert singing with the choir yet, so I'll take that as a good sign... And Wright really did back Dennett into the corner there (which is suprisingly easy to do)... -Nicq From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Oct 15 02:47:59 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:47:59 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) References: <20041015021821.77836.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0b1a01c4b261$61d64260$b8232dcb@homepc> Trend Ologist wrote: > Every pleasure is an escape from dead-end reality. > Getting intoxicated from alcohol or marijuana is an > escape from reality & mortality. Films, music, art, > are escapist. Attending church is comparable to going > to a play. The priests and pastors appears in front of > altars as if actors whose job is to transport you to > another place (Jerusalem, say); another time (1st > century CE). Is *your* worldview then able to be summed up in one old word - Hedonism? Have you a person alive in 2004 nothing to add to the worldview of some ancient Greeks? And more generally, anybody, if extropy is a transhumanist philosophy how would if differentiate as a philosophy from hedonism? Where are the extropian principles incompatible? Brett Paatsch From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 15 03:14:08 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:14:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) In-Reply-To: <0b1a01c4b261$61d64260$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041015031408.71716.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hedonism is something of an accurate description of *my* philosophy but Escapism is more to the point. As some might turn to drink, drugs, religion, art, travel, and so on, I continually escape not so much from reality but from the power-grasping of others; I think most people are motivated by power, and to spend an entire lifetime avoiding the clutches of others seems a decent manner of life to my way of reckoning. Name your poison, Brett. *My* worldview is based economically on PR Sarkar's theories, and politically on James Madison. As for spirituality? Good question. It would take a book to begin to describe *my* spiritual leanings, or lack thereof. > Is *your* worldview then able to be summed up in one > old > word - Hedonism? Have you a person alive in 2004 > nothing to add to the worldview of some ancient > Greeks? ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 15 04:09:31 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:09:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) In-Reply-To: <0b1a01c4b261$61d64260$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041015040931.49469.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > And more generally, anybody, if extropy is a > transhumanist > philosophy how would if differentiate as a > philosophy from > hedonism? Where are the extropian principles > incompatible? In a nutshell - doesn't hedonism live for the pleasures of the moment, with little regard for the future? Transhumanism encourages one to take action to maek sure there is a pleasant future, starting with making sure there is a future. (And preferably not a finite one.) From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 15 04:35:03 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 05:35:03 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? In-Reply-To: <20041015040931.49469.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041015043503.64910.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Madison's influence isn't all that well known in America, but we can see and hear its effects every day we tune into the political world outside our neighborhoods. The much deplored polarized atmosphere of today's politics is what Madison wanted. Now there's nothing sacred or pleasant about our jungle politics. But to anyone reared in America it becomes part of the make-up, conscious & unconscious. It has been that way for around 210 years, which means about, what? Eight generations? I bring this up because when you ask the mythical 'average person' to mention the names of those who have affected America the most, you hear: "Jesus"; "Washington"; "Lincoln"; "Adam Smith", etc. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 15 04:36:15 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] proto-extropian religions In-Reply-To: <710b78fc041014172023ac00b2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041015043615.45427.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Emlyn wrote: > On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 10:40:06 -0700 (PDT), Adrian > Tymes > wrote: > > --- The Avantguardian > > > wrote: > > > If > > > mankind were to create life in a test tube > tomorrow > > > this would be just as much evidence for > Intelligent > > > Design perhaps more so than for abiogenesis. > > > > Point of order: actually, mankind created life in > a > > test tube many months ago. > > What? When? Huh? Late last year. Granted, 'twas only a virus, and some scientists say viruses are too simple to count as "life". But it's no great leap of imagination to go from there to, say, building an amoeba; it's largely an extension of the same techniques. http://atheism.about.com/b/a/042809.htm gives a good summary of this and some of the religious implications, while http://www.usatoday.com/news/science/2003-11-13-new-life-usat_x.htm gives the story itself. Google for "artificial virus" and you'll find more. The short-term state of mankind's technological progress appears to depend on the observer: many people simply are not aware of some of the more radical advances, and thus can not seek them out (and I'm not talking about the technologies that get integrated into infrastructure so people use them without knowing they exist), so those advances might as well not exist for those people. From that perspective...it's cool living in the future. ^_^ From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 15 04:11:10 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:11:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry Message-ID: <20041015041110.85DC457E2D@finney.org> In recent political news, 537 economists have blasted the policies of Bush and Kerry, for both raising and lowering taxes. The helpful economists, who include 8 Nobel laureates, also advised the candidates to both increase and reduce government social programs. See and . Well, of course this advice did not all come from the same people. Some of them criticized Kerry and some Bush. Neither praised any candidates. (Actually I didn't look to see whether anyone signed both letters.) Consider that these people are among the greatest experts in the world on economic topics, that they have devoted their entire professional lives, countless hours of intensive study, and intensive intellectual scrutiny and debate to these issues. And yet they come to diametrially opposite conclusions. Given this reality, what hope have any of us in deciding what is the truth here? Should taxes be raised or lowered? Entitlement programs revised up or down? If study and intelligence would lead to answers to these questions, why do the people who have applied both, to the highest degree possible, still have such sharp disagreements? And yet, I'll bet many politically oriented readers, especially those who have pledged their allegiance to an ideological system, believe that they actually know the truth of the matter. They think that they, with their cursory and amateur levels of study, know these issues better than hundreds of hardworking, brilliant experts. Or perhaps, prompted by ideological certainty, they will comfort themselves that those hundreds of experts on the other side are evil, wicked liars. I'm not sure what lesson to draw from this, other than to recognize that the world is a more complicated place than we sometimes let ourselves believe. And perhaps, we should keep in mind that even those who disagree with us may have just as good reasons for their beliefs as we do for ours. Hal From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Oct 15 04:59:16 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 21:59:16 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dead - But Not Unemployed References: <20041014035546.22827.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <034301c4b273$b91f5cc0$6600a8c0@brainiac> A digitally revived Steve McQueen, who died in 1980, will be reprising the character of Lt. Frank Bullitt in a commercial promoting the redesigned and retro Ford Mustang.: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/15/business/media/15adco.html?oref=login October 15, 2004 ADVERTISING Ford Brings Back Steve McQueen By JEREMY PETERS and DANNY HAKIM EARBORN, Mich. DETROIT is exhuming another face from the past to pitch its cars to a new generation. A digitally revived Steve McQueen, who died in 1980, will be reprising the character of Lt. Frank Bullitt in a commercial promoting the redesigned and retro Ford Mustang. The ad is part of a heavy push by the Ford Motor Company to convince Americans that a new crop of cars coming out this month are worth buying on their own merits, not because of a $5,000 rebate or zero-interest financing. To make its pitch as loud as possible, Ford will spend $150 million to $200 million this quarter on advertising, the most ever in a quarter. Commercials will be focused on three new vehicles from the Ford division: a new large sedan, the Ford Five Hundred; the Freestyle, a cross between a station wagon and a sport utility vehicle; and the redesigned Mustang. The Ford division also said yesterday that it would jettison its somewhat defensive advertising theme, "If you haven't looked at Ford lately, look again," which it has been using in commercials for cars like the beleaguered Taurus sedan. The successor slogan is "Built for the road ahead," which echoes the "Built Ford tough" tag line of its truck campaigns. In one of the "Road ahead" commercials, a 60-second spot called "Cornfield" that will start showing in November, the revived McQueen swaggers out from behind a field of cornstalks and jumps behind the wheel of a 2005 Mustang. Other ads in the series will start running on Sunday. The "Cornfield" commercial follows the recent resurrection by General Motors of Harley Earl, its long-dead design chief, in a series of Buick commercials that sometimes also included Tiger Woods. Buick has since moved on, changing campaigns for 2005 and no longer using the actor who portrayed Earl. McQueen, who played the title character in the 1968 film "Bullitt," is "an icon," said Tom Cordner, co-president of J. Walter Thompson USA in Detroit, which developed most of the new Ford division campaign, and "the car's an icon," he added, referring to the Mustang. Thompson, part of the WPP Group, is the longtime agency for the Ford division. The stakes are considerable for Ford. In the last decade, the company's automotive earnings have come almost entirely from sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks, but those markets are now under assault from the likes of Toyota and Nissan. This year, all the Big Three domestic automakers have rededicated themselves to designing passenger cars that they hope American consumers might get excited about. "People would acknowledge that we have been extremely strong in trucks," Steve Lyons, president of the Ford division, said in an interview yesterday. "You'd have to say the car side would not be our strong suit." In fact, passenger cars make up only about 32 percent of the company's sales, down from 42 percent in 1998. Over all, Ford's market share in the United States this year through September has declined to 18.4 percent from 19.5 percent, according to the AutoData Corporation. "Their market share has fallen to levels not seen since the 30's, and most of that decline is in the passenger car area," said David Healy, an analyst at Burnham Securities. "To bolster their North American profitability, they can no longer depend to the extent they have on the F-150 and, to a certain extent, the S.U.V.'s," he added. Mr. Lyons said Ford was hoping that the new vehicles would increase its total retail volume next year by 15 percent. "With these new products, the only way to go is up," he said. And what better way to breathe a little life into your sagging car sales than with a dead actor? "Cornfield" begins with a farmer using a bulldozer to build a racetrack in his cornfield. He then pulls a new Mustang out of his red barn, takes it for a spin and stops along the road at a checkered line. McQueen, as Frank Bullitt, emerges from the cornstalks. The farmer tosses him the keys and the Bullitt character gets into the car and tears off down the track. Ford had to negotiate first with the McQueen estate and then with Warner Brothers, which released "Bullitt," over the rights to use the character's likeness. The company is not saying how much it paid. Ford also had to find a look-alike of McQueen to pose in the commercials and then digitally impose the character's icy gaze onto the body double. Ford said yesterday that it would also spend more money than it has before on nontraditional forms of advertising like event sponsorship and integrating products into TV shows, which it sees as a way to fight the commercial-zapping made possible by digital video recorders like TiVo. Pursuing that strategy, Ford will sponsor a commercial-free episode of the NBC series "American Dreams." Though it is set in the 1960's, the new Mustang and Five Hundred will make appearances, apparently in a flash-forward sequence. The Mustang will also take a bow on "The O.C.," the teenage drama on Fox, where it will be driven by the waifish lead actress, Marissa Cooper. And Jennifer Garner will also drive the Mustang on the ABC spy show "Alias," in which all manner of Fords have already appeared. "This is not product placement," said Ford's advertising manager, Rich Stoddart. "Product placement is easy. You give someone a box of soap and say, put this on the shelf and make sure the camera sees it. This is totally different." Ford will also take on reality TV in giveaways that will be part of the ABC series "Extreme Makeover: Home Edition." In one clip from the show that Ford executives played at the campaign kickoff event yesterday, a family whose home is being extremely made over opens the garage to find a Ford F-250 Super Duty pickup. The father can barely contain himself. "I think it's safe to say he was more excited about the Super Duty than he was about the new wallpaper in the living room," Mr. Stoddart said. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: d.gif Type: image/gif Size: 312 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 15 05:43:31 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 01:43:31 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015041110.85DC457E2D@finney.org> References: <20041015041110.85DC457E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: <416F6383.8020402@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > In recent political news, 537 economists have blasted the policies > of Bush and Kerry, for both raising and lowering taxes. The helpful > economists, who include 8 Nobel laureates, also advised the candidates > to both increase and reduce government social programs. > > See and > . > > Well, of course this advice did not all come from the same people. Some > of them criticized Kerry and some Bush. Neither praised any candidates. > (Actually I didn't look to see whether anyone signed both letters.) > > Consider that these people are among the greatest experts in the world on > economic topics, that they have devoted their entire professional lives, > countless hours of intensive study, and intensive intellectual scrutiny > and debate to these issues. And yet they come to diametrially opposite > conclusions. I'm not sure that follows. Why might not both criticisms of both candidates be wholly correct, if, as you say, neither praised any candidates? I am proud of these economists, who are so steady as to not praise either candidate, despite their biases. For it would seem to me to indicate that while their political polarization might lead them to criticize one particular candidate, it has not gone so far as to make them praise the other. On what matter of fact do these scientists disagree? I have reviewed both letters and they seem to target different follies by both candidates; there is no incompatibility between these disasters. (The statement on the National Review website praising Bush is from a Bush flunky, not part of the signed letter.) > Given this reality, what hope have any of us in deciding what is the > truth here? Should taxes be raised or lowered? Entitlement programs > revised up or down? If study and intelligence would lead to answers to > these questions, why do the people who have applied both, to the highest > degree possible, still have such sharp disagreements? I saw no disagreement, save over the unscientific question of who to vote against in the next election. > And yet, I'll bet many politically oriented readers, especially those > who have pledged their allegiance to an ideological system, believe > that they actually know the truth of the matter. They think that they, > with their cursory and amateur levels of study, know these issues better > than hundreds of hardworking, brilliant experts. Or perhaps, prompted by > ideological certainty, they will comfort themselves that those hundreds > of experts on the other side are evil, wicked liars. I've studied economics only peripherally, on my way to other things - the kind of economics I'm familiar with is the kind that's more strongly resembles cognitive psychology, or math questions in decision theory, than anything about interest rates. But I will venture that the following opinions seem to be standard, and I saw no contradiction of them in either signed letter: Higher taxes are bad. Massive deficits are bad. Trade protection is bad. Entitlements in the US are a huge ticking time bomb. I think most economists would also agree that if you make a massive tax cut, the estate tax and capital gains tax were probably not the best taxes to cut first; and that increasing concentration of income is bad; but some economists might say otherwise, I'm not sure. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 15 06:17:48 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 07:17:48 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <416F6383.8020402@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041015061748.97759.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> America is said to be the world's top debtor. But many economists don't want to pay down the debt owed to other nations, because then we'd be transfering trillions to other nations. So what should we do? Leave it alone? > Higher taxes are bad. > Massive deficits are bad. > Trade protection is bad. > Entitlements in the US are a huge ticking time bomb. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Oct 15 06:20:25 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:20:25 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) References: <20041015031408.71716.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0b6201c4b27f$0eea18b0$b8232dcb@homepc> Trend Ologist wrote: > Hedonism is something of an accurate description of > *my* philosophy but Escapism is more to the point. As > some might turn to drink, drugs, religion, art, > travel, and so on, I continually escape not so much > from reality but from the power-grasping of others; I > think most people are motivated by power, and to spend > an entire lifetime avoiding the clutches of others > seems a decent manner of life to my way of reckoning. > Name your poison, Brett. Sounds like you have a life dedicated to not dying and not being of service or a resource to power-grasping others. And that sooner or later you think you will die, either as a result of power grasping by others or as a result of "natural" causes. And that seems a "decent" life. Aren't you trading life fullness for life duration? That isn't bad necessarily but it doesn't appeal to me. Unless denying others gives you pleasure than, to me, even hedonism has more to recommend it than your escapism as at least hedonists value their own pleasure. Your life seems to be dedicated only towards a denial of others pleasures. That doesn't seem like the sort of life that you could have always aspired too, it contains no obvious positive impetus for going on because it contains no goals, pursuits, or values. Or do you have these and leave them out? Am I missing something? In the classics (perhaps slightly corrupted in my head by the movie Troy), facing a life without any prospect of immortality Achilles had a choice, he could conduct himself in such a way as to have a long laborious life (as he saw it), or a short glorious one (as he saw it). As I understand it, what made Achilles different was his perception of the choice. Those that do not face their mortality squarely across a span of years or even decades cannot so deliberately choose. They can't weight the trade. (I assume we are all born wanting to live). In knowing that he was mortal I imagine Achilles could apply a sort of calculus that weighted the values of his moments. He could decide that a short glorious life was to be preferred over a long inglorious one. And that made him dangerous to other power graspers in a world of power graspers because there were fewer scales on his eyes than the majority of choice-deniers. He was motivated to be a player, a predator, and a fighter not just a fleer. He lived fully while he lived and then he died as he would have done anyway. I'm not Achilles, and I'm not ready to name my poison. I'm still working out what the likely default timespan is. I hope I don't settle for a "decent" life though - it would be disappointing I think. Brett From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Oct 15 06:35:40 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:35:40 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015061748.97759.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006b01c4b281$30ccf400$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Trend Ologist> > > America is said to be the world's top debtor... Ja but this is a good thing. Keeping the government in debt up to its eyeballs keeps relentless pressure on to cut the budget, cut everywhere, keep that spending down. > So what should we do? Leave it alone? Yes. Many centuries ago, philosophers claimed that all democracies would last only a couple hundred years. They suggested that eventually the proletariat would realize it could vote itself ever larger slices of the commonwealth pie. Perhaps if there is no commonwealth pie, and all the government owns is a pile of debt, the voters would not be so eager to vote itself a piece of it. It seems to have worked so far. spike From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 15 06:09:43 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2004 23:09:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry Message-ID: <20041015060943.20E0C57E2D@finney.org> Eliezer writes: > Hal Finney wrote: > > See and > > . > On what matter of fact do these scientists disagree? I > have reviewed both letters and they seem to target different follies by > both candidates; there is no incompatibility between these disasters. How about this: from the first letter, "The data make clear that your policy of slashing taxes - primarily for those at the upper reaches of the income distribution - has not worked.... What is called for, we believe, is a dramatic reorientation of fiscal policy, including substantial reversals of your tax policy." And from the second letter, "John Kerry has proposed tax increases that threaten to sap the economy's vitality and reduce long-term growth. Specifically, Kerry proposes to 'restore the top two [income] tax rates to their levels under President Clinton'.... In fact, we believe Kerry's proposals would, over time, inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally." The first group recommends "substantial reversals" of Bush's tax policy. But the second specifically criticizes Kerry's proposal to roll back the tax situation to what it was before Bush took office. That looks pretty contradictory to me. The conclusions of the two letters are not exactly opposite but pretty discouraging when read in concert: "Given the tenuous state of the American economy, we believe that the time for an honest assessment of the problem and for genuine corrective action is now. Ignoring the fiscal crisis that has taken hold during your presidency may seem politically appealing in the short run, but we fear it could ultimately prove disastrous. From a policy standpoint, the clear message is that more of the same won't work. The warning signs are already visible, and it is incumbent upon all of us to pay attention." "All in all, John Kerry favors economic policies that, if implemented, would lead to bigger and more intrusive government and a lower standard of living for the American people." So Bush's policies will lead to disaster, and Kerry's will lower the American standard of living. Is it possible that each candidate has managed to craft an economic program that will be actively harmful? Do you think most of the professional economists who signed these letters would agree with the statements in the other one? If so, maybe someone did sign them both! Well, I just spent a few minutes analyzing them and there don't seem to be any common signatories. Frankly I would be pretty surprised if that happened. Hal From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 15 07:29:37 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:29:37 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) In-Reply-To: <0b6201c4b27f$0eea18b0$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041015072937.45491.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> When young I lived a full life, always with people, now I spend most of the time alone. When one is nineteen, one has fire in the belly, later on it turns to acid reflux, so slowing down is option #1; option #2 is continuing on as if one were young. I chose #1 and feel much better, no more nagging 'significant other', grasping family, bad friends. I have a few good friends, but I wasn't able to make friends with them until after getting the others out of my life-- that is, after choosing option #1. Just because one is active & lives a full life when young does not mean it has to continue indefinitely. Some fellows spend their whole lives getting women into bed, some fellows reach a point where they want to keep women out of their bed so they can watch football videos. > Sounds like you have a life dedicated to not dying > and not > being of service or a resource to power-grasping > others. > And that sooner or later you think you will die, > either as a > result of power grasping by others or as a result of > "natural" > causes. > > And that seems a "decent" life. Aren't you trading > life fullness > for life duration? That isn't bad necessarily but it > doesn't > appeal to me. > > Unless denying others gives you pleasure than, to > me, even > hedonism has more to recommend it than your escapism > as > at least hedonists value their own pleasure. Your > life seems > to be dedicated only towards a denial of others > pleasures. > > That doesn't seem like the sort of life that you > could have > always aspired too, it contains no obvious positive > impetus > for going on because it contains no goals, pursuits, > or values. > Or do you have these and leave them out? Am I > missing > something? > > In the classics (perhaps slightly corrupted in my > head by the > movie Troy), facing a life without any prospect of > immortality > Achilles had a choice, he could conduct himself in > such a way > as to have a long laborious life (as he saw it), or > a short glorious > one (as he saw it). > > As I understand it, what made Achilles different was > his perception > of the choice. Those that do not face their > mortality squarely across > a span of years or even decades cannot so > deliberately choose. They > can't weight the trade. (I assume we are all born > wanting to live). In > knowing that he was mortal I imagine Achilles could > apply a sort of > calculus that weighted the values of his moments. He > could decide > that a short glorious life was to be preferred over > a long inglorious > one. And that made him dangerous to other power > graspers in a > world of power graspers because there were fewer > scales on his > eyes than the majority of choice-deniers. He was > motivated to be a > player, a predator, and a fighter not just a fleer. > He lived fully while > he lived and then he died as he would have done > anyway. > > I'm not Achilles, and I'm not ready to name my > poison. I'm still > working out what the likely default timespan is. I > hope I don't > settle for a "decent" life though - it would be > disappointing I think. > > Brett > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 15 09:39:33 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 05:39:33 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015060943.20E0C57E2D@finney.org> References: <20041015060943.20E0C57E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: <416F9AD5.2030007@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > Eliezer writes: > >>Hal Finney wrote: >> >>>See and >>>. >> >>On what matter of fact do these scientists disagree? I >>have reviewed both letters and they seem to target different follies by >>both candidates; there is no incompatibility between these disasters. > > How about this: from the first letter, "The data make clear that your > policy of slashing taxes - primarily for those at the upper reaches > of the income distribution - has not worked.... What is called for, > we believe, is a dramatic reorientation of fiscal policy, including > substantial reversals of your tax policy." Right. Concentration of wealth is bad. > And from the second letter, "John Kerry has proposed tax increases that > threaten to sap the economy's vitality and reduce long-term growth. > Specifically, Kerry proposes to 'restore the top two [income] > tax rates to their levels under President Clinton'.... In fact, we > believe Kerry's proposals would, over time, inhibit capital formation, > depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive > internationally." Right. Higher taxes are bad. > The first group recommends "substantial reversals" of Bush's tax policy. > But the second specifically criticizes Kerry's proposal to roll back > the tax situation to what it was before Bush took office. That looks > pretty contradictory to me. I admit that you have to look at this pretty closely, knowing in advance what economists can be expected to agree upon, to see how both sets of signatories managed to phrase their criticism without saying anything that would depart from the standard model. > The conclusions of the two letters are not exactly opposite but pretty > discouraging when read in concert: > > "Given the tenuous state of the American economy, we believe that the > time for an honest assessment of the problem and for genuine corrective > action is now. Ignoring the fiscal crisis that has taken hold during > your presidency may seem politically appealing in the short run, but we > fear it could ultimately prove disastrous. From a policy standpoint, the > clear message is that more of the same won't work. The warning signs > are already visible, and it is incumbent upon all of us to pay attention." > > "All in all, John Kerry favors economic policies that, if implemented, > would lead to bigger and more intrusive government and a lower standard > of living for the American people." Why would this be contradictory? Is there some version of the Law of the Excluded Middle which states that the truth must be either Bush or Kerry? What makes you think that a happy ending to this mess is even possible? > So Bush's policies will lead to disaster, and Kerry's will lower the > American standard of living. Is it possible that each candidate has > managed to craft an economic program that will be actively harmful? Of *course*! What else do you think is happening? Do you think that if two Republicrat candidates make campaign promises, one set of campaign promises must not be actively harmful? You should be surprised that there's even a noticeable difference between the two sets of promises, and probably most of the difference is pure campaign bull. > Do you think most of the professional economists who signed these letters > would agree with the statements in the other one? I think they would be hard-pressed to directly contradict them in writing, especially writing they expected their peers to read. > If so, maybe someone did sign them both! Unlikely; how many economists are likely to be both partisan Republicans and partisan Democrats? > Well, I just spent a few minutes analyzing them > and there don't seem to be any common signatories. Frankly I would be > pretty surprised if that happened. So would I. But I also don't see any hundreds of economists signing a refutation of either set of accusations. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 15 10:13:15 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 06:13:15 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <416F9AD5.2030007@pobox.com> References: <20041015060943.20E0C57E2D@finney.org> <416F9AD5.2030007@pobox.com> Message-ID: <416FA2BB.6090108@pobox.com> Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Hal Finney wrote: >> >> How about this: from the first letter, "The data make clear that your >> policy of slashing taxes - primarily for those at the upper reaches >> of the income distribution - has not worked.... What is called for, >> we believe, is a dramatic reorientation of fiscal policy, including >> substantial reversals of your tax policy." > > Right. Concentration of wealth is bad. > >> And from the second letter, "John Kerry has proposed tax increases that >> threaten to sap the economy's vitality and reduce long-term growth. >> Specifically, Kerry proposes to 'restore the top two [income] >> tax rates to their levels under President Clinton'.... In fact, we >> believe Kerry's proposals would, over time, inhibit capital formation, >> depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive >> internationally." > > Right. Higher taxes are bad. > >> The first group recommends "substantial reversals" of Bush's tax policy. >> But the second specifically criticizes Kerry's proposal to roll back >> the tax situation to what it was before Bush took office. That looks >> pretty contradictory to me. > > I admit that you have to look at this pretty closely, knowing in advance > what economists can be expected to agree upon, to see how both sets of > signatories managed to phrase their criticism without saying anything > that would depart from the standard model. PS: Remember, the proper role of an economist is just to predict what will happen. Letting the deficit go up and up and up has negative consequences. Anything you try to do to get the deficit under control will have consequences - for example, increasing capital gains taxes will, yes, inhibit capital formation. But to say that *therefore* we should not increase these taxes, and instead cut existing government spending (with some different untasty consequence), is a political decision, not an economic prediction. Of course economists may disagree about choices. I ask you to show me where they disagree in their predictions. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Fri Oct 15 12:34:25 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:34:25 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] ASSC William James Prize In-Reply-To: <001101c4b1b0$1be54ff0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <001101c4b1b0$1be54ff0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <8C93150C-1EA6-11D9-B4F0-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> ASSOCIATION FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF CONSCIOUSNESS (ASSC) The ASSC William James Prize for Contributions to the Study of Consciousness Each year one prize will be awarded for an outstanding published contribution to the empirical or philosophical study of consciousness by a graduate student or postdoctoral scholar/researcher within 5 years of receiving a PhD or other advanced degree. The prize consists of: a) An award of $1000 (USD), b) Invitation to present a plenary address at ASSC9 which will be held in Pasadena, California from June 24 to 27, 2005 (Travel, accommodation, and registration paid by ASSC), c) Lifetime membership in ASSC. Nominations, including self nominations, should be sent to Phil Merikle, Chair, ASSC Prize Committee (pmerikle at uwaterloo.ca). The nomination letter should include a brief statement as to why the contribution is outstanding, and for co-authored publications, there should be a statement describing the nominee?s role. To be considered, the contribution must be published or accepted for publication and be written in English. Electronic copies of the contribution and the nominee?s CV should be attached to the nomination letter. Prize Committee: Ned Block, New York University Christof Koch, California Institute of Technology. Phil Merikle, University of Waterloo Petra Stoerig, Henrich-Heine University D?sseldorf Deadline for submission of nominations is November 15, 2004. For further details see . From natasha at natasha.cc Fri Oct 15 14:45:24 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 07:45:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <20041015001818.43176.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041014181531.01a58938@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041015073045.03416170@mail.earthlink.net> At 01:18 AM 10/15/04 +0100, trendologist wrote: >Bookish? the 'typical product of our culture' leans >more towards local yokel ...they can read sports >statistics, romance novels, etc. Women are actively >encouraged to play dumb because it supposedly makes >them more feminine. Clumping all of culture together reduces the ability of systems to adjust to change. There is no typical product of our culture because you are including "our" into the concept, which means that you are including all aspects of culture and the social, technological, environmental, economic and political drivers and trends. Including all aspects would include, not exclude, the trends that drive change, intentional or not, and set the standard for cultural branding. One very significant aspect of this branding is how women are perceived. Women are not perceived as dumb for gain, whether it be sexual gain, professional gain, monetary gain, or social gain. Taking a 20th century neg-concept is of little value in our culture. Society is one thing, culture is another. Society may want to view women as dumb so that it can foster the vicious cycle of male dominance, but culture does not see it that way. Culture works as a catalyst to make social changes, and one of the prime catalytic trends is releasing women from the labels which are highly damaging. Women are actively encouraged to be smart, get an education, reduce pregnancies, and become self-reliance. In the past 100 years, women have made enormous strides to ride themselves, ourselves, of the chains of slavery and suppression. Our culture wants women to excel. Natasha Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 15 14:04:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 07:04:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015041110.85DC457E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041015140416.23046.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Saw the other day that the fellow who just won this years Nobel in economics says the Bush tax cuts were not big enough. --- Hal Finney wrote: > In recent political news, 537 economists have blasted the policies > of Bush and Kerry, for both raising and lowering taxes. The helpful > economists, who include 8 Nobel laureates, also advised the > candidates > to both increase and reduce government social programs. > > See and > . > > Well, of course this advice did not all come from the same people. > Some > of them criticized Kerry and some Bush. Neither praised any > candidates. > (Actually I didn't look to see whether anyone signed both letters.) > > Consider that these people are among the greatest experts in the > world on > economic topics, that they have devoted their entire professional > lives, > countless hours of intensive study, and intensive intellectual > scrutiny > and debate to these issues. And yet they come to diametrially > opposite > conclusions. > > Given this reality, what hope have any of us in deciding what is the > truth here? Should taxes be raised or lowered? Entitlement programs > revised up or down? If study and intelligence would lead to answers > to > these questions, why do the people who have applied both, to the > highest > degree possible, still have such sharp disagreements? > > And yet, I'll bet many politically oriented readers, especially those > who have pledged their allegiance to an ideological system, believe > that they actually know the truth of the matter. They think that > they, > with their cursory and amateur levels of study, know these issues > better > than hundreds of hardworking, brilliant experts. Or perhaps, > prompted by > ideological certainty, they will comfort themselves that those > hundreds > of experts on the other side are evil, wicked liars. > > I'm not sure what lesson to draw from this, other than to recognize > that > the world is a more complicated place than we sometimes let ourselves > believe. And perhaps, we should keep in mind that even those who > disagree > with us may have just as good reasons for their beliefs as we do for > ours. > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 15 15:30:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:30:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015061748.97759.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041015153039.28609.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > America is said to be the world's top debtor. But many > economists don't want to pay down the debt owed to > other nations, because then we'd be transfering > trillions to other nations. > So what should we do? Leave it alone? While some of the debt is to other nations, those nations use that debt as a reserve to back their own currencies. If we paid off those debts (with federal reserve notes, which are themselves debts), their currencies would tailspin into inflationary recessions. Most of the debt is actually to other Americans. Some of that is held by Americans who hold their assets in offshore instruments (which are themselves 'non-resident alien corporate persons') while others hold the debt directly. The only real way to pay off those debts with real assets is to give federal lands to those who hold the debt. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 15 17:18:19 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 10:18:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry Message-ID: <20041015171819.4CCC457E2E@finney.org> > >>>See and > >>>. Eliezer writes: > Hal Finney wrote: > > The first group recommends "substantial reversals" of Bush's tax policy. > > But the second specifically criticizes Kerry's proposal to roll back > > the tax situation to what it was before Bush took office. That looks > > pretty contradictory to me. > > I admit that you have to look at this pretty closely, knowing in advance > what economists can be expected to agree upon, to see how both sets of > signatories managed to phrase their criticism without saying anything that > would depart from the standard model. But still, they gave contradictory advice. They may agree on some broad principles, but they apparently apply them differently in the present situation. Do you think the anti-Bush signers would agree that rolling back his tax cuts would "sap the economy's vitality, ...inhibit capital formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less competitive internationally"? For another data point take a look at this Economist article, . It has some nice bar charts showing the results of a poll of 100 randomly selected academic economists. Again, strong disagreements are present. These economists appear to be as polarized as the uninformed public as far as which policies are better. my original point was how the average person should decide these issues. Especially in the context of voting, how much study is worthwhile? If even decades of study by the smartest people in the land lead to contradictions, doesn't this suggest that studying the issues is not a successful method for making better voting decisions? > > If so, maybe someone did sign them both! > > Unlikely; how many economists are likely to be both partisan Republicans > and partisan Democrats? Which came first; the partisan positions, or the economic opinions? Did the ones who claim that the Bush tax cuts were disastrous say that because they are Democrats; or did they determine that such policies lead to disaster, and on this basis decide that they should become Democrats? The first case would be intellectually dishonest, and I will reject that for now. The second case further shows the paradox that different people, equally intelligent and following the same course of study, can come to diametrically opposite conclusions on such issues as whether cutting taxes in present circumstances leads to disaster. In that case, if I decided that I was going to learn all there was to know about economics and decide for myself the truth of the matter, it would be entirely random which conclusion I would come to. Maybe I would become one of the people who believe that the Bush tax cuts lead to disaster; or maybe I would become someone who believes that rolling back those tax cuts would be harmful. It apparently will be as random as flipping a coin. So wouldn't it make more sense just to flip the coin rather than to expend all those years of study? Neither approach is going to bring me any closer to the truth, and the coin is a heck of a lot easier. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 15 18:30:25 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 11:30:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015171819.4CCC457E2E@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041015183025.58251.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hal Finney wrote: > > But still, they gave contradictory advice. You are surprised? You've got all the Keynesians and the rest of the liberal democrats, socialists, and other left-leaning pseud-economists against Bush and all the Austrians and Chicago folks supporting Bush or saying he didn't cut taxes enough. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 15 22:01:56 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 18:01:56 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015171819.4CCC457E2E@finney.org> References: <20041015171819.4CCC457E2E@finney.org> Message-ID: <417048D4.8030206@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: >>>>>See and >>>>>. > > Eliezer writes: >> >>I admit that you have to look at this pretty closely, knowing in advance >>what economists can be expected to agree upon, to see how both sets of >>signatories managed to phrase their criticism without saying anything that >>would depart from the standard model. > > But still, they gave contradictory advice. They may agree on some broad > principles, but they apparently apply them differently in the present > situation. Do you think the anti-Bush signers would agree that rolling > back his tax cuts would "sap the economy's vitality, ...inhibit capital > formation, depress productivity growth, and make the United States less > competitive internationally"? My guess? They would probably try to phrase it differently, or duck the question, in some way that avoided their needing to argue in a peer-visible forum that the statement above was actually false. > For another data point take a look at this Economist article, > . > It has some nice bar charts showing the results of a poll of 100 randomly > selected academic economists. Again, strong disagreements are present. > These economists appear to be as polarized as the uninformed public as > far as which policies are better. Ah, but they were asked if they approved or disapproved. They were not asked to predict consequences. >>>If so, maybe someone did sign them both! >> >>Unlikely; how many economists are likely to be both partisan Republicans >>and partisan Democrats? > > Which came first; the partisan positions, or the economic opinions? > Did the ones who claim that the Bush tax cuts were disastrous say that > because they are Democrats; or did they determine that such policies lead > to disaster, and on this basis decide that they should become Democrats? Given human nature, and the likely causal history, I would guess with a very, very high degree of probability that the partisan positions came first. > The first case would be intellectually dishonest, Macroeconomists are not Bayesian masters, Hal. Only the heuristics-and-biases folks would even have begun to accumulate the skills of rationality. Macroeconomists are just ordinary human beings who happen to be macroeconomists. They play politics, they pick dimwit positions on the basis of the politics they started with and find some way to rationalize it. By far the greatest determinant of your choice of political party is the party your parents belonged to. 95% correlation. That's human nature for ya. > and I will reject that for now. Reject the obvious and most probable explanation so you can carry through the moral you selected in advance as your conclusion? Isn't that intellectually dishonest? > The second case further shows the paradox that different > people, equally intelligent and following the same course of study, > can come to diametrically opposite conclusions on such issues as whether > cutting taxes in present circumstances leads to disaster. > > In that case, if I decided that I was going to learn all there was to know > about economics and decide for myself the truth of the matter, it would be > entirely random which conclusion I would come to. Maybe I would become > one of the people who believe that the Bush tax cuts lead to disaster; > or maybe I would become someone who believes that rolling back those > tax cuts would be harmful. It apparently will be as random as flipping > a coin. So wouldn't it make more sense just to flip the coin rather > than to expend all those years of study? Neither approach is going to > bring me any closer to the truth, and the coin is a heck of a lot easier. If nothing else, study would tell you which ideas are universally agreed to be stupid. This helps. A lot. We've clashed over this before, Hal, and my position remains the same as last time: Advanced rationality is a massively interdisciplinary science and a high-level martial art, and one who has not mastered the skills will use their intelligence to defeat itself. It takes a hell of a lot of rationality for someone to transcend political silliness. Why would you expect it of macroeconomists? Rationality is not their specialty. They're just, like, macroeconomists. When it comes to politics, most economists' brains switch off just like most people's. But you can probably get a fair amount of agreement from macroeconomists on consequences, so long as they're not allowed to say "good" or "bad", just flatly describe probable consequences. You can get even more agreement if you ask them about past outcomes in similar cases instead of futures, and if you don't tell them which candidate is endorsing which policy. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From hibbert at mydruthers.com Fri Oct 15 23:49:09 2004 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 16:49:09 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <417048D4.8030206@pobox.com> References: <20041015171819.4CCC457E2E@finney.org> <417048D4.8030206@pobox.com> Message-ID: <417061F5.2030203@mydruthers.com> Eli wrote: > By far the greatest determinant of your choice of political > party is the party your parents belonged to. 95% correlation. > That's human nature for ya. That seems plausible for people who hew to one of the major parties, but it seems doubtful for anyone else. (Hmm. maybe I only mean libertarians, now that I try to think about Greens, Socialist, Birchers, etc.) Has anyone tried to figure out whether there is a good predictor for who will turn out to be a libertarian? I'd bet that most lib's parents weren't libertarians. (And BTW, do you have actual statistics you can reference on that 95% correlation, or is it a figure reconstructed from what you know about human nature?) Chris -- C. J. Cherryh, "Invader", on why we visit very old buildings: "A sense of age, of profound truths. Respect for something hands made, that's stood through storms and wars and time. It persuades us that things we do may last and matter." Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com http://mydruthers.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 16 03:34:02 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:34:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: towards the Sun? In-Reply-To: <004e01c4b1bb$9f84ae90$51b71b97@administxl09yj> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041007172655.019d90f8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <004e01c4b1bb$9f84ae90$51b71b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041015222925.01a03e30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Serafino tipped me off to these interesting papers: >http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/0409117 >http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0409615 The first proposes: It is amusing that this inverts Vinge's schema in the Zoned Galaxy sequence, and perhaps in Poul Anderson's classic BRAIN WAVE. It might imply that the ferocious fluxes in the center of galaxies is where we'll find the fastest minds. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 16 03:50:45 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:50:45 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] an interesting new QT model of gravity Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041015224918.01ab7ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Sorry for the odd subject line of my previous post. I should add this: Ahem. His website says: < Kris Krogh Sr. Electronics Technician Kris Krogh designs instrumentation for the Jacobs color vision lab. He studied undergraduate physics at UCSB and graduate optics at the University of Rochester's Institute of Optics. Areas of expertise include electronic and mechanical design, optics, software engineering and digital signal processing. Outside interests include running, skiing, guitar, salsa and swing dancing, and nature. He also does theoretical physics. > Damien Broderick From sahynepu at concentric.net Sat Oct 16 04:36:56 2004 From: sahynepu at concentric.net (Sahyinepu) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:36:56 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A more advanced neural interface chip In-Reply-To: <20041014203443.15248.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02A76417-1F2D-11D9-A267-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> what a neat article.... I assume people are thinking of developing the technology for purposes other than helping the disabled? I am interested in the thinking of some to combine computer technology with the human mind/brain directly to help increase human intelligence. This sort of thing, enhancing humans with technology, has always fascinated me...I have never understood some people's attachment to their form, even when such attachment prevents them from improving their condition. Sah On Thursday, October 14, 2004, at 03:34 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041011/full/041011-9.html > > Now if only they'd disclose how much it cost, and open > up training on installing the chip. I'm sure there > are several people who'd be willing to have this > installed even if they had to fund their own > participation, and even if it required extensive > customization by experts (thus, high labor costs) at > this time. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 16 06:14:37 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:14:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] A more advanced neural interface chip In-Reply-To: <02A76417-1F2D-11D9-A267-000502FB8EC2@concentric.net> Message-ID: <20041016061437.60904.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sahyinepu wrote: > I assume people are thinking of developing the > technology for purposes > other than helping the disabled? Some are, but unfortunately this doesn't get as much funding, especially outside of military projects. Then again, no one's yet come up with a way to do human-equivalent control cheaply enough to make enhancement economically practical - yet. It currently only makes sense when natural capabilities aren't an option - i.e., for the disabled. I hope that changes, and that phrasing things that way helps illustrate exactly what would need to happen for that change to occur. > I > have never > understood some people's attachment to their form, > even when such > attachment prevents them from improving their > condition. Nostalgia, fear that the "upgrade" would in truth be a downgrade (which happens from time to time with poorly-planned deployments of more mundane technology - and has been shown to be avoided with proper planning), awareness that enhancement currently is not viable combined with a lack of imagination (or even just logical prediction based on ancient but still just as relevant historic trends), warped senses of "fairness", worries that only the rich would be able to afford enhancements (which, again, blatantly ignores history's lessons)...there are many reasons. None of them truly justified or justifiable, but they still exist. From sjatkins at gmail.com Sat Oct 16 06:54:53 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:54:53 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <002801c4afe8$4068a5d0$e40fecdc@turtle> References: <20041011202257.53433.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <002801c4afe8$4068a5d0$e40fecdc@turtle> Message-ID: <948b11e04101523541f5d3dfb@mail.gmail.com> Please explain how these principles can be practiced without also acting in and considering the nature of the political domain. Can we make these things real in our lives without application to the political also? I don't believe so. Therefore I do not see that politics as such, including local politics (e.g., of one's country) is off-topic per se. -samantha From sjatkins at gmail.com Sat Oct 16 07:01:38 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 00:01:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] US Justice Dept. wants new antipiracy powers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <948b11e041016000152088ffc@mail.gmail.com> It seems obvious that little of these extra-Constitutional powers is remotely about drugs, terrorism, or "piracy". It is about power to monitor and control every aspect of citizen's lives. IMHO, it is about fear, deep fear of a future that doesn't look like what existing powers are used to. It is a fight against change itself. The real and/or trumped up "evil" used for justification is not terribly relevant to the shape of the "cure". - samantha On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 07:13:16 +0200, Amara Graps wrote: > >From boing-boing (http://www.boingboing.net/) : > > "At a press conference in Los Angeles today, Atttorney General John > Ashcroft announced an expansion of Department of Justice powers to > combat intellectual property theft. Some say the approach appears to be > modeled after the war on drugs." > > and then to the source: > > http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5406654.html > > Justice Dept. wants new antipiracy powers > By Declan McCullagh CNET News.com October 12, 2004, 4:42 PM PT > > The U.S. Justice Department recommended a sweeping transformation of the > nation's intellectual-property laws, saying peer-to-peer piracy is a > "widespread" problem that can be addressed only through more spending, > more FBI agents and more power for prosecutors. > > In an extensive report released Tuesday, senior department officials > endorsed a pair of controversial copyright bills strongly favored by the > entertainment industry that would criminalize "passive sharing" on > file-swapping networks and permit lawsuits against companies that sell > products that "induce" copyright infringement. > > "The department is prepared to build the strongest, most aggressive > legal assault against intellectual-property crime in our nation's > history," Attorney General John Ashcroft, who created the task force in > March, said at a press conference in Los Angeles on Tuesday afternoon. > > In an example of the Justice Department's hunger for new > copyright-related police powers, the report asks Congress to introduce > legislation that would permit wiretaps to be used in investigating > serious intellectual-property offenses and that would create a new crime > of the "importation" of pirated products. It also suggests stationing > FBI agents and prosecutors in Hong Kong and Budapest, Hungary, to aid > local officials and "develop training programs on intellectual-property > enforcement." > > [see article for more] > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 16 11:16:07 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 12:16:07 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20041015073045.03416170@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20041016111607.80513.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Well, perhaps my mind is still in the twentieth century. In one sense I'm a conservative, in that my reference point is the past. Incidentally a post-modernist student told me culture is a construct-- is that so? > Clumping all of culture together reduces the ability > of systems to adjust > to change. There is no typical product of our > culture because you are > including "our" into the concept, which means that > you are including all > aspects of culture and the social, technological, > environmental, economic > and political drivers and trends. Including all > aspects would include, not > exclude, the trends that drive change, intentional > or not, and set the > standard for cultural branding. One very > significant aspect of this > branding is how women are perceived. Women are not > perceived as dumb for > gain, whether it be sexual gain, professional gain, > monetary gain, or > social gain. > > Taking a 20th century neg-concept is of little value > in our > culture. Society is one thing, culture is another. > Society may want to > view women as dumb so that it can foster the vicious > cycle of male > dominance, but culture does not see it that way. > Culture works as a > catalyst to make social changes, and one of the > prime catalytic trends is > releasing women from the labels which are highly > damaging. > > Women are actively encouraged to be smart, get an > education, reduce > pregnancies, and become self-reliance. In the past > 100 years, women have > made enormous strides to ride themselves, ourselves, > of the chains of > slavery and suppression. > > Our culture wants women to excel. > > Natasha > > > Natasha Vita-More > http://www.natasha.cc > ---------- > President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org > Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture > http://www.transhumanist.biz > http://www.transhuman.org > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 16 12:11:48 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:11:48 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041015153039.28609.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041016121148.65425.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> If you scroll down, this economist discusses the same topic towards the end of his forecast record: http://www.ravibatra.com/my_forecasting_record.htm > While some of the debt is to other nations, those > nations use that debt > as a reserve to back their own currencies. If we > paid off those debts > (with federal reserve notes, which are themselves > debts), their > currencies would tailspin into inflationary > recessions. Most of the > debt is actually to other Americans. Some of that is > held by Americans > who hold their assets in offshore instruments (which > are themselves > 'non-resident alien corporate persons') while others > hold the debt > directly. > > The only real way to pay off those debts with real > assets is to give > federal lands to those who hold the debt. > > ===== > 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!? > Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! > http://vote.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From benboc at lineone.net Sat Oct 16 13:32:53 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:32:53 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <200410151531.i9FFVn005087@tick.javien.com> References: <200410151531.i9FFVn005087@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <41712305.4090205@lineone.net> Natasha Vita-More wrote: "Society is one thing, culture is another. Society may want to view women as dumb so that it can foster the vicious cycle of male dominance, but culture does not see it that way. Culture works as a catalyst to make social changes" I'm confused by this. I understood 'culture' to be a *product* of 'society', and i don't see how they can be at odds in the way described. I do agree that there is no typical product of 'culture' as a whole, mainly because there is such a huge variety in our (i mean western) society. In fact, i think it's all but meaningless. There is no coherent culture, only sub-cultures. Society produces many different cultural groups, some of them with wildly different bases and behaviours. What, culturally, do a woman who lives in, say, Salt Lake City and one who lives in New York City have in common (assuming they are both stereotypical inhabitants of those places)? The culture of one may well include catalysts for social change, but i very much doubt if the other would. Btw, I've never been to either place, so my examples may be bad ones (if so, blame TV!), but i'm sure you know what i'm getting at. ben From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 16 14:20:36 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:20:36 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] (no subject) Message-ID: <20041016142036.45019.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> An Austrian-School economist, Mike Rosen, wrote in his Friday 15 April column (paraphrased): 'though tobacco users get sick and cost us funds for their medical treatment [and presumably burial as well] they die younger so they take less from pension plans'. He is cold blooded but minces no words. He continued (again paraphrased): 'tobacco tax-increase referendas are nannyistic, make bureaucrats feel more important and further their payrolls & secret agendas'. He goes on to say: 'when voting in referendas, the basic rule of thumb is to vote "No", because most referendas are ploys to increase the size of bureaucracies'. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Sat Oct 16 18:38:00 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:38:00 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] an interesting new QT model of gravity References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041015224918.01ab7ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <001601c4b3af$443529c0$26c21b97@administxl09yj> [D.B.] Ahem. His website says: "Kris Krogh Sr. Electronics Technician" Heh! Everyone seems to be interested in Pioneer anomalous acceleration http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0307042 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0405076 Nottale's expanation of the Pioneer anomaly is based on Mach's principle (and I like it, because everyone says Mach was wrong). Nottale just reconciles a local coordinate system with a global one by simply matching two metrics at the orbital distances of the Pioneer. Another paper, by Carlos Castro, showing the maximal proper force to be related to Born's Dual Principle of Relativity combined with Mach's ideas about the dynamics of the masses in the universe http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0211053 seems to point out a possible connection between micro & macro (an idea Dirac had, and wrote about). Btw (nothing to do with the above), there is a paper, by G.Kalbermann, which - according to a real expert of relativity, strings, etc. - is consistent (at least). http://www.arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9910063 'Communication through an extra dimension' 12 pages, Int.J.Mod.Phys. A15 (2000) 3197-3206 'If our visible universe is considered a trapped shell in a five-dimensional hyper-universe, all matter in it may be connected by superluminal signals traveling through the fifth dimension. Events in the shell are still causal, however, the propagation of signals proceeds at different velocities depending on the fifth coordinate.' (Something we all heard about, but I never read a canonical paper) From scerir at libero.it Sat Oct 16 18:51:22 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:51:22 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force References: <20041016142036.45019.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001001c4b3b1$21f9d160$26c21b97@administxl09yj> http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-10/p11.html From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 16 20:00:46 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 15:00:46 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Power of Nightmares Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041016150008.019caea8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> an interesting viewpoint: The Making of the Terror Myth By ANDY BECKETT The Guardian (U.K.) Since the attacks on the United States in September 2001, there have been more than a thousand references in British national newspapers, working out at almost one every single day, to the phrase "dirty bomb". There have been articles about how such a device can use ordinary explosives to spread lethal radiation; about how London would be evacuated in the event of such a detonation; about the Home Secretary David Blunkett's statement on terrorism in November 2002 that specifically raised the possibility of a dirty bomb being planted in Britain; and about the arrests of several groups of people, the latest only last month, for allegedly plotting exactly that. Starting next Wednesday, BBC2 is to broadcast a three-part documentary series that will add further to what could be called the dirty bomb genre. But, as its title suggests, The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear takes a different view of the weapon's potential. "I don't think it would kill anybody," says Dr Theodore Rockwell, an authority on radiation, in an interview for the series. "You'll have trouble finding a serious report that would claim otherwise." The American department of energy, Rockwell continues, has simulated a dirty bomb explosion, "and they calculated that the most exposed individual would get a fairly high dose [of radiation], not life-threatening." And even this minor threat is open to question. The test assumed that no one fled the explosion for one year. During the three years in which the "war on terror" has been waged, high-profile challenges to its assumptions have been rare. The sheer number of incidents and warnings connected or attributed to the war has left little room, it seems, for heretical thoughts. In this context, the central theme of The Power of Nightmares is riskily counter-intuitive and provocative. Much of the currently perceiv ed threat from international terrorism, the series argues, "is a fantasy that has been exaggerated and distorted by politicians. It is a dark illusion that has spread unquestioned through governments around the world, the security services, and the international media." The series' explanation for this is even bolder: "In an age when all the grand ideas have lost credibility, fear of a phantom enemy is all the politicians have left to maintain their power." Adam Curtis, who wrote and produced the series, acknowledges the difficulty of saying such things now. "If a bomb goes off, the fear I have is that everyone will say, 'You're completely wrong,' even if the incident doesn't touch my argument. This shows the way we have all become trapped, the way even I have become trapped by a fear that is completely irrational." So controversial is the tone of his series, that trailers for it were not broadcast last weekend because of the killing of Kenneth Bigley.At the BBC, Curtis freely admits, there are "anxieties". But there is also enthusiasm for the programmes, in part thanks to his reputation. Over the past dozen years, via similarly ambitious documentary series such as Pandora's Box, The Mayfair Set and The Century of the Self, Curtis has established himself as perhaps the most acclaimed maker of serious television programmes in Britain. His trademarks are long research, the revelatory use of archive footage, telling interviews, and smooth, insistent voiceovers concerned with the unnoticed deeper currents of recent history, narrated by Curtis himself in tones that combine traditional BBC authority with something more modern and sceptical: "I want to try to make people look at things they think they know about in a new way." The Power of Nightmares seeks to overturn much of what is widely believed about Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. The latter, it argues, is not an organised international network. It does not have members or a leader. It does not have "sleeper cells". It does not h ave an overall strategy. In fact, it barely exists at all, except as an idea about cleansing a corrupt world through religious violence. Curtis' evidence for these assertions is not easily dismissed. He tells the story of Islamism, or the desire to establish Islam as an unbreakable political framework, as half a century of mostly failed, short-lived revolutions and spectacular but politically ineffective terrorism. Curtis points out that al-Qaida did not even have a name until early 2001, when the American government decided to prosecute Bin Laden in his absence and had to use anti-Mafia laws that required the existence of a named criminal organisation. Curtis also cites the Home Office's own statistics for arrests and convictions of suspected terrorists since September 11 2001. Of the 664 people detained up to the end of last month, only 17 have been found guilty. Of these, the majority were Irish Republicans, Sikh militants or members of other groups with no connection to Islamist terrorism. Nobody has been convicted who is a proven member of al-Qaida. In fact, Curtis is not alone in wondering about all this. Quietly but increasingly, other observers of the war on terror have been having similar doubts. "The grand concept of the war has not succeeded," says Jonathan Eyal, director of the British military thinktank the Royal United Services Institute. "In purely military terms, it has been an inconclusive war ... a rather haphazard operation. Al-Qaida managed the most spectacular attack, but clearly it is also being sustained by the way that we rather cavalierly stick the name al-Qaida on Iraq, Indonesia, the Philippines. There is a long tradition that if you divert all your resources to a threat, then you exaggerate it." Bill Durodie, director of the international centre for security analysis at King's College London, says: "The reality [of the al-Qaida threat to the west] has been essentially a one-off. There has been one incident in the developed world since 9/ 11 [the Madrid bombings]. There's no real evidence that all these groups are connected." Crispin Black, a senior government intelligence analyst until 2002, is more cautious but admits the terrorist threat presented by politicians and the media is "out of date and too one-dimensional. We think there is a bit of a gulf between the terrorists' ambition and their ability to pull it off." Terrorism, by definition, depends on an element of bluff. Yet ever since terrorists in the modern sense of the term (the word terrorism was actually coined to describe the strategy of a government, the authoritarian French revolutionary regime of the 1790s) began to assassinate politicians and then members of the public during the 19th century, states have habitually overreacted. Adam Roberts, professor of international relations at Oxford, says that governments often believe struggles with terrorists "to be of absolute cosmic significance", and that therefore "anything goes" when it comes to winning. The historian Linda Colley adds: "States and their rulers expect to monopolise violence, and that is why they react so virulently to terrorism." Britain may also be particularly sensitive to foreign infiltrators, fifth columnists and related menaces. In spite, or perhaps because of, the absence of an actual invasion for many centuries, British history is marked by frequent panics about the arrival of Spanish raiding parties, French revolutionary agitators, anarchists, bolsheviks and Irish terrorists. "These kind of panics rarely happen without some sort of cause," says Colley. "But politicians make the most of them." They are not the only ones who find opportunities. "Almost no one questions this myth about al-Qaida because so many people have got an interest in keeping it alive," says Curtis. He cites the suspiciously circular relationship between the security services and much of the media since September 2001: the way in which official briefings about terrorism, often unverified or unverifiable b y journalists, have become dramatic press stories which - in a jittery media-driven democracy - have prompted further briefings and further stories. Few of these ominous announcements are retracted if they turn out to be baseless: "There is no fact-checking about al-Qaida." In one sense, of course, Curtis himself is part of the al-Qaida industry. The Power of Nightmares began as an investigation of something else, the rise of modern American conservatism. Curtis was interested in Leo Strauss, a political philosopher at the university of Chicago in the 50s who rejected the liberalism of postwar America as amoral and who thought that the country could be rescued by a revived belief in America's unique role to battle evil in the world. Strauss's certainty and his emphasis on the use of grand myths as a higher form of political propaganda created a group of influential disciples such as Paul Wolfowitz, now the US deputy defence secretary. They came to prominence by talking up the Russian threat during the cold war and have applied a similar strategy in the war on terror. As Curtis traced the rise of the "Straussians", he came to a conclusion that would form the basis for The Power of Nightmares. Straussian conservatism had a previously unsuspected amount in common with Islamism: from origins in the 50s, to a formative belief that liberalism was the enemy, to an actual period of Islamist-Straussian collaboration against the Soviet Union during the war in Afghanistan in the 80s (both movements have proved adept at finding new foes to keep them going). Although the Islamists and the Straussians have fallen out since then, as the attacks on America in 2001 graphically demonstrated, they are in another way, Curtis concludes, collaborating still: in sustaining the "fantasy" of the war on terror. Some may find all this difficult to swallow. But Curtis insists,"There is no way that I'm trying to be controversial just for the sake of it." Neither is he trying to be an anti-conservative pol emicist like Michael Moore: "[Moore's] purpose is avowedly political. My hope is that you won't be able to tell what my politics are." For all the dizzying ideas and visual jolts and black jokes in his programmes, Curtis describes his intentions in sober, civic-minded terms. "If you go back into history and plod through it, the myth falls away. You see that these aren't terrifying new monsters. It's drawing the poison of the fear." But whatever the reception of the series, this fear could be around for a while. It took the British government decades to dismantle the draconian laws it passed against French revolutionary infiltrators; the cold war was sustained for almost half a century without Russia invading the west, or even conclusive evidence that it ever intended to. "The archives have been opened," says the cold war historian David Caute, "but they don't bring evidence to bear on this." And the danger from Islamist terrorists, whatever its scale, is concrete. A sceptical observer of the war on terror in the British security services says: "All they need is a big bomb every 18 months to keep this going." The war on terror already has a hold on western political culture. "After a 300-year debate between freedom of the individual and protection of society, the protection of society seems to be the only priority," says Eyal. Black agrees: "We are probably moving to a point in the UK where national security becomes the electoral question." Some critics of this situation see our striking susceptibility during the 90s to other anxieties - the millennium bug, MMR, genetically modified food - as a sort of dress rehearsal for the war on terror. The press became accustomed to publishing scare stories and not retracting them; politicians became accustomed to responding to supposed threats rather than questioning them; the public became accustomed to the idea that some sort of apocalypse might be just around the corner. "Insecurity is the key driving concept of our times," says Durodi e. "Politicians have packaged themselves as risk managers. There is also a demand from below for protection." The real reason for this insecurity, he argues, is the decay of the 20th century's political belief systems and social structures: people have been left "disconnected" and "fearful". Yet the notion that "security politics" is the perfect instrument for every ambitious politician from Blunkett to Wolfowitz also has its weaknesses. The fears of the public, in Britain at least, are actually quite erratic: when the opinion pollsters Mori asked people what they felt was the most important political issue, the figure for "defence and foreign affairs" leapt from 2% to 60% after the attacks of September 2001, yet by January 2002 had fallen back almost to its earlier level. And then there are the twin risks that the terrors politicians warn of will either not materialise or will materialise all too brutally, and in both cases the politicians will be blamed. "This is a very rickety platform from which to build up a political career," says Eyal. He sees the war on terror as a hurried improvisation rather than some grand Straussian strategy: "In democracies, in order to galvanize the public for war, you have to make the enemy bigger, uglier and more menacing." Afterwards, I look at a website for a well-connected American foreign policy lobbying group called the Committee on the Present Danger. The committee features in The Power of Nightmares as a vehicle for alarmist Straussian propaganda during the cold war. After the Soviet collapse, as the website puts it, "The mission of the committee was considered complete." But then the website goes on: "Today radical Islamists threaten the safety of the American people. Like the cold war, securing our freedom is a long-term struggle. The road to victory begins ... " From hal at finney.org Sat Oct 16 20:23:55 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry Message-ID: <20041016202355.3BF5757E2E@finney.org> See and . Eliezer wrote: > Hal Finney wrote: > > Which came first; the partisan positions, or the economic opinions? > > Did the ones who claim that the Bush tax cuts were disastrous say that > > because they are Democrats; or did they determine that such policies lead > > to disaster, and on this basis decide that they should become Democrats? > > Given human nature, and the likely causal history, I would guess with a > very, very high degree of probability that the partisan positions came first. > > > The first case would be intellectually dishonest, > > Macroeconomists are not Bayesian masters, Hal. Only the > heuristics-and-biases folks would even have begun to accumulate the skills > of rationality. Macroeconomists are just ordinary human beings who happen > to be macroeconomists. They play politics, they pick dimwit positions on > the basis of the politics they started with and find some way to > rationalize it. > > By far the greatest determinant of your choice of political party is the > party your parents belonged to. 95% correlation. That's human nature for ya. > > > and I will reject that for now. > > Reject the obvious and most probable explanation so you can carry through > the moral you selected in advance as your conclusion? Isn't that > intellectually dishonest? That wasn't what I was trying to do. I am genuinely surprised at the suggestion that 95% of economists end up with the same ideological position after their studies. I suppose it's possible, though. It would be interesting to here what someone like Robin Hanson would say about this, having recently gone through an econ PhD program. I would have guessed that there would be quite a bit of ideological influence by the teachers and colleagues. Harvard probably graduates quite a different ideological mix than U of Chicago. Of course it's difficult to trace out cause and effect here. But in the context of my puzzle about whether study of political and economic issues is worthwhile and will bring you closer to the truth, this 95% result is just as discouraging. Apparently I can expect that as a result of years of study, I will hold the same views I do now, only I'll have better grounds for them! Well, I'm being facetious. If two people of opposite ideologies both get economics degrees and hold to their positions, then at least one of them in some sense has moved farther from the truth. He has taken in information that should have converted him to the other side, and has perverted it, distorted it, and forced it to fit into his ideological preconceptions. It's like the puzzle that Bryan Moss offered: which is better, to hold an unjustified true belief or a justified false one? I thought that was a good question and not easy to answer. But I do think that if your course of study only further entrenches you in a false belief, it was not to your benefit. > If nothing else, study would tell you which ideas are universally agreed to > be stupid. This helps. A lot. That's true, but it doesn't seem to go to the heart of the paradox. > We've clashed over this before, Hal, and my position remains the same as > last time: Advanced rationality is a massively interdisciplinary science > and a high-level martial art, and one who has not mastered the skills will > use their intelligence to defeat itself. It takes a hell of a lot of > rationality for someone to transcend political silliness. Why would you > expect it of macroeconomists? Rationality is not their specialty. They're > just, like, macroeconomists. When it comes to politics, most economists' > brains switch off just like most people's. But you can probably get a fair > amount of agreement from macroeconomists on consequences, so long as > they're not allowed to say "good" or "bad", just flatly describe probable > consequences. You can get even more agreement if you ask them about past > outcomes in similar cases instead of futures, and if you don't tell them > which candidate is endorsing which policy. I don't particularly remember clashing with anyone on this issue, but what you say makes sense here. However doesn't it actually strengthen the conclusion that for the average person, not an advanced rationalist, study of political and economic issues is not going to move him closer to the truth, when it comes down to the final decision between alternative policies? Doesn't that strike you as a paradoxical result? Hal From hal at finney.org Sat Oct 16 20:37:07 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLL: Principles of Extropy Message-ID: <20041016203707.C97E157E2E@finney.org> Samantha Atkins writes: > Please explain how these principles can be practiced without also > acting in and considering the nature of the political domain. Can we > make these things real in our lives without application to the > political also? I don't believe so. Therefore I do not see that > politics as such, including local politics (e.g., of one's country) is > off-topic per se. I don't think all political discussions are off topic; in fact as you may have noticed I launched my own politics thread in part to illustrate how I think we can discuss politics in a more Extropian manner. I am trying to discuss somewhat "meta" issues in terms of how we do politics, and how politics as an institution works, and how we might think about other institutions. There's a long history of Extropian discussion on these matters. But as far as the pure discussion of whether Bush or Kerry is better, and the even more contentious issues like whether the Iraq war was justified, I don't know that we are very successful or productive in those discussions. Arguing Bush vs Kerry is, as far as I am concerned, much like arguing Yankees vs Red Sox. We have as much influence on the outcome in each case. It activates vestigial monkey instincts to have these arguments and gives us some primal satisfaction to vent, but I don't think it is a truly valuable and beneficial experience for anyone. It just gets people mad, to no constructive end. If you really care about politics, I recommend getting involved with local political groups and campaigns. Now is a perfect time to do so, many people are just getting interested and I think most campaigns will welcome volunteers. That's a more productive way to spend your time than shouting on a mailing list. You'll meet interesting people and make a difference. And I suspect that you're far more likely to convert a voter by going to his door, shaking his hand and handing out a piece of literature than by even the most impassioned online argumentation, which will inevitably be countered by an equally impassioned advocate for the other side. Hal From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 16 21:35:24 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 14:35:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLL: Principles of Extropy References: <20041016203707.C97E157E2E@finney.org> Message-ID: <000c01c4b3c8$0c62d010$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: ""Hal Finney"" >... Arguing Bush vs Kerry is, as far as I am concerned, > much like arguing Yankees vs Red Sox. Disagree. Maybe more like Yankees v. Bad News Bears. Or Richard Feynman to Barney the Dinosaur (the latter is a comparison Mark Morford made ... not I): http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/gate/archive/2004/10/15/notes101504.DTL&type=printable > We have as much influence on the > outcome in each case. Yes, but ... > Maybe not, but It activates vestigial monkey instincts to have > these arguments and gives us some primal satisfaction to vent ... ... eee ooh ahh!!! Olga From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Oct 17 00:04:04 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:04:04 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <41712305.4090205@lineone.net> References: <200410151531.i9FFVn005087@tick.javien.com> <200410151531.i9FFVn005087@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041016164521.03416a10@mail.earthlink.net> At 02:32 PM 10/16/04 +0100, you wrote: >Natasha Vita-More wrote: > >"Society is one thing, culture is another. Society may want to >view women as dumb so that it can foster the vicious cycle of male >dominance, but culture does not see it that way. Culture works as a >catalyst to make social changes" > >I'm confused by this. > >I understood 'culture' to be a *product* of 'society', and i don't see how >they can be at odds in the way described. They are not at "odds." An apple is an apple and a pear is pear. This does make them at odds with one another. Society is the relationship between people and common interests of people, and that can be as broad as sharing chromosomes or individualized as preference in cuisine. Culture the development of intellectual and creative activity and the products of such activity. It is also the patterns of behavior endemic to certain communities and reflects the ideas and ideals of that community. >I do agree that there is no typical product of 'culture' as a whole, >mainly because there is such a huge variety in our (i mean western) >society. In fact, i think it's all but meaningless. There is no coherent >culture, only sub-cultures. There are cultures, such as the scientific world and the arts world. There are also subcultures which are groups that grow out of these cultures and form their own hubs of beliefs, style and products. >Society produces many different cultural groups, some of them with wildly >different bases and behaviours. What, culturally, do a woman who lives in, >say, Salt Lake City and one who lives in New York City have in common >(assuming they are both stereotypical inhabitants of those places)? The Internet. And a whole lot more. Remember we do live in the 21st century and the person in Salt Lake City might have business in New York. The two women could also wear Tom Ford designs, or practice yoga. Or they might even be transhumanists. >The culture of one may well include catalysts for social change, but i >very much doubt if the other would. Culture is indeed a driver of social change. The art culture is a very important driver of social change. You can takes these apart and say that it is the economics of art that is the real driver of social change or the applied technology used in the art. The world is a very large system full of all sorts of connections and interrelationships that are very connected so you can look at it from many perspectives. >Btw, I've never been to either place, so my examples may be bad ones (if >so, blame TV!), but i'm sure you know what i'm getting at. Not really, but I enjoyed your response. Best, Natasha Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Oct 17 00:06:57 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:06:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] John C. Wright finds god In-Reply-To: <20041016111607.80513.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <5.2.0.9.0.20041015073045.03416170@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041016170452.0341f250@mail.earthlink.net> Your friend might be a reductionist or a deconstructivist, or simply like to build things from other things. But isn't life a matter of taking what is around us, or what we pay attention to, and making our own connections and then calling it art? Nothing wrong with that at all. Natasha At 12:16 PM 10/16/04 +0100, you wrote: >Well, perhaps my mind is still in the twentieth >century. In one sense I'm a conservative, in that my >reference point is the past. >Incidentally a post-modernist student told me culture >is a construct-- is that so? > > > Clumping all of culture together reduces the ability > > of systems to adjust > > to change. There is no typical product of our > > culture because you are > > including "our" into the concept, which means that > > you are including all > > aspects of culture and the social, technological, > > environmental, economic > > and political drivers and trends. Including all > > aspects would include, not > > exclude, the trends that drive change, intentional > > or not, and set the > > standard for cultural branding. One very > > significant aspect of this > > branding is how women are perceived. Women are not > > perceived as dumb for > > gain, whether it be sexual gain, professional gain, > > monetary gain, or > > social gain. > > > > Taking a 20th century neg-concept is of little value > > in our > > culture. Society is one thing, culture is another. > > Society may want to > > view women as dumb so that it can foster the vicious > > cycle of male > > dominance, but culture does not see it that way. > > Culture works as a > > catalyst to make social changes, and one of the > > prime catalytic trends is > > releasing women from the labels which are highly > > damaging. > > > > Women are actively encouraged to be smart, get an > > education, reduce > > pregnancies, and become self-reliance. In the past > > 100 years, women have > > made enormous strides to ride themselves, ourselves, > > of the chains of > > slavery and suppression. > > > > Our culture wants women to excel. > > > > Natasha > > > > > > Natasha Vita-More > > http://www.natasha.cc > > ---------- > > President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org > > Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture > > http://www.transhumanist.biz > > http://www.transhuman.org > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! >Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 17 00:50:25 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:50:25 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000a01c4b3e3$4d6c0750$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Amara Graps > some large pieces from this wonderful article about the > Dr. Strangelove Movie ........ "that was a documentary!" > > Amara > ... > two admittedly regrettable but nevertheless distinguishable postwar > environments - one where you get 20 million people killed and the > other where you get 150 million people killed!" ... > "Wouldn't this nucleus of survivors be so grief-stricken and anguished > that they'd, well, envy the dead?" > > Strangelove exclaims that, to the contrary, many would feel "a spirit > of bold curiosity for the adventure ahead." Kahn's book contains a > long chapter on mineshafts. Its title: "Will the Survivors Envy the > Dead?" One sentence reads: "We can imagine a renewed vigor among the > population with a zealous, almost religious dedication to > reconstruction."... I had an interesting experience a few yrs ago. A friend invited me to a weekend conference of Doctors for Disaster Preparedness. http://www.oism.org/ddp/ He knew I am a Mars fan; Robert Zubrin was one of the speakers, giving a talk on human colonization of Mars. Turns out this group is composed of actual physicians (my friend is a medic) who are interested in learning techniques for surviving nuclear war! It was all quite Strangelove-ian. I was astounded at some of the bizarre comments I heard there. I thought it was all rather hilarious, but my friend took all this quite seriously. One that springs to mind is that if the major nuclear powers unleashed everything, most of the planet's population would not know anything had happened, being in places that aren't worth a nuke. He has since sold his practice and moved his family onto a ranch in western Oregon. Perhaps he will someday get the last laugh, if that term is applicable to the near extinction of mankind. spike From samantha at objectent.com Sun Oct 17 00:57:27 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:57:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <20041013021256.11737.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041013021256.11737.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8396CAAC-1FD7-11D9-B825-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> I give up. What the heck does the subject, which became mainly about embryos and their status and political maneuvering on same, have to do with the 22nd century? How does adding an empty assertion at the end make this the fit subject line? Speaking of assertions, asserting that only the will to power is behind all the controversies of the day is pretty empty and non-falsifiable. And what the hell is this empty assertion that Libertarians want power more than self-ownership? Is this a claim that it is untrue that large numbers of people want nothing more out of politics than to be left alone to live their lives in peace and voluntary interactions with others? It looks like an assertion that they are all really power-hungry. Please explain and support these rather odd assertions. -s On Oct 12, 2004, at 7:12 PM, Trend Ologist wrote: > It's foolishness to think anyone in Bush's position > has regard for embryos; third semester fetuses, > perhaps, but not microscopic cells. Bush isn't a > theologian or philosopher, he is a politician... > politicians want power even more than life itself. > Which segues into the main fault line of > libertarianism: the sad fact is we want power more > than self-ownership. The will to power is vastly more > important to most than liberty. You are doing what you > believe in being libertarians, in using FSP to attempt > to change New Hampshire, and you can have fun doing > it. Yet the time frame is longer than you think. > Libertarianism is a 22nd century, not 21st century, philosophy. > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sun Oct 17 01:14:58 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:14:58 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) References: <20041015040931.49469.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <0d3001c4b3e6$b8470a90$b8232dcb@homepc> Adrian Tymes wrote: > --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > > And more generally, anybody, if extropy is a > > transhumanist philosophy how would if differentiate as a > > philosophy from hedonism? Where are the extropian > > principles incompatible? > > In a nutshell - doesn't hedonism live for the > pleasures of the moment, with little regard for the > future? Transhumanism encourages one to take action > to maek sure there is a pleasant future, starting with > making sure there is a future. (And preferably not a > finite one.) Living for the pleasures of the moment is pretty close to how I think of hedonism anyway. Seems to me like *all* pleasures are experienced in the moment as are all pains, we can *anticipate* pleasures and speak of "looking forward" to things and we can anticipate pain and be anxious about it, but anticipation of both takes place in the present. As does pride in accomplishment. A key thread for most transhumanists seems to be to oppose the arbitrariness of three score and ten years or of a lifespan upperbounded at 120 but few transhumanists expect to avoid dying altogether, most recognize that an accident would get them sooner or later. That being the case, there are many other boundaries that one could choose to oppose if opposing boundaries gets one's juices flowing. I wonder, I do not claim to know, if it might be just as valid if not more so to live more in the moments we know we have - the present ones. I accept your point that at least superficially transhumanists tend to be more future oriented than hedonists but ultimately both only live and experience in the present. Why would mortals facing lifespans of seconds or of eons EVER delay gratification? Brett From megaquark at hotmail.com Sun Oct 17 02:23:02 2004 From: megaquark at hotmail.com (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:23:02 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] assignment help! Message-ID: My girlfriend has a class assignment that she is having sever problems completing. She needs to ask some questions of a person who has moved to the US from another country. Even if you have been in the US for a period of time it would help. She is looking for some comparison and contrast between their country and ours. She has tried chat rooms and message boards, but all she can find is people looking to "hook up" with her. She needs to complete this today if possible. I know we have an international membership. Can someone please help? If so, please email me offlist. Thanks! Kevin Freels -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 17 02:47:55 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 19:47:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Hedonism? Why or why not? Was (John C. Wright finds god) In-Reply-To: <0d3001c4b3e6$b8470a90$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041017024755.94418.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > Living for the pleasures of the moment is pretty > close to > how I think of hedonism anyway. Seems to me like > *all* pleasures are experienced in the moment as are > all pains, we can *anticipate* pleasures and speak > of > "looking forward" to things and we can anticipate > pain > and be anxious about it, but anticipation of both > takes > place in the present. As does pride in > accomplishment. Anticipation of pleasure is not the same as the pleasure itself. To equate them leads to confused, paradoxical situations, as you have shown. While we exist in the present moment, that moment is not the sum total of our being. We also have memories of the past, and predictions about the future (based in large part upon our memories of prediting the past future, then seeing said predictions come true - or not). > A key thread for most transhumanists seems to be to > oppose the arbitrariness of three score and ten > years > or of a lifespan upperbounded at 120 but few > transhumanists > expect to avoid dying altogether, most recognize > that an > accident would get them sooner or later. Many recognize that even today, there is at least one method that may offer revival after most forms of death: cryonics. Quite a few suspect that if they survive long enough, advancing technology is likely to provide other, even better options. And more believe that even if this does not happen, living a very very long time and living forever are not - from the present perspective in which they decide their current actions and beliefs - all that different. > That being the case, there are many other boundaries > that > one could choose to oppose if opposing boundaries > gets > one's juices flowing. Indeed. But extending lifespan would give more time to oppose many more of the rest during one's life, no? > I wonder, I do not claim to > know, > if it might be just as valid if not more so to live > more in > the moments we know we have - the present ones. One can point to history and show *so* many examples where people thought only of the present and not of the future, and then lived to see a future whose misery far outweighed what pleasure they did derive in that moment, that I would take the negation of that wonder as self-evident for all practical purposes. > Why would mortals facing lifespans of seconds or of > eons > EVER delay gratification? When the gratification is expected to be much greater if delayed. (For seconds, this is almost never the case. For eons, it probably will be the case from time to time.) Again, the expectation is not, itself, the pleasure: one can have a very bad day, but if all that mattered were the present then one might as well cease experiencing the pain. However, if one knows that things will get better despite the current bad times, that - while not pleasure - can be sufficient motivation to pull through. (Or, if you take an even more narrow view of the "present moment": one's actions will not have any effect until at least the next moment, therefore one's actions are irrelevant to present pleasure and vice versa. Therefore, if hedonism is a philosophy/means of determining actions whose only goal is to maximize pleasure in the present moment, then hedonism is either useless or impossible, since there is no way short of time travel - which is not currently available, and might never be - to alter pleasure or anything else in the present moment as opposed to moments in the - possibly near, possibly far - future.) From sentience at pobox.com Sun Oct 17 03:32:58 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 23:32:58 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] RATIONALITY: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041016202355.3BF5757E2E@finney.org> References: <20041016202355.3BF5757E2E@finney.org> Message-ID: <4171E7EA.1090402@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > See and > . > > > Eliezer wrote: >> >> By far the greatest determinant of your choice of political party is >> the party your parents belonged to. 95% correlation. That's human >> nature for ya. > > I am genuinely surprised at the suggestion that 95% of economists end up > with the same ideological position after their studies. I suppose it's > possible, though. It would be interesting to here what someone like > Robin Hanson would say about this, having recently gone through an econ > PhD program. I don't know if the statistic applies to 95% of economists. It's for the general American population. > I would have guessed that there would be quite a bit of ideological > influence by the teachers and colleagues. Harvard probably graduates > quite a different ideological mix than U of Chicago. Of course it's > difficult to trace out cause and effect here. You could take a sample of the students as they entered, then check their political allegiance again after graduation. We can count those who become libertarians to check how much of that is rationality and how much is peer pressure and random drift. Though unfortunately libertarianism is nowhere near as good an indicator as would be the case in, say, atheism. Maybe instead we ought to count the students who become atheists and see where their political allegiance goes. > But in the context of my puzzle about whether study of political and > economic issues is worthwhile and will bring you closer to the truth, > this 95% result is just as discouraging. Apparently I can expect that > as a result of years of study, I will hold the same views I do now, only > I'll have better grounds for them! Again, the statistic is for the general population. As for the notion of having "better grounds" for the same position you started out with, that, from a rationalist perspective, is ridiculous. The only possible way to improve the goodness of your opinion is to change your opinion, unless the facts themselves have changed. > Well, I'm being facetious. If two people of opposite ideologies both > get economics degrees and hold to their positions, then at least one of > them in some sense has moved farther from the truth. He has taken in > information that should have converted him to the other side, and has > perverted it, distorted it, and forced it to fit into his ideological > preconceptions. > > It's like the puzzle that Bryan Moss offered: which is better, to hold > an unjustified true belief or a justified false one? I thought that was > a good question and not easy to answer. But I do think that if your > course of study only further entrenches you in a false belief, it was > not to your benefit. Agreed. >> If nothing else, study would tell you which ideas are universally >> agreed to be stupid. This helps. A lot. > > That's true, but it doesn't seem to go to the heart of the paradox. A paradox? Why do you see a paradox when looking at facts? Your model of reality must be producing the wrong predictions, if it takes real-world facts and names them paradoxes. >> We've clashed over this before, Hal, and my position remains the same >> as last time: Advanced rationality is a massively interdisciplinary >> science and a high-level martial art, and one who has not mastered the >> skills will use their intelligence to defeat itself. It takes a hell >> of a lot of rationality for someone to transcend political silliness. >> Why would you expect it of macroeconomists? Rationality is not their >> specialty. They're just, like, macroeconomists. When it comes to >> politics, most economists' brains switch off just like most people's. >> But you can probably get a fair amount of agreement from >> macroeconomists on consequences, so long as they're not allowed to say >> "good" or "bad", just flatly describe probable consequences. You can >> get even more agreement if you ask them about past outcomes in similar >> cases instead of futures, and if you don't tell them which candidate >> is endorsing which policy. > > I don't particularly remember clashing with anyone on this issue, but > what you say makes sense here. However doesn't it actually strengthen > the conclusion that for the average person, not an advanced rationalist, > study of political and economic issues is not going to move him closer > to the truth, when it comes down to the final decision between > alternative policies? Doesn't that strike you as a paradoxical result? Paradoxical? Of course not. It strikes me as being more or less what I would expect, though I do not claim it as my advance prediction. My conclusion is that it takes both rationality and knowledge; both facts and the ability to be swayed by facts. The more rational you are, the less the crushing weight of evidence needed to force you to choose between finally admitting the obvious to yourself or losing your self-respect. Science is a method for accumulating such massive evidence that even scientists cannot ignore it. This is the distinguishing capability of a scientist; a nonscientist will ignore it anyway. I aspire to rationality, and not scientism, because I aspire to greater speed than the social process of science. Not greater long-run power, mind you, but faster speed. I aspire that it should not take so much evidence to shake me loose of my delusions as it takes to shift an entire academic field. Before the social process of science can confirm a hypothesis, some individual scientist must be rational enough to hypothesize it. Though I'm not just trying to do better than someone else, of course. I'm trying to pare down the necessary weight of evidence to the pure Bayesian minimum, to attain the inertialess mind, to step just as far as I ought to step and no further on seeing every incoming piece of evidence, to fight with the forces of fact instead of giving them battle, to willingly follow trails of evidence wherever they lead, rather than demanding that someone else shake me loose of my preferred opinion. I have yet to read such poetry from macroeconomists, nor those other average scientists from whom you expect such great feats of rationality. They might agree with the poetry if asked, but they have not said it spontaneously, nor practiced the art. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 17 03:20:18 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:20:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhedonism In-Reply-To: <0d3001c4b3e6$b8470a90$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <20041015040931.49469.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> <0d3001c4b3e6$b8470a90$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041016201737.02930ae0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Momentary pleasure is Hedonism for 3 year olds. Deeper pleasure comes from deeper preparation. An example is Tantric Sex. Another is the creation of art. I guess we need a new word here, may I propose 'Transhedonism'. >Living for the pleasures of the moment is pretty close to >how I think of hedonism anyway. Seems to me like >*all* pleasures are experienced in the moment as are >all pains, we can *anticipate* pleasures and speak of >"looking forward" to things and we can anticipate pain >and be anxious about it, but anticipation of both takes >place in the present. As does pride in accomplishment. > >Why would mortals facing lifespans of seconds or of eons >EVER delay gratification? > >Brett ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 17 03:17:08 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:17:08 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) In-Reply-To: <000a01c4b3e3$4d6c0750$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000a01c4b3e3$4d6c0750$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041016201416.00a61da0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> You really think ham radio or the internet will crash at attack time? The immediate loss of linkages will be a real tell tale that something is up. 98% of the survivors will know within 24 hours. >One that springs to mind is that if the major nuclear >powers unleashed everything, most of the planet's >population would not know anything had happened, being >in places that aren't worth a nuke. > >spike ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 17 03:52:20 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 22:52:20 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] RATIONALITY: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry References: <20041016202355.3BF5757E2E@finney.org> <4171E7EA.1090402@pobox.com> Message-ID: <011601c4b3fc$b4720bc0$7ab32643@kevin> It is worth mentioning that most atheists that I know came from Christian households that tended to go off the deep end. These people tend to vote opposite their parents. Kevin Freels From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 17 04:16:51 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:16:51 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041016201416.00a61da0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001f01c4b400$20ac29d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Hara Ra > Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 8:17 PM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) > > > You really think ham radio or the internet will crash at > attack time? The > immediate loss of linkages will be a real tell tale that > something is up. > 98% of the survivors will know within 24 hours. Oh they would find out soon enough. The notion is that there are plenty of places that wouldn't be anywhere near any conceivable target. There are advanced technological civilizations that have never had (to my knowledge) any beef with anyone, such as New Zealand. Do they even *have* a military? Their point at Doctors for Disaster Preparedness is that nuclear war might end civilization as we have known it but would not end civilization. What I found interesting is that the audience, being mostly medical professionals, realized that radiation doesn't necessarily slay proles. Most who survived the blast and the possible anarchy that followed would likely survive long term. Life would go on, and human life would recover eventually. Technological libraries would survive here and there; within a few decades we could once again have sufficient technology to nuke ourselves. spike From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 17 04:35:49 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 23:35:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) References: <001f01c4b400$20ac29d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <000901c4b402$c78b35a0$7ab32643@kevin> > Life would go on, and human life would recover eventually. > Technological libraries would survive here and there; > within a few decades we could once again have > sufficient technology to nuke ourselves. That is, assuming that the human mind continues to be a greater survival adaptation than other traits. From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Sun Oct 17 13:40:58 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 14:40:58 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041016202355.3BF5757E2E@finney.org> References: <20041016202355.3BF5757E2E@finney.org> Message-ID: <4172766A.5080501@optusnet.com.au> One thing you don't seem to be considering here is the difference in values of these people. It is quite possible that, as Eliezer says, most people would retain the same positions after much economic study but that this is because they disagree about the values of the outcomes. Somebody who is a staunch libertarian will argue reasonably and rationally for economic policies that are very different from what a socialist would reasonably and rationally argue for. It may be that people are intuitively good are picking the policies appropriate to their value system, and studying would not tend to change their positions. Hal Finney wrote: > See and > . > > Eliezer wrote: > >>Hal Finney wrote: >> >>>Which came first; the partisan positions, or the economic opinions? >>>Did the ones who claim that the Bush tax cuts were disastrous say that >>>because they are Democrats; or did they determine that such policies lead >>>to disaster, and on this basis decide that they should become Democrats? >> >>Given human nature, and the likely causal history, I would guess with a >>very, very high degree of probability that the partisan positions came first. >> >> >>>The first case would be intellectually dishonest, >> >>Macroeconomists are not Bayesian masters, Hal. Only the >>heuristics-and-biases folks would even have begun to accumulate the skills >>of rationality. Macroeconomists are just ordinary human beings who happen >>to be macroeconomists. They play politics, they pick dimwit positions on >>the basis of the politics they started with and find some way to >>rationalize it. >> >>By far the greatest determinant of your choice of political party is the >>party your parents belonged to. 95% correlation. That's human nature for ya. >> >> >>>and I will reject that for now. >> >>Reject the obvious and most probable explanation so you can carry through >>the moral you selected in advance as your conclusion? Isn't that >>intellectually dishonest? > > > That wasn't what I was trying to do. I am genuinely surprised at > the suggestion that 95% of economists end up with the same ideological > position after their studies. I suppose it's possible, though. It would > be interesting to here what someone like Robin Hanson would say about > this, having recently gone through an econ PhD program. > > I would have guessed that there would be quite a bit of ideological > influence by the teachers and colleagues. Harvard probably graduates > quite a different ideological mix than U of Chicago. Of course it's > difficult to trace out cause and effect here. > > But in the context of my puzzle about whether study of political and > economic issues is worthwhile and will bring you closer to the truth, > this 95% result is just as discouraging. Apparently I can expect that > as a result of years of study, I will hold the same views I do now, > only I'll have better grounds for them! > > Well, I'm being facetious. If two people of opposite ideologies both > get economics degrees and hold to their positions, then at least one of > them in some sense has moved farther from the truth. He has taken in > information that should have converted him to the other side, and has > perverted it, distorted it, and forced it to fit into his ideological > preconceptions. > > It's like the puzzle that Bryan Moss offered: which is better, to hold > an unjustified true belief or a justified false one? I thought that > was a good question and not easy to answer. But I do think that if > your course of study only further entrenches you in a false belief, > it was not to your benefit. > > >>If nothing else, study would tell you which ideas are universally agreed to >>be stupid. This helps. A lot. > > > That's true, but it doesn't seem to go to the heart of the paradox. > > >>We've clashed over this before, Hal, and my position remains the same as >>last time: Advanced rationality is a massively interdisciplinary science >>and a high-level martial art, and one who has not mastered the skills will >>use their intelligence to defeat itself. It takes a hell of a lot of >>rationality for someone to transcend political silliness. Why would you >>expect it of macroeconomists? Rationality is not their specialty. They're >>just, like, macroeconomists. When it comes to politics, most economists' >>brains switch off just like most people's. But you can probably get a fair >>amount of agreement from macroeconomists on consequences, so long as >>they're not allowed to say "good" or "bad", just flatly describe probable >>consequences. You can get even more agreement if you ask them about past >>outcomes in similar cases instead of futures, and if you don't tell them >>which candidate is endorsing which policy. > > > I don't particularly remember clashing with anyone on this issue, but > what you say makes sense here. However doesn't it actually strengthen > the conclusion that for the average person, not an advanced rationalist, > study of political and economic issues is not going to move him closer to > the truth, when it comes down to the final decision between alternative > policies? Doesn't that strike you as a paradoxical result? > > Hal > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From natashavita at earthlink.net Sun Oct 17 05:09:30 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 01:09:30 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] assignment help! Message-ID: <267970-2200410017593050@M2W048.mail2web.com> See if Philippe Van Nedervelde can help her. Philippe is an Advisor to ExI. Try emailing him at Van-Nedervelde at foresight.org Best, Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Kevin Freels megaquark at hotmail.com Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 21:23:02 -0500 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] assignment help! My girlfriend has a class assignment that she is having sever problems completing. She needs to ask some questions of a person who has moved to the US from another country. Even if you have been in the US for a period of time it would help. She is looking for some comparison and contrast between their country and ours. She has tried chat rooms and message boards, but all she can find is people looking to "hook up" with her. She needs to complete this today if possible. I know we have an international membership. Can someone please help? If so, please email me offlist. Thanks! Kevin Freels -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From sjatkins at gmail.com Sun Oct 17 05:15:55 2004 From: sjatkins at gmail.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 16 Oct 2004 22:15:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLL: Principles of Extropy In-Reply-To: <20041016203707.C97E157E2E@finney.org> References: <20041016203707.C97E157E2E@finney.org> Message-ID: <948b11e041016221530ee26cc@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 13:37:07 -0700 (PDT), "Hal Finney" wrote: > But as far as the pure discussion of whether Bush or Kerry is better, > and the even more contentious issues like whether the Iraq war was > justified, I don't know that we are very successful or productive in > those discussions. Arguing Bush vs Kerry is, as far as I am concerned, > much like arguing Yankees vs Red Sox. We have as much influence on the > outcome in each case. Not quite. Yankees vs Red Sox is not subject to a popular election. Individuals attempting to explain their positions and sway other indviduals in elective politics do have an effect. At a stretch we could also say that discussing these things is an exercise in applied rationality (or its absence). I am rather biased in that: a) I don't see how Bush's record as president could possibly be more sorry and indicative that he doesn't deserve a second term; b) Neither candidtate stand for (publicly) much that I consider real or important; c) I believe we are in for a very difficult four years regardless of who wins although I think Kerry is by far the more rational of the two. And no, the difficult is not terrorism. It is soaring energy costs, possible collapse of the dollar and massive economic problems. It activates vestigial monkey instincts to have > these arguments and gives us some primal satisfaction to vent, but I > don't think it is a truly valuable and beneficial experience for anyone. > It just gets people mad, to no constructive end. > I would not characterize all such discussions as "venting". I think such characterization is part of what is unproductive. > If you really care about politics, I recommend getting involved with > local political groups and campaigns. Now is a perfect time to do so, > many people are just getting interested and I think most campaigns will > welcome volunteers. That's a more productive way to spend your time > than shouting on a mailing list. You'll meet interesting people and > make a difference. And I suspect that you're far more likely to convert > a voter by going to his door, shaking his hand and handing out a piece > of literature than by even the most impassioned online argumentation, > which will inevitably be countered by an equally impassioned advocate > for the other side. > Again, charactizations such as "shouting on a mailing list" deny people legitimate voicing of concerns and thoughts online within their online communities. As much as we would sometimes wish this list to be more specialized many here experience this list as an extended family and place where they can be visible in various important aspects. Disowning certain types of sharing upfront or negatively painting them lessens the community and the possibilities for fruitful sharing and even learning from one another. Surely one of the things we need to learn as we seek extropy is to discuss even difficult matters without merely "shouting". - samantha From extropians at perception.co.nz Sun Oct 17 07:33:26 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 20:33:26 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) In-Reply-To: <001f01c4b400$20ac29d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041016201416.00a61da0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <001f01c4b400$20ac29d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041017202940.05b778f0@127.0.0.1> >spike wrote >Oh they would find out soon enough. The notion is that >there are plenty of places that wouldn't be anywhere >near any conceivable target. There are advanced >technological civilizations that have never had >(to my knowledge) any beef with anyone, such as >New Zealand. Do they even *have* a military? yes, NZ does have a military, but it's kind of amusing.. "girl guides" as described by an ex South African special forces friend. the navy is mostly to keep better equipped and probably more expensive Japanese fishing boats out of our waters. I'm not sure if the air force -has- any active fighter planes any more after the last ones were decommissioned.. we're all a bit friendly down here to go picking fights.. Si From trichrom at optusnet.com.au Sun Oct 17 07:51:44 2004 From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:51:44 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) References: <6.0.3.0.1.20041016201416.00a61da0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com><001f01c4b400$20ac29d0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <6.1.2.0.2.20041017202940.05b778f0@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <000201c4b41e$283cd370$15541fd3@turtle> NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark confirmed in the first week of April 2004 that a unit of up to 50 Special Air Service troops had left the country for Afghanistan, the country's second contingent since the invasion of Afghanistan in October 2001. robKPo ----- Original Message ----- From: Simon Dawson To: ExI chat list Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2004 5:33 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Dr. Strangelove - the "documentary" :-) >spike wrote >Oh they would find out soon enough. The notion is that >there are plenty of places that wouldn't be anywhere >near any conceivable target. There are advanced >technological civilizations that have never had >(to my knowledge) any beef with anyone, such as >New Zealand. Do they even *have* a military? yes, NZ does have a military, but it's kind of amusing.. "girl guides" as described by an ex South African special forces friend. the navy is mostly to keep better equipped and probably more expensive Japanese fishing boats out of our waters. I'm not sure if the air force -has- any active fighter planes any more after the last ones were decommissioned.. we're all a bit friendly down here to go picking fights.. Si _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From benboc at lineone.net Sun Oct 17 13:28:30 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 14:28:30 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Culture In-Reply-To: <200410170438.i9H4cU020235@tick.javien.com> References: <200410170438.i9H4cU020235@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <4172737E.7000502@lineone.net> Natasha Vita-More said: "Culture the development of intellectual and creative activity and the products of such activity. It is also the patterns of behavior endemic to certain communities and reflects the ideas and ideals of that community." OK, I see what you mean. We are using different definitions for the word 'culture' (i have a very old dictionary). I was thinking of it as a more static thing, like "the Eskimo Culture" etc., whereas yours is a more dynamic kind of thing. I like yours better, btw. "> but i'm sure you know what i'm getting at. Not really, but I enjoyed your response." I was getting at the relationship between society and culture, which made me think that what you said wasn't making sense. But you didn't mean what i thought you meant and it does make sense after all, so it's all ok. "The two women could also wear Tom Ford designs, or practice yoga. Or they might even be transhumanists." {:^o :^> I'd love to see a Mormon Transhumanist! They must be like a hypercube: very difficult to visualise. I'm not saying it's impossible, just that i can't imagine what they'd be like. (Anybody here a Mormon? - I hope i'm not offending anybody, but i once found the book of mormon in a hotel room, so being bored i started to read it. I had to put it down before it gave me a hernia. That's one funny book. I was beginning to think Peter Cook or the Monty Python people had written it.) I know, i'm going straight to hell. ben From bjk at imminst.org Sun Oct 17 14:31:07 2004 From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:31:07 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update Message-ID: <4172822B.4080002@imminst.org> ImmInst's "The Scientific Conquest of Death" Book Review by Stephen Gordon When I heard this summer that the Immortality Institute was publishing its first book, ?The Scientific Conquest of Death: Essays on Infinite Lifespans,? I asked for an advanced copy to review for the Speculist. I was surprised and honored when Bruce Klein and Reason from FightAging emailed me a working draft. This was a valuable blog-lesson for me: ask and you shall (sometimes) receive... http://www.blog.speculist.com/archives/000095.html Book available from Amazon by Nov 13, 2004 IMMINST CHAT Oct 17 - Robin Zebrowski - AI & Qualia University of Oregon Ph.D. Candidate in the Dept. of Philosophy, Robin joins ImmInst to discuss Cognitive Science, Artificial Intelligence and Qualia. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=63&t=4027&s= IMMINST FORUM Problem with 'Immortality' - by Ben Best I believe that it is self-defeating to attempt to live forever by presenting one's position as an alternative to religion. I also think that one can never know that one can live forever and that the belief that one has achieved immortality is likely to reduce vigilance and hasten death... http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=106&t=4298&#entry38743 EVENTS Nov 5-7 - Accelerating Change Conference (ACC) Physical Space, Virtual Space, and Interface, Palo Alto, CA http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4299 Dec 4 - ImmInst Social, near Hartford, CT ImmInst Chair, Bruce Klein will speak about the new ImmInst book, "The Scientific Conquest of Death," and the ImmInst Film Project, "Exploring Life Extension." Free rooms available. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=159&t=4220 ABOUT IMMINST Immortality Institute - For Infinite Lifespans Mission - Conquer the Blight of Involuntary Death Members: 1,735 - Full Members: 105 http://www.imminst.org/fullmembers From naddy at mips.inka.de Sun Oct 17 15:47:47 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 15:47:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry References: <20041015041110.85DC457E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: Hal Finney wrote: > Consider that these people are among the greatest experts in the world on > economic topics, [...] what hope have any of us in deciding what is the > truth here? This points to a major problem we keep touching on here: How can we as laymen make decisions in the face of conflicting expert opinion? And even if there actually is a scientific consensus, how can we recognize it? This keeps popping up on this list in the context of global warming. I understand nothing of climatology, how can I tell what views are consensus ones and which are biased? Let's get away from controversial examples and look at the general problem. Science reporting is plagued by this. A journalist, who himself doesn't understand the subject, sets out to write an article on some topic. Determined to present a fair picture he gives equal room to the presentation of all conflicting opinions. But since he is not an expert, he can't tell what the actual scientific consensus is, and he is bound to provide exaggerated coverage to minority views and outright kooks. A purported "conflict in the scientific community" may be nothing of that sort. If you sent a science reporter out to write about the shape of the earth, he would likely spend a disproportionate part of his article on flat earth ideas--all in the spirit of fair and neutral reporting, but naively giving the cranks a wildly exaggerated significance and an enormous audience. The usual suggestion to resolve a conflict is to come to a compromise. But if one side is fair and the other is wildly biased, the compromise will be biased, too. Since a detailed examination of conflicting scientific opinions would require expert knowledge neither the reporter nor the reader possess, the presentation of controversies devolves into a game of "he said, she said", with credibility points being awared on irrelevant aspects, such as academic credit or personal bearing, rather than the strength of the theories themselves. While I'm writing this I also have a browser window open with an article reporting on the current state of cold fusion and nicely illustrative of the problem. The text is all bullshit. It all deals with meta issues and who is saying what. "He hit me first." "No, he did." There is nothing there to help me figure out the _truth_ of the matter. (And now for something completely different:) > And yet, I'll bet many politically oriented readers, especially those > who have pledged their allegiance to an ideological system, believe > that they actually know the truth of the matter. They think that they, > with their cursory and amateur levels of study, know these issues better > than hundreds of hardworking, brilliant experts. Or perhaps, prompted by > ideological certainty, they will comfort themselves that those hundreds > of experts on the other side are evil, wicked liars. Group thinking, or tribalism, or whatever the correct term is, is a fundamental part of the human condition. People associate with a particular group, frequently by accident, then they identify with the group and fall into a pattern of "us versus them" thinking, where everything considered good is projected on the in-group, everything bad on the out-group. It pervades all levels of human society. It can be found in the schoolyard, it appears in harmless contexts such as people fervently advocating the computer operating system they use, it entirely dominates the political process, and in the unpleasant extreme it motivates genocide driven by nationalism or ideology. Once you realize this and start looking you can see it all around you. You can observe it on this very mailing list: "we Extropians", "we Americans". Given the ubiquity of the process I'm flabbergasted that it doesn't appear to have any _conscious_ presence in the public mind. Other than psychologists talking about youth cliques and anthropologists about remote aboriginal peoples, the subject is never broached in our culture, as if we were immune to its effects or as if it were a taboo. Given its fundamental position in human psychology, group identity should be of particular interest to transhumanism, both from a practical perspective (how will it affect the road to a posthuman future? what will be its effects on posthumans?) and a theoretical one (do we want it? do we want to get rid of it?). Instead transhumanists are unconsciously caught up in it as much as everybody else. (Can anybody point me to some introductory psychological literature that covers group mentality? I imagine this being so basic that it must have been exhaustively treated even a century ago.) -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From gregburch at gregburch.net Sun Oct 17 16:01:17 2004 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:01:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A brief discourse on transhumanity -- of death and persons In-Reply-To: <000201c4b41e$283cd370$15541fd3@turtle> Message-ID: A friend of mine is lucky enough to teach honors English students and this semester is teaching a unit on transhumanism, with texts such as "Brave New World" and the works of Fukuyama and Kass. I've been involved in a dialogue with him, some excerpts of replies by me I pass on here: > -----Original Message----- > From: _________ > Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2004 8:11 AM > > In a message dated 10/14/2004 7:46:11 AM Central Daylight Time, > gregburch at gregburch.net writes: >> Ultimately -- and unfortunately -- yes, although Fukuyama is more >> graceful and indirect in his position; ultimately yes. And I >> think I know where this is going, Socrates, but that's OK. > > Then let's digress. > What makes you think that there's any realistic choice to be > made? That death can be evaded? That all men (and wymn) are not > essentially mortal? > And a second question, are all men ESSENTIALLY anything at all? > (With whatever philosophical take you make on the all-caps word.) > fp The answer to the first question is in two levels. On one level, it seems -- for now --that death cannot ultimately be avoided, because ultimately -- and it's a distant ultimate -- all information seems to be destined for entropic dissolution. If, as I and many others maintain, meaningful life is ultimately a matter of informational organization, then the dissolution of the universe as we know it will mean the death of any life forms then extant. Whether this view is correct is, though, for now a matter of near guess-work, since it depends on fundamantal physical questions that are beyond our current certain knowledge. But then there's a more immediate level to the first question, one dealing with our imminent mortality. About that, one can entertain far more vigorous hope. We know so much more about the nature of our selves than we did just a mere 50 years ago. That human life as we know it now could be extended significantly seems beyond serious doubt to anyone who will give the matter serious consideration. Thus the Kassian and Fukuyamic backlash against transhumanism: Were our ideas about near-term life extension mere fantasy, such serious-minded folks wouldn't be devoting so much ink to opposing us and urging our deaths upon us. Beyond that, it requires only a slight extension of analysis about what human life is (which is the subject of your second question) to conclude that even further extension and augmentation is possible, so that the term of meaningful life (although I don't here use the word human) could be extended to scales that current humans would consider to be vast, indeed -- Tens of thousands or tens of millions of years, at least. But this leads to the second question, because that life would in many respects be quite different from what we might now consider to be "human." About that -- which is the more fundamental question -- I will write further this weekend. * * * * * * * * Having addressed death, then, let me address life, or rather, your question: "are all men ESSENTIALLY anything at all?" By this, I take your question to mean, "What is human" or "What does it mean to be human or *A* human." There is a linguistic problem with this question, which is often not clearly identified: "human" as an adjective is really quite different from "human" as a noun. A severed finger is clearly human, but also it is clearly not *A* human. Herein, I think, lies much of the problem encountered in the abortion "debate." (I put the word "debate" in scare quotes because most discussion of the problem is really little more than the vomiting forth of feelings and the trading of insults.) The tissue that makes up a fetus is clearly "human", but the question is, is it *A* human. (Even worse, by the way, is the locution "when life begins" -- the microbes in my feces are examples of "life", but they certainly aren't something that requires a constitutional amendment to protect...) I much prefer the term "person," because it avoids this confusion -- and also clarifies the moral pathway to what I think is the necessary conclusion of transhumanism. If we simply test our feelings, we can clearly conclude that there is nothing sacrosanct about human tissue: We have no moral qualms about discarding the flesh that is removed in, say, a surgical operation on a bone or a muscle. But even where no flesh is discarded, we have great moral feelings about, for instance, a lobotomy. Why? Because a lobotomy impacts the PERSON, not simply the flesh. So, what is a person? Clearly it is more than flesh, because we do not consider a corpse to be a person. No, it is a combination of *properties* of flesh. It must be animated with life, and it must have something else, as well, because most people have come to the moral conclusion that a completely and truly brain-dead but otherwise living human body is not a person. Now we enter into the realm of scary feelings, because once one realizes that a person is different from a human body, one takes on the moral responsibility of making judgments about things that are not so tangible as bodies. Thus, by the way, I believe that those who draw a moral bright line at the conception of the human fetus do so because it is a simple moral heuristic to identify the person with the living body. If one leaves the question at that, then one need not face the troubling moral questions of *what* lies below, and *who* above, the line of personhood. Ironically, though, many (if not most) of those who would fix the point of personhood at the conception of the fetus also believe that there is an intangible thing called a "soul" which carries with it a load of moral baggage. To my mind, this is a strange kind of mental gymnastics, indeed. At any rate, having concluded that the object of our moral sentiments are "persons" rather than "humans," then it is incumbent upon us to define what a person is. This is a large field to traverse, but let me sketch out the survey of the landscape. There are functional and moral elements to the definition of a person. Functionally, we must conclude that a person is an agent capable of *intention*. This distinguishes persons from non-teleological agents such as bacteria and thermostats. The moral dimension to the landscape of personhood follows, I find, from the element of intention. A person is an agent who can be held morally accountable for its actions. We do not judge the lion a murderer when he mauls the lamb. Why is this? I believe it is because, while the lion may exercise some rudimentary intentional thought relative to the *means* by which he will kill the lamb, he is incapable of making the *end* or goal of killing the subject of intention. Thus, it is the reach of the scope of intention to ultimate, or at least remote or deeper, goals that raises an agent above the moral line of personhood. At this point I should note I have long ago resolved for myself the so-called dilemma of "free will versus determinism" through the route of complexity theory. While all things are in a physical sense determined by ontological natural causes, the impossibility of prediction in sufficiently complex systems creates a wall of ignorance beyond which no mind can penetrate. This is in fact a moving barrier up to a certain point: Just as the speed of light determines an absolute angle of 45 degrees on the observer offset within a time-space light cone, but angles of less than 45 degrees (approaching oblique at Newtonian velocities and masses) are possible, so the quality of self-knowledge of internal mental causes and external physical causes is possible -- up to a theoretical limit vastly greater than that of the current human mind. Thus one can see a "continuum of personhood" reaching from the most rudimentary self-knowledge in, for instance, lower primates or other advanced non-human animals, passing through the current natural human and then on up to some theoretically possible "maximum person" which would consist of the greatest possible concentration of thinking matter that is commensurate with the physical limitations of matter and energy to instantiate thought. This "maximum person," though, could not have the attributes traditionally bestowed upon the Judeo-Christian deity, because it's ability to know itself and its environment would be limited by the computing power of its substrate within the confines of relativistic and quantum physics. Thus computing faster than light or with physical elements smaller than the Planck scale is impossible, imposing absolute limits on the reach of personhood. Beyond those limits even the theoretically possible "maximum person" must be a moral, teleological being because it could not predict exactly the outcome of its actions nor know precisely the state of its inner being and would therefore have to devolve into the realm of hierarchical teleological goals. That detour into the realm of the least persons and the greatest possible persons points, I conclude, to the ultimate definition of personhood: An agent capable of intentional action and self-directed goal redefinition through internal processes. Such agents are moral subjects and objects, which is a handy shorthand for judgment about persons. Thus, for instance, lower animals are proper moral objects (because they experience pain), but are not moral subjects, because they do not engage in meaningful self-directed goal redefinition through internal processes. Note that I have sidestepped the "problem of consciousness" here, although I do not believe I have really ignored it. Instead, I believe we will ultimately discover that consciousness *is* the process of self-directed goal redefinition, or rather, what that process *feels* like. Of course, all of this is too abstract and will seem too cold to throw into the rhetorical fray against the likes of Fukuyama and especially Kass. Kass has explicitly enshrined "the ethics of disgust," after all; a conscious choice to reject reason in the pursuit of answers to the moral questions posed by the looming prospect of meaningful augmentation of the human animal. In fact, the philosophical odyssey that has brought me to these conclusions also makes me recoil from the prospect of engaging in a productive debate with those who oppose the transhumanist agenda. They are so far from being willing to take the first steps down the road that has led me to my conclusions, that I honestly fear that no rational discourse is possible. Instead, the public policy that will govern the outcome will be a terrible thing made up of ad hoc compromises on an issue-by-issue basis. The final result will be a misshapen abortion, I fear ... pun intended .... GB, THHotA From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 17 16:17:18 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 09:17:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Groupthink and enhancements In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041017161718.89113.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Christian Weisgerber wrote: [quite a number of good points, but the only one I'm responding to here is] > Given its fundamental position in human psychology, > group identity > should be of particular interest to transhumanism, > both from a > practical perspective (how will it affect the road > to a posthuman > future? what will be its effects on posthumans?) > and a theoretical > one (do we want it? do we want to get rid of it?). > Instead > transhumanists are unconsciously caught up in it as > much as everybody > else. One thing to consider is that this may well play up when enhancements (cybernetics, uploading, personal true-AI assistants, or whatever path bears fruit) become more real. At first, the enhanced will be a minority, and they may well view themselvse as different groups based on the exact brand of enhancement they use, they level of effect they realize from it, and so forth. Meanwhile, the unenhanced will almost certainly view themselves as one big group, once there are enough enhanced to matter. The upshot? In short, "with power comes responsibility" in spades. Those who are enhanced will have to be extra-careful not to seem as a threat to the rest of humanity, and make sure their fellow enhanced either are the same or are easily identifiable (and identified) to the unenhanced as a different group. Otherwise, the enhanced will find their blessing turning into a curse - at worst, a death sentence and nobody else willing to follow their path. This should clamp down on any very quick (say, high exponential growth) Singularity outcomes that most of the world would view as evil once it happened*. Power over others can only be given, never truly taken by force, so the smartest sentient being in the world can not do much if everyone else actively hates it and seeks its termination. (* I include this because this necessarily includes any details of the specific version - details which are almost never present in general predictions.) From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 17 17:17:04 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:17:04 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] vertical wind tunnel In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000c01c4b46d$2350cf70$6501a8c0@SHELLY> A local company is talking about building one of those vertical wind tunnels that is used as a freefall simulator for skydivers. It blows the the air straight up so that you can fly motionless in the updraft, practice your midair maneuvers and such. I had an idea: what if you were in one of those things with a real parachute and you deployed it? Wouldn't you go SHOOOM right up in the air? Perhaps 100 meters? Then you could float down nearby. Or you could have a competition where you fly back and forth, staying in the updraft. You could practice your landings and parachute repacking, without ever having to take a plane off the ground. Or perhaps you could use it as a means of launching hang gliders or parasails or something. Wouldn't that be a kick? How much do you figure it would cost to build something like that? How much per hour to run it? spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Oct 17 17:48:00 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:48:00 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] vertical wind tunnel In-Reply-To: <000c01c4b46d$2350cf70$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000c01c4b46d$2350cf70$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041017124554.01a80ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:17 AM 10/17/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: >I had an idea: what if you were in one of those things >with a real parachute and you deployed it? Wouldn't you >go SHOOOM right up in the air? Perhaps 100 meters? Then >you could float down nearby. I have an intuition that most of the time you'd crash right down, tangled in fabric. At the top of trajectory the oomph would be lost (I sense) and the chute would turn into a mess of cloth and cable, and it's so hard to get the toothpaste back into the tube. Damien Broderick [just guessing] From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 17 18:06:34 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 11:06:34 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] vertical wind tunnel In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041017124554.01a80ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000d01c4b474$0a0da950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > I have an intuition that most of the time you'd crash right > down, tangled > in fabric. At the top of trajectory the oomph would be lost > (I sense) and > the chute would turn into a mess of cloth and cable, and it's > so hard to > get the toothpaste back into the tube. > > Damien Broderick > [just guessing] Ok alternate solution: have the wind tunnel with tall vertical sides like a big cylinder, 10 meters high or more. Then the extreme ground-divers would jump into the hole, float most of the way to the bottom where the fan is pushing the air up at perhaps 60 meters per second. Then when the thrillseeker deployed the chute, the air would be guided upwards by the walls of the tunnel, so that she would be guaranteed at least a reasonable altitude, from which control of the canopy should be possible. Perhaps one could modify a grain silo in this way. We could use a dummy mass to test the notion. spike From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 17 19:56:27 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 12:56:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] vertical wind tunnel In-Reply-To: <000c01c4b46d$2350cf70$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <000c01c4b46d$2350cf70$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041017125253.028f68b8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> As I recall one of the Las Vegas casinos has this toy. The cost to the user is in the $ per minute range. I don't think deployment of a parachute makes sense as the radius increases by a factor of 30 or so, and if the tube just exits into the air, most of the chute will not be at full air velocity... The costs of skydiving for a day are close enough to make this economically useless. At 10:17 AM 10/17/2004, you wrote: >A local company is talking about building one of those >vertical wind tunnels that is used as a freefall simulator >for skydivers. It blows the the air straight up so that >you can fly motionless in the updraft, practice your >midair maneuvers and such. > >I had an idea: what if you were in one of those things >with a real parachute and you deployed it? Wouldn't you >go SHOOOM right up in the air? Perhaps 100 meters? Then >you could float down nearby. Or you could have a competition >where you fly back and forth, staying in the updraft. >You could practice your landings and parachute repacking, >without ever having to take a plane off the ground. Or >perhaps you could use it as a means of launching hang >gliders or parasails or something. > >Wouldn't that be a kick? > >How much do you figure it would cost to build something >like that? How much per hour to run it? > >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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 17 20:37:12 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 21:37:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 22nd century In-Reply-To: <8396CAAC-1FD7-11D9-B825-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> Message-ID: <20041017203712.76441.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Libertarianism is 22nd century philosophy because we are evolving too slowly to know libertarianism in this century except as, I would suppose, a 'temporary autonomous zone', for lack of a better designation. I wrote: "the will to power is vastly more important to most than liberty". If libertarians valued self-ownership more than anything they would move to a location where they could own themselves. Move to, say, the Caymans and they own themselves yet such is not evidently what they want. The FSP want to (it could be surmised) libertarianize New Hampshire, though it appears to be a Quixotic endeavor. however it is also fun; moving to a totally free location is boring. But you are correct the post rambled. And what the hell is this empty assertion that Libertarians want power more than self-ownership? Is this a claim that it is untrue that large numbers of people want nothing more out of politics than to be left alone to live their lives in peace and voluntary interactions with others? It looks like an assertion that they are all really power-hungry. Please explain and support these rather odd assertions. -s On Oct 12, 2004, at 7:12 PM, Trend Ologist wrote: > It's foolishness to think anyone in Bush's position > has regard for embryos; third semester fetuses, > perhaps, but not microscopic cells. Bush isn't a > theologian or philosopher, he is a politician... > politicians want power even more than life itself. > Which segues into the main fault line of > libertarianism: the sad fact is we want power more > than self-ownership. The will to power is vastly more > important to most than liberty. You are doing what you > believe in being libertarians, in using FSP to attempt > to change New Hampshire, and you can have fun doing > it. Yet the time frame is longer than you think. > Libertarianism is a 22nd century, not 21st century, philosophy. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 17 23:02:21 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 00:02:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] by the same token Message-ID: <20041017230221.58038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> As libertarianism is not an option at this time (unless one lives offshore) neither is socialism realistic. I happen to personally know those who have run for both president and vice president on the Socialist ticket; they are people who couldn't run a supermarket. It's just a game. The same reason socialism is unrealistic is the same reason libertarianism is unrealistic: we're evolving so slowly that by the time any sort of socialism could theoretically succeed it would already be outmoded. Perhaps libertarianism has a better future-- however that future is way off past the middle of this century, and probably nearer to the end of the century. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Mon Oct 18 00:06:24 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 17:06:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] by the same token In-Reply-To: <20041017230221.58038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041017230221.58038.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8C866D2E-2099-11D9-9958-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Oct 17, 2004, at 4:02 PM, Trend Ologist wrote: > The same reason socialism is unrealistic is the same reason > libertarianism is unrealistic: we're evolving so slowly that by the > time any sort of socialism could theoretically succeed it would > already be outmoded. Perhaps libertarianism has a better future-- > however that future is way off past the middle of this century, and > probably nearer to the end of the century. Both pure socialism and pure anarcho-capitalist libertarianism are unrealistic because both are based on invalid models of the system we actually live in (in a mathematical sense). Bad assumptions mean bad outcomes, and hence why both models always seem to be broken in practice and neither are optimal in a pure form. The problem with socialism is very simple: it scales poorly when applied to finite agents e.g. humans, mostly due to computational complexity as a function of population with respect to making it perform well. Libertarianism is an adaptive catch-all that scales extremely well in the general case, though it makes some assumptions that are broken in fact or fall below the noise floor on a local scale. In short, socialism requires (nearly) complete public information about the agents involved to approximate optimality but degrades badly without it, and libertarianism is a robust approximation of optimality that can be less efficient on a local scale but degrades very gracefully with partial or incomplete information on the agents involved. As far as I can tell, socialism doesn't scale much beyond groups of about 100 people or so; beyond that libertarianism is more optimal. Attempting to scale socialism to very large populations (like an entire country) is ruinous and suboptimal, and betrays a pretty poor understanding of the nature of the system. Math and reality don't give a crap about ideology. Libertarianism has one meritorious property: it allows for the local emergence of socialist systems when such forms are optimal without damaging the mechanics of the system. This is important if for no other reason than to protect long-term diversity. j. andrew rogers From sentience at pobox.com Mon Oct 18 01:36:58 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 17 Oct 2004 21:36:58 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: References: <20041015041110.85DC457E2D@finney.org> Message-ID: <41731E3A.6060408@pobox.com> Christian Weisgerber wrote: > > (Can anybody point me to some introductory psychological literature > that covers group mentality? I imagine this being so basic that > it must have been exhaustively treated even a century ago.) Not a century ago, but you can find quite a lot on it in social psychology - any textbook or reader will have something on it. Group polarization, inter-group dynamics, etc. Social psychology has the dreadful and startling and reproducible experiments, evolutionary psychology has the explanation and math. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From Walter_Chen at compal.com Mon Oct 18 08:41:02 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:41:02 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05> If PK (Psychokinesis) is really true (at least for some people under some mental states on moving other physical objects or changing the physical probabilities), does it mean that there must be some interaction (or force) between mind and matter? Does this deserve a unified theory of mind and matter? 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: Sunday, October 17, 2004 2:51 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force http://www.physicstoday.org/vol-57/iss-10/p11.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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 18 14:15:25 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:15:25 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] encapsulation of evolutionary psychology Message-ID: <20041018141526.71329.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> This is a conservative take on the subject, but I haven't seen one more compact yet: http://www.nationalreview.com/22Dec97/mcginnis122297.html ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 18 14:34:41 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:34:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: towards the Sun? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041015222925.01a03e30@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041018143441.60148.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > It is amusing that this inverts Vinge's schema in the Zoned Galaxy > sequence, and perhaps in Poul Anderson's classic BRAIN WAVE. It > might imply that the ferocious fluxes in the center of galaxies is > where we'll find the fastest minds. Vinge's scheme was merely an inversion of the classical Azimov/Heinlein/Smith assumption that Galactic civilization would be greatest nearer to the core. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 18 14:45:32 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 07:45:32 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041016121148.65425.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041018144532.61040.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > If you scroll down, this economist discusses the same > topic towards the end of his forecast record: > http://www.ravibatra.com/my_forecasting_record.htm As someone who makes forecasts, I'd like to see other forecasters provide links or citations when they say they made predictions. Virtually all of mine are documented in the archives of this list, with only a few being off by any significance. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 18 15:17:08 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:17:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] POLITICS: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <20041018144532.61040.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041018151708.68334.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Valid point. What can I do? Give you Batra's email at SMU? > As someone who makes forecasts, I'd like to see > other forecasters > provide links or citations when they say they made > predictions. > Virtually all of mine are documented in the archives > of this list, with > only a few being off by any significance. > > Mike Lorrey ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 18 15:38:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 08:38:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] RATIONALITY: 537 Economists Criticize Bush and Kerry In-Reply-To: <011601c4b3fc$b4720bc0$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041018153853.68816.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > It is worth mentioning that most atheists that I know came from > Christian > households that tended to go off the deep end. These people tend to > vote opposite their parents. NOTE: That they are atheists does not prevent them from going off the deep end in the other direction. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 18 15:48:55 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:48:55 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: <20041018154855.25715.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Jeb Bush said today he wont run for President in 2008. "That's not my interest". "I want to finish my term" (as Florida's governor). Bush said he wont make a decision concerning his future until his term ends. His term ends in January 2006, over one year and nine months before the Presidential election of 2008. And he makes this announcement fifteen days before the current election? It is true the detractors of his brother, the President, are being unfair, Dubya is not stupid, he graduated from Yale, later received his MBA from Harvard. Yet Dubya does wish to get his family in power, there is no question about it...neither are his relations reluctant to comply. Barbara Bush has even said, "all america must be run by a Bush". Now, it's not illegal, there is no law against nepotism. But geez Louise, what more evidence do we need that the Bush family are pushing to the limit our tacit tolerance of nepotism? More importantly: what more evidence do we need that many Bush family members, perhaps virtually the entire family, are power-addicts? ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From vanvidum at msn.com Mon Oct 18 16:17:47 2004 From: vanvidum at msn.com (Paul carbone) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 16:17:47 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: >From: Trend Ologist >Now, it's not illegal, there is no law against >nepotism. But geez Louise, what more evidence do we >need that the Bush family are pushing to the limit our >tacit tolerance of nepotism? More importantly: what >more evidence do we need that many Bush family >members, perhaps virtually the entire family, are >power-addicts? > I shall take it then, that the Kennedy family similarly infuriates or infuriated you. I can't say that I care much about actual or perceived nepotism in a democracy, and given the electoral durability of, again, the Kennedy name, the public doesn't care much either, and that's what matters, for better or worse. So they may push your "tacit tolerance" but they have a long way to go to really bother Mr. and Ms. American voter with it. --Paul From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 18 16:27:55 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 09:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041018162755.4250.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Paul carbone wrote: > I shall take it then, that the Kennedy family > similarly infuriates or > infuriated you. I can't speak for Trend, but I'm certainly a little bit irritated that people bring up the Kennedys like they're supposed to win any election they're in. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 18 17:11:18 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:11:18 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... References: <20041018162755.4250.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003101c4b535$7cab6d00$7ab32643@kevin> Weird that the Kennedys would be brought up as a similarity to the Bush family since Jack and Ted are so far apart on so many issues that Jack would be a Republican today. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 11:27 AM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... > --- Paul carbone wrote: > > I shall take it then, that the Kennedy family > > similarly infuriates or > > infuriated you. > > I can't speak for Trend, but I'm certainly a little > bit irritated that people bring up the Kennedys like > they're supposed to win any election they're in. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Mon Oct 18 17:20:44 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 18:20:44 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041018172044.28319.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Maybe there will be no harm if Jeb should be elected in 2008, serve as president until 2017, and then perhaps Neil serves until 2025, and then the Bush twins Jenna and Barbara serve until... the Bushes are certainly not stupid, no family could be so successful and lack cleverness. >I shall take it then, that the Kennedy family similarly infuriates >or infuriated you. I can't say that I care much about actual or >perceived >nepotism in a democracy, and given the electoral durability of, >again, the >Kennedy name, the public doesn't care much either, and that's >what matters, >for better or worse. So they may push your "tacit tolerance" >but they have a long way to go to really bother Mr. and Ms. >American voter with it. ->Paul --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 18 17:29:35 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:29:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? Message-ID: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> I was just doing some shopping for a new processor, and the fastest I found available was the Intel 3.4 Ghz P4. I did some checking and that processor was unveiled in February, 2004. http://it.asia1.com.sg/newsdaily/news002_20040203.html Some additional checking, which I admit was light, revealed that the P4 1.7 Ghz processor was unveiled in 2001. This is somewhat more than 18 months for a two-fold increase in processing speed. http://tech-report.com/reviews/2001q2/pentium4-1.7/index.x?pg=1 Is there a new processor out that I don;t know about, or was the P4 released later than that? Or os there something else that I am missing entirely? Also, a bit of humor. I found this at the following site: http://www.slashnot.com/article.php3?story_id=413§ion=Home "Intel has announced a new low performance processor value priced processor that will appeal to the cost conscious consumer to be called the Pentium 4 Mobile Home edition. The design is similar to a typical mobile computer, but without the mobility. P4 Mobile Home editions are typically mounted permanently to their desks, often with an old dog asleep under it. The processors also support the ?double-wide? 64-bit processor mode in upcoming Pentium 4 and AMD processors. Rudimentary clustering is the norm, with eight to sixty-four units forming Parks wherever an undeveloped parcel of deskspace remains unclaimed for a long period of time. Wireless capabilities are built in, but require the addition of an old coat hanger for extended range reception. The systems typically ship with three or four mice, and will be sold exclusively through WalMart with Red Neck Enterprise Workstation pre-installed." He he! Kevin Freels -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian at posthuman.com Mon Oct 18 17:43:09 2004 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:43:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> References: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: <417400AD.7060801@posthuman.com> Intel messed up pretty badly, and now admits they are incapable of releasing a 4ghz P4. That news just came out in the past few days. AMD though just this week released their 4ghz equivalent 64-bit AMD64 4000+ processor. AMD is the one to watch for desktop and small server performance leading CPUs for at least the next 18 months as dual core CPUs are released. -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From hemm at openlink.com.br Mon Oct 18 17:46:08 2004 From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:46:08 -0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? References: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: <038701c4b53a$59af5550$fe00a8c0@HEMM> As far as I know, the clock reace is over and manufacturers are now focusing on multicore chips and 64 bit chips. Intel Cancels Plans for 4-Gigahertz Pentium 4 Clock speed isn't the only way to improve processor performance, the company says. http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/10/ap_4101404.asp?trk=nl ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Freels To: ExI chat list Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 3:29 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? I was just doing some shopping for a new processor, and the fastest I found available was the Intel 3.4 Ghz P4. I did some checking and that processor was unveiled in February, 2004. http://it.asia1.com.sg/newsdaily/news002_20040203.html Some additional checking, which I admit was light, revealed that the P4 1.7 Ghz processor was unveiled in 2001. This is somewhat more than 18 months for a two-fold increase in processing speed. http://tech-report.com/reviews/2001q2/pentium4-1.7/index.x?pg=1 Is there a new processor out that I don;t know about, or was the P4 released later than that? Or os there something else that I am missing entirely? Also, a bit of humor. I found this at the following site: http://www.slashnot.com/article.php3?story_id=413§ion=Home "Intel has announced a new low performance processor value priced processor that will appeal to the cost conscious consumer to be called the Pentium 4 Mobile Home edition. The design is similar to a typical mobile computer, but without the mobility. P4 Mobile Home editions are typically mounted permanently to their desks, often with an old dog asleep under it. The processors also support the ?double-wide? 64-bit processor mode in upcoming Pentium 4 and AMD processors. Rudimentary clustering is the norm, with eight to sixty-four units forming Parks wherever an undeveloped parcel of deskspace remains unclaimed for a long period of time. Wireless capabilities are built in, but require the addition of an old coat hanger for extended range reception. The systems typically ship with three or four mice, and will be sold exclusively through WalMart with Red Neck Enterprise Workstation pre-installed." He he! Kevin Freels _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Mon Oct 18 18:03:14 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:03:14 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> References: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, Kevin Freels wrote: >Some additional checking, which I admit was light, >revealed that the P4 1.7 Ghz processor was unveiled in 2001. >This is somewhat more than 18 months for a two-fold increase in >processing speed. Actually it would worse than that, because processing speed doesn't scale 1:1 with clock speed. >Is there a new processor out that I don;t know about, > or was the P4 released later than that? >Or os there something else that I am missing entirely? Just that clockspeed is a poor measure of performance. AMD Athlon64 and Opteron chips run around 2 Ghz, but they process data as fast or faster than P4s. Intel's own Itanium, IBM Power5 and the rest of the server chips run between 1 and 2 Ghz, but go much faster than any desktop-level offer from AMD or Intel (well, apart from P4's integer performance which is really high). Cache architecture and dimensions, memory speed, bus design (for multiprocessor system), simultaneous multithreading (known as Hyperthreading in the P4 case, SMT for the others), all play a large factor in determining a processor performance, while clock speed is just another factor. Alfio From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 18 18:09:42 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 11:09:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <003101c4b535$7cab6d00$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041018180942.94800.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Weird that the Kennedys would be brought up as a similarity to the > Bush family since Jack and Ted are so far apart on so many issues that > Jack would be a Republican today. Yeah, JFK is no John Kerry. Jack would likely, actually, find a lot of commonality with the neo-cons, though not to the degree that Goldwater would have been. More of a Reaganite, I think. ===== 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 Oct 18 18:56:06 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 13:56:06 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? References: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: <00f001c4b544$2006b2d0$7ab32643@kevin> So would you say that processing speeds are still doubling every 18 months even though clock speeds are not? I have noticed the trend towards ever faster memory and bus speeds, but when I recently upgraded with double faster memory and bus speeds, I didn't notice the huge increase in performance that I noticed the last time when I went from 700 Mhz to 1.4 Ghz. Also, my system is definitely not one that should be used to benchmark average processing times. It is a hodgepodge of newer and older parts. Don't get me wrong. The performance improved. It just wasn't as drastic as the last upgrade and so I thought I would check out the processors. When I saw that the top of the list was the 3.4 and it was at the top 8 months ago as well, I started to wonder what was happening. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alfio Puglisi" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? > On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, Kevin Freels wrote: > > >Some additional checking, which I admit was light, > >revealed that the P4 1.7 Ghz processor was unveiled in 2001. > >This is somewhat more than 18 months for a two-fold increase in > >processing speed. > > Actually it would worse than that, because processing speed doesn't scale > 1:1 with clock speed. > > >Is there a new processor out that I don;t know about, > > or was the P4 released later than that? > >Or os there something else that I am missing entirely? > > Just that clockspeed is a poor measure of performance. AMD Athlon64 and > Opteron chips run around 2 Ghz, but they process data as fast or faster > than P4s. Intel's own Itanium, IBM Power5 and the rest of the server > chips run between 1 and 2 Ghz, but go much faster than any desktop-level > offer from AMD or Intel (well, apart from P4's integer performance which > is really high). > > Cache architecture and dimensions, memory speed, bus design (for > multiprocessor system), simultaneous multithreading (known as > Hyperthreading in the P4 case, SMT for the others), all play a large > factor in determining a processor performance, while clock speed is just > another factor. > > Alfio > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From scerir at libero.it Mon Oct 18 19:02:00 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:02:00 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05> Message-ID: <001101c4b544$f2dd75e0$5cb61b97@administxl09yj> > If PK (Psychokinesis) is really true [...] > that there must be some interaction (or force) > between mind and matter? > Walter. Or there is a (hidden) common cause which influences both mind and matter :-) This is called 'conspiracy principle', or 'superdeterminism', it depends. It is difficult to believe, but it cannot be excluded, the possibility that in the overlap of the backward light-cones of 'mind' and of that piece of 'matter' you can find common causes. In principle you can also find common 'causes' in the overlap of forward light-cones! Eg. when the dynamics is time-symmetrical, eg. Nagasawa "dual" "diffusion" Schroedinger eq., ABL time-symmetric 'two-state' formalism, etc. The possible existence of a space-like separated 'jammer' who can correlate or can influence (eg. in a random way) events in two space-like separated regions, was also investigated. http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9508001 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0102083 Not to mention the Heller & Sasin conjecture (Int. Journ. of Theor. Physics, 38, 1619, (1999)) about the 'point-less' nature of space time (nonlocality is pervasive, in there). And the El_Naschie-Castro-Nottale-etc. 'point-less' metric based on Fractal-Cantorian 'transfinite' space-time! http://www.arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0007224 Subtle is the Lord! "candies" here http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0312115 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9511029 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0106103 http://rugth30.phys.rug.nl/dlm/ http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0205092 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402103 From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Mon Oct 18 19:07:37 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:07:37 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <00f001c4b544$2006b2d0$7ab32643@kevin> References: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> <00f001c4b544$2006b2d0$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Oct 2004, Kevin Freels wrote: >So would you say that processing speeds are still doubling every 18 months >even though clock speeds are not? Actually it's not that easy to say. Processing speed is now depending a great deal on what type of computation you do. In general usage (internet, mail, starting office and so on) the main bottleneck is often the hard disk, not the processor or the memory, and sadly the hard disk performance is not going up as fast as the rest (even if the capacity is). So you won't see much difference. For multimedia processing, current processors are much faster than, say, 4x with respect to 3 years ago, thanks to specialized instructions sets like SSE. 3D graphics cards also have been on accelerated Moore's law for some years now, but the type of processing that they do is very specialized. Things like 3d rendering with 3DStudio or Lightwave have benefitted from this too and are now faster than one should expect looking at the clockspeed. For scientific workloads, those measured by SPEC benchmarks and similar, I believe things have progressed quite close to a doubling every 18 months. But unless you run numeric-intensive programs like simulations you won't see it. Commercial benchmarks like TPC, useful for banks and such, depend a lot more on system architecture than just the processors used. So as you see it's quite complicated so say how processing speed is going. The general direction is up, but the slope is hard to measure :-)) Alfio From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Mon Oct 18 19:28:17 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:28:17 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? Message-ID: I think the press release from Intel is just spin because they are unable to release a 4 gig processor. Note that they had planned and published a roadmap that included a 4 gigger, but due to their screwups had to suddenly announce this change in strategy. BAL >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" >To: "Kevin Freels" , "ExI chat list" > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? >Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:46:08 -0200 > >As far as I know, the clock reace is over and manufacturers are now >focusing on multicore chips and 64 bit chips. > >Intel Cancels Plans for 4-Gigahertz Pentium 4 >Clock speed isn't the only way to improve processor performance, the >company says. >http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/10/ap_4101404.asp?trk=nl > > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Kevin Freels >To: ExI chat list >Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 3:29 PM >Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? > > > >I was just doing some shopping for a new processor, and the fastest I found >available was the Intel 3.4 Ghz P4. I did some checking and that processor >was unveiled in February, 2004. >http://it.asia1.com.sg/newsdaily/news002_20040203.html > >Some additional checking, which I admit was light, revealed that the P4 1.7 >Ghz processor was unveiled in 2001. This is somewhat more than 18 months >for a two-fold increase in processing speed. >http://tech-report.com/reviews/2001q2/pentium4-1.7/index.x?pg=1 > >Is there a new processor out that I don;t know about, or was the P4 >released later than that? Or os there something else that I am missing >entirely? > >Also, a bit of humor. I found this at the following site: >http://www.slashnot.com/article.php3?story_id=413§ion=Home > >"Intel has announced a new low performance processor value priced processor >that will appeal to the cost conscious consumer to be called the Pentium 4 >Mobile Home edition. >The design is similar to a typical mobile computer, but without the >mobility. P4 Mobile Home editions are typically mounted permanently to >their desks, often with an old dog asleep under it. The processors also >support the ?double-wide? 64-bit processor mode in upcoming Pentium 4 and >AMD processors. Rudimentary clustering is the norm, with eight to >sixty-four units forming Parks wherever an undeveloped parcel of deskspace >remains unclaimed for a long period of time. Wireless capabilities are >built in, but require the addition of an old coat hanger for extended range >reception. The systems typically ship with three or four mice, and will be >sold exclusively through WalMart with Red Neck Enterprise Workstation >pre-installed." > >He he! > >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 From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 18 19:35:50 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 12:35:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <00f001c4b544$2006b2d0$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: <20041018193550.7742.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Desktop PC's are not generally governed by processor speeds, that is merely one contributor. The biggest contributor to speed is the amount of RAM installed, seconded by the speed of the hard drive. When virtual ram is forced to be created on hard drives, and especially when hard drives are partitioned, slow performance results. Most value desktops are sold with anemic levels of RAM, and the slowest hard drive speed. You have to special order sufficient RAM and faster hard drives. RAM chip speed and bus speeds are also contributory. One thing I've noticed, though, is that, at least with Windows operating systems, there is a degree of self-governing going on, where the OS tends to reduce its own memory footprint based on the capabilities of the system. When I install more RAM, it seems as though the OS creates a larger footprint in response. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From naddy at mips.inka.de Mon Oct 18 20:43:12 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:43:12 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? References: <007401c4b538$0a2f6210$7ab32643@kevin> Message-ID: Kevin Freels wrote: > Subject: A slow down in Moore's law? Time to remind people again of this paper: - - - - - - - - - - The Lives and Death of Moore's Law by Ilkka Tuomi Abstract: Moore's Law has been an important benchmark for developments in microelectronics and information processing for over three decades. During this time, its applications and interpretations have proliferated and expanded, often far beyond the validity of the original assumptions made by Moore. Technical considerations of optimal chip manufacturing costs have been expanded to processor performance, economics of computing, and social development. It is therefore useful to review the various interpretations of Moore's Law and empirical evidence that could support them. Such an analysis reveals that semiconductor technology has evolved during the last four decades under very special economic conditions. In particular, the rapid development of microelectronics implies that economic and social demand has played a limited role in this industry. Contrary to popular claims, it appears that the common versions of Moore's Law have not been valid during the last decades. As semiconductors are becoming important in economy and society, Moore's Law is now becoming an increasingly misleading predictor of future developments. Full article: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/index.html -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com Mon Oct 18 22:55:28 2004 From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:55:28 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D46F@amazemail2.amazeent.com> And, to counter: http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=memelist.html?m=1%23593 Kurzweil argues that the relevant metric for Moore's law is price per transistor cycle and provides much more convincing evidence (IMHO) that Tuomi. So many good quotes, but here's a good one: If we measure what is really important (overall processor performance), we need to consider speed improvements, among other factors. Tuomi himself provides evidence of the exponential speed improvement in his figure 4 above. Taking speed as well as design innovations into account, we get a doubling time of about 1.8 years for overall processor performance.24 This does not include the issue of word length, which has been increasing during this period. Including this factor would bring down the doubling time further. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Christian Weisgerber Sent: Monday, 18 October, 2004 15:43 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? Kevin Freels wrote: > Subject: A slow down in Moore's law? ... Full article: http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/index.html -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu Tue Oct 19 00:18:23 2004 From: Johnius at Genius.UCSD.edu (Johnius) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 17:18:23 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] anti-hurricane engineering, reply Message-ID: <41745D4F.9D30FD48@Genius.UCSD.edu> Hi all, I forwarded some of your feedback posted on the anti-hurricane engineering thread to Wenger. He's now back from his teaching tour and sent the following replies. Best, Johnius ==== begin forward ==== [...OTECs in connection with Wenger's proposal...] Sounds like a very interesting application. Thought being that the construction of such a large vertical pipe would not be such a problem next to long-legged oil rigs, which abound in the Gulf.... Many thanks. ....win ----------------------------- << Hmm. I wonder if one could do a sub-million-dollar proving project, that would slightly but measurably reduce the force of a cat 1 or 2? Preferably one not slated to come ashore, just in case the worst happens. Once one has proven it this way, then one could make backed-up-by-evidence projections of how much it would cost to diminsh a cat 4 or 5, and try to get funding for that upscaled project. A.T. >> It might be feasible to get a mile or so's deployment out there, run computer predictions of hurricane performance from the four or five current best weather models, then compare actual hurricane performance. But you'd need to do that a few times to get confidence of data, especially since the changes would be small - so I'm thinking the minimum figure would be more likely somewhere between five and ten million dollars. ...w ----------------------------- << The author reports on simulations suggesting that changing the air temperature a degree or two in particular regions around the hurricane can change its course or reduce its intensity. However the article was somewhat vague about what technology might accomplish this task. There were references to unsuccessful experiments with cloud seeding in the 1960s, and suggestions that commercial jet flights might someday be planned to control where the shadows fell from their contrails. More advanced technologies could include microwave beams from solar power satellites or special biodegradable oil coatings to reduce evaporation >from selected regions of the ocean. >> Cloud seeding might actually intensify hurricanes. If it provokes extra precipitation, extra heat is released from that condensed moisture back into the storm system. ...w ==== end forward ==== From spike66 at comcast.net Tue Oct 19 02:19:22 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 19:19:22 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005801c4b582$0f2e3940$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > To: Kevin Freels; ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] A slow down in Moore's law? > > >So would you say that processing speeds are still doubling > >every 18 months even though clock speeds are not?... If you look at GIMPS, processor performance is cooking right along at a factor of 2 every 1.5 yrs or so. We made a big hootnanny when it broke the trillion flops threshold about summer of 2000. Now its about to break thru 20 teraflops. Ahhhhh life is gooooood... {8-D spike http://www.mersenne.org/primenet/status.shtml http://mersenne.org/ips/stats.html (You too can join and do something with your idle CPU cycles. Even if it is something silly.) (You might win 1e5 bucks. There is about a 61% chance that someone will win the $100k in the next 3 yrs.) {8-] s (do it.) From fortean1 at mindspring.com Tue Oct 19 03:39:41 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:39:41 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... References: Message-ID: <41748C7D.DC375133@mindspring.com> Paul carbone wrote: > > >From: Trend Ologist > >Now, it's not illegal, there is no law against > >nepotism. But geez Louise, what more evidence do we > >need that the Bush family are pushing to the limit our > >tacit tolerance of nepotism? More importantly: what > >more evidence do we need that many Bush family > >members, perhaps virtually the entire family, are > >power-addicts? > > > > I shall take it then, that the Kennedy family similarly infuriates or > infuriated you. I can't say that I care much about actual or perceived > nepotism in a democracy, and given the electoral durability of, again, the > Kennedy name, the public doesn't care much either, and that's what matters, > for better or worse. So they may push your "tacit tolerance" but they have a > long way to go to really bother Mr. and Ms. American voter with it. > > --Paul Nepotism is more common in our republic than many realize. < http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem/200307/bellow > ["In Praise of Nepotism"] 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 spike66 at comcast.net Tue Oct 19 03:41:55 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:41:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] disputin' putin In-Reply-To: <000a01c4b3e3$4d6c0750$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <005c01c4b58d$99159080$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Oh my. Now the ruskies like Bush. What a strange world we live in. http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/18/putin.iraq/index.html From fauxever at sprynet.com Tue Oct 19 03:58:11 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 20:58:11 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] disputin' putin References: <005c01c4b58d$99159080$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <000c01c4b58f$dc405190$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Spike" > Oh my. Now the ruskies like Bush. What a strange world we live in. > > http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/10/18/putin.iraq/index.html No surprise here. Take it from me ... throughout the decades, most of the Russkies I've known have had a decidedly conservative streak. Even the communist Russkies exhibited this tendency. Olga From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Oct 19 04:00:40 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 21:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] anti-hurricane engineering, reply In-Reply-To: <41745D4F.9D30FD48@Genius.UCSD.edu> Message-ID: <20041019040040.42082.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Johnius wrote: > I forwarded some of your feedback posted on the > anti-hurricane engineering thread to Wenger. He's > now back from his teaching tour and sent the > following replies. > ==== begin forward ==== > << Hmm. I wonder if one could do a > sub-million-dollar > proving project, that would slightly but measurably > reduce the force of a cat 1 or 2? Preferably one > not > slated to come ashore, just in case the worst > happens. > Once one has proven it this way, then one could > make > backed-up-by-evidence projections of how much it > would > cost to diminsh a cat 4 or 5, and try to get > funding > for that upscaled project. A.T. >> > > It might be feasible to get a mile or so's > deployment out there, run computer > predictions of hurricane performance from the four > or five current best > weather models, then compare actual hurricane > performance. But you'd need to do > that a few times to get confidence of data, > especially since the changes would > be small - so I'm thinking the minimum figure would > be more likely somewhere > between five and ten million dollars. ...w Eh, what? Did I actually suggest something that might work? ^_^;;; If five to ten - or, for safety factor's sake, let's call it twenty - million dollars is all that would be needed to prove this out, that sounds like something in the range of charity or a small government-funded study. Either way, funding seems possible. So, I wonder if there's anyone on this list who's more of an expert at these kinds of studies, who might want to run with it. Or, if not, where would be a good place to suggest this idea to get it run with (possibly with further reality checking, of course). A quick google on "otec hurricane" shows I'm not the only one who's thought of this in the past few months, but I didn't find any plans for formal studies of the idea. From scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 19 09:16:02 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:16:02 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05> Message-ID: <004501c4b5bc$418c7660$81c61b97@administxl09yj> > [...] some interaction (or force) > between mind and matter? Another theo(he)retical possibility would be the 'unmatter'. Besides matter and antimatter there must exist 'unmatter' (as a new form of matter) in accordance with the neutrosophy theory that between an entity and its opposite there exist intermediate entities. 'Unmatter' is neither matter nor antimatter, but something in between. An atom of 'unmatter' is formed either by (1): electrons, protons, and antineutrons, or by (2): antielectrons, antiprotons, and neutrons. It will be possible to test the production of 'unmatter'. The existence of 'unmatter' in the universe has a similar chance to that of the antimatter, and its production also difficult for present technologies. More about this, at cern.ch http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/other/ext/ext-2004-142.pdf :s) From sentience at pobox.com Tue Oct 19 10:03:26 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 06:03:26 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter In-Reply-To: <004501c4b5bc$418c7660$81c61b97@administxl09yj> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05> <004501c4b5bc$418c7660$81c61b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <4174E66E.5010807@pobox.com> scerir wrote: > > Another theo(he)retical possibility would be > the 'unmatter'. Besides matter and antimatter > there must exist 'unmatter' (as a new form of matter) > in accordance with the neutrosophy theory that between > an entity and its opposite there exist intermediate > entities. 'Unmatter' is neither matter nor antimatter, > but something in between. An atom of 'unmatter' is formed > either by (1): electrons, protons, and antineutrons, > or by (2): antielectrons, antiprotons, and neutrons. > It will be possible to test the production of > 'unmatter'. The existence of 'unmatter' in the universe > has a similar chance to that of the antimatter, and its > production also difficult for present technologies. > > More about this, at cern.ch > http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/other/ext/ext-2004-142.pdf ... You know, I'm pretty sure that I once read a humorous SF novel featuring three states: matter, anti-matter and doesn't-matter. Truth isn't stranger than fiction, but sometimes it comes pretty close. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From amara at amara.com Tue Oct 19 11:23:49 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:23:49 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] volcanic gas- origins of life? Message-ID: From hal at finney.org ("Hal Finney"), Mon, 11 Oct 2004: >Amara Graps writes: >> Filling in some parts from what Jeff Davis pointed extropy-chat to: >> >> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/sri-cov100704.php >> ... > Looking up the paper, to see the abstract and some details: >> >> Science, Vol 306, Issue 5694, 283-286 , 8 October 2004 >> > Carbonyl Sulfide-Mediated Prebiotic Formation of Peptides >> Luke Leman,1 Leslie Orgel,2 M. Reza Ghadiri1* >> >> ... We show that carbonyl sulfide (COS), a simple >> volcanic gas, brings about the formation of peptides from amino acids >> under mild conditions in aqueous solution. Depending on the reaction >> conditions and additives used, exposure of -amino acids to COS >> temperature. Dear Hal, I think you might like the following article. It's current, and it is readable: -------------------------- J.L. Bada / Earth and Planetary Science Letters 226 (2004) 1-15 How life began on Earth: a status report by Jeffrey L. Bada Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0212, United States Received 7 January 2004; received in revised form 16 July 2004; accepted 22 July 2004 Editor: A.N. Halliday Abstract There are two fundamental requirements for life as we know it, liquid water and organic polymers, such as nucleic acids and proteins. Water provides the medium for chemical reactions and the polymers carry out the central biological functions of replication and catalysis. During the accretionary phase of the Earth, high surface temperatures would have made the presence of liquid water and an extensive organic carbon reservoir unlikely. As the Earth's surface cooled, water and simple organic compounds, derived from a variety of sources, would have begun to accumulate. This set the stage for the process of chemical evolution to begin in which one of the central facets was the synthesis of biologically important polymers, some of which had a variety of simple catalytic functions. Increasingly complex macromolecules were produced and eventually molecules with the ability to catalyze their own imperfect replication appeared. Thus began the processes of multiplication, heredity and variation, and this marked the point of both the origin of life and evolution. Once simple self-replicating entities originated, they evolved first into the RNA World and eventually to the DNA/Protein World, which had all the attributes of modern biology. If the basic components water and organic polymers were, or are, present on other bodies in our solar system and beyond, it is reasonable to assume that a similar series of steps that gave rise of life on Earth could occur elsewhere. ------------------------------- >It seems strange that only now would people be doing testing to see >how reactions would occur in the presence of what I gather is a >relatively common gas in the atmosphere of the early earth. I watched >the PBS show Origins a few weeks ago, and they were still talking >about the 1953 Urey-Miller experiment in which an atmosphere thought >to mimic that of the prebiotic Earth was exposed to a spark gap (meant >to simulate lightning); after a few days testing showed the presence >of amino acids. This is what Bada's article says regarding Miller's experiments: -------------------- In 1953, Stanley L. Miller demonstrated the ease by which important biomolecules, such as amino and hydroxy acids, could be synthesized under what were viewed at the time as plausible primitive Earth conditions (see [31] for a summary of this classic experiment). A key aspect of the experiment was the formation of hydrogen cyanide (HCN), aldehydes and ketones produced during the sparking of the reduced gases H2 ,CH4 and NH3 . The formation of these reagents suggested that the compounds were produced by the Strecker-Cyanohydrin reaction, first discovered in 1850 by the German chemist Adolph Strecker. The actual synthesis takes place in aqueous solution, implying that on the early Earth, amino acids could have been produced in bodies of water, provided the necessary reagents were present. Only a-hydroxy acids are formed in the absence of ammonia. Thus, the concentration of ammonia in the primitive oceans would have been critical in determining whether amino acids would be have been synthesized by this process. [...] This result strongly suggests that in order for HCN to play a significant role in prebiotic chemistry on the early Earth, temperatures at the time must have been cool. [...] If the primitive oceans were cool and more acidic than today, the ammonia would have been mainly dissolved in the ocean present as NH4+. This implies that even if there was adequate NH4+ dissolved in the oceans to support prebiotic reactions, the atmospheric ammonia levels may have been too low to provide for sufficient greenhouse warming to keep the early Earth's surface temperature above freezing. [...] One often-overlooked aspect of the Miller experiment is that the main product was oily goo. With a methane-rich atmosphere, oily material would have been produced in huge quantities on the early Earth, forming an oil slick that would have unimaginable on the Earth today. Oily material could have formed a protective layer on the primitive ocean surface that allowed not only for molecules to be protected from destruction by the sun's ultraviolet light [36], but also may have helped promote the condensation of simple monomeric compounds into polymers by acting as an anhydrous solvent [37]. In addition, the oily layer could have decreased the vapor pressure of water and thus the OH radical concentration in the atmosphere. As a consequence, the atmospheric lifetimes of reducing gases, such as methane and ammonia, could have been substantially increased [37]. Since the classic Miller experiment, numerous researchers have demonstrated that a large assortment of organic molecules can be synthesized using a variety of gaseous mixtures and energy sources (for example, see [38,39]). Most of the molecules that play an essential role in modern biochemistry, such as amino acids, nucleobases, sugars, etc., have been synthesized under plausible geochemical conditions. The conditions employed have ranged from the highly reducing conditions first used by Miller to less reducing mixtures containing CO and CO2 [40]. However, with neutral atmospheric mixtures containing CO2 and N2, the yields of amino acids and other essential organic compounds is vanishingly low. Many geoscientists today doubt that the primitive atmosphere had the highly reducing composition used by Miller in 1953. Although reducing conditions may not have existed on a global scale, localized high concentrations of reduced gases may have existed around volcanic eruptions, especially in hot-spot island-arc systems that may have been common on the early Earth. Whether reducing volcanic gases would have been dominant in these systems on the early Earth would depend on the oxidation state of the early mantle, which could have been more reducing than today [41]. The localized release of reduced gases by volcanic eruptions on the early Earth would likely have been immediately exposed to intense lightning (see Fig. 2), which is commonly associated with volcanic eruptions today [42,43]. With present day volcanic gas mixtures, NO is the main product [44], but with more reducing mixtures containing H2 ,CH4 and N2 , acetylene, HCN and other prebiotic reagents would have been produced [45]. Thus, in localized volcanic plumes, prebiotic reagents may have been produced, which after washing out of the atmosphere could have become involved in the synthesis of organic molecules. Island-arc systems may have been particularly important in localized Strecker-type syntheses because the reagents could have rained out into tidal areas where they could be concentrated by evaporation or periodic freezing. -------------------- >The problem is that the gases used in that experiment are no longer >thought to represent a good model of Earth's atmosphere. Yes. Bada's article supports this. The expression: "reducing atmosphere" is one that contains molecules saturated with hydrogen atoms, which are able to reduce other molecules. Miller and Urey used in their experiments a mixture of CH4, NH3, H2 to mimic the early Earth, but many scientists in this area don't believe that the Earth's atmosphere contain those molecules. They think instead it was full of oxidants (neutral, not permitting organic chemistry): CO2 and N2. Bada's writes (above) that there are some problems with amino acid yields with this kind of atmosphere too, however. If you Google-Search on 'reducing atmosphere', you will find more on this topic. >That makes the experiments somewhat meaningless as evidence of >anything other than that amino acids can form in some hypothetical >conditions that as far as we know never occured anywhere but in that >experiment. Yet people still point to this experiment as evidence of >how life originated. >Why don't we hear about people running revised versions of that experiment >with a more accurate mixture of gases, including the one used in this >experiment, carbonyl sulfide? I don't know about 'hearing', but my guess is that many experiments on variations of early atmosphere have been made. (But this is out of my area a bit, so I don't know) However, Bada says: "Since the classic Miller experiment, numerous researchers have demonstrated that a large assortment of organic molecules can be synthesized using a variety of gaseous mixtures and energy sources (for example, see [38,39]). [...] The conditions employed have ranged from the highly reducing conditions first used by Miller to less reducing mixtures containing CO and CO2 [40]." >Is it that there is still too much uncertainty about what was present >and their relative concentrations? Perhaps yes, This statement by Bada struck me: "Whether reducing volcanic gases would have been dominant in these systems on the early Earth would depend on the oxidation state of the early mantle, which could have been more reducing than today [41]." I think that no one is sure what was the exact components of the early atmosphere, because I don't think that enough is known about the oxidation state of the early mantle. More on that in my long addendum below. >One page I found that sheds some light on this is by Leslie E. Orgel, >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Lab/2948/orgel.html. He describes >Miller's work and then discusses some followups: >"Since then, workers have subjected many different mixtures of simple >gases to various energy sources. The results of these experiments can be >summarized neatly. Under sufficiently reducing conditions, amino acids >form easily. Conversely, under oxidizing conditions, they do not arise >at all or do so only in small amounts." >... >"Doubt has arisen because recent investigations indicate the earth's >atmosphere was never as reducing as Urey and Miller presumed. I suspect >that many organic compounds generated in past studies would have been >produced even in an atmosphere containing less hydrogen, methane and >ammonia. Still, it seems prudent to consider other mechanisms for the >accumulation of the constituents of proteins and nucleic acids in the >prebiotic soup." >It seems strange that the question of the effects of today's best >models of the early atmosphere must be disclaimed with an "I suspect". >Apparently the work has not been done. It might have been done, but results were not conclusive, or else the experiments are very hard to make. >And now in this new research, someone throws in a new gas and gets a new >result, the formation of peptides (chains of amino acids). I can't help >wondering, what might happen if you put in yet other gases that would >have been present? And how meaningful is it to leave out gases that >might have significant effects? I realize that it makes the experiment >easier to have just a few gases, but who knows whether some gas you >are leaving out of the experiment might totally change the results? >In general, the quality of work in this area seems to leave much to be >desired. Granted, it is an extremely difficult and frustrating problem, >the origin of life, and perhaps not one that gets much funding. But it >surely is of great philosophical interest. And when you look at how >much money NASA is spending on Mars probes whose purpose is largely to >shed light on this area, it would seem easy to spare a few billion for >Earthly lab experiments, which is probably about a thousand times more >than is currently being spent. I think that anyone working in this field would have to be a multidisciplinary scientist and a specialist at the same time. I don't see how one can address these questions without having a deep understanding of geochemistry, microbiology, marine chemistry, and geophysics. Another reference that you might like: book: _Life in the Universe_ by Dirk Schulze-Makuch and Louis Irwin, Springer-Verlag, 2004. It is a thin book, but with many references so that the reader can follow up in more detail on any of the topics. Chapter Headings: Definition of Life Lessons from the History of Life Energy Sources and Life Building Blocks of Life Life and the Need for a Solvent Habitats of Life Ideas of Exotic Forms of Life Signatures of Life and the Question of Detection ----------------------- If you don't mind my diverging on a related topic, this might address why it looks like progress is slow. I would like to talk a bit on the largest puzzle today in planetary science: "how did Earth get its water?" It seems to me that the multidisciplinary aspects of this question, and the rate of progress parallels that in the area of emergent life on the prebiotic Earth. Water is one of the key molecules of life, and a fundamental solvent of our own human life form. Despite our living embedded in the Earth environment, the origin of our atmosphere is one of the most puzzling enigmas in the planetary sciences. The processes and sources that contributed to its formation require knowledge of the formation of the solar nebula, Earth and its planetary neighbors, and each of their subsequent interactions, including the smaller members of the clan: asteroids, meteorites and comets. Timing and location is everything in this story and the main tool we have for trying to understand the puzzle is geochemistry. Earth has substantially more water than scientists would expect to find at 1 A.U. Other compounds and elements also readily vaporize at Earth's distance. Typical protoplanetary disk models and meteorite data suggest that the 1 A.U. zone where the Earth formed was too hot for water to be directly incorporated in local planetesimals. Water must have been acquired by the Earth from material that formed farther from the Sun. This puzzle is not new, but it was addressed by A. Delsemme, who proposed that Earth's water came from comets. Delsemme's theory was not completely satisfactory, but it provided a working hypothesis, until spectral measurements of comets Halley, Hyakutake, and Hale-Bopp, during their near-Earth passes in 1986, 1996 and 1997. The spectral analysis of the three comets showed that the abundance of the deuterium isotope of water is twice that found in Earth's water. Earth's water could not have come all from comets. What we can consider as today's oceans is essentially liquified early atmosphere. Planetary atmospheres are an expected consequence of planetary formation and evolution because gases such as the noble gases, and nitrogen, water, and carbon dioxide were present in the solar nebula. When the Earth in its early formation held enough mass to directly attract gases from the protoplanetary nebula, that initial inventory of nebular gases eventually became Earth's "first generation", or "primary", atmosphere. The first generation atmosphere is a captured solar atmosphere. But timing is everything. The Earth is melting and cooling as it is accreting, gaining mass, differentiating, thereby providing favorable or unfavorable conditions to capture nebular gases and for nebular gases to dissolve into the rock. After the core formed, and after about a 100 million year melting process, the differentiated mantle formed, which is the driver for the geothermal cycle. Gases that were dissolved into the rock bubbled to the surface, where they escaped to space or were held by the gravity to form our atmosphere. When the Earth cooled enough, clouds formed and a steady rain gave rise to the oceans. Other processes added to the water, such as the breaking apart of chemical bonds by light (photolysis), volcanic eruptions, and the release of gases via geothermal vents. With a first generation atmosphere assumption, we would expect that the elemental abundances to match the solar composition. Here begins one of the puzzles. It doesn't. Measurements of the noble gases in our present day atmosphere don't match the elemental signatures of the solar nebula. In addition, the protoplanetary disk models suggest that the 1 A.U. zone, where the Earth formed, was too hot for water to be directly incorporated. Therefore, we must consider the possibility that the Earth's present atmosphere might not be primary, and might be (at least) Earth's second generation atmosphere, with the water added after its initial formation. If so, then where could Earth have acquired its water? Some new-ish hypotheses for the origin of Earth's water 1) "Late-veneer Theory Modified" The starting point is Delsemme's ideas, but now assume that some of Earth's water still comes from comets, but that water is supplemented with that from the planetesimals from orbital reservoirs of objects of the outer asteroid belt. 2) "Wet-accretion Theory" The Earth formed 'wet'. In this scenario, the Earth must have accreted from, and then _entirely depleted_, an ancient supply of water-rich material located at the same heliocentric distance as the silicate material that formed the Earth. 3) "One Large Splash" (or the Stochastic Wet-accretion Theory) The Earth formed not from materials within a narrow band located a specific distance from the Sun, but from one or a few large (~1000 km in size) bodies arriving from the outer asteroid belt. This chance occurrence in the first 50 My of solar system evolution brought the water and volatiles to the Earth in one large splash, sparing Mercury, Venus, and Mars. These theories, especially 3), could solve the puzzle if we are only concerned with matching the deuterium (D/H) isotopic ratio between Earth's ocean water and carbonaceous chondrite meteorites. However, you cannot ignore the noble gases, and the above theories do poorly to address the questions posed by measurements of the noble gases. By noble gases, I mean the volatile, unreactive, silicate-incompatible noble gases helium (He), neon (Ne), argon (Ar), krypton (Kr), and xenon (Xe). Each of the noble gases give a different story. Since a noble gas doesn't react, it cannot be removed easily. The noble gases trapped in the Earth's silicate mantle give us the best keys for unlocking the water question because they give information for the processes and conditions in early Earth history, they constrain how much of the gases have escaped to the atmosphere over the Earth's history, and they tell us what remains of the primitive volatile gas reservoirs within the deep Earth. Obtaining useful isotopic data with high precision is hard work, though, so progress in isotopic geochemistry is slow. In addition, one must have a working, accurate model of the interior of the Earth in which the gases were stored. From my readings in the geosciences during the last couple of years, it seems to me that scientists don't have this working model, anymore, due to better data. (Google on the words: "Mantle Plumes" to see the controversy) The old "Standard Model" in geosciences assumes that plumes from the Earth's core-mantle boundary are able to cross the upper and lower mantle regions, providing glimpses into the Earth's transition region and lower mantle, but noble gas isotopic measurements are no longer clear whether there is an upper mantle and a lower mantle, so it is no longer clear where exactly are the reservoirs in which the noble gases are stored. In addition to the theories being overturned and reworked, progress is slow because the measurements are difficult. One must be very careful and precise when collecting geochemical data. One progress I've noticed in my readings is the most accurate measurements of noble gases use a method called: "Stepwise heating". In the lab it might look like this: Procedure: crushed sample, baked in ultra-high vacuum gas extraction system and backed at ~120C for ~day. the gases are extracted by a "resistively-heated Ta furnace" at temps of 600, 800, 900, 1000, 1100, 1200, 1400, and 1600C. For the gas fraction of each temp step, elemental and isotopic compositions of he, Ne, ar, Kr, and Xe are analyze by a mass spectrometer. You cannot contaminate your sample with atmospheric gas, either, or the sample is meaningless. Of course, atmospheric measurements are important for gaining the whole picture of noble gas evolution too, because the atmospheric gases are derived, in part, from outgassing of the Earth's interior, via volcanoes and other processes. I separate the questions about the origin of the Earth's water, which the noble gases can address, in this way: 1. Helium - the 'where' 2. Neon - the 'how' 3. Xenon - the 'when' 4. Argon and Krypton - mix of the 'how and 'when' 1. Helium was one of the first noble gases to be considered by geochemists in their studies of the processes and conditions in the formation in the early Earth. Helium has two stable isotopes: 3He and 4He. The first is considered a primordial isotope, because it has not been produced in any significant quantities since the Big Bang. The second, 4He, is constantly being produced, mostly by the decay of uranium and thorium. The ratio of the two: 3He/4He, in mid-ocean-ridge basalts (MORBs: samples upper mantle) and ocean-island basalts (OIBs: samples lower mantle ... maybe) is about eight times the ratio in the Earth's atmosphere, suggesting that helium in the mantle originated from an early time in the Earth's formation. Did the two different basalts originate from different reservoirs in the Earth's interior? Many geochemists say 'yes'. One idea to explain the helium data is that a thorough mixing of a dense primary atmosphere with a magma ocean created a high 3He concentration. Another idea to explain the data is the accretion of planetesimals buried deep in the mantle that survived the main degassing during Earth's accretion and are, therefore, still releasing helium. 2. Neon. If one succeeds in explaining the neon data, then one can answer, in some detail, how most of Earth's water arrived on Earth. Isotopic abundances of neon can answer if the solar nebula gas, including the water, was trapped directly via a magma ocean into the Earth's mantle, before the solar nebula dispersed. If not this scenario, then the neon isotopic abundances can demonstrate that a (small/large) contribution of noble gases arrived later from impacts of planetesimals. Data from MORBs and OIBs measurements indicates that solar-like neon was incorporated into the deep mantle directly from the solar nebula. However, other neon isotopes are found as well, giving another story of its history. Planetesimals acquired a "neon-B" isotope at a stage when the solar nebula gas had dissipated, and the accreting planetesimals were small (0.1-1 km). Furthermore, the Ne-B identified implies that solar neon trapped within the Earth has remained virtually unchanged over the past ~4.5 Ga. This is not the whole story either, because neon in the atmosphere gives another clue. The atmospheric neon isotopes show extreme 'fractionation', which is when the heavier isotopes are enriched relative to the lighter isotopes. The process that the neon fractionation requires is a gravitational capture of a primary atmosphere from a dense solar nebula, which is subsequently lost to space, as the light volatile gases streamed from the early Earth's atmosphere. 3. Xenon. Xenon measurements can give the 'when' for which the Earth accreted material, differentiated, and released gas from its interior. As a dating tool, the nine terrestrial xenon isotopes include products of 129I and 244Pu, which are called 'extinct radionuclides' because they were formed by a process of stellar nucleosynthesis prior to the formation of the solar system, radionuclides which have subsequently decayed away to zero. The variety of xenon isotopes give investigators a finer-scaled chronometer because the different radiogenic isotopes have different half-lives, which can be ratioed in order to determine specific ages. Dating results using xenon show a total time scale of 150 million years for accretion, MORB differentiation, and degassing of the Earth. Some scientists' model calculations indicate that the mantle started to partially retain radiogenic and fissiogenic xenon isotopes no later than 50-70 million years after solar system formed, which is just after the extraction of the Moon from the young Earth by a giant impact 4.5 billion years ago. Other xenon measuremnets indicate that solar nebular-like xenon was incorporated into the Earth's mantle while it was still forming, and that a mass fractionation event, such as what is seen in neon, occured later, after the Earth's formation and its atmosphere. In addition, other xenon measurements suggest a deeper reservoir of pristine solar nebular-like xenon enriched with some lighter xenon isotopes feeding the upper mantle. In other words, this deeper reservoir of primitive noble gases, which are caught in certain areas of the mantle, are slowly making their way through the mantle and ultimately into the atmosphere 4.6 billion years later. I'll skip 4.) for now, because this message is already so long, and it gives similar answers as 2) and 3). I hope that I have convinced you of the complexities. It seems that in answering this simple question: "How did Earth get its water?", more data gives more questions, and it is clear to me that we don't have all of the answer yet. At least, if one were to look at all of the pieces of the water puzzle, the solution is that we need _all_ of the available solar system processes running at the time, in order to bring the water to Earth. So if the question on how life began is similar in complexity, and involving many different fields, I am not surprised if progress looks slow. I would bet that significant progress is made, even if there are no earth-shattering press releases about 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/ ******************************************************************** "And chase down any of those noble gases or whatever that crud is." -- Apollo 12 Astronaut Alan Bean From Walter_Chen at compal.com Tue Oct 19 10:24:36 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:24:36 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED3F@tpeex05> Very interesting! I think antimatter is well accepted by scientists. Is unmatter just a philosophical idea or it's also accepted by scientists? Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eliezer Yudkowsky Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 6:03 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter scerir wrote: > > Another theo(he)retical possibility would be > the 'unmatter'. Besides matter and antimatter > there must exist 'unmatter' (as a new form of matter) > in accordance with the neutrosophy theory that between > an entity and its opposite there exist intermediate > entities. 'Unmatter' is neither matter nor antimatter, > but something in between. An atom of 'unmatter' is formed > either by (1): electrons, protons, and antineutrons, > or by (2): antielectrons, antiprotons, and neutrons. > It will be possible to test the production of > 'unmatter'. The existence of 'unmatter' in the universe > has a similar chance to that of the antimatter, and its > production also difficult for present technologies. > > More about this, at cern.ch > http://doc.cern.ch//archive/electronic/other/ext/ext-2004-142.pdf ... You know, I'm pretty sure that I once read a humorous SF novel featuring three states: matter, anti-matter and doesn't-matter. Truth isn't stranger than fiction, but sometimes it comes pretty close. -- 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at amara.com Tue Oct 19 13:24:14 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:24:14 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter Message-ID: Eliezer S. Yudkowsky : >Truth isn't stranger than fiction, but sometimes it comes pretty close. You might like this: http://www.amara.com/stranger/str_fiction.html Amara From sentience at pobox.com Tue Oct 19 13:34:41 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:34:41 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] stranger than fiction In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <417517F1.7050703@pobox.com> Amara Graps wrote: > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky : > >> Truth isn't stranger than fiction, but sometimes it comes pretty close. > > You might like this: > > http://www.amara.com/stranger/str_fiction.html You've got at least one fake item, from the Weekly World News. (Not only that, it's marked "Weekly World News" in the byline.) Triggering my suspicions was this text: "The slide struck him in the worst possible place--the vulnerable spot just behind and below the left ear. Bone fragments pierced his brain, killing him instantly." I like News of the Weird's new feature where they have three true items and one made-up item. Like I always say, the measure of your strength as a rationalist is your ability to be more confused by fiction than by reality. It's a good test of my ability to see if I can spot the most confusing item. I'm proud to say I spotted the Weekly World News item as fake before I noticed the byline, and that I went back and searched and didn't find any others. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From amara at amara.com Tue Oct 19 14:55:46 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:55:46 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter Message-ID: Eliezer, I collected those stories so many of my lifetimes ago, I don't even remember from where I picked up the trombone story. I'll remove that item, next time I work on that page (I want the items to be true items). Yes, it's true: I'm gullible gullible gullible. My sisters and parents like to play jokes on my gullibility (but I got them back a few times too :-) ) Amara -- *********************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ *********************************************************************** "Never squat with your spurs on." -- Texan Proverb From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 14:23:04 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:23:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] stranger than fiction In-Reply-To: <417517F1.7050703@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041019142304.7078.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> I actually read that Penrose article in Discover Magazine. --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Amara Graps wrote: > > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky : > > > >> Truth isn't stranger than fiction, but sometimes it comes pretty > close. > > > > You might like this: > > > > http://www.amara.com/stranger/str_fiction.html > > You've got at least one fake item, from the Weekly World News. (Not > only > that, it's marked "Weekly World News" in the byline.) Triggering my > suspicions was this text: "The slide struck him in the worst > possible > place--the vulnerable spot just behind and below the left ear. Bone > fragments pierced his brain, killing him instantly." > > I like News of the Weird's new feature where they have three true > items and > one made-up item. Like I always say, the measure of your strength as > a > rationalist is your ability to be more confused by fiction than by > reality. > It's a good test of my ability to see if I can spot the most > confusing > item. I'm proud to say I spotted the Weekly World News item as fake > before > I noticed the byline, and that I went back and searched and didn't > find any > others. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ > Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ===== Mike Lorrey 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 19 14:25:40 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:25:40 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <41748C7D.DC375133@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041019142541.18868.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Maybe our Republic is passe'? Perhaps we should dispense with these inefficient, divisive elections to set up a Bush monarchy? The Bush family has already had a guy who served as Director of the CIA, vice president, and president; another who served as governor of Texas and is now president; plus there is yet another who is governor of Florida, who says he isn't going to run for president in 2008 but wont decide until he leaves his current office in 2006. Sounds like the beginnings of a hereditary monarchy. >Nepotism is more common in our republic than many realise. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 14:40:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 07:40:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019142541.18868.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019144035.10111.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Maybe our Republic is passe'? Perhaps we should dispense with these > inefficient, divisive elections to set up a Bush monarchy? The Bush > family has already had a guy who served as Director of the CIA, vice > president, and president; another who served as governor of Texas and > is now president; plus there is yet another who is governor of > Florida, who says he isn't going to run for president in 2008 but > wont decide until he leaves his current office in 2006. Sounds like > the beginnings of a hereditary monarchy. A lot can happen between now and then. Keeping Cheney in the VP spot, when he's stated he doesn't want to be President, leaves the door wide open for GOP candidates from across the country. Jeb is just one possibility. Tom Ridge is another. Craig Benson is said to be looking at it, and he's got a half billion dollar war chest of his own to play with, winning elections is becoming a bit of a hobby for him. Ahnuld won't, unless they change the constitution between now and then. They'll all be going up against the presumptive DNC heir, Hillary, unless she succumbs to the realization that the real authority without accountability in DC is as a Senator. My bet is Benson will be the come from behind candidate because he'll have the most money to spend on getting more name recognition nationwide. He's fighting for one more two year term as governor, but won't run again in 2006, so he'll have two years to build a base nationwide. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 19 14:49:46 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:49:46 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter & ur References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED3F@tpeex05> Message-ID: <00f201c4b5ea$e1475660$fbb81b97@administxl09yj> > Is unmatter just a philosophical > idea or it's also accepted by scientists? > Walter. More or less like the "Ur-theory" by von Weizsaecker (pupil of W. Heisenberg, co-inventor of 'EPR' effect and of the 'delayed choice' measurement). The 'Unmatter' is just a joke (I hope). The Ur-theory was, more or less, the QIT, the quantum information theory, that is to say something new, a dual theory, not just measurement-knowledge- Copenhagen, not just physical states, but both. In QIT, quantum information, according to Horodecki^3, is indeed carried by a quantum system and that the wave function is the image of this information. The former cannot be described on paper, or by means of a sequence of classical symbols on the tape of a Turing machine, but the wave function can be. Thus, we would say that quantum information does exist; yet it is not just the wave function, but it is represented by it. Horodecki^3 http://www.research.ibm.com/journal/rd48-1.html http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0410090 Ur-theory, by Carl Friedrich Freiherr von Weizsaecker http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9611048 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0309183 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0212084 Carl Friedrich Freiherr von Weizsaecker: 'Classical physics has been superseded by quantum theory. Quantum theory is verified by experiments. Experiments must be described in terms of classical physics.' 'Nature is earlier than man, but man is earlier than natural science.' From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 19 14:50:19 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:50:19 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019144035.10111.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019145019.58676.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Of course you're right. However I now go by trends extrapolated from the past. It does appear a monarchy is at least contemplated, in an emergency a constitutional monarchy would possibly be installed. That is certainly what the Bushes want... I don't think any of them are stupid at all. Mike Lorrey wrote: A lot can happen between now and then. Keeping Cheney in the VP spot, when he's stated he doesn't want to be President, leaves the door wide open for GOP candidates from across the country. Jeb is just one possibility. Tom Ridge is another. Craig Benson is said to be looking at it, and he's got a half billion dollar war chest of his own to play with, winning elections is becoming a bit of a hobby for him. Ahnuld won't, unless they change the constitution between now and then. They'll all be going up against the presumptive DNC heir, Hillary, unless she succumbs to the realization that the real authority without accountability in DC is as a Senator. My bet is Benson will be the come from behind candidate because he'll have the most money to spend on getting more name recognition nationwide. He's fighting for one more two year term as governor, but won't run again in 2006, so he'll have two years to build a base nationwide. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 19 14:57:00 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:57:00 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: <20041019145700.72408.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Bush is of average intelligence, though he seems to be low-balling it. Bush comes on as a folksy fella from Texas who is no different than the bubba next door. So he is not stupid, he is pretending to be slightly stupid so he will be underestimated-- and it appears to be working. The whole family wants us to underestimate them: "Shucks, we're merely God-fearin' obedient public servants from Texas, please don't over-rate us". --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Tue Oct 19 15:13:15 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 11:13:15 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: Don't forget Jeb's up and coming son George P Bush who is half-Latino and poised for the 2016 election (after Jeb wins in 2008 and 2012 of course). http://archives.cnn.com/2000/ALLPOLITICS/stories/08/03/bush.young/ BAL >From: Trend Ologist >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:50:19 +0100 (BST) > >Of course you're right. However I now go by trends extrapolated from the >past. It does appear a monarchy is at least contemplated, in an emergency a >constitutional monarchy would possibly be installed. That is certainly what >the Bushes want... I don't think any of them are stupid at all. > >Mike Lorrey wrote: >A lot can happen between now and then. Keeping Cheney in the VP spot, >when he's stated he doesn't want to be President, leaves the door wide >open for GOP candidates from across the country. Jeb is just one >possibility. Tom Ridge is another. Craig Benson is said to be looking >at it, and he's got a half billion dollar war chest of his own to play >with, winning elections is becoming a bit of a hobby for him. Ahnuld >won't, unless they change the constitution between now and then. >They'll all be going up against the presumptive DNC heir, Hillary, >unless she succumbs to the realization that the real authority without >accountability in DC is as a Senator. > >My bet is Benson will be the come from behind candidate because he'll >have the most money to spend on getting more name recognition >nationwide. He's fighting for one more two year term as governor, but >won't run again in 2006, so he'll have two years to build a base >nationwide. > > > > >--------------------------------- > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 15:34:44 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:34:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019145019.58676.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019153444.47781.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Of course you're right. However I now go by trends extrapolated from > the past. It does appear a monarchy is at least contemplated, in an > emergency a constitutional monarchy would possibly be installed. That > is certainly what the Bushes want... I don't think any of them are > stupid at all. I'm not so cynical or paranoid as to think they want to install a monarchy here. Or so stupid. You've been spending too much time in Britain. Installing a monarchy is about the stupidest move someone could make here. We like the British royals just fine as celebrities, so long as they stay on their side of the pond and visit on occasion. Doesn't mean we want or need or will tolerate any of our own. Why be a king when you can control who gets elected? No, what we are seeing here in the US is, with the vast expansion in the immigrant community, a return to the political boss system that existed prior to the advent of the political primary process. The bosses have now figured out how to totally game the system and use the media to program the voters to get the desired result. ===== 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 Tue Oct 19 15:51:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041019155100.77715.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> How old would George P be then? Isn't he like 22 years old now? I'd expect to see him get into congress first... --- Brian Lee wrote: > Don't forget Jeb's up and coming son George P Bush who is half-Latino > and poised for the 2016 election (after Jeb wins in 2008 and 2012 of > course). ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From natashavita at earthlink.net Tue Oct 19 16:35:48 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:35:48 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: <181220-2200410219163548804@M2W048.mail2web.com> Texas isn't as dumb as people think. I am highly impressed by the sophistication of Texas. There are not many bubbas as well. This is an international state and you only find the bubbas out in the backlands, similar to all states/countries. I can't believe I'm defending Texas, but aftedr living her 1.5 years, I have to say that it is very much like California, but without the surfers. Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Trend Ologist trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:57:00 +0100 (BST) To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Bush is of average intelligence, though he seems to be low-balling it. Bush comes on as a folksy fella from Texas who is no different than the bubba next door. So he is not stupid, he is pretending to be slightly stupid so he will be underestimated-- and it appears to be working. The whole family wants us to underestimate them: "Shucks, we're merely God-fearin' obedient public servants from Texas, please don't over-rate us". --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 16:42:51 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:42:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019155100.77715.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019164251.10450.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20041019/NEWS09/410190343 Voter fraud case traced to Defiance County registrations volunteer 124 registrations falsified, allegedly for crack cocaine By JOE MAHR BLADE STAFF WRITER Mary Poppins. Jeffrey Dahmer. Janet Jackson. Chad Staton. Defiance County elections officials were confident the first three hadn't moved to their small community. But the fourth one lived there, and - in exchange for crack cocaine - tried to falsely submit the first three names and more than 100 others onto the county's voter registration rolls, police said. Now Mr. Staton, 22, of Defiance, faces a felony charge of false registration in a case that has quickly gained national attention as part of a hotly contested presidential battle that's attracted a flurry of new voter registrations across the country - and a flurry of complaints of voter registration fraud. Defiance County Sheriff David Westrick said that Mr. Staton was working on behalf of a Toledo woman, Georgianne Pitts, to register new voters. She, in turn, was working on behalf of the NAACP National Voter Fund, which was formed by the NAACP in 2000 to register new voters. Sheriff Westrick said that Pitts, 41, of Toledo, admitted she gave Mr. Staton crack cocaine in lieu of cash for supplying her with completed voter registration forms. The sheriff declined to say how much crack cocaine Pitts supplied Mr. Staton, or to say whether Pitts knew that the forms Mr. Staton gave her were falsified. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Tue Oct 19 17:03:38 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 10:03:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] volcanic gas- origins of life? Message-ID: <20041019170338.A5B5557E2B@finney.org> Thanks, Amara, that was very interesting information. The nature of the early Earth is apparently far less understood than I had realized. NASA announced yesterday that recent observations imply that the planet formation stage was somewhat different than previously thought, http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/releases/ssc2004-17/release.shtml. The implication is that as planetisimals joined to form planets, there was a longer phase of destruction and rejoining, rather than a relatively smooth process of accretion. I suppose this might provide more thorough mixing of the initial components. Hal From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 19 17:06:43 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:06:43 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <181220-2200410219163548804@M2W048.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041019170643.98340.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I didn't mean Texans are more stupid than others in red states (which opens another can of worms) I meant bubba in the generic, not Texas sense. Sophisticated in America is Massachusetts & Vermont... > Texas isn't as dumb as people think. I am highly > impressed by the > sophistication of Texas. There are not many bubbas > as well. This is an > international state and you only find the bubbas out > in the backlands, > similar to all states/countries. > > I can't believe I'm defending Texas, but aftedr > living her 1.5 years, I > have to say that it is very much like California, > but without the surfers. > > Natasha ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Tue Oct 19 17:11:41 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:11:41 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: I think he is currently 28 so by 2016 he should be 42 and old enough to be prez. That gives him 12 years to become governor/representative/senator/ceo/emperor/whatever. BAL >From: Mike Lorrey >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 08:51:00 -0700 (PDT) > >How old would George P be then? Isn't he like 22 years old now? I'd >expect to see him get into congress first... > >--- Brian Lee wrote: > > > Don't forget Jeb's up and coming son George P Bush who is half-Latino > > and poised for the 2016 election (after Jeb wins in 2008 and 2012 of > > course). > >===== >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!? >Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! >http://vote.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 19 17:16:52 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:16:52 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019153444.47781.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019171652.992.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I meant a de facto constitutional monarchy like, say, Cromwell's Protectorate-- which was installed after an emergency. If America got attacked with WMD I could see a Protectorate installed, not in name but in substance. We would be ruled by decrees; the president would appoint his successor. Naturally, it's a big 'if', perhaps we are being deliberately frightened by the administration's WMD talk . Just today Cheney gave a little speech on megadeath in an American city, the need to "wrap our minds around" WMD attacks, and Kerry's own unpreparedness in meeting such threats. > I'm not so cynical or paranoid as to think they want > to install a > monarchy here. Or so stupid. You've been spending > too much time in > Britain. Installing a monarchy is about the > stupidest move someone > could make here. We like the British royals just > fine as celebrities, > so long as they stay on their side of the pond and > visit on occasion. > Doesn't mean we want or need or will tolerate any of > our own. > > Why be a king when you can control who gets elected? > No, what we are > seeing here in the US is, with the vast expansion in > the immigrant > community, a return to the political boss system > that existed prior to > the advent of the political primary process. The > bosses have now > figured out how to totally game the system and use > the media to program > the voters to get the desired result. > > ===== > 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 > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From ophis at freewest.net Tue Oct 19 18:51:03 2004 From: ophis at freewest.net (Ophis) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:51:03 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis Message-ID: <20041019185103.GA14621@abiose.net> I just came across an interesting article on "Le Qu?b?cois Libre" (an online French-Canadian Libertarian magazine) titled "The Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis" (http://www.quebecoislibre.org/04/041015-5.htm). The article (in English) was written by Gennady Stolyarov and contains numerous references to Max More, to the Principles of Extropy, and to other renowned Extropes. Share and Enjoy, C. -- Since man extends his nervous system through channels of communication, he who controls the media controls part of the nervous system of every member of society. -Hagbard Celine, "Never Whistle While You're Pissing" SHA1 Fingerprint : 738D 16BE EF96 8CF0 6F02 6E9E 2018 BFF4 118D CEE0 CA Certificate : http://www.abiose.net/ca.crt From benboc at lineone.net Tue Oct 19 19:34:58 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 20:34:58 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible In-Reply-To: <200410191426.i9JEQB024299@tick.javien.com> References: <200410191426.i9JEQB024299@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <41756C62.30708@lineone.net> Amara Graps said: "Yes, it's true: I'm gullible gullible gullible. " Amara, didn't you know? The word 'gullible' was removed from the official English dictionary about a year ago. I don't remember what it has been replaced with. Maybe it's still in the American English dictionary, though. ben From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 19:38:04 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019170643.98340.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019193804.28221.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > I didn't mean Texans are more stupid than others in > red states (which opens another can of worms) I meant > bubba in the generic, not Texas sense. > Sophisticated in America is Massachusetts & Vermont... OH PLEASE. You've evidently never been to western Massachusetts, or even to Southie. Typical tourist, thinks that Mass is all like Cambridge, the Vineyard, and Bunker Hill, while Vermont is all like Woodstock or Burlington. Gimme a break. Vermont produces some of the biggest rednecks in the world, as does western Mass. Ever seen "Man with a Plan"? ===== 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 Tue Oct 19 19:42:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 12:42:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019171652.992.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019194253.60257.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > I meant a de facto constitutional monarchy like, say, > Cromwell's Protectorate-- which was installed after an > emergency. If America got attacked with WMD I could > see a Protectorate installed, not in name but in > substance. We would be ruled by decrees; the president > would appoint his successor. > Naturally, it's a big 'if', perhaps we are being > deliberately frightened by the administration's WMD > talk . Just today Cheney gave a little speech on > megadeath in an American city, the need to "wrap our > minds around" WMD attacks, and Kerry's own > unpreparedness in meeting such threats. Well, I'm frankly not surprised. The forces of revolution have been mounting for years on both sides. Constitutionalists on the right and socialists on the left have been mobilizing and using their hooks in congress and state governments to instigate the repression/reaction vicious cycle that Marxist revolutionary theory prescribes. Global socialism wants revolution here in the US. If they can succeed here, then global socialist government will fall into place very easily. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 19 20:21:17 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:21:17 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible References: <200410191426.i9JEQB024299@tick.javien.com> <41756C62.30708@lineone.net> Message-ID: <000401c4b619$312a2620$e2b81b97@administxl09yj> > The word 'gullible' was removed from the > official English dictionary about a year ago. > I don't remember what it has been replaced with. > ben ['Spookster' wrote recently ...] I logged onto globalnews.com today to check up on world events and see if anything interesting had happened to the human race, and 'lo and behold it seems that Oxford University Press (And several other publishing companies) are being forced to remove a word from their dictionaries. The word in question is 'Gullible'. The reasons behind it's attempted removal from the English language are complicated but I'll try to explain them in brief here. It all started in Africa. Prior to the 19th century, the rest of the world knew very little about this continent. Any trade between Europeans and African traders occurred on the coast. However, beginning in the early 1800s, explorers began to explore the African interior. Many of the first European explorers in Africa were missionaries who felt called to 'bring God into the lives of the pagan African tribes'. In the late 19th century the 'scramble' began - this was the major European colonization of Africa. Seven nations in total would vie for supremacy of as much of the continent as possible. Of the seven European countries that would eventually dominate Africa, Great Britain, France and Belgium together controlled most of Africa's territory. This is where the Guleb tribe enters the picture. The Guleb Tribe were a reasonably large community who lived peacefully in the country we know nowadays as the Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast). Then came the French. As Africa was 'civilized' the tribes were gradually deprived of their ancestral lands. This was no different for the Guleb tribe except for the fact that they were exploited out of almost everything they had. What happened was that when the French settlers arrived at the Ivory Coast they wanted the most fertile land. A large amount of this happened to be along the western edge of the "Lac de Buyo" which was the lake the Guleb tribe had settled around. The tribe was incredibly hospitable and open to the new settlers. They willingly offered to share their land, food and other resources with these strange, pale people. And the French took complete advantage of them. The next thing the Guleb knew they were dispossed of their lands, crops and other material possessions. What made it worse was that the settlers managed to deceive the tribesmen so completely and then boasted about how easily they had robbed the natives of their land while the other European nations were having so much trouble exploiting their own 'savages'. This led to the name Guleb being used to describe anyone who was easily deceived or tricked. The use of the term eventually made it's way to Europe where it was corrupted into 'Gullib' or 'Gullible'. Recently a small group of descendents from the Guleb tribe have been trying to regain their tribal lands from the government of the Ivory Coast. Unfortunately they've met with almost no success. At the same time they've also discovered how their ancestral name has been turned into a derogatory term in the English language. As a result they are campaigning to try and get the word removed in it's current form from the English language. The biggest purveyor (For want of a better word) of the English language are dictionaries, so that's what they concentrated on. This attempt has been taken as a joke up till now when the descendents have appealed directly to the British Government and the British Publishing Associations Board. Fearing a public relations upset the BPAB has forced the Oxford University Press along with several other publishing companies to remove the word or at least annotate the entry in their next edition of dictionaries to explain the history behind the term. Now, I personally agree that the Guleb Tribes-people should regain their land and receive reparations from the Ivory Coast government for their losses, but trying to change a language seems kinda stupid. Yes, it is politically incorrect and offensive to the Guleb Tribe to use the word. But does it really need to be removed? -Spookster From amara.graps at gmail.com Tue Oct 19 20:45:27 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:45:27 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] volcanic gas- origins of life? Message-ID: hal at finney.org: >Thanks, Amara, that was very interesting information. The nature of >the early Earth is apparently far less understood than I had realized. >NASA announced yesterday that recent observations imply that the >planet formation stage was somewhat different than previously thought, >http://www.spitzer.caltech.edu/Media/releases/ssc2004-17/release.shtml. >The implication is that as planetisimals joined to form planets, there >was a longer phase of destruction and rejoining, rather than a relatively >smooth process of accretion. I suppose this might provide more thorough >mixing of the initial components. The press release says: "According to the most popular theory, rocky planets form somewhat like snowmen. They start out around young stars as tiny balls in a disc-shaped field of thick dust. Then, through sticky interactions with other dust grains, they gradually accumulate more mass. Eventually, mountain-sized bodies take shape, which further collide to make planets." Yes, but there is a "Late Phase" that is more-or-less accepted by planet formation modelers that the press release doesn't mention. I think the Spitzer press release should be saying that there is 'more' collisions in the Late Phase in terrestrial planet formation than astronomers previously thought. I was thinking of this topic last summer when a "Supper-Earth" planet was found with a mass of about 14 Earth masses. I tried to find in the literature some upper masses for Earthlike planets, and I found none. (This is not my specialty area either, but I try to follow the literature.) Too many variables, and the last phase of planet formation is the largest variable. The following is what I collected about terrestrial planet formation. The article that I've seen that best describes the process of terrestrial planet formation was published last April in Physics Today: [1] "Origin of Terrestrial Planets and the Earth-Moon System" by Robin Canup, pgs. 56-62. More details on terrestrial planet formation can be found online in the KITP seminars. These are particularly relevant: [2] Terrestrial Planet Planet Formation in BInary Star Systems by Jack Lissauer http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/planetf_c04/lissauer/oh/01.html [3] Implications of Planet Formation Models for the Initial State of the Earth by David Stevenson http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/planetf_c04/stevenson/oh/01.html [4] Two Fluid Flights of Fancy: From Dust to Planetesimals by Andrew Youdin http://online.itp.ucsb.edu/online/planetf_c04/youdin/oh/01.html see also: J.E. Chambers (2001), "Accretion in the Solar System" Icarus 152 205. Terrestrial planet accretion in our solar system is typically described in three stages [1, 2]: I. Early Stage: Growth of dust grains (about micron) --> planetesimals (1-10 km) Timescale: Fast [3] This early stage is the least well-understood process [1], coagulation (sticking) is difficult, gravitational instability is hard [4]. II. Middle Stage: Growth by accretion of planetesimals --> planetary embryos (1000s km) Timescale: ~ 10^7 years [1, 3] Canup's paper describes this part well. She says: This next stage is much better understood due to extensive modeling work by the theoreticians. The rate of accretions (and hence the growth of the planetesimals) is controlled by the rate of collisions among the orbiting planetesimals in the solar nebula. The rate of collisions depends on the local orbital velocity (which increases with decreasing distance from the Sun, so that regions closer to the Sun generally accrete more rapidly), the number density of the planetesimals and their sizes and relative velocities. A source of velocity damping for the smaller objects is the gaseous nebula. There is a possible 'runaway growth' that can happen, due to the largest objects growing the fastest, with a single object running away with most of the available mass in its annular region in the solar nebula disk. In this case, then an object of roughly 1% of Earth mass can grow in as little as 10^5 years. Eventually we run out of solar nebula material. so that becomes is our final limiting factor for growth at this stage. III. Late Stage: Collision of tens to hundreds of embryos to yield --> planets Occurs in the absence of the solar nebula, but not always. Current modeling work suggests that solid planets are 'sculpted' by a violent, stochastic final phase of giant impacts. She says in [1] that a seemingly inherent feature of the late stage is giant impacts, in which lunar-to-Mars-sized objects mutually collide to yield the final few terrestrial planets. (Canup has worked extensively on the Earth-Moon formation process, that occured at this stage.) The bodies come from outside of the original accretion zone. Note that in our own solar system, these events were strongly influenced by Jupiter's gravity. The implication of this last stage is that our terrestrial planets (and Moon) may only represent one possible outcome in a wide array of potential solar-system architectures.[1] 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 20:54:16 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 13:54:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible In-Reply-To: <000401c4b619$312a2620$e2b81b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- scerir wrote: > > At the same time they've also discovered how their > ancestral name has been turned into a derogatory term > in the English language. As a result they are campaigning > to try and get the word removed in it's current form > from the English language. The biggest purveyor (For want > of a better word) of the English language are dictionaries, > so that's what they concentrated on. I think they are pretty gullible if they think that removing the world 'gullible' from our dictionaries is going to keep people from referring to them as the most gullible bunch of Guleb on the planet. I think this is going to become one of my favorite words now.... ===== 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 amara.graps at gmail.com Tue Oct 19 21:02:02 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:02:02 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Gullible Message-ID: My Roget's International Thesaurus, Fourth edition, Thomas Crowell Co., 1977, pg. 994 gives two related words for gullible: credulous, and foolable. I think the latter sounds silly and I don't think credulous is the proper meaning. However the foolable is closer to the meaning, so then going with foolable, we see: foolable, befollable, gullible, naive, artless, inexperienced, green. None, with the exception of gullible, is the proper meaning. So, then, if you find the replacement word, I am interested to know about it. Meanwhile, I guess I will continue to use gullible. 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 19 21:13:49 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:13:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Gullible In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041019211349.28504.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > My Roget's International Thesaurus, Fourth edition, Thomas Crowell > Co., 1977, pg. 994 gives two related words for gullible: credulous, > and foolable. I think the latter sounds silly and I don't think > credulous is > the proper meaning. However the foolable is closer to the meaning, so > then going with foolable, we see: > > foolable, befollable, gullible, naive, artless, inexperienced, green. > > None, with the exception of gullible, is the proper meaning. So, > then, if you find the replacement word, I am interested to know > about it. Meanwhile, I guess I will continue to use gullible. wordreference.com says "Fleeceable", which I think is a suitable substitute, except of course for the politically incorrect aspersions as to how easy it is to steal a sheeps fleece.... Of course, thesaurus.reference.com says the following: 9 entries found for gullible. Entry: gullible Function: adjective Definition: trusting Synonyms: believing, bite, born yesterday, credulous, easy, easy mark, eat up, fall for, fleeceable, foolish, go for, green, innocent, kid oneself, lap up, mark, naive, patsy, silly, simple, sucker, susceptible, swallow, swallow whole, taken in, trustful, tumble for, unskeptical, unsophisticated, unsuspecting, wide-eyed, yoyo Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: credulous Function: adjective Definition: naive Synonyms: accepting, believing, born yesterday, dupable, easy mark, fall for, green, gullible, overtrusting, simple, swallow whole, taken in, trustful, trusting, uncritical, unquestioning, unsophisticated, unsuspecting, unsuspicious, unwary Antonyms: cynical, disbelieving, incredulous, skeptical, suspecting, suspicious, untrusting, wary Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: easy Function: adjective Definition: tolerant Synonyms: accommodating, amenable, benign, biddable, charitable, clement, compassionate, compliant, condoning, deceivable, deludable, dupable, easygoing, excusing, exploitable, fleeceable, flexible, forbearing, forgiving, gentle, gullible, humoring, indulgent, kindly, lax, lenient, liberal, light, merciful, mild, moderate, mollycoddling, naive, pampering, pardoning, soft, spoiling, submissive, susceptible, sympathetic, temperate, tractable, trusting, unburdensome, unoppressive, unsuspicious Antonyms: harsh, intolerant, stern, strict Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: green Function: adjective Definition: inexperienced Synonyms: callow, credulous, fresh, gullible, ignorant, immature, inexpert, ingenuous, innocent, naive, new, raw, unconversant, unpolished, unpracticed, unseasoned, unskillful, unsophisticated, untrained, unversed, young, youthful Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: innocent Function: adjective Definition: naive Synonyms: artless, childlike, credulous, frank, fresh, green, guileless, gullible, hurtless, ignorant, inexperienced, ingenuous, innocuous, innoxious, inobnoxious, inoffensive, lily white, low tech, offenseless, open, raw, safe, simple, soft, square, unacquainted, unartificial, uncool, unfamiliar, unhurtful, uninjurious, unmalicious, unobjectionable, unoffensive, unschooled, unsophisticated, unstudied, unsuspicious, unworldly, well-intentioned, well-meant, wide-eyed, youthful Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: naive Function: adjective Definition: childlike Synonyms: aboveboard, artless, callow, candid, confiding, countrified, credulous, forthright, frank, fresh, green, guileless, gullible, harmless, ignorant, impulsive, ingenuous, innocent, innocuous, instinctive, jejune, lamb, natural, open, original, patsy, plain, simple, simple-minded, sincere, spontaneous, square, sucker, trusting, unaffected, unjaded, unpretentious, unschooled, unsophisticated, unsuspecting, unsuspicious, untaught, unworldly, virgin, wide-eyed Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: simple Function: adjective Definition: feeble-minded Synonyms: amateur, asinine, backward, blockheaded, brainless, credulous, dense, dim-witted, dopey, dull, dumb, fatuous, feeble, foolish, green, gullible, half-witted, idiotic, ignorant, illiterate, imbecile, inane, inexperienced, inexpert, insensate, mindless, moronic, nitwitted, obtuse, retarded, senseless, shallow, silly, simple-minded, slow, soft, stupid, thick, uneducated, unintelligent, witless Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: stupid Function: adjective Definition: irresponsible Synonyms: brainless, dazed, deficient, dense, dim, dodo, doltish, dopy, dotterel, dull, dumb, dummy, foolish, futile, gullible, half-baked, half-witted, idiotic, ill-advised, imbecilic, inane, indiscreet, insensate, irrelevant, irresponsible, laughable, loser, ludicrous, meaningless, mindless, moronic, naive, nonsensical, obtuse, pointless, puerile, rash, senseless, short-sighted, simple, simple-minded, slow, sluggish, stolid, stupefied, thick, thickheaded, trivial, unintelligent, unthinking, witless Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. Entry: susceptible Function: adjective Definition: exposed Synonyms: affected, aroused, disposed, easily moved, easy, fall for, given, gullible, impressed, impressible, impressionable, inclined, influenced, liable, mark, movable, naive, nonresistant, obnoxious, open, patsy, persuadable, pigeon, predisposed, prone, pushover, ready, receptive, responsive, roused, sensible, sensile, sensitive, sentient, sitting duck, soft, stirred, subject, sucker, suggestible, susceptive, swallow, swayed, tender, touched, tumble for, vulnerable, wide open Source: Roget's New Millennium? Thesaurus, First Edition (v 1.0.5) Copyright ? 2004 by Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. All rights reserved. ===== 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 scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 19 21:23:55 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:23:55 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05><004501c4b5bc$418c7660$81c61b97@administxl09yj> <4174E66E.5010807@pobox.com> Message-ID: <002a01c4b621$f0d2a850$e2b81b97@administxl09yj> Eliezer > Truth isn't stranger than fiction, > but sometimes it comes pretty close. Googling googling ... 'Unmatter' by Apryl Fox All great artists work with matter - the un-matter, which is used in paintings and murals. I don't mean with painting murals, you understand; the murals of words, painting pictures in your mind. That's what I meant. I've seen those paintings in museums: "The Scream," "Mona Lisa." She was a good looking woman, Mona Lisa, with a sensual smile and a half-quirked eyebrow. She is unmatter, just as all paintings are, just as all words are; so I propose that artists - - including poets and pianists - become scientists, and scientists remain as they are. They know about unmatter. In fact, Einstein was the first to discover it. From scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 19 21:24:34 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:24:34 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible References: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002e01c4b622$081a2150$e2b81b97@administxl09yj> From: "Mike Lorrey" > I think this [gullible or gullibile] > is going to become one of my favorite words now.... Btw, in Rome they use "boccone" (sing.) (mouthful, or big mouth) and "bocconi" (pl.). In Florence "grullo" and "grulli" (pl.) is a must. From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Tue Oct 19 21:59:30 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:59:30 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041019193804.28221.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041019215930.56582.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I lived in Vermont for three years, and have visited all over Massachusetts, the rednecks in both states are not nearly as ornery as the ones I met down South. The Beans of Maine are rednecks, certainly, but they wont beat one unless provoked. Down in Dixie you can be battered without even trying at all. No sir, Mike, I spent enough time in both North & South to know that the white trash in Dixie are trashier than the ones up North if you include the willingness to use fists and booted feet to quick result. Mike Lorrey wrote: --- Trend Ologist wrote: > I didn't mean Texans are more stupid than others in > red states (which opens another can of worms) I meant > bubba in the generic, not Texas sense. > Sophisticated in America is Massachusetts & Vermont... OH PLEASE. You've evidently never been to western Massachusetts, or even to Southie. Typical tourist, thinks that Mass is all like Cambridge, the Vineyard, and Bunker Hill, while Vermont is all like Woodstock or Burlington. Gimme a break. Vermont produces some of the biggest rednecks in the world, as does western Mass. Ever seen "Man with a Plan"? ===== 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 --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From naddy at mips.inka.de Tue Oct 19 22:06:52 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:06:52 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible References: <200410191426.i9JEQB024299@tick.javien.com> <41756C62.30708@lineone.net> <000401c4b619$312a2620$e2b81b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: scerir wrote: > The word in question is 'Gullible'. >From "gull": a person who is easily tricked or cheated; a dupe. Etymology: Probably from _gull_, to swallow (obsolete), from Middle English _golen_, to pretend to swallow, from _gole_, throat, perhaps from Old French _goule_. (Source: The American Heritage Dictionary) Did I spoil a meta joke? -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com Tue Oct 19 22:10:27 2004 From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 15:10:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D4D9@amazemail2.amazeent.com> A fascinating story, but this is probably the oldest etymological joke known to man. Perhaps I'm just failing to find it humorous. Anyway, because I find etymology quite interesting, here is the etymology back to the 14th century, from a great site http://www.etymonline.com/ gullible 1793 (implied in gullibility), earlier cullibility (1728), probably connected to gull, a cant term for "dupe, sucker" (1594), which is of uncertain origin. It is perhaps from the bird (see gull (n.)), or from verb gull "to swallow" (1530, from O.Fr. goule, from L. gula "throat," see gullet); in either case with a sense of "someone who will swallow anything thrown at him." Another possibility is M.E. dial. gull "newly hatched bird" (1382), which is perhaps from O.N. golr "yellow," from the hue of its down. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir Sent: Tuesday, 19 October, 2004 15:21 To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible > The word 'gullible' was removed from the > official English dictionary about a year ago. > I don't remember what it has been replaced with. > ben ['Spookster' wrote recently ...] I logged onto globalnews.com today to check up on world events and see if anything interesting had happened to the human race, and 'lo and behold it seems that Oxford University Press (And several other publishing companies) are being forced to remove a word from their dictionaries. The word in question is 'Gullible'. The reasons behind it's attempted removal from the English language are complicated but I'll try to explain them in brief here. It all started in Africa. Prior to the 19th century, the rest of the world knew very little about this continent. Any trade between Europeans and African traders occurred on the coast. However, beginning in the early 1800s, explorers began to explore the African interior. Many of the first European explorers in Africa were missionaries who felt called to 'bring God into the lives of the pagan African tribes'. In the late 19th century the 'scramble' began - this was the major European colonization of Africa. Seven nations in total would vie for supremacy of as much of the continent as possible. Of the seven European countries that would eventually dominate Africa, Great Britain, France and Belgium together controlled most of Africa's territory. This is where the Guleb tribe enters the picture. The Guleb Tribe were a reasonably large community who lived peacefully in the country we know nowadays as the Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast). Then came the French. As Africa was 'civilized' the tribes were gradually deprived of their ancestral lands. This was no different for the Guleb tribe except for the fact that they were exploited out of almost everything they had. What happened was that when the French settlers arrived at the Ivory Coast they wanted the most fertile land. A large amount of this happened to be along the western edge of the "Lac de Buyo" which was the lake the Guleb tribe had settled around. The tribe was incredibly hospitable and open to the new settlers. They willingly offered to share their land, food and other resources with these strange, pale people. And the French took complete advantage of them. The next thing the Guleb knew they were dispossed of their lands, crops and other material possessions. What made it worse was that the settlers managed to deceive the tribesmen so completely and then boasted about how easily they had robbed the natives of their land while the other European nations were having so much trouble exploiting their own 'savages'. This led to the name Guleb being used to describe anyone who was easily deceived or tricked. The use of the term eventually made it's way to Europe where it was corrupted into 'Gullib' or 'Gullible'. Recently a small group of descendents from the Guleb tribe have been trying to regain their tribal lands from the government of the Ivory Coast. Unfortunately they've met with almost no success. At the same time they've also discovered how their ancestral name has been turned into a derogatory term in the English language. As a result they are campaigning to try and get the word removed in it's current form from the English language. The biggest purveyor (For want of a better word) of the English language are dictionaries, so that's what they concentrated on. This attempt has been taken as a joke up till now when the descendents have appealed directly to the British Government and the British Publishing Associations Board. Fearing a public relations upset the BPAB has forced the Oxford University Press along with several other publishing companies to remove the word or at least annotate the entry in their next edition of dictionaries to explain the history behind the term. Now, I personally agree that the Guleb Tribes-people should regain their land and receive reparations from the Ivory Coast government for their losses, but trying to change a language seems kinda stupid. Yes, it is politically incorrect and offensive to the Guleb Tribe to use the word. But does it really need to be removed? -Spookster _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From natashavita at earthlink.net Tue Oct 19 22:29:21 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:29:21 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter Message-ID: <160750-2200410219222921878@M2W055.mail2web.com> From: scerir "so I propose that artists - - including poets and pianists - become scientists, and scientists remain as they are. They know about unmatter. In fact, Einstein was the first to discover it." (Apryl Fox) What a tragedy that would be, for it would cripple humanity and transhumanity by limiting the mind and all its possibilities into a formula driven by what "man" calls science. No wonder Einstein stated that life would be meaningless without the arts. "Imagination is more important than knowldge." Einstein "... Such developments manifest themselves in traditions, instituitions, and organizations; in literature; in scientific and engineering accomplishments; *in works of art.* This explains how it happens that, in a certain sense, man can influence his life through his own conduct, and that in this process conscious thinking and wanting can play a part." (Einstiein) "Where the world ceases to be the scene of our personal hopes and wishes, where we face it as free beings, admiring, asking and observing, there we enter the realm of art and science." (Einstein) "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and all science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed." (Einstein) Natasha Googling googling ... 'Unmatter' by Apryl Fox All great artists work with matter - the un-matter, which is used in paintings and murals. I don't mean with painting murals, you understand; the murals of words, painting pictures in your mind. That's what I meant. I've seen those paintings in museums: "The Scream," "Mona Lisa." She was a good looking woman, Mona Lisa, with a sensual smile and a half-quirked eyebrow. She is unmatter, just as all paintings are, just as all words are; so I propose that artists - - including poets and pianists - become scientists, and scientists remain as they are. They know about unmatter. In fact, Einstein was the first to discover it. _______________________________________________ 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 cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Tue Oct 19 21:57:35 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 16:57:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible References: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00c401c4b626$a501af20$f1494842@kevin> Please tell me this is a joke! If this word is removed, that will open the door to removal of all kinds of words that will be somehow offensive to one group or another! How could these people who removed it fromthe dictinary be so gullible? Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lorrey" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 3:54 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible > > --- scerir wrote: > > > > At the same time they've also discovered how their > > ancestral name has been turned into a derogatory term > > in the English language. As a result they are campaigning > > to try and get the word removed in it's current form > > from the English language. The biggest purveyor (For want > > of a better word) of the English language are dictionaries, > > so that's what they concentrated on. > > I think they are pretty gullible if they think that removing the world > 'gullible' from our dictionaries is going to keep people from referring > to them as the most gullible bunch of Guleb on the planet. > > I think this is going to become one of my favorite words now.... > > > ===== > 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 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From max at maxmore.com Tue Oct 19 23:10:28 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:10:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] My talk on the Proactionary Principle in Austin, Thursday Oct 21 Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041019180707.03bb2e80@mail.earthlink.net> Hello everyone, Since the ExI-Tex list may not reach everyone who might be in or near Austin this Thursday, I'm posting this notice here: I'd like to let anyone in the Austin area know about a talk I'm giving on Thursday to the Austin chapter of the World Futurist Society. The Proactionary Principle The Central Texas Chapter of the World Future Society will hold its next monthly meeting on October 21, 2004. It will be held at the meeting room of the Iron Cactus, 10001 Stonelake Blvd. (527-8890) at 6:00 p.m. Our speaker will be Max More. His talk is entitled "The Proactionary Principle: Assessing Technology Impacts Objectively, Comprehensively and Responsibly." Agenda 6:00 - 6:30 Networking and Order Dinner 6:30 - 6:45 Announcements - Bob Kelley 6:45 - 7:00 Topical Discussion: Alternative Energy Systems - Bob Kelley 7:00 - 7:30 Dinner 7:30 - 8:30 Evening Speaker: The Proactionary Principle: Assessing Technology Impacts Objectively, Comprehensively and Responsibly - Max More 8:30 - 9:00 Discussion Price for dinner and program is $15 per person, cash or checks only. Price includes dinner (four-item menu selection) and drink. (Make checks payable to CenTexWFS.) Alcoholic beverage can be purchased separately from server. The meeting room is at the back of the restaurant on the far right. Seating is limited so please reserve your place by going to www.glocalvantage.com/CenTexWFS/Register.html or by sending an e-mail to Paul Schumann (ctwfs at glocalvantage.com). For more information about the Central Texas Chapter of the World Future Society, visit www.CenTexWFS.org ------------------------------- 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 Walter_Chen at compal.com Wed Oct 20 00:04:32 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:04:32 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter & ur Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED44@tpeex05> Do you believe in PK (Psychokinesis)? If yes, which theory in physics can explain these phenomena (how a mind could move some external physical objects w/o contacts) best? (Of course, it's better that the theory can let us do some experiments to duplicate the phenomena, and make some predictions also.) Thanks. Walter. --------- -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Oct 20 01:14:41 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 18:14:41 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <181220-2200410219163548804@M2W048.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <004101c4b642$2d32d7a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > natashavita at earthlink.net > I can't believe I'm defending Texas... I dont see why not. Texas is a great state. Its big and has lotsa variety. Of all the people who looooove their home state, Texas is the one that has the most enthusiastic homeboys. > ...but after living here 1.5 years, I > have to say that it is very much like California, but without > the surfers. > > Natasha Dont they surf on the gulf coast? spike From spike66 at comcast.net Wed Oct 20 02:01:08 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:01:08 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] google saves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005e01c4b648$ab227840$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Hey cool, check this: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135938,00.html That gives me an idea. We could machine-generate a few thousand pro-Islamic articles. Then anyone who was travelling where they might be apprehended by Islamic terrorists could just copy one of them onto their website. Then the terrorists might google on their captive's name, find the article, then be convinced to let the person go. Actually that whole idea is scalable. We could have a script that automatically loads into one's website a machine-generated article sticking up for whatever terrorists inhabit the land you wish to visit. Then if kidnapped, you pull out the laptop and demonstrate how much you despise the {fill in name of enemy-du-jour} and how you have struggled for decades to help the (fill in name of captors}. A long resume of good deeds could be generated. This would be perfectly moral thing to do even if false, since the deceived are those who threaten to lop off your head. spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 20 02:08:41 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:08:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] google saves In-Reply-To: <005e01c4b648$ab227840$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041020020841.21006.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > Hey cool, check this: > > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,135938,00.html > > That gives me an idea. We could machine-generate a > few thousand pro-Islamic articles. Then anyone who was > travelling where they might be apprehended by Islamic > terrorists could just copy one of them onto their website. > Then the terrorists might google on their captive's name, > find the article, then be convinced to let the person go. > > Actually that whole idea is scalable. We could have > a script that automatically loads into one's website > a machine-generated article sticking up for whatever > terrorists inhabit the land you wish to visit. Then > if kidnapped, you pull out the laptop and demonstrate > how much you despise the {fill in name of enemy-du-jour} > and how you have struggled for decades to help the > (fill in name of captors}. A long resume of good > deeds could be generated. This would be perfectly > moral thing to do even if false, since the deceived > are those who threaten to lop off your head. Problem: Iraq, for instance, has Sunnis and Shiites, who hate each other. If your script loads shiite propaganda, but you are kidnapped by sunnis, you are gonna die anyways. ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From kpj at sics.se Wed Oct 20 02:10:19 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:10:19 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] google saves In-Reply-To: Message from "Spike" of "Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:01:08 PDT." <005e01c4b648$ab227840$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <200410200210.i9K2AKV06017@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Spike wrote: | |That gives me an idea. We could machine-generate a |few thousand pro-Islamic articles. Then anyone who was |travelling where they might be apprehended by Islamic |terrorists could just copy one of them onto their website. |Then the terrorists might google on their captive's name, |find the article, then be convinced to let the person go. You might wish to contact the Department of Pre-Crime before you do that, to avoid any problems with your career and flight boardings. From matus at matus1976.com Wed Oct 20 02:55:56 2004 From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:55:56 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis In-Reply-To: <20041019185103.GA14621@abiose.net> Message-ID: <001401c4b650$55b39d50$6701a8c0@hplaptop> Wonderful article. I have always felt, since I understood both concepts, that extropianism is in most ways the logical consequence of objectivism (and Eudaemonism). This article does an excellent job of arguing that. Objectivism is the reason to be extropian. Michael -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Ophis Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2004 2:51 PM To: ExI Chat Subject: [extropy-chat] Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis I just came across an interesting article on "Le Qu?b?cois Libre" (an online French-Canadian Libertarian magazine) titled "The Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis" (http://www.quebecoislibre.org/04/041015-5.htm). The article (in English) was written by Gennady Stolyarov and contains numerous references to Max More, to the Principles of Extropy, and to other renowned Extropes. Share and Enjoy, C. -- Since man extends his nervous system through channels of communication, he who controls the media controls part of the nervous system of every member of society. -Hagbard Celine, "Never Whistle While You're Pissing" SHA1 Fingerprint : 738D 16BE EF96 8CF0 6F02 6E9E 2018 BFF4 118D CEE0 CA Certificate : http://www.abiose.net/ca.crt _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From dgc at cox.net Wed Oct 20 03:09:58 2004 From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen) Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 23:09:58 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D46F@amazemail2.amazeent.com> References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D46F@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Message-ID: <4175D706.2010500@cox.net> The original Moore's law did not mention CPU speed at all. It was about the cost per transistor. As a transistor shrinks, the effective cost per transistor decreases. The reduction in transistor size is one factor in the decrease int he cycle time a CPU. For many years, we have been accustomed to correlating the inverse of CPU cycle (i.e., CPU clock rate) with CPU capability. This is grossly over simplistic. Moore's law (decreased cost per transistor) continues apace. The best direct gage of References: <20041019185103.GA14621@abiose.net> <001401c4b650$55b39d50$6701a8c0@hplaptop> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041019231955.01a10ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 10:55 PM 10/19/2004 -0400, Matus wrote: >Wonderful article. Ahem ============ As I explained in my science fiction novel, Eden against the Colossus, resistance by governments, criminals, and irrationalist intellectuals against individual liberty and initiative will be futile once indefinite life is attained. Let the irrationalists then prate about the unworthiness of man, or of the need to curtail his ambitions. They would have nothing with which to curtail, no means of wielding their clubs efficiently, as the pain would be nullified and the damage repaired in almost an instant. They would be able to put forth no de facto threat, no practical intimidation by which to harness the titans of the mind and force them to grovel before the witch doctors' shriveled animate carcasses. The forces of reason and progress would have won their ultimate battle. After centuries of shielding themselves against the tide of mystic maggots, they would have devised the surefire repellant at last. (G. Stolyarov II, Eden against the Colossus, p. 360) ============== I'm shocked, shocked I say, to see that this glorious work has failed to attain publication. It would make a suitable entry in the Ayn Rand Cruel Parody contest. Damien Broderick From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Oct 20 06:04:38 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:04:38 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-research hysteria In-Reply-To: <26990010.1098251690099.JavaMail.root@bla73.blogger.com> References: <26990010.1098251690099.JavaMail.root@bla73.blogger.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204101923046e69e71d@mail.gmail.com> At one day from the beginning of the UN debate on therapeutic cloning, there are a few interesting articles in the press. The Washington Post has a good summary of where things stand, and a very good article on "A Cloning Compromise That Works" by the president of the Royal Society, Britain's national academy of sciences. The proposal put forward by Belgium and supported by Britain, would prohibit human reproductive cloning but would allow individual countries to make their own decisions about therapeutic cloning for research. The Times quotes one of the leading spokesmen for the fundamentalist anti-research hysteria, Pres. Bush?s advisor Leon Kass: "By allowing scientists to clone human embryos for research, countries such as Britain that have permissive regulatory regimes are promoting the perfection of technology that will one day be abused for reproduction". Kass does not seem too concerned with the potential of therapeutic cloning for treating diseases and saving lives. http://www.cyborgdemocracy.net/2004/10/anti-research-hysteria.html From scerir at libero.it Wed Oct 20 06:33:31 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:33:31 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible References: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c4b626$a501af20$f1494842@kevin> Message-ID: <003e01c4b66e$b8445400$d1b31b97@administxl09yj> From: "Kevin Freels" > Please tell me this is a joke! Is it? It is. We need a 'gullibility' test. I need a Norton anti-'gullibility'! Etymology: - from _gull_ - from old French _goule_ [- from Tuscan _grullo_ ?] From scerir at libero.it Wed Oct 20 07:02:27 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:02:27 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force & matter & ur References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED44@tpeex05> Message-ID: <005c01c4b672$c29e7cb0$d1b31b97@administxl09yj> [Walter] > Do you believe in PK (Psychokinesis)? No. But, i.e., I stopped my watch, for few seconds. I was young. And gullible. > If yes, which theory in physics can explain > these phenomena (how a mind could move some > external physical objects w/o contacts) best? The 'nonlocal' exchange of some conserved, gauge invariant quantity, has been established, i.e. in the Bohm-Aharonov interference (nonlocal quantum potential interference) http://rugth30.phys.rug.nl/quantummechanics/ab.htm But in PK the 'nonlocal' exchange would involve quantities that seem to be (in PK) not conserved. Momentum, energy, information, etc. So you need, imo, more than a point-to-point 'nonlocality'. You need a space-time which knows what happens in an entire fibre, and a fundamental level which is (?) a-temporal and a-spatial. From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Oct 20 14:11:48 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:11:48 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: <257720-2200410320141148535@M2W046.mail2web.com> Spike sez: >Dont they surf on the gulf coast? Ooops, yes they do. :-<> Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 20 14:12:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:12:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible In-Reply-To: <003e01c4b66e$b8445400$d1b31b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <20041020141200.15477.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- scerir wrote: > From: "Kevin Freels" > > > Please tell me this is a joke! > > Is it? It is. We need a 'gullibility' test. > I need a Norton anti-'gullibility'! > > Etymology: > - from _gull_ > - from old French _goule_ > [- from Tuscan _grullo_ ?] Ah, but where did the old French get "goule"???? Riddle me that... ===== Mike Lorrey Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." -William Pitt (1759-1806) Blog: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=Sadomikeyism _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From hemm at openlink.com.br Wed Oct 20 14:25:36 2004 From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:25:36 -0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D46F@amazemail2.amazeent.com> <4175D706.2010500@cox.net> Message-ID: <011f01c4b6b0$aa955830$fe00a8c0@HEMM> Still on subject: Moore's Law Lives! Intel says that it has made a fully functional memory chip with more than a half-billion transistors, each measuring only 35 nanometers across. The company expects to begin shipping commercial versions of the chip next year. http://www.technologyreview.com/articles/04/11/nanotech1104.asp?trk=nl ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Clemmensen" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 12:09 AM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? | The original Moore's law did not mention CPU speed at all. It was about | the cost per transistor. | As a transistor shrinks, the effective cost per transistor decreases. From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 20 14:31:44 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:31:44 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <257720-2200410320141148535@M2W046.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041020143144.85255.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I don't care how much surfing there is on the Gulf Coast, the South remains the most backward region of the country, with a culture of violence. Southerners insist on pushing their retro-politics on the rest of America, there are even those who still resent the Union victory in 1865. Perhaps worst of all, Southern 'Christianity' is the locus of aggressive religion in America. BTW Austin Texas is not representative of Texas, or the South as a whole, any more than Berkeley is representative of California. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Oct 20 14:41:56 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 10:41:56 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: I'm not sure if this is a joke or not. But after spending 5 years in south Georgia, not only have I never been hassled or beaten down, I've never heard a first hand report of someone who has. I've also spent a few summers in the Adirondacks of northern New York and the rednecks there are just as terrifying, but I never heard of them beating someone down either. I have seen "I Spit on Your Grave" and it has a story of northern nednecks/hillbillies. BAL >From: Trend Ologist >To: ExI chat list >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:59:30 +0100 (BST) > >I lived in Vermont for three years, and have visited all over >Massachusetts, the rednecks in both states are not nearly as ornery as the >ones I met down South. > The Beans of Maine are rednecks, certainly, but they wont beat one unless >provoked. Down in Dixie you can be battered without even trying at all. No >sir, Mike, I spent enough time in both North & South to know that the white >trash in Dixie are trashier than the ones up North if you include the >willingness to use fists and booted feet to quick result. > >Mike Lorrey wrote: > >--- Trend Ologist wrote: > > > I didn't mean Texans are more stupid than others in > > red states (which opens another can of worms) I meant > > bubba in the generic, not Texas sense. > > Sophisticated in America is Massachusetts & Vermont... > >OH PLEASE. You've evidently never been to western Massachusetts, or >even to Southie. Typical tourist, thinks that Mass is all like >Cambridge, the Vineyard, and Bunker Hill, while Vermont is all like >Woodstock or Burlington. Gimme a break. Vermont produces some of the >biggest rednecks in the world, as does western Mass. Ever seen "Man >with a Plan"? > >===== >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 > > >--------------------------------- > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Oct 20 14:57:24 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 09:57:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... References: Message-ID: <00e401c4b6b5$1c2af690$f1494842@kevin> Is everyone forgetting about West Virginia where all the hoobillies and inbreeders live in the mountains? Hasn;t anyone here seen the movie "Wrong Turn"? Isn't that where the moonshine distilleries are? Also, aren;t the survivalist whackos and militiamen all living in Washington state, Oregon, Idaho, and Montana? Give me a break! Are there really people here who think that stupidity and violence are geographically restricted? Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Lee" To: Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 9:41 AM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... > I'm not sure if this is a joke or not. But after spending 5 years in south > Georgia, not only have I never been hassled or beaten down, I've never heard > a first hand report of someone who has. I've also spent a few summers in the > Adirondacks of northern New York and the rednecks there are just as > terrifying, but I never heard of them beating someone down either. > > I have seen "I Spit on Your Grave" and it has a story of northern > nednecks/hillbillies. > > BAL > > >From: Trend Ologist > >To: ExI chat list > >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... > >Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 22:59:30 +0100 (BST) > > > >I lived in Vermont for three years, and have visited all over > >Massachusetts, the rednecks in both states are not nearly as ornery as the > >ones I met down South. > > The Beans of Maine are rednecks, certainly, but they wont beat one unless > >provoked. Down in Dixie you can be battered without even trying at all. No > >sir, Mike, I spent enough time in both North & South to know that the white > >trash in Dixie are trashier than the ones up North if you include the > >willingness to use fists and booted feet to quick result. > > > >Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > >--- Trend Ologist wrote: > > > > > I didn't mean Texans are more stupid than others in > > > red states (which opens another can of worms) I meant > > > bubba in the generic, not Texas sense. > > > Sophisticated in America is Massachusetts & Vermont... > > > >OH PLEASE. You've evidently never been to western Massachusetts, or > >even to Southie. Typical tourist, thinks that Mass is all like > >Cambridge, the Vineyard, and Bunker Hill, while Vermont is all like > >Woodstock or Burlington. Gimme a break. Vermont produces some of the > >biggest rednecks in the world, as does western Mass. Ever seen "Man > >with a Plan"? > > > >===== > >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 > > > > > >--------------------------------- > > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > >_______________________________________________ > >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 Oct 20 14:56:49 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041020143144.85255.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041020145649.70197.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > > I don't care how much surfing there is on the Gulf Coast, the South > remains the most backward region of the country, with a culture of > violence. Southerners insist on pushing their retro-politics on the > rest of America, there are even those who still resent the Union > victory in 1865. Perhaps worst of all, Southern 'Christianity' is > the locus of aggressive religion in America. > > BTW Austin Texas is not representative of Texas, or the South as a > whole, any more than Berkeley is representative of California. Thats funny, they say the same thing about Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio, etc: i.e. big cities aren't 'real texas'. This is the same everywhere. Most educated city people, especially those in the upper classes, generally don't reflect the culture of the region that city is located in and are more likely to buy into 'citizen of the world' garbage. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 20 14:58:00 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 07:58:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <00e401c4b6b5$1c2af690$f1494842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041020145801.78444.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > Give me a break! Are there really people here who think that > stupidity and violence are geographically restricted? Sounds like Mr. Ologist is missing out on some important trends.... ===== 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 natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Oct 20 15:11:44 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:11:44 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis Message-ID: <60710-2200410320151144388@M2W054.mail2web.com> Let's not go backwards. Extropy is forward. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Oct 20 16:37:45 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:37:45 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: <47440-2200410320163745657@M2W099.mail2web.com> Trend, In your email, please use phrases such as "In my opinion," or "it is my view that" when making claims. Otherwise your claims are read in a brash tone. Do you have the stats for violence in the United States to distinguish which states have the most violence? Thank you, Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Trend Ologist trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 15:31:44 +0100 (BST) To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... I don't care how much surfing there is on the Gulf Coast, the South remains the most backward region of the country, with a culture of violence. Southerners insist on pushing their retro-politics on the rest of America, there are even those who still resent the Union victory in 1865. Perhaps worst of all, Southern 'Christianity' is the locus of aggressive religion in America. BTW Austin Texas is not representative of Texas, or the South as a whole, any more than Berkeley is representative of California. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 20 17:34:00 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:34:00 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041020173400.81573.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> It is not a joke. However from what all of you have replied here, the South has changed dramatically, violence having diminished rapidly. Also, no longer are Southerners attempting to impose their traditional values on America; no, it's those liberals in Hollywood with their homosexual agenda who are doing the imposing. [note to Natasha: the above is based on personal opinion and does not reflect the views of extropy-chat] > I'm not sure if this is a joke or not. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 20 18:04:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <20041020173400.81573.qmail@web25202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041020180424.10288.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > It is not a joke. > However from what all of you have replied here, the > South has changed dramatically, violence having > diminished rapidly. Also, no longer are Southerners > attempting to impose their traditional values on > America; no, it's those liberals in Hollywood with > their homosexual agenda who are doing the imposing. > [note to Natasha: the above is based on personal > opinion and does not reflect the views of > extropy-chat] Trend, There is more violence in LA than most all of the south. The great thing and the bad thing, about the US, is that everybody has a chance to have an influence on the system if they get involved and put their resources forward. I personally don't care about anybody's homosexual agenda. What I care about are statist/socialists that use homosexual agendas (or any other agenda: terrorism, national security, education, children, women, etc) to further socialism. That so many prominent socialists are also gay is an unfortunate demographic accident, much as so many prominent communists in 1930's Germany also happened to be jewish, and so many prominent communists and socialists in the US civil rights movement also happened to be black. These straw man tactics are rather typical, and are purposely developed to allow attacks on socialism and communism to be labeled as racist, anti-semite, sexist, etc. as a means of furthering incrementalism. I've been all over this country, and the only truly violent people I've ever met were drunks in bars in Chicago and LA, a rural Colorado sheriff, the anti-busing bigots of Seattle and Boston, and the luddites of the radical left (who, it just so happens, come from 'sophisticated' middle and upper class families on the west coast and north-east primarily). I've seen far more violence on the TV in LA, Chicago, Boston, Seattle, New York, DC, Cleveland, and other so-called 'sophisticated' big cities, than I've ever seen in the media, or in person, in all the rural areas. The most peaceful, law abiding individuals I've ever known are gun toting, conservative and libertarian, rural people, in all areas of the country. These people are generally shocked at the penchant that so-called 'sophisticates' in the big cities have for violence, and, if they act bigoted, it is generally bigotry against big city people in general, not against any race, gender, etc., because of this penchant for violence that city people bring with them. ===== 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 naddy at mips.inka.de Wed Oct 20 18:27:35 2004 From: naddy at mips.inka.de (Christian Weisgerber) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:27:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D46F@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Message-ID: Acy James Stapp wrote: > > http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/index.html > And, to counter: > http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=memelist.html?m=1%23593 To counter what? People are arguing at cross purposes. The Tuomi paper shows that "Moore's Law" is ill-defined and the usual attempts to phrase it are counterfactual. The thrust of the argument is not that computers aren't getting faster. > Kurzweil argues that the relevant metric for Moore's law is price per > transistor cycle and provides much more convincing evidence (IMHO) that > Tuomi. Kurzweil comes up with yet another metric that he tries to shoehorn into "Moore's Law". All this does is to reinforce that people can't agree on what "Moore's Law" actually is. The term is meaningless. I know people on this list like to reference it with religous fervor, making them sound all the more naive. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy at mips.inka.de From scerir at libero.it Wed Oct 20 18:52:16 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 20:52:16 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Gullible References: <20041020141200.15477.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006201c4b6d5$eb9227d0$dfb61b97@administxl09yj> > > Etymology: > > - from _gull_ > > - from old French _goule_ > > [- from Tuscan _grullo_ ?] [Mike] > Ah, but where did the old French get "goule"? Latin "gula" -> French "goule" -> "gueule" ->? "gorge" "goulu" = "gourmand" is still in use http://www.legoulu.com/ From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com Wed Oct 20 19:41:11 2004 From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 12:41:11 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D51C@amazemail2.amazeent.com> I promise this is my last post on the subject, unless it comes up again :) Tuomi addresses many variants of Moore's law, all leading toward the metric Kurzweil proposes, which is in essence, computation per dollar. So Kurzweil's analysis is applicable in the context of the Tuomi paper. Kurzweil sidesteps the whole "Moore's Law" issue by restaging the advance of information processing capability into his own "law of accelerating returns". The introduction of the phrase "Moore's Law" to describe Kurzweil's ideas on the future of computation was my doing. There is a fundamental difference of opinion between the two on the rate, shape, and limits of information processing capability which drives their argument. Tuomi does seem to be advocating that the advance of computing technology is in fact slowing (or rather, the acceleration is decelerating). I will finally note that one can be fervent about something without being religious. Fervor is a a strong expression of passion for and excitement about some thing. Fervor in service of an ideal serves to direct and motivate one to work toward that ideal. Sometimes, even often, it is to the detriment of rationality but it can drive one to action in support of a rationally determined goal. (Of course, for most humans, this goal will still serve some basic genetically determined ned or desire.) Acy -----Original Message----- From: Christian Weisgerber Acy James Stapp wrote: > > http://www.firstmonday.dk/issues/issue7_11/tuomi/index.html > And, to counter: > http://www.kurzweilai.net/meme/frame.html?main=memelist.html?m=1%23593 To counter what? People are arguing at cross purposes. The Tuomi paper shows that "Moore's Law" is ill-defined and the usual attempts to phrase it are counterfactual. The thrust of the argument is not that computers aren't getting faster. > Kurzweil argues that the relevant metric for Moore's law is price per > transistor cycle and provides much more convincing evidence (IMHO) that > Tuomi. Kurzweil comes up with yet another metric that he tries to shoehorn into "Moore's Law". All this does is to reinforce that people can't agree on what "Moore's Law" actually is. The term is meaningless. I know people on this list like to reference it with religous fervor, making them sound all the more naive. From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Oct 20 21:02:17 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:02:17 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... Message-ID: <67140-220041032021217324@M2W079.mail2web.com> Trend, Please be more respectful of those of us on the list that who are liberals and/or homosexuals. This is not a joke. Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Trend Ologist trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:34:00 +0100 (BST) To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... It is not a joke. However from what all of you have replied here, the South has changed dramatically, violence having diminished rapidly. Also, no longer are Southerners attempting to impose their traditional values on America; no, it's those liberals in Hollywood with their homosexual agenda who are doing the imposing. [note to Natasha: the above is based on personal opinion and does not reflect the views of extropy-chat] > I'm not sure if this is a joke or not. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ 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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Wed Oct 20 21:47:17 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 22:47:17 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] now here is craftiness... In-Reply-To: <67140-220041032021217324@M2W079.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041020214717.68646.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Natasha, I was lampooning the views of many Southerners, and also Westerners, who speak of "Eastern snobs and Hollywood elitists who push an agenda aimed against our God-blessed American way of life". "natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: Please be more respectful of those of us on the list that who are liberals and/or homosexuals. This is not a joke. Natasha --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Oct 21 01:17:38 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 18:17:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] At Your Service Message-ID: <001f01c4b70b$c225d8c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> By the end of the decade, the study says, robots will "also assist old and handicapped people with sophisticated interactive equipment, carry out surgery, inspect pipes and sites that are hazardous to people, fight fire and bombs.": http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/aptech_story.asp?category=1700&slug=Robots%20Among%20Us Olga From matus at matus1976.com Thu Oct 21 03:18:15 2004 From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus) Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 23:18:15 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041019231955.01a10ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000001c4b71c$9df4a600$6701a8c0@hplaptop> At 10:55 PM 10/19/2004 -0400, Matus wrote: >Wonderful article. Ahem ============ As I explained in my science fiction novel, Colossus, p. 360) ============== I'm shocked, shocked I say, to see that this glorious work has failed to attain publication. It would make a suitable entry in the Ayn Rand Cruel Parody contest. Damien Broderick --------------- I did not say his story was wonderful, I have not read it. The part you quote is from his story. I realize you like to take any opportunity you can to criticize other people's works of fiction, no doubt because yours are so great (so I've heard anyway) but what did you think of the article? Michael From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Oct 21 05:48:32 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:48:32 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians Message-ID: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> I confess that I subscribe to the "rael-science" yahoogroup, a news-only group with about five postings per day. These days they take much material from Betterhumans and other transhumanist publications, but there was a time where subscribing to rael-science was one of the best way to be alerted of interesting news. Still today it is quite useful. Only one in ten posts is Raelian propaganda, the rest is interesting alerts on cutting edge science and in particular human enhancement tech. They launched a service in Spanish with the same features ("rael-ciencia"). The signature line says: --- "Ethics" is simply a last-gasp attempt by deist conservatives and orthodox dogmatics to keep humanity in ignorance and obscurantism, through the well tried fermentation of fear, the fear of science and new technologies. There is nothing glorious about what our ancestors call history, it is simply a succession of mistakes, intolerances and violations. On the contrary, let us embrace Science and the new technologies unfettered, for it is these which will liberate mankind from the myth of god, and free us from our age old fears, from disease, death and the sweat of labour --- Now, this seem a quite hardline transhumanist statement to me. Hell, I am not that radical, nor are many posters on our lists. Reading the rael.org website you find much hardline transhumanist content mixed with gibberish about flying saucers. An impression is that this is an extreme transhumanist movement with a layer of flying-saucers and new-age superposed. Other components of the extra layer are normative lifestyle guidelines and endless requests for money. The extra layer does not have much to do with the message (remove it, and you are left with hardline transhumanism that could stand on its own), so I frequently wonder why it is there. Some writings of Rael are surprisingly reasonable and well written once you remove the flying-saucers bits. The only other flaw, again, is that they are too radical and extremists and unwilling to compromise. I am sure Rael himself and other top officers never believed in the flying-saucers layer so, again, I wonder why it is there when the massage would stand on its own. Then I think that: The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. I wonder what conclusions we should make. G. From sentience at pobox.com Thu Oct 21 07:44:43 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:44:43 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Raelians In-Reply-To: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <417768EB.4080506@pobox.com> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Then I think that: > The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. > All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. > I wonder what conclusions we should make. You should conclude that... the other 100 cults that tried to get started using flying-saucer nonsense didn't make it big, so you never heard about them in the media? It's sort of like the way that every successful founder of a company rhapsodizes on the importance of Pluck and Perseverance. IIRC, 75% of new companies fail, 95% of Internet startups during the dot-com era. Who's to say that the founders of the failures put in any less Pluck and Perseverance? To figure out the *distinguishing* ingredients of success, you have to do longitudinal tracking. Maybe memes make it big more or less at random. Maybe the Raelians randomly made it big so you hear about them in the press and so on, and a hundred similar cults failed and you never heard about them, and no transhumanist organization has randomly made it big yet. You cannot conclude by looking at other people's successes, from Bill Gates to Richard Smalley, that *planned* success is possible. To succeed on purpose is a great deal harder. That is one of the reasons I greatly respect Einstein; he succeeded twice in a row, proving that the first time was deliberate rather than accidental. Succeeding reliably, on purpose, without being able to rely on any probabilities fortuitously falling your way, may be far harder than you would think from looking at successes that included a component of luck. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From brentn at freeshell.org Thu Oct 21 09:49:03 2004 From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 05:49:03 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Anti-research hysteria In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204101923046e69e71d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: (10/20/04 8:04) Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >At one day from the beginning of the UN debate on therapeutic cloning, >there are a few interesting articles in the press. The Washington Post >has a good summary of where things stand, and a very good article on >"A Cloning Compromise That Works" by the president of the Royal >Society, Britain's national academy of sciences. The proposal put >forward by Belgium and supported by Britain, would prohibit human >reproductive cloning but would allow individual countries to make >their own decisions about therapeutic cloning for research. >The Times quotes one of the leading spokesmen for the fundamentalist >anti-research hysteria, Pres. Bush?s advisor Leon Kass: "By allowing >scientists to clone human embryos for research, countries such as >Britain that have permissive regulatory regimes are promoting the >perfection of technology that will one day be abused for >reproduction". Kass does not seem too concerned with the potential of >therapeutic cloning for treating diseases and saving lives. This does not surprise in the least. Kass, like others of his ilk, have a deep-seated fear of the future and believe that a frantic effort to halt all change is the only way to save humanity. Personally, I think a sound thrashing with a copy of Postrel's "The Future and Its Enemies" is called for. :) B -- Brent Neal Geek of all Trades http://brentn.freeshell.org "Specialization is for insects" -- Robert A. Heinlein From kpj at sics.se Thu Oct 21 13:35:24 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:35:24 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Raelians In-Reply-To: Message from Eliezer Yudkowsky of "Thu, 21 Oct 2004 03:44:43 EDT." <417768EB.4080506@pobox.com> Message-ID: <200410211335.i9LDZOx20077@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Eliezer Yudkowsky : | |Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: |> Then I think that: |> The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. |> All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. |> I wonder what conclusions we should make. | |You should conclude that... the other 100 cults that tried to get started |using flying-saucer nonsense didn't make it big, so you never heard about |them in the media? Logically, you should create an alter ego (Yu?l?) having 60,000 paying members. Good for economy, I understand. The propaganda dynamics of Yu?l giving happy-happy A.I. news, and Eliezer Yudkowsky being the moderate group would make nice media input. OTOH, that just *may* make your Baby A.I. confused. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 21 13:38:04 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 06:38:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D51C@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Message-ID: <20041021133804.97297.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Acy James Stapp wrote: > drives their argument. Tuomi does seem to be advocating that the > advance of computing technology is in fact slowing (or rather, the > acceleration is decelerating). One reason why pro-singularity people all over should be lobbying to repeal the Telecommunications Reform Act which stifled the progress in getting fiber optic to everyone's home. It was this one act which killed the dot com boom, and is now starting to drag down the rate of acceleration. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From amara at amara.com Thu Oct 21 15:09:34 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:09:34 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy Thursday Message-ID: Now one autumn morning when the wind had blown all the leaves off the trees in the night, and was trying to blow the branches off, Pooh and Piglet were sitting in the Thoughtful Spot and wondering. "What I think," said Pooh, "is I think we'll go to Pooh Corner and see Eeyore, because perhaps his house has been blown down, and perhaps he'd like us to build it again." "What I think," said Piglet, "is I think we'll go and see Christopher Robin, only he won't be there, so we can't." "Let's go and see everybody," said Pooh. "Because when you've been walking in the wind for miles, and you suddenly go into somebody's house, and he says, 'Hallo, Pooh, you're just in time for a little smackerel of something,' and you are, then it's what I call a Friendly Day." Piglet thought that they ought to have a Reason for going to see everybody, like Looking for Small or Organizing an Expotition, if Pooh could think of something Pooh could. "We'll go because it's Thursday," he said, "and we'll go to wish everybody a Very Happy Thursday. Come on, Piglet." They got up; and when Piglet had sat down again, because he didn't know the wind was so strong, and had been helped up by Pooh, they started off. They went to Pooh's house first, and luckily Pooh was at home just as they got there, so he asked them in, and they had some, and then they went on to Kanga's house, holding on to each other, and shouting "Isn't it?" and "What?" and "I can't hear." By the time they got to Kanga's house they were so buffeted that they stayed to lunch. Just at first it seemed rather cold outside afterwards, so they pushed on to Rabbit's as quickly as they could. "We've come to wish you a Very Happy Thursday," said Pooh, when he had gone in and out once or twice just to make sure that he could get out again. "Why, what's going to happen on Thursday?" asked Rabbit, and when Pooh had explained, and Rabbit, whose life was made up of Important Things, said, "Oh, I thought you'd really come about something," they sat down for a little . . . and by-and-by Pooh and Piglet went on again. The wind was behind them now, so they didn't have to shout. "Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully. "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever." "And he has Brain." "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain." There was a long silence. "I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's why he never understands anything." ------------------ -- ******************************************************************** 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/ ******************************************************************** "For a girl, she's remarkably perceptive." --Calvin From pharos at gmail.com Thu Oct 21 14:11:14 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 15:11:14 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians In-Reply-To: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:48:32 +0200, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > Then I think that: > The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. > All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. > I wonder what conclusions we should make. > G. Giulio This cross-posting to EXI and WTA really confuses my gmail labelling system. All the replies are shown under EXI *and* WTA, regardless of where they came from, so it is unclear whether I should respond to EXI or WTA (or both!). I think it might be better to post only to one of the lists first. See what the response is, and if more discussion is required then post to the other list as a separate message. BillK (Feeling a multiple personality disorder coming on) :) From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Oct 21 15:03:58 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:03:58 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians Message-ID: <80140-220041042115358705@M2W059.mail2web.com> Giulio wrote: > Then I think that: > The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. > All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. > I wonder what conclusions we should make. Thank you for posting this Giulio. The reasonable assumption is that the Raelians are doing something better to obtain members than transhumanists groups. But assumptions can be misleading. First we need to take a look at what constitute the two groups. The Raelians are a type of religious group, and religious groups tend to have a higher degree of membership than intellectual organizations. Second, the Raelians are not split into varied smaller groups that want to create new names and independent groups and/or compete against each other. Let me take this point a step further: There is one Raelian group which functions as a spiraling network aimed at developing a type of fantastic reality. Transhumanism is devoted to developing solutions to problems by fostering change through rationale, critical thinking, and pro-active steps. Further, transhumanism is split into a variety of beliefs that have separated themselves from the transhumanist core. Rather than forming different departments of one group, individuals have created their own organizations, logos and statements. At the beginning it was just ExI and Foresight who worked to share membership and ideas. Later, WTA, IAC, etc. came along and developed their own memberships rather than joining ExI and Foresight. Herein, the central core of the philosophy splintered off and became diffused rather than embodied into a core movement. If transhumanist organizations worked together, rather than apart, then we would probably have a population in the thousands. I would like to see this happen and have encouraged it for years. I still think we could get a hell of a lot more accomplished by working together. On another point there is the assumption that quantity is better than quality. I think that the transhumanist community has an amazing high quality of people. I think that each principle, from each separate organization, has many impressive and essential qualities that are immensely beneficial to transhumanism. Lastly, an assumption that we must be successful *now* might not be worth the sweat and tears. I have spent 20 years in the field of transhumans and transhumanism and I have seen a slow but steady progression forward. While it was enormously frustrating in the 1980s and 1990s to not see ideas realized, I have come to believe that we are maturing and becoming part of the mainstream just a little ahead of society now, and we must move outside the "group" mentality and function within our specific areas of expertise and do what we can independently of any one group to impress on the world our ideas. Being radical and introducing new concepts is exciting, but actually seeing the concepts forming within society is rewarding. Perhaps what we may have to forfeit is getting our personal imprint on the ideas, but who cares in the long run? We are here to move the world forward, carefully yet pro-active. My best to all, Natasha Vita-More President, Extropy Institute Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture Senior Associate, Foresight Institute Honorary Vice Chair, WTA Editorial Advisor, Betterhumans Member, Immortality Institute Member, SIAI -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 21 15:24:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians In-Reply-To: <80140-220041042115358705@M2W059.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041021152456.56900.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- "natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: > realized, I have come to believe that we are maturing and becoming > part of the mainstream just a little ahead of society now, and we > must move outside the "group" mentality and function within our > specific areas of expertise and do what we can independently of > any one group to impress on the world our ideas. > > Being radical and introducing new concepts is exciting, but actually > seeing the concepts forming within society is rewarding. Perhaps > what we may have to forfeit is getting our personal imprint on the > ideas, but who cares in the long run? We are here to move the world > forward, carefully yet pro-active. I agree with Natasha. As an example, I'd point to Alan Greenspan, one-time member of Ayn Rand's salon, but has had over the last few decades more impact on global monetary policy than anyone else. Few people know he developed as a Randite, but he has helped shape the world we live in to help expand free market systems around the world and has slowed the advance of socialism and discredited the concept of nationalization. Some of us will rise to similar positions in various fields over the coming years with effort and determination. We can assist each other in that as well, but ultimately it relies on each of us making personal effort at making our own lives so, and believing that we each can make a difference if we decide to work within the system. So what if the backward thinking of Leon Kass has the ear of the white house now? If we put together a political plan to counter him, we can do it, but it all requires patience. Ultimately, the really important decision points are years in the future. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Thu Oct 21 15:32:07 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:32:07 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians In-Reply-To: <80140-220041042115358705@M2W059.mail2web.com> References: <80140-220041042115358705@M2W059.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204102108325265886b@mail.gmail.com> Thanks Natasha for your interesting comments. I tend to agree with Eliezer that the Raelian are just the visible tip of the flying-saucer iceberg. Probably the flying-saucer movement is as fragmented as the transhumanist movement and there are hundreds of other flying-saucer sects, much less successful. Yet, the numbers remain: 60.000 against about 300, millions against thousands of bucks. Yes we are much cooler intellectually but then why people don't join this or that transhumanist movement instead of joining the Raelians. I think, the Raelians imitate conventional religion by providing fast-food for thought, standardized and already packaged. Perhaps this provides a solution to a deep need: a nice MacHeaven to consume in a few minutes and move on. On the contrary, we want people to cook good meals fro themselves and exchange recipies for tasty and healthy meals on our lists. Perhaps we should think of something halfway between like a neighborhood steak and salad house. I like what you say on transhumanism disappearing into the texture of mainstream culture and society, but disgree on "an assumption that we must be successful *now* might not be worth the sweat and tears". A steamy political confrontation is beginning to take shape, see the UN debate, bill 71 in California, Fukuyama's paper, the reactions to the death of Christopher Reeve, etc., all these signs indicate that "they" are sharpening their knives. I expect the confrontation to become real dirty in five years and "their" victory now may set things back for decades. G. On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:03:58 -0400, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > > Giulio wrote: > > > Then I think that: > > The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. > > All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. > > I wonder what conclusions we should make. > > Thank you for posting this Giulio. > > The reasonable assumption is that the Raelians are doing something better > to obtain members than transhumanists groups. But assumptions can be > misleading. First we need to take a look at what constitute the two groups. > > The Raelians are a type of religious group, and religious groups tend to > have a higher degree of membership than intellectual organizations. > Second, the Raelians are not split into varied smaller groups that want to > create new names and independent groups and/or compete against each other. > > Let me take this point a step further: There is one Raelian group which > functions as a spiraling network aimed at developing a type of fantastic > reality. Transhumanism is devoted to developing solutions to problems by > fostering change through rationale, critical thinking, and pro-active steps. > > Further, transhumanism is split into a variety of beliefs that have > separated themselves from the transhumanist core. Rather than forming > different departments of one group, individuals have created their own > organizations, logos and statements. At the beginning it was just ExI and > Foresight who worked to share membership and ideas. Later, WTA, IAC, etc. > came along and developed their own memberships rather than joining ExI and > Foresight. Herein, the central core of the philosophy splintered off and > became diffused rather than embodied into a core movement. > > If transhumanist organizations worked together, rather than apart, then we > would probably have a population in the thousands. I would like to see > this happen and have encouraged it for years. I still think we could get a > hell of a lot more accomplished by working together. > > On another point there is the assumption that quantity is better than > quality. I think that the transhumanist community has an amazing high > quality of people. I think that each principle, from each separate > organization, has many impressive and essential qualities that are > immensely beneficial to transhumanism. > > Lastly, an assumption that we must be successful *now* might not be worth > the sweat and tears. I have spent 20 years in the field of transhumans and > transhumanism and I have seen a slow but steady progression forward. While > it was enormously frustrating in the 1980s and 1990s to not see ideas > realized, I have come to believe that we are maturing and becoming part of > the mainstream just a little ahead of society now, and we must move outside > the "group" mentality and function within our specific areas of expertise > and do what we can independently of any one group to impress on the world > our ideas. > > Being radical and introducing new concepts is exciting, but actually seeing > the concepts forming within society is rewarding. Perhaps what we may have > to forfeit is getting our personal imprint on the ideas, but who cares in > the long run? We are here to move the world forward, carefully yet > pro-active. > > My best to all, > > Natasha Vita-More From jef at jefallbright.net Thu Oct 21 15:43:54 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:43:54 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy Thursday In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4177D93A.4060000@jefallbright.net> Thanks Amara. I appreciate the wisdom of Pooh, and your sensitivity and astuteness in sharing it. Here are links to a few of my favorites that you may enjoy. - Jef Amara Graps wrote: > > Now one autumn morning when the wind had blown all the leaves off > the trees in the night, and was trying to blow the branches off, > Pooh and Piglet were sitting in the Thoughtful Spot and wondering. > > "What I think," said Pooh, "is I think we'll go to Pooh Corner and > see Eeyore, because perhaps his house has been blown down, and > perhaps he'd like us to build it again." > > "What I think," said Piglet, "is I think we'll go and see > Christopher Robin, only he won't be there, so we can't." > > "Let's go and see everybody," said Pooh. "Because when you've been > walking in the wind for miles, and you suddenly go into somebody's > house, and he says, 'Hallo, Pooh, you're just in time for a little > smackerel of something,' and you are, then it's what I call a > Friendly Day." > > Piglet thought that they ought to have a Reason for going to see > everybody, like Looking for Small or Organizing an Expotition, if > Pooh could think of something > > Pooh could. > > "We'll go because it's Thursday," he said, "and we'll go to wish > everybody a Very Happy Thursday. Come on, Piglet." > > They got up; and when Piglet had sat down again, because he > didn't know the wind was so strong, and had been helped up by > Pooh, they started off. They went to Pooh's house first, and luckily > Pooh was at home just as they got there, so he asked them in, and > they had some, and then they went on to Kanga's house, holding on to > each other, and shouting "Isn't it?" and "What?" and "I can't > hear." By the time they got to Kanga's house they were so buffeted > that they stayed to lunch. Just at first it seemed rather cold > outside afterwards, so they pushed on to Rabbit's as quickly as they > could. > > "We've come to wish you a Very Happy Thursday," said Pooh, when > he had gone in and out once or twice just to make sure that he > could get out again. > > "Why, what's going to happen on Thursday?" asked Rabbit, and > when Pooh had explained, and Rabbit, whose life was made up of > Important Things, said, "Oh, I thought you'd really come about > something," they sat down for a little . . . and by-and-by Pooh and > Piglet went on again. The wind was behind them now, so they didn't > have to shout. > > "Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully. > > "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever." > > "And he has Brain." > > "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain." > > There was a long silence. > > "I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's why he never > understands anything." > > ------------------ > From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Oct 21 15:51:21 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:51:21 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians Message-ID: <174320-2200410421155121352@M2W099.mail2web.com> Good points. Didn't Gov. Schwarzenegger publicly state that he supports therapeutic stem cell cloning? Let?s think about the magnitude of this. (1) Schwarzenegger is world famous. He is known as an athlete and a smart businessman. He is married to the US royal family. He is an icon in Hollywood. People listen to him. (2) Christopher Reeve just passed away. He may become the hero of what ?could have been? had he received advanced biotechnological treatment. This in itself sends a powerful message. This is a mighty award against bioconservatives. And we might have another one: If the Proactionary Principle becomes a known doctrine for determining how to address and deal with new technologies and policy making, etc., then we do have a chance. So, I?ll ask that you all get behind the Proactionary Principle. Max is giving a talk at the World Futures Society meeting this evening on the Proactionary Principle. Write to the World Futures Society and tell them that you support the Proactionary Principle and that you encourage them to support and promote it. Many thanks Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 pgptag at gmail.com Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:32:07 +0200 To: natashavita at earthlink.net, extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org, wta-talk at transhumanism.org Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians Thanks Natasha for your interesting comments. I tend to agree with Eliezer that the Raelian are just the visible tip of the flying-saucer iceberg. Probably the flying-saucer movement is as fragmented as the transhumanist movement and there are hundreds of other flying-saucer sects, much less successful. Yet, the numbers remain: 60.000 against about 300, millions against thousands of bucks. Yes we are much cooler intellectually but then why people don't join this or that transhumanist movement instead of joining the Raelians. I think, the Raelians imitate conventional religion by providing fast-food for thought, standardized and already packaged. Perhaps this provides a solution to a deep need: a nice MacHeaven to consume in a few minutes and move on. On the contrary, we want people to cook good meals fro themselves and exchange recipies for tasty and healthy meals on our lists. Perhaps we should think of something halfway between like a neighborhood steak and salad house. I like what you say on transhumanism disappearing into the texture of mainstream culture and society, but disgree on "an assumption that we must be successful *now* might not be worth the sweat and tears". A steamy political confrontation is beginning to take shape, see the UN debate, bill 71 in California, Fukuyama's paper, the reactions to the death of Christopher Reeve, etc., all these signs indicate that "they" are sharpening their knives. I expect the confrontation to become real dirty in five years and "their" victory now may set things back for decades. G. On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:03:58 -0400, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > > Giulio wrote: > > > Then I think that: > > The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. > > All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. > > I wonder what conclusions we should make. > > Thank you for posting this Giulio. > > The reasonable assumption is that the Raelians are doing something better > to obtain members than transhumanists groups. But assumptions can be > misleading. First we need to take a look at what constitute the two groups. > > The Raelians are a type of religious group, and religious groups tend to > have a higher degree of membership than intellectual organizations. > Second, the Raelians are not split into varied smaller groups that want to > create new names and independent groups and/or compete against each other. > > Let me take this point a step further: There is one Raelian group which > functions as a spiraling network aimed at developing a type of fantastic > reality. Transhumanism is devoted to developing solutions to problems by > fostering change through rationale, critical thinking, and pro-active steps. > > Further, transhumanism is split into a variety of beliefs that have > separated themselves from the transhumanist core. Rather than forming > different departments of one group, individuals have created their own > organizations, logos and statements. At the beginning it was just ExI and > Foresight who worked to share membership and ideas. Later, WTA, IAC, etc. > came along and developed their own memberships rather than joining ExI and > Foresight. Herein, the central core of the philosophy splintered off and > became diffused rather than embodied into a core movement. > > If transhumanist organizations worked together, rather than apart, then we > would probably have a population in the thousands. I would like to see > this happen and have encouraged it for years. I still think we could get a > hell of a lot more accomplished by working together. > > On another point there is the assumption that quantity is better than > quality. I think that the transhumanist community has an amazing high > quality of people. I think that each principle, from each separate > organization, has many impressive and essential qualities that are > immensely beneficial to transhumanism. > > Lastly, an assumption that we must be successful *now* might not be worth > the sweat and tears. I have spent 20 years in the field of transhumans and > transhumanism and I have seen a slow but steady progression forward. While > it was enormously frustrating in the 1980s and 1990s to not see ideas > realized, I have come to believe that we are maturing and becoming part of > the mainstream just a little ahead of society now, and we must move outside > the "group" mentality and function within our specific areas of expertise > and do what we can independently of any one group to impress on the world > our ideas. > > Being radical and introducing new concepts is exciting, but actually seeing > the concepts forming within society is rewarding. Perhaps what we may have > to forfeit is getting our personal imprint on the ideas, but who cares in > the long run? We are here to move the world forward, carefully yet > pro-active. > > My best to all, > > Natasha Vita-More -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From amara at amara.com Thu Oct 21 17:32:15 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:32:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy Thursday In-Reply-To: <4177D93A.4060000@jefallbright.net> References: <4177D93A.4060000@jefallbright.net> Message-ID: At 8:43 AM -0700 10/21/04, Jef Allbright wrote: >Thanks Amara. I appreciate the wisdom of Pooh, and your sensitivity >and astuteness in sharing it. > >Here are links to a few of my favorites that you may enjoy. > > > > Indeed! They are among my favorites... http://www.amara.com/astories/zenofpooh.html Amara -- *********************************************************************** Amara Graps, PhD email: amara at amara.com Computational Physics vita: ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt Multiplex Answers URL: http://www.amara.com/ *********************************************************************** "The universe: a device contrived for the perpetual astonishment of astronomers." -- Arthur C. Clarke From bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com Thu Oct 21 16:33:10 2004 From: bryan.moss at dsl.pipex.com (Bryan Moss) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:33:10 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians In-Reply-To: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4177E4C6.2030208@dsl.pipex.com> Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >Then I think that: >The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide and a lot of money. >All transhumanist associations together have perhaps 300 paying members. >I wonder what conclusions we should make. > While I agree with Eliezer about the dangers of reading too much into success (a similar message to the Raelians claim that there's nothing "glorious" about history), I think there's a few things that might make being a Raelian more appealing than being a transhumanist. The first is leadership; I don't think any transhumanist movements have been started by people who are comfortable in leadership roles. The second is the fact that the Raelians *are* hardline. One frustrating aspect of being a member of a rationalist movement is that, on the popular account of rationality, you have to dilute your message. You can see this especially in atheist movements, where internal concerns about being "militant" have *far* outweighed any militant element that has ever existed. The third is that transhumanist movements don't seem to be out to make money; the more you can milk your existing members for funds, the more new members you can go after, and so on. It would be interesting to see what would happen if you took transhumanist ideas, fleshed them out with some more practical here-and-now elements, and presented them as a slick *message*. It wouldn't have to be a cult, I don't think, just a movement. (I often think Eliezer has come closer to achieving this than anyone, albeit accidentally, with his Meaning of Life FAQ acting as a well-positioned, if neglected, "message" to pull in new blood, his stronger status as a personality [ascetic Bayesian Master] compared to other transhumanists, and the more "hardline" focus of his brand of Singularitarianism. "Yudkowskyan Singularitarianism" also passes the all important test of meaning: I often wish I bought into it, because then I'd know exactly what I had to do.) BM From pharos at gmail.com Thu Oct 21 16:49:29 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:49:29 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <20041021133804.97297.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D51C@amazemail2.amazeent.com> <20041021133804.97297.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 06:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > One reason why pro-singularity people all over should be lobbying to > repeal the Telecommunications Reform Act which stifled the progress in > getting fiber optic to everyone's home. It was this one act which > killed the dot com boom, and is now starting to drag down the rate of acceleration. > Oh, really? And there was me thinking it was just another stock market bubble, like all the previous (and future) market bubbles. Some people lay the blame on Alan Greenspan for failing to take action (such as raising the Fed funds rate) that might have stopped the market madness earlier. But, of course, there were many factors in play. Although this is the first time I've heard the TRA being blamed. BillK From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 21 17:32:40 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041021173240.8151.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 06:38:04 -0700 (PDT), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > One reason why pro-singularity people all over should be lobbying > to > > repeal the Telecommunications Reform Act which stifled the progress > in > > getting fiber optic to everyone's home. It was this one act which > > killed the dot com boom, and is now starting to drag down the rate > of acceleration. > > > > Oh, really? And there was me thinking it was just another stock > market bubble, like all the previous (and future) market bubbles. [gets on soap box] What is a 'market bubble'? It is a surge in the markets expectations of future gains based on the assumption that things will continue with current trends, that ends when those trends cease or change. Why did the late 90's bubble burst? It helps to look at the trends that were driving that bubble. One of the biggest trends was the global growth in bandwidth. Enron, Global Crossing, Worldcom (starting to see a pattern?) among others, all were heavily vested in backbone infrastructure, particularly intercontinental optical cable. Why did these companies invest so much in so much bandwidth? Because they were expecting the US telecommunications markets to actually be reformed such that companies would be free to invest in putting fiber optic through to "the last mile" to people's homes, giving people immense amounts of bandwidth very cheaply. Solving the 'last mile' problem would have empowered people to do immense amounts of data processing at home, work at home, and operate in virtual environments like those forseen in science fiction. This was the sort of world we were headed for, and would be living in, right now: the world of Snow Crash, and heading toward The Diamond Age in our future only a few decades hence. Nations and governments of the 1990's were headed toward obsolescence. Remember how we all used to talk about that sort of stuff? The prospect of this scared the bejeezus out of some people. Some very powerful people. People vested in the status quo, in maintaining their control. They could not let this sort of future happen. So they didn't let it happen. They passed a provision in the TRA which essentially stated that ANY company that routed optical fiber to a persons home HAD to allow their competitors access to that customer for less than the cost of putting that fiber connection in. Faced with a mandated money losing situation, the telecoms decided: "Fuck it, we won't put optic in." Simple as that. Instead, we are left using DSL and Cable Modems which, while an improvement on 56k dial-up, are still light years slower and narrower than optic. This is not my rambling, BTW. At least one other list member, who worked in the telecom industry during that period, first floated that on this very list back in '98 and '99. The TRA IS the cause of the dot com crash. The dot coms were all looking forward to the immense amounts of bandwidth that were promised to be available soon. I personally knew of ventures working on concepts like VR Bordellos, VR sports broadcasts(so that you could actually view the game from the huddle, from the pitchers mound, etc), as well as a number of other such ventures requiring large amounts of bandwidth to achieve. They all went tits up in 2000-2001 as the TRA started to have an impact on things. The capital they had received was spent and never earned a return on investment (and never was able to compound any interest for anybody). You know what happened to Enron, Global Crossing, and Worldcom. Compounded interest that one earns on one's investments, and is responsible for the real growth in one's savings that one depends on for the future, is a lot like Moore's Law, because both operate on a process of exponential growth. Moore's Law was trucking along on a wave of capital market growth that was itself being fed by the productivity gains of prior computer generations and their impact on the economy as a whole. That trend NEEDED more bandwidth to continue. It HAD to have it to keep the exponential curve going. When one law got changed that disinscentivized investment in the growth of the local bandwidth capacity, the whole ball of wax collapsed. Whole future worldlines winked out of existence. Governments are still not obsolete, people are still paying taxes, and you have to wonder why transhumanist science fiction hasn't turned out as we thought it would? Government wouldn't let itself be obsolete, it fudged the rules to make sure it stayed relevant. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 21 17:40:16 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:40:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians In-Reply-To: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041021174016.78528.qmail@web60008.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > The Raelians have 60.000 paying members worldwide > and a lot of money. All transhumanist associations > together have perhaps 300 paying members. > I wonder what conclusions we should make. That the ratio of ultra whack jobs to techno-rationists is 200 to 1. Best, Jeff Davis "We call someone insane who does not believe as we do to an outrageous extent." Charles McCabe __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Oct 21 17:54:18 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:54:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: A slow down in Moore's law? In-Reply-To: <20041021173240.8151.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041021175418.75543.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > They passed a provision in the TRA which essentially > stated that ANY > company that routed optical fiber to a persons home > HAD to allow their > competitors access to that customer for less than > the cost of putting > that fiber connection in. Faced with a mandated > money losing situation, > the telecoms decided: "Fuck it, we won't put optic > in." Simple as that. > Instead, we are left using DSL and Cable Modems > which, while an > improvement on 56k dial-up, are still light years > slower and narrower > than optic. > > This is not my rambling, BTW. At least one other > list member, who > worked in the telecom industry during that period, > first floated that > on this very list back in '98 and '99. The TRA IS > the cause of the dot > com crash. That may have sparked it, but the crash was waiting to happen. Most of the dot coms that died, had no business plan beyond, "get big and then figure out how to make money". They had no or little viable source of revenue to help them get big, nor even necessarily one they could tap even if they did grow as hoped. I know from personal experience, having served with two dotbombs during the crash, and this is the same story I hear from others who worked for dotcoms that died during that period. From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 21 18:05:25 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] vertical wind tunnel In-Reply-To: <000d01c4b474$0a0da950$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041021180525.99841.qmail@web60007.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > We could use a dummy mass to test the notion. Do you have someone particular in mind? Best, Jeff Davis Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes? Groucho Marx __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From scerir at libero.it Thu Oct 21 18:10:05 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:10:05 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Raelians References: <470a3c520410202248492e85c4@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001001c4b799$31649090$47bb1b97@administxl09yj> Giu1i0: > I confess that I subscribe to the "rael-science" yahoogroup, > a news-only group with about five postings per day. There are sects, and 'religions', everywhere. I was interested in Pythagoras but - as you can see - the first group was too 'wide' (and they mix 'mystery school', 'animal rights', and 'god'). http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Pythagorean/ 'Suitable topics for discussion will include, but are not limited to, Pythagoras, pythagoreanism, pagan, paganism, neopaganism, neopagan, vegan and veganism, vegetarian and vegetarianism, animal rights, bloodless sacrifice, Orphism, Orphic, orpheus, hellene, hellenism, Hellenic Paganism, Perennial, wisdom, philosophy, philosopher, esotericism, esoteric, spirituality, monotheism, polytheism, panentheism, pantheism, deism, sacred geometry, tetractys, tetraktys, Apollonius of Tyana, Philostratus, Iamblichus, god, eleusis, eleusian, eleusinian, demeter, persephone, kore, hekate, helios, apollo, golden verses, isis, osiris, horus, pre-socratic, mystery, mysteries, mystic, mysticism, golden tablets, reincarnation, karma, mason, masonic, freemason, freemasonry, scottish rite, albert pike, proserpine, secret society, mystery school, peace, self actualization.' The second group was a bit ... frightening (or it seems so, to me, being Italian). http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pythagoras/ 'The mafia identification and extermination club' At last I've found a good one. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wave-Structure-Matter/ The religion of 'Matter Waves' (mother church at spaceandmotion.com). http://www.spaceandmotion.com/ Promotion of T-shirts in the section: 'Vintage Erotica - Erotic Art Posters - Sex and Survival'. See also: http://www.spaceandmotion.com/WSM-Discussion-Group-Guidelines.htm Saluti, s. From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Oct 21 18:21:38 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 13:21:38 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] frame dragging confirmed Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021131955.01cdbfe8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> By ROBERT ROY BRITT SPACE.com After 11 years of watching the movements of two Earth-orbiting satellites, researchers found each is dragged by about 6 feet (2 meters) every year because the very fabric of space is twisted by our whirling world. The results, announced today, are much more precise than preliminary findings published by the same group in the late 1990s. The effect is called frame dragging. It is a modification to the simpler aspects of gravity set out by Newton. Working from Einstein's relativity theory, Austrian physicists Joseph Lense and Hans Thirring predicted frame dragging in 1918. (It is also known as the Lense-Thirring effect.).... The researchers say their result is 99 percent of the predicted drag, with an error of up to 10 percent. The details are reported in the Oct. 21 issue of the journal Nature. From scerir at libero.it Thu Oct 21 18:51:55 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:51:55 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] frame dragging confirmed References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021131955.01cdbfe8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <003701c4b79f$098a5400$47bb1b97@administxl09yj> http://www.nature.com/news/2004/041018/full/041018-11.html or http://physicsweb.org/articles/news/8/10/12/1 Ignazio Ciufolini is a good one (wrote a book about inertia, with J.A. Wheeler) From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Oct 21 20:25:59 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:25:59 -0400 Subject: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians Message-ID: <64260-2200410421202559596@M2W026.mail2web.com> It is not just intellectual credibility, although this is a worthy variable. Other variables that affect the reinforcement of further development and influences of transhumanism, are the number of valued innovative thinkers, number of scientists, number of academics, number of accomplished futurists, number of PhDs, number of conferences, seminars, summits, and events, number of courses, number of books written referencing transhumanism or transhumanists individuals, number of televised interviews with transhumanists, number of organizations that have stemmed out of transhumanism, amount of worth of the ideas developed by transhumanists, amount of effort produced by transhumanists, and amount of leading edge. While one could lump all these elements together, they actually function on their own and influence each other separately to reinforce the growth of transhumanism. On another point, I do not think that it is necessarily a bad thing that transhumanist do not feel the need or are not driven to donate money, as the practice is with religious organizations (passing the cup). I am not so certain that "membership" is a positive variable or a necessary one. It could very well be a limiting one. Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Hughes, James J. james.hughes at trincoll.edu Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 12:19:00 -0400 To: pgptag at gmail.com, wta-talk at transhumanism.org, natashavita at earthlink.net, extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians I think intellectual credibility does have to be used as a multiplier on potential influence. Who has ever proclaimed that Raelianism was the most dangerous ideology in the world? That said, the pitiful level of collective resources in our very affluent movement is a testament to the organizational advantage of collectivist ideologies over individualist ones. The average conservative Protestant gives 10% of their income to their church. How many transhumanists give even 1% to a transhumanist organization? ------------------------ James Hughes Ph.D. Executive Director World Transhumanist Association http://transhumanism.org Box 128, Willington CT 06279 USA (office) 860-297-2376 director at transhumanism.org -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From benboc at lineone.net Thu Oct 21 20:59:50 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:59:50 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Raelians In-Reply-To: <200410211800.i9LI0I025662@tick.javien.com> References: <200410211800.i9LI0I025662@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <41782346.2050801@lineone.net> It seems to me that transhumanists, unlike members of groups like the raelians, are more likely to be 'individuals' (Cue: "Yes, we're all individuals!"), and not so likely to 'join the transhumanists' as to realise that they are one. Maybe as a result of talking to others or seeing a website, but not likely as a result of being 'recruited' by an existing member. I was a transhumanist decades before i even heard of the word. So, to me, transhumanism is just a convenient label for my own mindset. It's great that there are other people with a similar mindset, and that i can discuss things with them and even co-operate with them to do my bit to help make a desirable future, but there's no party line to toe, and if there was, it wouldn't get my toe. If someone became a 'leader of the movement' and tried to tell me what to believe and how to behave, i would probably ignore them (probably? no, definitely!). I might even decide that i wasn't a transhumanist after all, if that's what it's about. I would then revert to what i was before - a 'bennist', which is what i always used to tell people if they asked me what i was. That's the difference between cults like the raelians and rationalist movements like transhumanism, at least to me. I think it's natural that there are many different transhumanist groups with their own take on things. Some of them will be all new-agey, some will be hard-core rationalist and ultra-high-tech, etc., but as long as we are all facing in vaguely the same direction, it's ok. Diversity is good. Biology has proved that again and again. I think there will be transhumanists around long after the raelians are a slightly puzzling historical footnote. (Of course they might not be called transhumanists anymore. TransPosthumanists, maybe?) Natasha: "transhumanism is split into a variety of beliefs that have separated themselves from the transhumanist core" 'is split into a variety of beliefs', maybe, if you want to use the word "beliefs", although i would rather not. But, 'separated themselves from the transhumanist core'? Well, i can only speak for myself, but i certainly never did this. Couldn't, cos i was never part of it. This conjures up an image of a single object splintering into smaller bits that fall away. I think it's more accurate to picture a saturated solution, with crystals spontaneously forming in it, all over the place. You can't say that most of the crystals have separated themselves from the one that happened to form first. I don't mean to belittle the role of the first people to call themselves transhumanists, but we shouldn't put the cart before the horse. We are not followers of anybody or anything. We are people with a (fairly) common vision. If there is an organisational model for transhumanists, it's certainly not like the military. It's more like the internet. ben From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Oct 21 21:33:32 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:33:32 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Raelians Message-ID: <47460-2200410421213332410@M2W045.mail2web.com> Ben writes: >"transhumanism is split into a variety of beliefs that have >separated themselves from the transhumanist core" I think you may be misinterpreting the use of ?core.? Transhumanism, as a philosophy, is a discipline comprising as its ?core? - logic, aesthetics, ethics, metaphysics, and epistemology. The core would imply the seed of transhumanity. A collective would be so incongruous to transhumanism. So, let's move away from that line of thinking. >'is split into a variety of beliefs', maybe, if you want to use the word >"beliefs", although i would rather not. Good point. I should have used "ideas". However, again, one needn?t be afraid to use words that can be useful or expressive just because they ?could? trigger something in someone (you) or mean something else in a different context. You have to look at the person who is saying them. Herein, note that the world ?belief? is often used in philosophy, as it is ?the most general beliefs, concepts, and attitudes of an individual or group.? The issue you are concerned about - individuality and following a tribe ? are not issues of transhumanity because they simply do not exist in the philosophy in its core. Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Oct 21 21:57:29 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:57:29 -0400 Subject: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians Message-ID: <103650-2200410421215729336@M2W096.mail2web.com> Taking the burden off members for monetary substance might be a wise decision in the long run. This cannot be realized by comparing philosophical organizations to religious organizations. It can be accomplished by considering what makes organizations financially successful. Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Hughes, James J. james.hughes at trincoll.edu Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:45:33 -0400 To: natashavita at earthlink.net, wta-talk at transhumanism.org, extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: RE: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians > I do not think that it is necessarily a bad > thing that transhumanists do not feel the need or are not > driven to donate money, as the practice is with religious > organizations (passing the cup). I am not so certain that > "membership" is a positive variable or a necessary one. It > could very well be a limiting one. Unfortunately the builders of successful nonprofits, parties and churches disagree. As I said, having 10,000 cultists donate 100% of their income and time can have less influence than 10,000 influentials who donate 0.5% of their time and money, if the cultists are isolated and the influentials respected. And it may be that there is a trade off to some degree between intensity of commitment and breadth of influence. But I don't think ExI or the WTA would sacrifice any of our "influence" by having members that gave twice as much time or money. J. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From sentience at pobox.com Thu Oct 21 08:59:18 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 04:59:18 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <41777A66.8050807@pobox.com> The Singularity Institute is approaching the end of its five-year provisional tax-exempt period. At the end of this year, December 31st 2004, the IRS will request information from us that they then use to determine whether the Singularity Institute will get permanent status as a public charity. The critical test they apply is called the "public support" test, and like most of what the IRS does, it's complicated. Roughly speaking, the IRS adds up all the donations we receive in a four-year period, takes the grand total, and divides by 50; this amount (2% of total support) is the most of any one individual's donation that counts as "public support". The rest of the donations from that individual, anything over and above 2% of your total support over that four-year period, are nonpublic support. Leaving aside the exact details of the calculation, the IRS asks whether a nonprofit is a *publicly* supported organization - whether their donations come from a broad base, or a few big donors. Right now, most of SIAI's support comes from a few big donors. To pass the public support test automatically, we would need 33.3% public support (1/3). At present, according to our calculations, we're at roughly 25% public support. This doesn't automatically fail us, but it does mean that the IRS applies something called the "facts and circumstances" test, which we might not pass - or the IRS might demand unworkable changes in our governing structure, like having members of the Board appointed by public officials (yes, this is part of the "facts and circumstances" test). In the worst case the IRS might determine that we were a private foundation, which would severely cripple SIAI. If we can get 6 *new* donors - not existing major donors - to donate $5000 apiece, we should pass automatically. If we can't do that, the IRS still pays attention to how much public support we *do* have, how many donors we have, and from how wide a base. The Singularity Institute also currently has $7,690 unfilled in the Fellowship Challenge - yes, $7,690 unfilled; Brian Cartmell increased the total Challenge Grant to $15,000. So if you donate now, and earmark your donation for the Fellowship Challenge, Cartmell will match your donation. Even if you can only afford a hundred bucks, the Fellowship Challenge will still match the donation, it still will be one more person who donated, and it will still help show the IRS that we have a broad base of public support. In short, now - yes, *now* - is a good time. And we need *new* donors. That means *you*. Not the people who already donated more than $5000 over 2001-2004, *you*. The Singularity Institute now announces a 72-hour donations campaign, starting at 5AM Eastern Time on Thursday, October 21st, and continuing until 5AM Eastern Time, Sunday October 24th. The title of the campaign is "Donate Today and Tomorrow". The 72-hour time limit is intended to give people "today and tomorrow" even if they don't check their email more than once a day. The theme of this campaign is donating early and fast, so if you've already decided to send us a check for $5000, you can go ahead and mail it right now, then continue reading at your leisure. Otherwise, a somewhat longish essay follows, meant for people who think that SIAI is a fun, neat, cool idea, but who haven't gotten around to donating yet. If you've never heard of us, don't start here - visit our website at http://singinst.org/. --- Today And Tomorrow -- Once upon a time, long ago and far away, ever so long ago... In the beginning, saith Richard Dawkins, the world was populated by stable things: Patterns that arose frequently, or patterns that lasted a long time. Raindrops that fell from the sky, or mountains that rose from the crust. This was the era of chemistry, the era of dynamic stability, an age before optimization. By chance a star might have dynamics that let it burn longer; and you would be more likely to see such a long-burning star than to see an unlucky star that went nova shortly after coalescing. But the star has no properties that are there *because* they help the star burn longer. A star may have intricate stellar dynamics, sunspots and corona and flares - but a star is not optimized, has no complex functional design. A star is an accident, something that just happens when interstellar dust comes together. In the beginning, the universe was populated by accidents. Today we see many patterns, from butterflies to kittens, with far more complexity than mere stars or raindrops. Not that stars are simple, but stars can't compare to the intricate order of a kitten. The kitten arises from a different kind of pattern-maker, a different source of structure. When we look around us, we find not just stable accidents, like mountains, or frequent accidents, like water molecules, but also patterns that copy themselves successfully. The process that structures these patterns is called evolution, and evolution produces complex structure enormously faster than accident alone. The first ten billion years of the universe were relatively boring, with little real complexity, because there was no way for complexity to accumulate. If by luck one star burns unusually long, that makes it no more likely that future stars will also last longer - the successful pattern isn't copied into other stars. Evolution builds on its successes and turns them into bigger and more complex successes. In an information-theoretic sense, there might be less complexity in the entire Milky Way outside Earth than there is in a single butterfly. Once upon a time, currently thought to be around 3.85 billion years ago, the era of accidents ended. Perhaps by sheer chance the processes of chemistry coughed up a single self-replicating molecule. Perhaps the transition was more subtle, an attractor in a swirling loop of catalytic chemistry. Even if it was most exceedingly unlikely for any given accident of chemistry to create a replicating pattern, it only had to happen once. So it all began, once upon a time, ever so long ago: the ultimate grandparent of all life, the very first replicator. From our later perspective, that first replicator must have looked like one of the oddest and most awkward things in the universe - a replicator with the pattern of a stable thing; a reproducing structure that arose by accident, without evolutionary optimization. The era of stable things ended with a special stable thing that was also a replicator, and only in this way could the era of biology bootstrap into existence. Had you been around at the time, you might have mistaken the first replicator for an exceptionally stable thing that just happened to be very common in the primordial soup. A great success as stable things go, but nothing fundamentally different. The true nature of the next era would not become clear until you saw the second replicator ever to exist, your penultimate grandparent, an optimized pattern that would never have arisen in the primordial soup without a billion copies of that first replicator around to potentially mutate. It was the second replicator that was a new kind of structure, a pattern that would never be found in a world of stable things alone. And what a strange sight a human must be - an intelligence inscribed entirely by evolution, a mind not constructed by another mind. We are one of the oddest and most awkward sights in the universe - an intelligence with the pattern of an evolved thing. Like that first replicator, we only had to evolve once, but we did have to evolve. The transition from biology to intelligence, from survival of the fittest to recursive self-improvement, could never have happened otherwise. Even today, if you look into the core of the replicators in today's world, you can see the trace of that distant stable thing in their ancestry. What a miracle, what fortuity, that Urey and Miller's experiment of running electricity through a primordial atmosphere of methane and ammonia should produce the amino acids making up all proteins! What fortuity, that later experiments based on new models of the primordial atmosphere produced DNA bases as well! How lucky! No, it is not luck at all; of course the elements of biology are molecules that would tend to arise by chance chemistry on primordial Earth. How else would life get started? Strange, that RNA should be capable of both carrying information, and twisting up into catalysts and enzymes. What a fortuitous property, in a molecule so close to DNA! But it is not luck; how else would you expect life to start, but with a molecule capable of both carrying information and carrying out chemical operations? And because that pattern of RNA was there at the beginning, it still forms part of the uttermost core, tiny strands of single-stranded RNA ubiquitous in the chemistry of the cell. Look at the pattern of any living thing in the world and you can see that there must have been a stable thing in its ancestry, far far back, ever so long ago. And someday, if we do our jobs right, our distant grandchildren will study evolutionary biology, and shake their heads in wonder. For though it is understandable enough that kindness should beget kindness and loving minds construct more loving minds, it is passing strange that the simple equations of evolutionary biology should do likewise. Who would ever have thought that natural selection, bloody in tooth and claw, should give rise to a sense of fun? Who would expect that the winning alleles would embody the love of beauty, taking joy in helping others, the ability to be swayed by moral argument, the wish to be better people? Evolution is an optimization process devoid of conscience and compassion. And yet we have conscience. We have compassion. Alleles for conscience and compassion somehow drove competing alleles to extinction. I do not wish to hint at mystery where no mystery exists: science does have a good idea as to how alleles for mercy wiped out the genetic competition. All our human natures are patterns that evolution can produce, and furthermore, patterns that carry the unique characteristic signature of evolution. The original archetype of Romeo and Juliet would not arise without sexual reproduction. Some emotions are less obvious at first blush than others, but there is always a reason, and there is always evolution's unique signature. That evolution coughed up friendship is amazing, but not mysterious. I still nominate the evolution of kindness as the most wonderful event in the history of the universe. The light that is born into our species is a precious thing, which must not be lost. Less surprising is that bloodlust, hatred, prejudice, tribalism, and rationalization are products of evolution. They are not humane, but they are human. They are part of us, not by our choice, but by evolution's design, and the heritage of billions of years of lethal combat. That is the tragedy of the human condition, that we are not what we wish we were. There shall come a time, I think, when humanity sees itself reflected, and burns the darkness clean. Yet the same impartial optimization process inscribed both our light and our darkness. The forces that first constructed intelligence were without intelligence. The dynamics that birthed morality were without morality. So it all began, once upon a time, long ago and far away, ever so long ago, in an age so distant that only a tiny handful of minds in all the countless galaxies remember... But that is for the future. First we must survive this century. It is not exactly trivial, to try and master fully the art of Friendly AI before anyone succeeds in cobbling together a half-understood hack that recursively self-improves. Creating Friendly AI is an engineering challenge, and it will take full-time people and specialized skills, and donors to support them. It has to be done fast, because we need a difficult cure to arrive before an easy disease. I still think it's possible to win, though the hour grows later. But you can't change the future by relaxing and letting things go on the way they have. You can't change the future by doing whatever you planned to do anyway with a newer and cleverer excuse. Changing the future takes people willing to change even themselves, if that is the price demanded. And even among those who understand what is at stake, it seems that the most common reaction is to sit back and cheer the Singularity Institute on, the way one might cheer for a football team - passively. Maybe it's watching movies that engrains the habit into people's minds. They would look at you oddly, in the movie theatre, if when the world was threatened you tried to jump into the silver screen to help. Maybe it's watching movies that teaches people that when the fate of the human species is at stake, the thing to do is wait with baited breath for the good guys to win, as they always do. Too few seem to realize that the outcome is yet in doubt, and that they might have their own parts in the unfinished tale, waiting for them to leap onto the stage. There's research in social psychology, starting in 1968 with a famous series of experiments by Latane and Darley, on the phenomenon now known as the "bystander effect". When more people are present at an emergency, it can reduce the probability that *anyone* will help. One of Latane and Darley's original experiments had subjects fill out questionnaries in a room when they began to add smoke. In one condition, the subject was alone. In another condition, three subjects were in the room. In the final condition, one subject and two confederate experimenters (apparently other students) were in the room. 75% of alone subjects calmly noticed the smoke and left the room to report it. When three subjects were in a room together, only 38% of the time did anyone leave to report the smoke. When a subject was placed with two confederates who deliberately ignored the smoke, the subject reported the smoke only 10% of the time. Other experiments in Latane and Darley's original series included the experimenter apparently breaking a leg and a student apparently having a seizure. In every case, the subjects who were alone reacted to the emergency faster than the subjects who witnessed the emergency in a group. Since 1968, Latane and Darley's original experiments have been extensively replicated, varied, tested in real-world conditions, et cetera, and the original result still holds: people in groups are much slower to react to emergencies than individuals, if they react at all. The current consensus in social psychology is that the bystander effect stems from two primary causes, diffusion of responsibility and a phenomenon called "pluralistic ignorance". Diffusion of responsibility works like this: If three people are present, each one thinks, "Well, *I* don't need to do anything, those other two will handle it," and no one does anything. People who are alone know that they alone are responsible, and if they don't do something, no one will - and, yes, that does make a huge, experimentally verifiable difference; one person, alone, is literally more than twice as likely to act in an emergency as a group of three people. "Pluralistic ignorance" is the name that social psychologists give to group underreaction: When people in groups see an emergency, they look around to see if anyone else is responding. If no one else is responding, they assume it's not a real emergency. The problem is that *before* people have decided something is an emergency, they instinctively try to appear calm and unconcerned while they dart their eyes about to see if anyone else is responding - and what they see are other people appearing calm and unconcerned. If you ever find yourself with a broken leg or some other emergency, and you're unlucky enough to have many people about, social psychologist Robert Cialdini recommends that you point at *one particular* person and tell him or her to call 911, or carry out some other definite action. Singling out a particular person reduces the diffusion of responsibility, and once a single person steps up to help, other people may also stop ignoring the emergency. Experimental manipulations that reduce group apathy and the bystander effect include (1) a bystander who thinks that the emergency requires intervention from them *personally*, (2) bystanders with considerable training in emergency intervention, and, last but not least, (3) bystanders who know about the bystander effect. So the next time you're in a large group when someone has a heart attack, don't try to look calm and unconcerned while you dart your eyes around to see if anyone else is panicking. Take out your cellphone, call 911, point to other people specifically and recruit them to help you. And yes, it has to be you, because only you know about the bystander effect. The bystander effect takes odd forms when it comes to people procrastinating about when to donate to the Singularity Institute. My current observation is that most nondonors do honestly plan to donate, eventually, just as soon as X - where X varies across donors, but always lies at least a year in the future. Non-donors also expect that lots of other people are donating. This is not so. Rather, lots of other people expect that lots of other people are donating. Also interesting is the way people choose X, the future condition that will finally allow them to donate. High school students say they want to wait until they can get into college on a scholarship. People in college on scholarships want to wait until they graduate and get jobs. People with jobs want to wait until they pay off their student loans. People whose student loans are paid off, want to wait another five years until their stock options vest. People whose stock options have vested, want to wait until they can support both the Singularity Institute and the startup venture they're currently funding... Meanwhile, the Singularity Institute recently received, in the mail, an envelope with no return address, containing an anonymous donation for ten dollars. We know, because he or she told us so, that whoever sent this donation is a high school student - and that's all we know. On the shoulders of such people rests the fate of the world. Maybe someday this person will show up on the SL4 mailing list. Maybe we'll find out who sent that letter after the Singularity. Maybe the donor will never choose to reveal himself or herself. Maybe someday there will be a monument to this person, the Anonymous Donor, and it will say: "We never knew who the one was, or why the one helped us, but when the one was needed, the one was there." I wonder how many names will be on the other monument, the monument to that entire band which once conducted the last defense of humankind. Less than ten thousand names? Less than a thousand? At the end of 2003 the roster of donors was less than a hundred. Let us be optimistic, and hope there will be five thousand and twenty-four names on this monument, and that they put forth enough effort to win. Five thousand and twenty-four names would still be fewer than one in a million, and there would never be any more. Somewhere on that monument will be the name of someone who donated a single dollar, and humanity will be glad that he did, for it is strange enough that there are only five thousand and twenty-four names on that monument; how much sadder if there should be only five thousand twenty-three. For as long as Earth-originating intelligent life continues that monument shall exist, and it shall still have only five thousand twenty-four names... And I had this thought, and I wondered how many SIAI volunteers would have their names on the monument, and I knew that at the present rate it would be fewer than one in ten. As a wise volunteer recently observed - I can't find the quote, so I'm paraphrasing - "The problem is that we're indoctrinated into believing that you can make a big difference by helping out just a little. But the sad truth is that you can't do AI on two hours a month." These are words of deep wisdom, and I wish I could remember who said them (if you're reading this, write me). As Christine Peterson of Foresight said on a similar occasion for similar reasons, donating is a *lot* more helpful than volunteering. I'm sorry, but that's the way it is. If you're waiting for the Singularity Institute to come up with a desperately urgent problem that can be solved with ten hours of Flash coding over five months, you'll probably wait forever. I had that thought about the monument, and I wondered what it would be like to spend the next several centuries explaining that, yes, you were one of the tiny fraction of humanity that knew the Singularity Institute existed, and you were on the volunteers list, and you even hung out on the SIAI volunteers IRC channel, but you never actually got around to donating a hundred bucks and that's why your name isn't on the monument. So I mentioned this thought in the #siaiv IRC channel, for it seemed to me like a dreadful and possible doom against which people ought to be warned. And someone who was not a donor said: but we aren't doing it for the fame. And I replied: it's all well and good to act on pure altruism if you can attain that level, but there's something wrong with deriding fame-lust when fame-lust would produce pragmatically better behavior. For one motivated by lust for fame would send in the hundred bucks, and that is more help than receiving nothing from an altruist. I probably should have phrased that rejoinder more tactfully. I was feeling a tad frustrated at the time. But tactless or not, it happens to be true. When I started up the Singularitarian movement, I wished (in my youthful idealism) to appeal to pure altruism, unmixed with lesser motives like the lure of everlasting fame. My original reasoning was that we might all zip off directly to superintelligence without lingering in the human spaces where things like monuments made sense, and for this reason I could promise nothing for the future. Today I do not think I would choose such rapid growth. I think I will prefer to grow at whatever healthy rate keeps my mind from going stale, and smell the roses along the way. But I might be mistaken. There may be no monument. There certainly won't be a monument if the human species dies without ever having its chance at the light. The future is uncertain and I cannot honestly promise anything; and so it disturbs me to even offer pleasant prospects, because there is something in human nature that makes us treat prospects as if they were promises. Today, it still strikes me as wrong and perhaps dangerous to tell someone that they should donate to SIAI for the uncertain prospect of fame. But I would also be deeply annoyed if the human species died off because its defenders were too proud to stoop to pointing out some of the specific impure motives that of course should not motivate you to help save the world. Right now, most people are waiting into the indefinite future to donate, and that's not an acceptable outcome. It means we're doing something wrong, and there's something about our strategy that we need to reconsider, and maybe this is it. I worry about the evolutionary psychology of the bystander effect. People dealing with emergencies in groups stand by and do nothing. Now experiment also shows that people who find themselves the sole source of help in emergencies, *do* act. This implies that ancestors who acted when alone did not do consistently worse than ancestors who walked away. Maybe the ancestors who walked away had lousy reputations and no one wanted to be their friends. Maybe the ancestors who helped, tended to end up helping someone who was more likely than average to share the helpful allele. The point is that individual helping behavior was not selected out. So why the bystander effect? If the selection pressure favors (or at least doesn't punish) acting in emergencies when you're standing there alone, why would this change if three people are present? My thought is that the presence of a group creates an arms race between alleles in which the goal is to avoid being the first person to help. Suppose that we start out with an allele A for helping someone in trouble right away. Allele A might maintain itself in the gene pool because spatial variance in the distribution of allele A meant that an ancestor who carried allele A and encountered someone in need of emergency assistance, or a threat to the tribe, usually helped beneficiaries with a higher proportion of A alleles than the general population pool. For whatever reason, allele A hasn't been driven to extinction. But now suppose that there's a group of three people watching someone in need of help. We'll call the person who needs helping Harry. Suppose one of the group of three has an alternative allele B that runs the algorithm, "Wait 20 seconds, then help Harry." If all three people present carry allele B, then Harry is still helped, albeit after a delay of 20 seconds. If one or more of the others present has allele A that helps immediately, then the A-carriers bear most of the cost of helping, while the B-carriers freeload. This holds true whether Harry carries allele A or B. Perhaps the bystander effect results from an evolutionary arms race to not be the *first* to help. Even if helping someone in need tended to be a net evolutionary benefit in the ancestral environment, if there happened to be a *group* present, there might have been a fitness advantage to not being the *first* to help. There would have been an arms race between alleles, a race of apathy and delay and hoping that someone else would handle the problem instead. And this arms race has no obvious upper bound. Latane and Darley performed their original series of experiments in the aftermath of the Kitty Genovese incident in Queens, New York, 1964. Kitty Genovese was stabbed, raped, robbed, and murdered over the course of half an hour. Later investigations showed that more than 38 people had witnessed parts of the attack. None called police. In 1995, Deletha Word was beaten with a tire iron on a bridge in Detroit; she jumped from the bridge to escape and died; none of the people crossing the bridge that morning stopped to save her. And though these are but anecdotes, they are anecdotes which illustrate solid experimental results. Individuals help, and people in groups hang back and wait for someone else to help. The thought also occurred to me that if you help everyone in the entire human species, it is an evolutionary null-op. Evolution runs on allele substitution rates in a population pool. What matters isn't whether you reproduce, it's whether you outreproduce peers who carry different alleles - whether an allele increases its proportion in the gene pool and eventually becomes fixed. A benefit that everyone in your species shares equally, benefits all alleles equally, and hence is an evolutionary null-op; it produces zero genetic information. Luckily, human beings are adaptation-executers, not fitness-maximizers. There were no existential risks in the ancestral environment, nor any Friendly AIs, no way for an individual to harm or benefit the entire human species at once. Our psychologies are already inscribed, solely by those selection pressures that acted on our ancestors. The psychology of existential risk is likely to fit the "threat to the tribe" template, a problem that was around in ancestral times and that involved noticeable selection pressures. (Unfortunately, "threats to the tribe" tended to be those evil Other Guys from the Tribe That Lives Across The Water, not hard-to-understand threats like recursively self-improving optimization processes. Which is why it's so difficult to keep people focused on boring old saving the world instead of fun politics. The sad truth is that if the Singularity were recognizably a Democrat or Republican project, we'd get a lot more funding.) I've done some math, and I have not yet found any obvious evolutionary reason why an action that benefits both others and yourself should create less selection pressure favoring your alleles than an action that benefits only yourself. (We assume the same individual cost and the same individual benefit in both cases, the only question being whether others receive duplicates of the individual benefit.) But I intend to keep looking for explanatory math, because there's a difference of *psychology* that is downright bizarre. If you ask how much people are willing to pay not to get shot, they name the entire amount of money in their bank account. If you ask people how much they're willing to pay for the entire human species to survive, most of them name the amount of money in their pockets, minus whatever they need to pay for their accustomed lunch. If it was *only* their own life at stake, not them plus the rest of the human species, they'd drop everything to handle it. There's an eerie echo here with the observation that anything that benefits or harms the entire human species is an evolutionary null-op. But I looked, and I didn't find any plausible direct connection, so it probably happens for other reasons. Maybe something that threatens everyone is something that someone else might handle - so hang back and wait another 20 seconds, or another 20 years. This kind of evolutionary arms race between individuals can promote alleles to universality that cause major group disasters. Individual selection can promote alleles to universality that result in the extinction of the entire species. Natural selection exercises no foresight, no extrapolation, does not ask "if this goes on". Natural selection is a tautology: alleles that increase their proportions in the gene pool become universal. Often the winning alleles look to a human like clever design, but sometimes the same math can promote downright suicidal alleles. George Williams's classic "Adaptation and Natural Selection" (published in 1966 and still an excellent read) debunked the then-popular notion that evolution worked for the good of species or ecologies. Williams discusses how individual selection can create group disasters or, indeed, wipe out an entire species. Happens all the time, apparently. I don't think that procrastination deserves the death penalty. But I'm human and I have wacky human notions about mercy, kindness, second chances, fair warnings, consequences proportional to acts. Maybe Nature has other ideas. So before that arms race of individual procrastination causes a species catastrophe, I want to get past this weird psychology that distinguishes between benefits to only yourself, and benefits to you *plus* everyone else. It really bugs me that if there was some kind of legitimate reason why the Singularity Institute *had* to build a Friendly AI that benefited only SIAI donors, we'd probably have a lot more donors. It's the *same benefit*! Does it not count if other people get it too? Of course you want to help. It's not like you're a bad person or anything. But there are these perfectly reasonable reasons why it makes sense to wait another year before helping, that somehow don't apply to buying a movie ticket or a cheeseburger. Even though, when you think about it, it's not the same order of personal benefit we're talking about here. Evolutionary psychology is subtle and sometimes downright stupid when it messes with your head. Here's a thought experiment: If I offered people, for ten dollars, a pill that let them instantly lose five pounds of fat or gain five pounds of muscle, they'd buy it, right? They'd buy it today, and not sometime in the indefinite future when their student loans were paid off. Now, why do so few people get around to sending even ten dollars to the Singularity Institute? Do people care more about losing five pounds than the survival of the human species? For that matter, do you care more about losing five pounds than you care about extending your healthy lifespan, or about not dying of an existential risk? When you make the comparison explicitly, it sounds wrong - but how do people behave when they consider the two problems in isolation? People spend more on two-hour movies than they ever get around to donating to the Singularity Institute. Cripes, even in pure entertainment we provide a larger benefit than that! The two questions seem to be handled by different areas of the brain. There are self-benefiting actions, that we go out and do right now using any necessary resources. And there's philanthropy, which we'll get to at some point in the indefinite future, if there are any free resources that we aren't using for something else. And, as only the Singularity Institute could demonstrate, this difference in emotional psychology doesn't even seem to depend on whether the philanthropic benefit that lands on *you personally* is *larger* than the selfish benefit. If I had an fMRI machine I could probably show that the two questions activate different brain areas. One emotional module procrastinates indefinitely, hoping that someone else will do it instead. The other emotional module goes out and does it right away before anyone else gets there first. If you knew you were going to get your name on a monument and get awed looks at social functions for the next thousand years, you'd probably make certain you seized the moment and sent in *some* kind of donation. Preferably one you weren't embarrassed to talk about a hundred years later, but yeah, fifty bucks if it came down to that, just to make sure you sent in *something*. For the honor of the human species, to bump the count up to five thousand twenty-five. Because it sure would be embarrassing to forget, and not get around to it in time, and spend the next thousand years kicking yourself. And, y'know, according to my current understanding, this scenario isn't really all that unlikely. So if fame is what it takes to get you moving, then by all means go for it. But whatever it takes to kick yourself out of bystander mode, please do! For it is also awful to forget and not get around to it in time, if what's at stake is the survival of humankind, and you don't have a thousand years to kick yourself afterward because the human species lost. And yet somehow the psychology seems to be different; for in the first case people do it today, and in the second case they plan to do it next year. There is a failure I would warn you against, a bug in the human architecture. Since the Singularity Institute booted up, I have observed this surprising fact: donors donate, and nondonors don't. People who donate this year will, very likely, donate again next year. People who plan to donate next year will, next year, still be planning to donate next year. If you want to give to the Singularity Institute someday, the best thing you can do to ensure that is to pull up http://singinst.org/donate.html and send a hundred dollars, right now. That makes you a donor instead of a non-donor. But if you donate only a hundred dollars, won't that prevent you from donating five thousand dollars, which you were planning to do any time now? No. Non sequitur. Just because you've donated a hundred dollars doesn't mean you can't donate more. What it does is transform you from a non-donor into a donor. That is progress, for donors donate, and non-donors don't. The title of this message is "Donate Today and Tomorrow". The usual motto for fighting procrastination is "today, not tomorrow". Yet it seems to me that this is not the way the human mind works. It's either "today and tomorrow", or "neither today nor tomorrow". The difficult part of keeping the Singularity Institute alive isn't finding people who want us to win, it's getting you to do something about it - to throw that mental switch from "someday in the indefinite future" to "in the next 48 hours after reading this message". Yes, the Singularity Institute is running a *very brief* fundraising campaign. Otherwise everyone waits until the last minute, hoping someone else will donate, and then they forget. Our new campaign lasts 72 hours since the sender's timestamp on this message, terminating at 5AM Eastern Time, Sunday, October 24th. Hopefully this will give almost everyone a chance to donate in the next 48 hours after reading this message. No one finds out how much someone else donated until afterward. So act now, before it's too late. Just like real life, compressed into a slightly shorter timescale. If you didn't even see this message until too late, I suppose you could take 24 hours from whenever you read it. A day may not seem like a large unit of time, but it's made up of hours, and an hour is made up of minutes. Even a minute is enough time to think, if you think now instead of later. Athletes and police officers and martial artists make huge choices in seconds because they don't think of themselves as slow. What are you waiting for? You're faster than this. Don't think you are, know you are. You can always donate afterward too, of course. Donate today and tomorrow. But now would be a good time. Now is when the Challenge Grant runs. Now is when the IRS review of our public charity status approaches. The next 72 hours is when we're running our "Donate Today and Tomorrow" campaign. If you can't be a major donor, we're looking for a typical donation of one hundred dollars. Everyone who reads this and hasn't already donated, please. More than a hundred dollars would be wonderful. If it helps, think of the monument and what you'll be telling people at social functions for the next thousand years. But we need a broader donor base, so please send something. If you just can't handle a hundred dollars, and you're at least as well off as that unknown high school student, match that ten-dollar donation. Think of it as voting to tell the IRS that you approve of the Singularity Institute and you want SIAI to have permanent public charity status. Think of it as making sure that the human species doesn't end up with an embarrassingly small monument. Think of it as letting us know that you exist and you care and we don't have to do this alone. It's your responsibility, you, yes, you personally. If I could insert into this email I'd do it. There are six billion people in this world. An infinitesimal fraction have the faintest inkling of what's at stake. If you don't step up, that's it. No one will. It's you or no one. This essay began when someone wrote to me, explaining why he didn't think his potential donations were important: "Trying to support the Institute financially, I believe that I wouldn't be able to offer much more than other professional contributors (you know, contributors that are professionals)." That was the anvil that broke the camel's back. Only 8 donors in the history of the Singularity Institute have given more than $5000. Right now it doesn't take much to make you a big name in the history of the Singularity Institute. Being a major donor may not seem like a glamorous, rare part to play in the unfolding of history, but it *is*. And if it weren't glamorous, that wouldn't make the tiniest difference. It's probably going to take something like ten major, steady repeat donors for each full-time specialist on the Friendly AI programming team. That's what it takes to get the job done. When this essay was done, I sent it to an SIAI volunteer, a non-donor who'd been hanging around since 2001. He read it all, offered a number of comments and suggestions for getting past the bystander effect, and then casually added: "But I have an active reason for not donating regularly." When I was done banging my head against the keyboard, I asked why. This was an error: his reasons started to get more elaborate as he explained. That's another failure mode - developing intricate justifications for not donating. If you decide not to donate, leave your options open for the future. Don't expend great effort trying to justify your decision to yourself, lest you succeed. You have no need to justify your decision to me, or to anyone. If you dislike your choice, change it! If you approve your choice, do it without apology! That volunteer did realize, after cogitating further, that despite his reasons it didn't make sense to donate *nothing* - he signed up for a twenty-dollar monthly donation. And I rejoiced, for there was one more donor, and a monthly donor beside. One more when the IRS asks how many people care about this effort. One more who might donate more someday. One more who will be able to say afterward: "I was there." I want everyone's name on the monument. Seriously. People assume that someone else is taking care of it. That professional contributors are donating. They're not! Other people are not taking care of it for you, and you shouldn't wish that! This is *your* chance to make a difference! Not someone else, you! You you you! You, born into this generation; you, one of the first intelligent beings ever to exist; you, one of only six billion sentients that can potentially intervene in this matter, out of all the countless minds that will someday (we hope) come into existence. And as if that isn't enough, you're among the tiny fraction that knows what's going on and is in a position to do something about it. That's as targeted as it gets, the finger pointing to you and you alone. You can't get any more personally responsible than that. No more diffusion of responsibility. No more bystander apathy. This problem landed in *your* lap. What if you want to throw that mental switch from "someday" to "now", but you're having trouble actually doing it? I know the feeling. Here's my suggestion: If you're a potential major donor, pick up your checkbook and write out a check for at least one thousand dollars, now. There's nothing irrevocable about that. Later you can rip up the check and not mail it, or rip it up and write a check for five thousand instead. But perform the action. Break the mental inertia. Give yourself a little reminder to stare at you. If it stares at you for too long, rid yourself of the problem by tearing it up or mailing it. If you're thinking of a lesser donation and you haven't gotten around to it, open up http://singinst.org/donate.html, and let it stare at you until you decide how to get rid of it. But do something *now*. Defy paralysis. Take the first step, and the second step will be easier. The scariest part isn't leaping onstage - it's standing up in the audience. Yours, Eliezer Yudkowsky, for the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Inc. From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Thu Oct 21 22:47:08 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 23:47:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy Thursday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041021224708.40188.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> This hits the spot. Don't forget to read my two books: 'How To Appear Correct even When You Are Entirely Mistaken' and 'How To Profit From Nuclear War And The Excruciating Agony Of Others' > Now one autumn morning when the wind had blown all > the leaves off > the trees in the night, and was trying to blow the > branches off, > Pooh and Piglet were sitting in the Thoughtful Spot > and wondering. > > "What I think," said Pooh, "is I think we'll go to > Pooh Corner and > see Eeyore, because perhaps his house has been blown > down, and > perhaps he'd like us to build it again." > > "What I think," said Piglet, "is I think we'll go > and see > Christopher Robin, only he won't be there, so we > can't." > > "Let's go and see everybody," said Pooh. "Because > when you've been > walking in the wind for miles, and you suddenly go > into somebody's > house, and he says, 'Hallo, Pooh, you're just in > time for a little > smackerel of something,' and you are, then it's what > I call a > Friendly Day." > > Piglet thought that they ought to have a Reason > for going to see > everybody, like Looking for Small or Organizing an > Expotition, if > Pooh could think of something > > Pooh could. > > "We'll go because it's Thursday," he said, "and > we'll go to wish > everybody a Very Happy Thursday. Come on, Piglet." > > They got up; and when Piglet had sat down > again, because he > didn't know the wind was so strong, and had been > helped up by > Pooh, they started off. They went to Pooh's house > first, and luckily > Pooh was at home just as they got there, so he > asked them in, and > they had some, and then they went on to Kanga's > house, holding on to > each other, and shouting "Isn't it?" and > "What?" and "I can't > hear." By the time they got to Kanga's house they > were so buffeted > that they stayed to lunch. Just at first it seemed > rather cold > outside afterwards, so they pushed on to Rabbit's as > quickly as they > could. > > "We've come to wish you a Very Happy Thursday," > said Pooh, when > he had gone in and out once or twice just to make > sure that he > could get out again. > > "Why, what's going to happen on Thursday?" > asked Rabbit, and > when Pooh had explained, and Rabbit, whose life was > made up of > Important Things, said, "Oh, I thought you'd > really come about > something," they sat down for a little . . . and > by-and-by Pooh and > Piglet went on again. The wind was behind them now, > so they didn't > have to shout. > > "Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully. > > "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever." > > "And he has Brain." > > "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain." > > There was a long silence. > > "I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's > why he never > understands anything." > > ------------------ > > -- > > ******************************************************************** > 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/ > ******************************************************************** > "For a girl, she's remarkably perceptive." --Calvin > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Oct 21 23:07:47 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 18:07:47 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <41777A66.8050807@pobox.com> References: <41777A66.8050807@pobox.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021175620.01aa3f08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 04:59 AM 10/21/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote: >If you ask people how much they're willing to pay for the entire human >species to survive, most of them name the amount of money in their >pockets, minus whatever they need to pay for their accustomed lunch. If >it was *only* their own life at stake, not them plus the rest of the human >species, they'd drop everything to handle it. Aw, come on. It's the plausibility of the threat. >Here's a thought experiment: If I offered people, for ten dollars, a pill >that let them instantly lose five pounds of fat or gain five pounds of >muscle, they'd buy it, right? They'd buy it today, and not sometime in >the indefinite future when their student loans were paid off. Now, why do >so few people get around to sending even ten dollars to the Singularity >Institute? Do people care more about losing five pounds than the survival >of the human species? Here's another thought experiment: If I offered people, for ten dollars, a pill that let them instantly go to heaven when they die, they'd buy it, right? They'd buy it today, and not sometime in the indefinite future when their student loans were paid off. (If they were sufficiently gullible. If they were sufficiently desperate. If I could absolutely prove to their satisfaction the truth of my hard-to-credit claim.) Now, why do so few people get around to sending even ten dollars to the Heaven for Everyone Institute? Do people care more about individual salvation than the salvation of the human species? (Gullible idiots would probably fall for both options *in my thought experiment*. In Eliezer's, there are two unknowns, each with an apriori likelihood, to the average human bean, of heygedouddahere. To the inner circle of FAI cognoscenti... well, maybe the probabilities are more in Eli's favor, but it's palpably easier to test the fat pill claim than the Horrid Existential AI Universal Doom Is Coming and Only I Am Left to Save You if You Can Spare a Dime claim.) Damien Broderick From hal at finney.org Thu Oct 21 23:30:12 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 16:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <20041021233012.2D92057E2B@finney.org> I don't see why you can't tell people your AI will give special favors to those who donate. How far do you think the Christians would have gotten if they'd said that God would put *everyone* into heaven, whether they were Christian or not? Nowhere. Even if that were God's actual plan (it sounds like a mighty Christian thing to do), they wouldn't tell people that. Otherwise nobody would have any incentive to behave, plus the religion wouldn't have been successful. So with the Friendly AI, why wouldn't it reward the people who made it possible? Repaying debts seems like a Friendly thing to do. And if it owed its existence to people who made contributions on the expectation that they would get a reward, a decent person would indeed reward them. We should be able to ask the same of the Friendly AI. The monument sounds nice, at least if it's got a lot of gold and diamonds and stuff, and if it's really big. I'm not dissing the monument, it's better than nothing. But come on, this AI could do a little better than a monument, don't you think? After all, the thing is supposed to be more or less omnipotent, right? It wouldn't seem like any great difficulty to throw a few bones to the people who made it possible, saved the human race and ensured the future happiness of the entire universe. I'm not saying it has to make anyone else suffer or anything, but some extra reward to the Chosen Few would seem possible and appropriate. Anyway, I did make a small donation, even though I found your essay a little condescending and insulting. But I think you should seriously consider the possibility that the AI would be willing to reward contributors. I don't see anything in Friendliness that would rule it out. You can bet the Raellians wouldn't get anywhere if they said that *everybody* would get to go on the UFO. As you note, a little personal reward can go a long way. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 22 03:13:22 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 22:13:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] thorium for reactors Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021221301.01bcdec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> This might be old news, but still: http://cavendishscience.org/bks/nuc/thrupdat.htm From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 22 03:19:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:19:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021175620.01aa3f08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041022031907.18639.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > Here's another thought experiment: If I offered people, for ten > dollars, a pill that let them instantly go to heaven when they die, > they'd buy it, right? They'd buy it today, and not sometime in the > indefinite future when their student loans were paid off. > > (If they were sufficiently gullible. If they were sufficiently > desperate. If I could absolutely prove to their satisfaction the > truth of my hard-to-credit claim.) > > Now, why do so few people get around to sending even ten dollars to > the Heaven for Everyone Institute? Do people care more about > individual salvation than the salvation of the human species? Literally billions of people send a lot more than ten dollars to the Heaven for Everyone Institute, actually to several competing institutes that all claim that their pill to heaven is the only one that works. Pills to Heaven are like lottery tickets: even if you are skeptical, you still scientifically must concede an extremely slight chance of winning, however small (even Stephen Hawking concedes this possibility given the existence of black holes), while the true believer thinks that every lotto ticket is the big one right up until the numbered balls roll out. Cheated chiliasts only feel cheated for a short amount of time. They quickly find something new to be a true believer in. It's only when they become very highly vested beyond mere supposition that the passing of a millenium can cause such a person to start acting rationally. Transhumanism is a narrow subset because its adherents tend to inhabit that no-mans-land of agnosticism WRT technological futures. A little too much faith for hard core scientists, and a little too much skepticism and rationality for the true believers. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 22 03:31:25 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:31:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] thorium for reactors In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021221301.01bcdec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041022033125.95465.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> The existence of this technology exposes the lie by Iran, et al, that their nuclear programs are solely for electricity production. --- Damien Broderick wrote: > This might be old news, but still: > > http://cavendishscience.org/bks/nuc/thrupdat.htm ===== 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 joe at barrera.org Fri Oct 22 03:35:57 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:35:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] thorium for reactors In-Reply-To: <20041022033125.95465.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041022033125.95465.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4178801D.8090503@barrera.org> Mike Lorrey wrote: > The existence of this technology exposes the lie by Iran, et al, that > their nuclear programs are solely for electricity production. Oh, what? Did anyone seriously believe that? - Joe -- Split an egg and war was born, a miracle of hate She banged her spoon against her plate Upon her spoon this motto wonderfully designed: "Violence completes the partial mind" From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 22 03:57:19 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:57:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] thorium for reactors In-Reply-To: <4178801D.8090503@barrera.org> Message-ID: <20041022035719.94795.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- "Joseph S. Barrera III" wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > The existence of this technology exposes the lie by Iran, et al, > that > > their nuclear programs are solely for electricity production. > > Oh, what? Did anyone seriously believe that? Apparently half the US population and most of Europe.... along with the UN IAEA.... Nope, no WMD here either, folks, just move along, nothing to see... Meanwhile, did you see the news story today that the EU has reached a treaty agreement with Syria that lets it keep its existing WMD (without finding out how much of it came from Iraq).... I could almost hear Chirac proclaiming peace in our time... ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 22 04:03:29 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 21:03:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] USA For Sale on EBay Message-ID: <20041022040329.95849.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=3936814125 Yes - up for bids is the United States of America Currently owned by large corporations and some foreign nations. Rules and laws enforced by the Democratic and Republican parties. The original manufactures were the founding fathers . Please see picture if you are unfamiliar with the USA. I drew a picture of it as close as I can remember - since rights and liberties have been eroded away. As a bonus, I'm also including a copy of the ORIGINAL Patriot Acts I and II. They are obscure and little known documents called the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The USA is sold as is and I'm hoping that the highest bidder can fix it. Free shipping and please vote for Michael Badnarik http://badnarik.org or other third party candidates. High bidder will receive an email from me saying you own the country. Please feel free to email me to add your rant. The last time I looked, there is freedom of speech.... well, I'll get back to you on that 'cause things change fast. ===== 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 amara.graps at gmail.com Fri Oct 22 06:02:58 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:02:58 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Ballot tales Message-ID: Voting in U.S. elections this year was a real pain. This being my first absentee vote since living abroad, I hope that it is not always like this. Registered in June 2004, and I requested absentee ballot to be sent when available. Received registration verification in July. In September no materials (information book or ballot) arrived, so I spent September phoning, faxing, emailing requests for my ballot from various agencies. October- first 3 weeks, still nothing in the mail. The Santa Clara County, California said they mailed materials to me on September 27. On October 18, my information book and sample ballot appeared. Still no real ballot. On October 20, I called the Santa Clara County, California Registrar's office (three times, the girl at the other end kept disconnecting me), and asked to please send me a ballot. They said they would send one immediately in overnight mail to my Rome, Italy address. On October 21, a ballot appeared (appears to be from September 27). October 22, I marked the ballot, and returned it using DHL overnight express (too late now for normal mail) to the voter's office in Santa Clara County. Amara From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Fri Oct 22 06:59:18 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 07:59:18 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] 140 year old Castro? Message-ID: <20041022065918.76789.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> AFP One of Fidel Castro's physicians, Eugenio Abdo, said after 78 year old Castro's stairway fall in Cuba, a tumble fracturing his right arm and left knee, that with "the scientific progress and advances in embryo stem cells" Castro is "heading for 140 (years), I am not exaggerating" explained Abdo. Sounds like Commie propaganda to me. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Oct 22 08:25:35 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:25:35 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] UF scientist: 'Brain' in a dish acts as autopilot, living computer Message-ID: <470a3c5204102201256b29309c@mail.gmail.com> UF scientist: 'Brain' in a dish acts as autopilot, living computer http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2004-10/uof-us102104.php GAINESVILLE, Fla. --- A University of Florida scientist has grown a living "brain" that can fly a simulated plane, giving scientists a novel way to observe how brain cells function as a network. The "brain" -- a collection of 25,000 living neurons, or nerve cells, taken from a rat's brain and cultured inside a glass dish -- gives scientists a unique real-time window into the brain at the cellular level. By watching the brain cells interact, scientists hope to understand what causes neural disorders such as epilepsy and to determine noninvasive ways to intervene. As living computers, they may someday be used to fly small unmanned airplanes or handle tasks that are dangerous for humans, such as search-and-rescue missions or bomb damage assessments. "We're interested in studying how brains compute," said Thomas DeMarse, the UF professor of biomedical engineering who designed the study. "If you think about your brain, and learning and the memory process, I can ask you questions about when you were 5 years old and you can retrieve information. That's a tremendous capacity for memory. In fact, you perform fairly simple tasks that you would think a computer would easily be able to accomplish, but in fact it can't." While computers are very fast at processing some kinds of information, they can't approach the flexibility of the human brain, DeMarse said. In particular, brains can easily make certain kinds of computations ? such as recognizing an unfamiliar piece of furniture as a table or a lamp ? that are very difficult to program into today's computers. "If we can extract the rules of how these neural networks are doing computations like pattern recognition, we can apply that to create novel computing systems," he said. DeMarse experimental "brain" interacts with an F-22 fighter jet flight simulator through a specially designed plate called a multi-electrode array and a common desktop computer. "It's essentially a dish with 60 electrodes arranged in a grid at the bottom," DeMarse said. "Over that we put the living cortical neurons from rats, which rapidly begin to reconnect themselves, forming a living neural network ? a brain." The brain and the simulator establish a two-way connection, similar to how neurons receive and interpret signals from each other to control our bodies. By observing how the nerve cells interact with the simulator, scientists can decode how a neural network establishes connections and begins to compute, DeMarse said. When DeMarse first puts the neurons in the dish, they look like little more than grains of sand sprinkled in water. However, individual neurons soon begin to extend microscopic lines toward each other, making connections that represent neural processes. "You see one extend a process, pull it back, extend it out ? and it may do that a couple of times, just sampling who's next to it, until over time the connectivity starts to establish itself," he said. "(The brain is) getting its network to the point where it's a live computation device." To control the simulated aircraft, the neurons first receive information from the computer about flight conditions: whether the plane is flying straight and level or is tilted to the left or to the right. The neurons then analyze the data and respond by sending signals to the plane's controls. Those signals alter the flight path and new information is sent to the neurons, creating a feedback system. "Initially when we hook up this brain to a flight simulator, it doesn't know how to control the aircraft," DeMarse said. "So you hook it up and the aircraft simply drifts randomly. And as the data comes in, it slowly modifies the (neural) network so over time, the network gradually learns to fly the aircraft." Although the brain currently is able to control the pitch and roll of the simulated aircraft in weather conditions ranging from blue skies to stormy, hurricane-force winds, the underlying goal is a more fundamental understanding of how neurons interact as a network, DeMarse said. "There's a lot of data out there that will tell you that the computation that's going on here isn't based on just one neuron. The computational property is actually an emergent property of hundreds or thousands of neurons cooperating to produce the amazing processing power of the brain." With Jose Principe, a UF distinguished professor of electrical engineering and director of UF's Computational NeuroEngineering Laboratory, DeMarse has a $500,000 National Science Foundation grant to create a mathematical model that reproduces how the neurons compute. These living neural networks are being used to pursue a variety of engineering and neurobiology research goals, said Steven Potter, an assistant professor in the Georgia Tech/Emory Department of Biomedical Engineering who uses cultured brain cells to study learning and memory. DeMarse was a postdoctoral researcher in Potter's laboratory at Georgia Tech before he arrived at UF. "A lot of people have been interested in what changes in the brains of animals and people when they are learning things," Potter said. "We're interested in getting down into the network and cellular mechanisms, which is hard to do in living animals. And the engineering goal would be to get ideas from this system about how brains compute and process information." Though the "brain" can successfully control a flight simulation program, more elaborate applications are a long way off, DeMarse said. "We're just starting out. But using this model will help us understand the crucial bit of information between inputs and the stuff that comes out," he said. "And you can imagine the more you learn about that, the more you can harness the computation of these neurons into a wide range of applications." From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 22 10:00:31 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 06:00:31 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041021175620.01aa3f08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <41777A66.8050807@pobox.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041021175620.01aa3f08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4178DA3F.1040704@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > At 04:59 AM 10/21/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote: > >> If you ask people how much they're willing to pay for the entire human >> species to survive, most of them name the amount of money in their >> pockets, minus whatever they need to pay for their accustomed lunch. >> If it was *only* their own life at stake, not them plus the rest of >> the human species, they'd drop everything to handle it. > > Aw, come on. It's the plausibility of the threat. No, Damien, it is not. I wrote that essay after conversing with many, many people who seemed to consider UFAI a plausible existential risk and who were quite kind and rational folks. People capable of dealing with probabilistic futures and evaluating scientific arguments. People who would open doors for a stranger with an armful of groceries. People who nonetheless sat back and cheered for SIAI without trying to leap into the silver screen. I realize there are people who do not agree with the reasoning and assign it a probability of essentially zero. There is no puzzle in the psychology of those people, nor was my email addressed to them. > (If they were sufficiently gullible. If they were sufficiently > desperate. If I could absolutely prove to their satisfaction the truth > of my hard-to-credit claim.) I'm not gullible nor do I encourage gullibility in others. There are people who think it's okay to prey upon weakness in a good cause. I disagree, oppose myself to that darkness, and I do my best to ensure that reading one of my essays makes people stronger of mind whether they agree or disagree. I include tidbits of science and theory-of-rationality that will feed a hungry mind regardless of whether the main point is accepted or rejected. I am dealing with a major existential risk, one that seems to incorporate a loss by default if nothing is done. If that doesn't qualify as "sufficiently desperate" I don't know what does. The idea that absolute proof is required to deal with an existential risk is another case of weird psychology. Would you drive in a car that had a 10% chance of crashing on every trip? There's no *absolute proof* that you'll crash, so you can safely ignore the threat, right? If people require absolute proof for existential risks before they'll deal with them, while reacting very badly to a 1% personal risk, then that is another case of weird psychology that needs explaining. Making comparisons to the Heaven-for-Everyone Institute is silly. What, just because people in the past made false claims of flight, the Wright Brothers are physically prevented from ever constructing a device that will fly? The territory of reality can't possibly threaten us because past maps raised false alams? Let's not forget that the boy who cried wolf didn't cause wolves to stop existing. I didn't choose that those others should cry wolf, and I have to do my best to rally the villagers despite the damage. SIAI is making an ordinary, rational case for the seriousness of an existential risk and a strategy for dealing with it. Previous irrational claims for existential risks, large benefits, etc., are not evidence against this; invalid reasoning is simply eliminated from the pool of arguments and does not count one way or the other. The world's greatest fool may have said at some point that the sun is shining, but that doesn't eliminate the physical possibility of day. Otherwise you follow a strategy which *guarantees* that if reality *ever does* throw an existential risk at you, you will do *nothing*, because once upon a time some other guy was fooled. As we all know, there's nothing worse in this world than losing face. The most important thing in an emergency is to look cool and suave. That's why, when Gandalf first suspected that Frodo carried the One Ring, he had to make *absolutely sure* that his dreadful guess was correct, interrogating Gollum, searching the archives at Gondor, before carrying out the tiniest safety precaution. Like, say, sending Frodo to Rivendell the instant the thought crossed his mind. What weight the conquest of all Middle-Earth, compared to the possibility of Gandalf with egg on his face? And the interesting thing is, I've never heard anyone else notice that there's something wrong with this. It just seems like ordinary human nature. Tolkien isn't depicting Gandalf as a bad guy. Gandalf is just following the ordinary procedure of taking no precaution against an existential risk until it has been confirmed with absolute certainty, lest face be lost. I don't think it's a tiny probability, mind you. I've already identified the One Ring to my satisfaction. But even if you don't know the One Ring on sight, Damien, even if you think you know better than I, please grant me a probability high enough that you don't want to actively get in my way while I'm working. Let me emphasize again that if you choose not to donate, you have no need to justify that choice to me, or to anyone. If you're satisfied with your choice, do it without apology. If your choice doesn't satisfy you, change it to a choice that does. But for the love of cute kittens! You have no need whatsoever to post your justifications to this or any other mailing list! Unless you think that every transhumanist movement should remain tiny and helpless forever and that the best way to achieve this is by starting an argument whenever one of them tries to gain momentum. Think of how nice it would be if, instead of arguments, we saw some replies from new donors. Wouldn't that be a warm and fuzzy feeling? Transhumanists showing that they can do more than argue about the future? It is in your best interest that others donate to SIAI even if you don't, so please don't discourage them. I swear, it's worse than herding cats. At least cats would obey Natasha. But we know we're cats, and we can, if we choose, try to think through the question of how rational self-aware cats can cooperate and not forever remain tiny compared to flying-saucer cults. Now I enjoy a bit of sarcasm in the course of rational criticism as much as anyone, but *not* when a transhumanist organization is in the middle of launching a new effort or project. If you must criticize (the rationality part goes without saying), that's a time for polite, constructive criticism phrased in such a way as to not actively discourage new activists. Save the delicious sarcasm for the next argument about politics. Please. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 22 10:21:32 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 06:21:32 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041021233012.2D92057E2B@finney.org> References: <20041021233012.2D92057E2B@finney.org> Message-ID: <4178DF2C.5030904@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > I don't see why you can't tell people your AI will give special favors to > those who donate. How far do you think the Christians would have gotten > if they'd said that God would put *everyone* into heaven, whether they > were Christian or not? Nowhere. Even if that were God's actual plan > (it sounds like a mighty Christian thing to do), they wouldn't tell > people that. Otherwise nobody would have any incentive to behave, > plus the religion wouldn't have been successful. > > So with the Friendly AI, why wouldn't it reward the people who made it > possible? Repaying debts seems like a Friendly thing to do. And if it > owed its existence to people who made contributions on the expectation > that they would get a reward, a decent person would indeed reward them. > We should be able to ask the same of the Friendly AI. > > The monument sounds nice, at least if it's got a lot of gold and diamonds > and stuff, and if it's really big. I'm not dissing the monument, it's > better than nothing. But come on, this AI could do a little better > than a monument, don't you think? After all, the thing is supposed > to be more or less omnipotent, right? It wouldn't seem like any great > difficulty to throw a few bones to the people who made it possible, saved > the human race and ensured the future happiness of the entire universe. > I'm not saying it has to make anyone else suffer or anything, but some > extra reward to the Chosen Few would seem possible and appropriate. "Donate within the next month and get a free catboy or catgirl after the Singularity." Bet that'd get us Slashdotted. The problem is, Hal, I really don't feel myself authorized to make those kind of promises. What if a harem of catgirls isn't good for you? Maybe sex with NPCs(*) tends to cause withdrawal from human society. And there are other reasons to beware of a rewarded Chosen Few. This is something I considered a very long time ago, and flinched back from then, and I still flinch back now. Maybe that will change, but I do not foresee it changing. I've suggested the possibility of everlasting fame; that is daring enough without bringing in catgirls. (*) Non-Player Characters > Anyway, I did make a small donation, even though I found your essay a > little condescending and insulting. I'm sorry. No better writer than I has yet leaped into that unfilled role on the stage - Michael Anissimov might grow into it but he's not there yet. So I do the best I can, even though I'm not suited to it. > But I think you should seriously > consider the possibility that the AI would be willing to reward > contributors. I don't see anything in Friendliness that would rule > it out. You can bet the Raellians wouldn't get anywhere if they said > that *everybody* would get to go on the UFO. As you note, a little > personal reward can go a long way. Thanks for pointing out the possibility to everyone, but I still don't dare make such promises in my own right. Too many of the wishes that I've heard are dangerous things, e.g., Spike Jones wishing to vacation as a female. It might not be helping, to promise to grant them. But, sure, all SIAI donors could end up +5 on their saving throws, it's a legitimate possibility. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 22 15:28:25 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 08:28:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <4178DA3F.1040704@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041022152825.76907.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > The idea that absolute proof is required to deal > with an existential risk > is another case of weird psychology. Would you > drive in a car that had a > 10% chance of crashing on every trip? There's no > *absolute proof* that > you'll crash, so you can safely ignore the threat, > right? No...but if it's a 10^-9 percent chance, then you can maybe safely ignore it, if you're already accepting greater risks. Or if it's 10^-19 percent. And especially if you'll get enough forewarning that the immediate chance has gotten higher (like, say, a few seconds where it jumps to 10 percent) to do something about it. One needs not prove that it doesn't exist, just that it doesn't yet merit part of one's limited resources to deal with. Of course, this relies on judging it to be extremely low odds - and the set of those who do approximates the set of those who judge the odds to be zero anyway. From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 22 15:31:03 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 10:31:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041022102345.01c65480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:00 AM 10/22/2004 -0400, Eliezer wrote: >>>If you ask people how much they're willing to pay for the entire human >>>species to survive, most of them name the amount of money in their >>>pockets, minus whatever they need to pay for their accustomed lunch. >>>If it was *only* their own life at stake, not them plus the rest of the >>>human species, they'd drop everything to handle it. >>Aw, come on. It's the plausibility of the threat. > >No, Damien, it is not. You're right, I was trying to be polite. It's the apriori plausibility of the solution. You expressed bafflement at a psychological conundrum, but it's only a puzzle if those hold-outs agree with both the urgency of the threat *and* with the high likelihood that you, personally, can resolve it (and therefore deserve having some of their money donated to your efforts). As far as I can tell, the disconnect is in the second factor. You, Eliezer, appear utterly persuaded of your [nearly unique] capacity to address this challenge. My suspicion is that those holding back from sending you bucks big and small might not share this conviction. If that is possible, it would provide an explanation for the apparent inconsistency you are baffled and infuriated by. This comment offers no opinion pro or con concerning the truth of either factor. You might be right. >I am dealing with a major existential risk, one that seems to incorporate >a loss by default if nothing is done. If that doesn't qualify as >"sufficiently desperate" I don't know what does. You're `dealing' with it? I think you're (1) proposing that it exists, providing various evidences for that opinion (somewhat plausibly, in my own view), and (2) telling people that you are on track to containing the risk (rather less plausibly, perhaps), and then (3) seeking donations to help you continue to do both. Wringing your hands over the `weird psychology that needs explaining' of those who fail to send you money seems to me either disingenuous or unnervingly innocent. >please grant me a probability high enough that you don't want to actively >get in my way while I'm working. Get in your way? You were the one soliciting an explanation for the `weird psychology that needs explaining'. Unless, of course, you weren't, and it was just a rhetorical ploy to browbeat laggardly donors. >Let me emphasize again that if you choose not to donate, you have no need >to justify that choice to me, or to anyone. If you're satisfied with your >choice, do it without apology. ... You have no need whatsoever to post >your justifications to this or any other mailing list! Apparently you can't hear how... Garner Ted Armstrong... this sounds to anyone not persuaded of your One Ring-bearer candidature. Oh well. (I speak as someone who invested more than a decade of intense self-funded effort in a research project done almost entirely alone that seemed to me to deal with one of the most terrible threats and opportunities the world had ever known. Rich or learned men gazed at me with kindly mockery or incomprehension as I solicited their [non-financial] assistance. Around the time I finally abandoned it, I learned that millions of dollars had been spent by the US government, in classified research, on precisely the same approach *at the same time I was doing my work* without any more success, it seemed, than I had attained. So it goes.) Damien Broderick From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 22 16:22:01 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 12:22:01 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <69920-220041052216221616@M2W040.mail2web.com> I'll be donating today! Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 22 16:48:37 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:48:37 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] UF scientist: 'Brain' in a dish acts as autopilot, living computer References: <470a3c5204102201256b29309c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <001901c4b856$fb1174e0$9b494842@kevin> Between this, and the moneys that had robot arms hooked to their brains, I wonder if we will see bird brains connected to drone aircraft any time soon... From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 22 17:28:58 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:28:58 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <2D9FC6D73BBC474DBBC979CE094CB33C2396D5@exchange-hou.velaw.com> References: <2D9FC6D73BBC474DBBC979CE094CB33C2396D5@exchange-hou.velaw.com> Message-ID: <4179435A.8030608@pobox.com> On wta-talk and Extropians, Giulio Prisco recently noted that the Raelian cult seems to have a surprising amount of transhumanist content, mixed in with gibberish about flying saucers. Giulio concluded by asking: > > I am sure Rael himself and other top officers never believed in the > flying-saucers layer so, again, I wonder why it is there when the > [transhumanist] message would stand on its own. > > Then I think that: The Raelians have 60,000 paying members worldwide and > a lot of money. All transhumanist associations together have perhaps > 300 paying members. I wonder what conclusions we should make. I (Eliezer) replied: > > You should conclude that... the other 100 cults that tried to get > started using flying-saucer nonsense didn't make it big, so you never > heard about them in the media? There are more people trying to start flying-saucer cults than transhumanist organizations, so you can't necessarily conclude that the probability of success for a flying-saucer cult is higher. Nonetheless, Giulio has a point. It is embarassing that rationalists have more trouble cooperating than flying-saucer nuts. I'm glad that here on SL4, at least, the "Donate Today and Tomorrow" initiative made it nearly an entire day before the inevitable chorus of naysaying started. The Extropians list was not so lucky. I draw the lesson that's dangerous to be half a rationalist. If you pick up some rationalist skills, there are certain other skills you have to adopt to compensate. If you learn to see the flaws in arguments, you also have to learn additional skills to make sure you apply the same level of criticism to the ideas you like as to those you dislike. Otherwise, the effect of learning to nitpick is to lock you into ideas that make you feel good, which really isn't what rationality is about. If you learn not to be certain, you also need to learn to live and act without certainty, and not demand overwhelming evidence to compel you. A rationalist knows that not even the theory of evolution is certain (though I would argue that it is the most strongly confirmed theory in the history of science). Creationists think that as long as evolution is not certain, they don't have to believe it. If you cast aside certainty and learn the art of skepticism, you'd better also cast aside the principle that only certainty can compel you to give up an idea. Cultists are like bosons. Transhumanists are like fermions. I am going to describe, as dispassionately as I can, the difference between Raelianism and transhumanism that makes transhumanism less effective. If a high-status Raelian says something, no one can question him; if you try you're out of the cult. There's a chorus of agreement instead of a chorus of disagreement. Everyone sees the atmosphere of agreement, and they feel more confident in the ideas presented. Anyone who doesn't feel confident keeps their objections to themselves. Anyone who really disagrees leaves the cult, and then the remaining people are more in agreement and reinforce each other. Like evaporative cooling; fast-moving minds are ejected. A counterintuitive observation of researchers who study cults is that cults often increase in fanaticism following what ought to be a setback - for example, a relevation that the founder clubbed cute baby seals or had an affair with Nathaniel Branden. Part of what happens is that the people with a lingering trace of sanity leave first, and then they're no longer around to hold the others back, who reinforce each other still further. When new people come in, they're confronted with wall-to-wall agreement, and the part of human nature that is vulnerable to peer pressure concludes that if everyone else agrees on something, it must be insane to think otherwise. Raising a doubt is met with scorn and other forms of negative reinforcement, making people less likely to doubt again. Consensus builds, discord dies, the Raelians move in harmony and lase. And this also of the Raelians: They are not afraid to be passionate about their ideas. Now let's look at transhumanism. SIAI has already received on the order of 20 donations. I wasn't planning to reveal this number until afterward, but these strange circumstances compel me to do so. Some of the donors included congratulatory notes saying how effective the essay was, or how it finally inspired them to get moving, and so on. Here's a sample, quoted with permission from Jesse Merriman, who donated $111.11: "I decided to give SIAI a little bit more. One more hundred, one more ten, one more single, one more dime, and one more penny. All may not be for one, but this one is trying to be for all." But none of those donors posted their congratulations and agreement to a mailing list, not one. As far as any of those donors knew, they were alone. And now they're looking at people saying scornfully why they shouldn't have donated! The criticism, the justifications or excuses for not donating, *that* part is displayed proudly in the open. A newcomer would see wall-to-wall disagreement. This is, in its own warped way, just as wrong as what the Raelians are doing. If a bias toward credulity is wrong, you still can't go right by reversing the bias. The opposite of a great mistake is nearly always another great mistake, the correct answer being something else entirely. Suppose that 20 donors *had* posted their agreement on the SL4 list. You'd feel pretty uncomfortable joining them, wouldn't you? I know that if I said something at a talk and twenty people in the audience stood up and shouted "You're absolutely right!", I'd stand around with my mouth open, completely at a loss for words. And you'd also be unnerved, right? Much more unnerved than if you were at a conference and 20 people asked scathing questions of a speaker. We're as uncomfortable together as the Raelians are apart. That's just as wrong, and if we ever want to get anywhere, we'll have to make a deliberate effort to get over it. It's dangerous to be half a rationalist. If you master some skills, you have to master others or end up worse off than before. If you learn to disagree with authority without shame, you have to learn to agree with authority without shame. If you challenge conventional ideas proudly, you have to accept conventional ideas proudly. I know how to deal with disagreement, but hearing people agree with me makes me feel uncomfortable. This I acknowledge as my failing, and I accept responsibility for getting over it. I think we can do, if not quite as well as flying-saucer nuts, maybe one-tenth as well. But it's going to take a deliberate effort. Rationalists can hold their own against irrationalists, but not easily. We have to be strong without being certain, by a deliberate act of will, by the conscious decision that certainty is not required for strength. We have to act in unison without being conformist, by an act of will, by the conscious choice that it makes sense to cooperate even when we aren't in full agreement. We have to forsake peer pressure and the instinct to believe what others are saying, and consciously evaluate the probability that someone else knows more than we do, taking into account neither personal like nor personal dislike. We have to reject the common misconception that the art of finding the correct answer to questions of fact - the art some call "rationality" - means cynicism, ironic detachment, and the refusal to feel emotion. Let us choose our beliefs on the sole basis of correspondence with reality. If those beliefs call forth our passions, then let us feel! We have to learn to express our unity as well as our disagreement, speak our rational agreement along with our rational criticism, show newcomers *both* sides of the issue, swallow hard and defy our fear of public harmony. I ask of SIAI's donors: Speak up, and hold your heads high without shame! -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 22 17:41:50 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:41:50 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <69920-220041052216221616@M2W040.mail2web.com> References: <69920-220041052216221616@M2W040.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <4179465E.5060001@pobox.com> Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Now let's look at transhumanism. SIAI has already received on the order > of 20 donations. I wasn't planning to reveal this number until > afterward, but these strange circumstances compel me to do so. Some of > the donors included congratulatory notes saying how effective the essay > was, or how it finally inspired them to get moving. [...] But > none of those donors posted their congratulations and agreement to a > mailing list, not one. [...] We're as uncomfortable together as the > Raelians are apart. After I wrote this, but before I sent the message, Natasha Vita-More wrote to the Extropy chat list: > I'll be donating today! > > Natasha Of course it was Natasha. I should have *expected* it to be Natasha. *She* knows better! Maybe she could give classes or something. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 22 18:31:06 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:31:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Badnarik's book a best seller Message-ID: <20041022183106.12179.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Libertarian Presidential Candidate Michael Badnarik is now a best selling author, ranked number 9 on Amazon.com: "It's Good to Be King: Foundations of Freedom" http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1594110964/ref=pd_ts_b_9/102-6465948-8561722?v=glance&s=books&n=53 I took Mike's course on the Constitution last November. This book is his putting down on paper all the things he's been teaching for years, about the difference between rights vs privileges, the constitution, etc.... all the stuff I told him last November "he needed to put into a book so we can get it into classrooms all over America". Well, he's followed through on his end of the bargain, now it's our turn. Amazon packages it at a nice price with Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom", for those who have not read that excellent book 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 22 18:55:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:55:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Some people compute more than others... Message-ID: <20041022185547.52171.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Quoted from SiliconValley.com, Oct 22, 2004 edition: "The vast majority of people are computer-generated. Some are very complicated and consume a whole Pentium by themselves. Some are so simple, you can run a few hundred on a computer." -- Bob Lucas, a division director at the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute, describes the cast of characters in "Urban Resolve," a massive Defense Department combat simulator. The Simulation is here, it just isn't evenly computated.... ;) ===== 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 Fri Oct 22 18:56:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 11:56:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] UF scientist: 'Brain' in a dish acts as autopilot, living computer In-Reply-To: <001901c4b856$fb1174e0$9b494842@kevin> Message-ID: <20041022185646.52346.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Kevin Freels wrote: > Between this, and the moneys that had robot arms hooked to their > brains, I > wonder if we will see bird brains connected to drone aircraft any > time > soon... I can see the luddites out in force when the Navy uses dolphin brains to guide torpedos.... ===== 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 natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 22 19:29:16 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:29:16 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <214910-2200410522192916498@M2W099.mail2web.com> Thank you for your eloquent plea Eli. My suggestion is to support the Proactionary Principle, for it balances rationale and progress. Natasha Natasha Vita-More President, Extropy Institute >We have to learn to express our unity as well as our disagreement, speak >our rational agreement along with our rational criticism, show newcomers >*both* sides of the issue, swallow hard and defy our fear of public >harmony. >I ask of SIAI's donors: Speak up, and hold your heads high without shame! -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 22 19:33:46 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:33:46 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] News: Want to clone your cat? Preserve your cadaver? Fly to space? Message-ID: <97490-2200410522193346159@M2W099.mail2web.com> http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B9036670F-4F75-4EF2-8D29-EC DE3AA72A74%7D&siteid=google&dist=google Natasha -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 22 20:20:29 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 13:20:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> Eliezer writes: > But none of those donors posted their congratulations and agreement to a > mailing list, not one. As far as any of those donors knew, they were > alone. Actually, I did post (on Extropy-Chat) that I had made a donation, although it was not in the context of "congratulations and agreement". Donors who read that message could have deduced that they were not alone. > Suppose that 20 donors *had* posted their agreement on the SL4 list. You'd > feel pretty uncomfortable joining them, wouldn't you? I don't think so. I've given similar small donations to groups that I agree with, like Foresight or the EFF, even though I often read messages about the good work they are doing. I don't see why you think such messages would discourage donations. > I know that if I > said something at a talk and twenty people in the audience stood up and > shouted "You're absolutely right!", I'd stand around with my mouth open, > completely at a loss for words. In that specific context it would indeed be unusual for that to happen. But I'll bet you've written essays and gotten a number of congratulatory and favorable responses. Did that unnerve you? > And you'd also be unnerved, right? Much > more unnerved than if you were at a conference and 20 people asked scathing > questions of a speaker. We're as uncomfortable together as the Raelians > are apart. Aren't you exaggerating here? Outsiders sometimes accuse Extropians of cultlike groupthink. There are certainly matters on which we largely agree. Look at the poll I did last week about the Principles. There was substantial agreement in the rankings. Remember what you wrote yesterday, about how people hesitate to help out when they are in groups? Part of the reason you suggested was that since no one else was panicking, each person figured there was no reason to panic. That's a group-conformist behavior pattern, and you seemed to be saying that reluctance to support SIAI was part of that pattern. Now it's the opposite, that it is our non-conformity which is keeping people from joining the bandwagon of support. I don't know what the answer is; probably the reasons are complex. But I think Damien has a good part of the truth when he says that the reason people don't donate is because ultimately they don't think it's money well spent. They don't think that the threat is imminent, or they don't think that your group will solve the problem. I suspect that rather than spending so much time explaining to us how irrational we all are, you would be better off considering your own strategy. What are your goals? Your milestones? Your deliverables? The essays are good, I guess, but they don't seem to obviously move things forward. It would be helpful if you could point to something tangible that shows that you are not just a net.crackpot amusing himself. Get into a position where you can go to donors and say, if we get this much money, then in six months we will achieve these milestones, and in 12 months these additional ones. I'll bet you'd do better soliciting donations with that approach than what you are doing now. Hal From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 22 21:19:22 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:19:22 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> References: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> Message-ID: <4179795A.5020608@pobox.com> Hal Finney wrote: > Eliezer writes: > >> I know that if I said something at a talk and twenty people in the >> audience stood up and shouted "You're absolutely right!", I'd stand >> around with my mouth open, completely at a loss for words. > > In that specific context it would indeed be unusual for that to happen. > But I'll bet you've written essays and gotten a number of congratulatory > and favorable responses. Did that unnerve you? Yes. The more favorable, the more unnerving. I can't take a compliment. I can sing my own praises all I want, but whenever someone else tries to laud me, I feel really, *really* uncomfortable. I won't be accused of humility. It's just a personality flaw from being raised a rationalist, that's all. > Remember what you wrote yesterday, about how people hesitate to help out > when they are in groups? Part of the reason you suggested was that > since no one else was panicking, each person figured there was no reason > to panic. That's a group-conformist behavior pattern, and you seemed > to be saying that reluctance to support SIAI was part of that pattern. > Now it's the opposite, that it is our non-conformity which is keeping > people from joining the bandwagon of support. I see no contradiction. The kind of non-conformity that people take pride in is often very conformist, and conformity is a basic human impulse that doesn't respect traditions of nonconformity. People are complex. > I don't know what the answer is; probably the reasons are complex. But I > think Damien has a good part of the truth when he says that the reason > people don't donate is because ultimately they don't think it's money > well spent. They don't think that the threat is imminent, or they don't > think that your group will solve the problem. *Which people* is the question. There are people who think that the threat is imminent and that we stand a good chance of solving the problem and they *still* stand back and cheer us on, hoping that someone else will donate first. I've met them, Hal, I've spoken to them on IRC, on the phone and in person. I addressed my email specifically to them. And I don't see why this is so hard to believe, given that (a) it fits the known pattern of a psychological bias and (b) many such people did in fact donate in the last two days, saying, oops, you're right, I didn't know about the bystander effect and I was hanging back and waiting for someone else to do it. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Fri Oct 22 21:43:45 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:43:45 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041022102345.01c65480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041022102345.01c65480@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <41797F11.10805@pobox.com> Damien Broderick wrote: > > You're right, I was trying to be polite. It's the apriori plausibility > of the solution. You expressed bafflement at a psychological conundrum... Just to clear something up: I am not baffled by this conundrum. I expected this in 1996 when I started up the Singularitarian movement. I didn't know about the bystander effect, but I did guess that at most 1% of the people who heard about the problem would help in even the smallest way. Different people have different reasons for not helping. For some, as Damien says, they will assign a zero probability of success to the solution. (If it's a nonzero probability of success, and an existential risk, then I have separate issues with the reasoning.) Others (quite a few of whom just now donated) may have agreed on the problem, thought SIAI had a decent chance at a solution, and then been zapped by the bystander effect. English is an annoying language. There's no good word to refer to a question with an important and interesting answer, that doesn't puzzle you because you know the answer, but would nonetheless be quite intriguing to someone who didn't know the answer, because the phenomenon is counterintuitive if you describe it in strictly surface terms without referring to the underlying causes that render it explicable. I call it a "puzzle", and am careful not to say that I am puzzled by it. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Oct 22 21:59:00 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 07:59:00 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow References: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> Message-ID: <009f01c4b882$565978e0$b8232dcb@homepc> Hal Finney wrote: > I don't know what the answer is; probably the reasons are complex. > But I think Damien has a good part of the truth when he says that the > reason people don't donate is because ultimately they don't think it's > money well spent. They don't think that the threat is imminent, or they > don't think that your group will solve the problem. This IS the case for me. I don't think the threat is imminent and I don't think that if it is that your group in particular will solve the problem. I do think Eliezer is one of the more rational and to me therefore likeable people around. But that is not enough reason for me to donate money. The essay was enough for me to take another quick look at the the linked singularity site. There I saw 21 definitions of Friendly AI which did not auger well in my view for an ability to produce one result - a friendly AI. > I suspect that rather than spending so much time explaining to us how > irrational we all are, you would be better off considering your own > strategy. What are your goals? Your milestones? Your deliverables? > The essays are good, I guess, but they don't seem to obviously move > things forward. It would be helpful if you could point to something > tangible that shows that you are not just a net.crackpot amusing himself. > Get into a position where you can go to donors and say, if we get this > much money, then in six months we will achieve these milestones, and in > 12 months these additional ones. I'll bet you'd do better soliciting > donations with that approach than what you are doing now. I think Hal is "absolutely right!" :-) Except that he apparently donated BEFORE asking for goals and milestones. I read a well written essay but didn't see a clear easy link to "the problem" that was being proposed as needing to be solved and my predisposition to the view that friendly AI cannot be built that would be friendly to everyone and would not just reflect the biases of the designer was not removed in the time I was willing to commit. If I was convinced there was an urgent serious problem then that would be step one accomplished. It would have little bearing on consideration two which would be the consideration of *how* in fact the problem was going to be solved. As a rational, in my view anyway, person I'd have to be persuaded that the *how* was viable and a generally favourable impression of Eliezer would not bear on that consideration of either the problem or the how. It would only bear on my willingness to take *some* time to take a look when I am inclined to think there is not an overwhelming threat. If there is a fairly well written concise statement of the problem somewhere and the proposed solution I'd like to see a link to it/them and not have to go looking. Brett From jef at jefallbright.net Fri Oct 22 22:12:06 2004 From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:12:06 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> References: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> Message-ID: <417985B6.2040107@jefallbright.net> Eliezer - I've thoroughly considered your request for donations, and have followed the subsequent email thread. I've decided to reply here on the Exi list, but will avoid "pissing in the punch" on the SL4 list as someone put it. I'm not financially well off, but I have contributed small amounts to groups that I believe are working in what I see as the right direction. My thinking is as follows: (1) I've been observing and occasionally interacting with you for about 8 years. During that time, I have been impressed with your noble willingness to dedicate yourself to your cause. I admire that, and feel a strong interest in supporting such behavior. (2) I observe extreme arrogance and deliberate exclusion of points of view that don't fit your current model -- understandable behavior for someone who's experience is that he's smarter than almost everyone he's interacted with. I see this as potentially dangerous to you and others who are influenced by you, unless you are helped and shielded by a protective benefactor until you've gained sufficient life-experience to broaden your understanding of what works in the real world. I view this as a dangerous phase, but with your basic goodness and a little luck, you'll pass through. I've attempted occasionally, via personal email and public comments to provide some praise, some encouragement, and some constructive criticism, and in return have received no direct replies from you of any kind. I think this arrogance is perhaps your biggest impediment to gaining cooperation and support. (3) I think you naively underestimate the capabilities of groups, both current and emerging now as we approach the tipping point for augmented human intelligence. In my opinion, new tools and resources to increase the awareness of the general population, augmented effective working memory and increasing access to knowledge will lead to improvements in human wisdom *and* provide broad-based self-correcting balance to the process of human growth. It isn't practical to extrapolate the collective volition of mankind, but you could contribute to helping mankind grow in an increasingly rational manner. I think you could contribute to this growth process by communicating your insights in a plain way and to a broader audience, perhaps playing a key role within a larger team. (4) I disagree with your premise that FAI is the only right path to saving humanity and that only you can provide these answers. I am encouraged, however, that you revise your positions as you gain new understanding, and that you are honest about it. To sum it up, I appreciate many of your essays and your contributions to discussions of rational thinking and have decided to make a small contribution in support of your growth. - Jef From wingcat at pacbell.net Fri Oct 22 22:27:29 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:27:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] UF scientist: 'Brain' in a dish acts as autopilot, living computer In-Reply-To: <20041022185646.52346.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041022222729.62426.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Kevin Freels wrote: > > Between this, and the moneys that had robot arms > hooked to their > > brains, I > > wonder if we will see bird brains connected to > drone aircraft any > > time > > soon... > > I can see the luddites out in force when the Navy > uses dolphin brains > to guide torpedos.... But would anyone dare ask the obvious - that the luddites would be perfectly welcome to donate their brains, if they thought that would provide better results? Note that there are two ways to take that. From brian at touchecstasy.com Fri Oct 22 22:57:27 2004 From: brian at touchecstasy.com (Brian Mackenzie) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:57:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: sexy shape-shifting References: <20041021224708.40188.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00ad01c4b88a$80da3c00$aec5149a@littlessiqotnm> A couple of good books related to the topic of shape-shifting are Fred Alan Wolf's _The Eagle's Quest_, in which he visits with a couple of shamanic practitioners (Native Americans, I believe) who are adept at shape-shifting, creating dopplegangers (or being in two places at once), etc. Then there is the fictional but very suggestive novel _The Wood Wife_. A web page exploring the various metaphors (including shapeshifting) used by the author can be seen here: http://www.mythicjourneys.org/passages/septoct2003/newsletterp10.html Also the movie "Underworld" is all about shapeshifting "weres" and vampires.... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trend Ologist" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2004 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Happy Thursday > This hits the spot. > Don't forget to read my two books: > > 'How To Appear Correct even When You Are Entirely > Mistaken' > > and > > 'How To Profit From Nuclear War And The Excruciating > Agony Of Others' > > > > > Now one autumn morning when the wind had blown all > > the leaves off > > the trees in the night, and was trying to blow the > > branches off, > > Pooh and Piglet were sitting in the Thoughtful Spot > > and wondering. > > > > "What I think," said Pooh, "is I think we'll go to > > Pooh Corner and > > see Eeyore, because perhaps his house has been blown > > down, and > > perhaps he'd like us to build it again." > > > > "What I think," said Piglet, "is I think we'll go > > and see > > Christopher Robin, only he won't be there, so we > > can't." > > > > "Let's go and see everybody," said Pooh. "Because > > when you've been > > walking in the wind for miles, and you suddenly go > > into somebody's > > house, and he says, 'Hallo, Pooh, you're just in > > time for a little > > smackerel of something,' and you are, then it's what > > I call a > > Friendly Day." > > > > Piglet thought that they ought to have a Reason > > for going to see > > everybody, like Looking for Small or Organizing an > > Expotition, if > > Pooh could think of something > > > > Pooh could. > > > > "We'll go because it's Thursday," he said, "and > > we'll go to wish > > everybody a Very Happy Thursday. Come on, Piglet." > > > > They got up; and when Piglet had sat down > > again, because he > > didn't know the wind was so strong, and had been > > helped up by > > Pooh, they started off. They went to Pooh's house > > first, and luckily > > Pooh was at home just as they got there, so he > > asked them in, and > > they had some, and then they went on to Kanga's > > house, holding on to > > each other, and shouting "Isn't it?" and > > "What?" and "I can't > > hear." By the time they got to Kanga's house they > > were so buffeted > > that they stayed to lunch. Just at first it seemed > > rather cold > > outside afterwards, so they pushed on to Rabbit's as > > quickly as they > > could. > > > > "We've come to wish you a Very Happy Thursday," > > said Pooh, when > > he had gone in and out once or twice just to make > > sure that he > > could get out again. > > > > "Why, what's going to happen on Thursday?" > > asked Rabbit, and > > when Pooh had explained, and Rabbit, whose life was > > made up of > > Important Things, said, "Oh, I thought you'd > > really come about > > something," they sat down for a little . . . and > > by-and-by Pooh and > > Piglet went on again. The wind was behind them now, > > so they didn't > > have to shout. > > > > "Rabbit's clever," said Pooh thoughtfully. > > > > "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit's clever." > > > > "And he has Brain." > > > > "Yes," said Piglet, "Rabbit has Brain." > > > > There was a long silence. > > > > "I suppose," said Pooh, "that that's > > why he never > > understands anything." > > > > ------------------ > > > > -- > > > > > ******************************************************************** > > 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/ > > > ******************************************************************** > > "For a girl, she's remarkably perceptive." --Calvin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.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 Fri Oct 22 23:15:21 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:15:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] News: Want to clone your cat? Preserve your cadaver? Fly to space? In-Reply-To: <97490-2200410522193346159@M2W099.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041022231521.64833.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- "natashavita at earthlink.net" wrote: > http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid=%7B9036670F-4F75-4EF2-8D29-EC > DE3AA72A74%7D&siteid=google&dist=google This is an example of what I was afraid would happen. Note the emphasis being placed on current prices, with little to no mention of the probability of costs coming down over time. I wonder if more people would buy into transhumanity if the core philosophy was advertised as, "Let's make everyone rich. Not (just) in money (since if everyone has more money then money isn't as valuable), but in the ways that really matter. Want more time? So do we, via longer lives - or in the time-per-day sense, via robots and AIs to do the menial tasks for us (even menial types of thinking, just like we already have calculators for basic math) so humans can focus on the things we want to focus on. Want more gold? Industrialize space and mine some asteroids. Want more of something we don't directly offer, like spirituality? Maybe money can't buy happiness itself, but it can buy time for you to find happiness." Viewed through this lens, even incremental advances towards AI and nano-Santa (and other things Singularity) become valuable steps in and of themselves, whether or not the ultimate forms are in fact possible. From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Oct 23 02:01:35 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 12:01:35 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow References: <20041022202029.9FCE357E2C@finney.org> <009f01c4b882$565978e0$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <00d201c4b8a4$39d7d550$b8232dcb@homepc> I wrote: > The essay was enough for me to take another quick look at the > the linked singularity site. There I saw 21 definitions of Friendly > AI which did not auger well in my view for an ability to produce > one result - a friendly AI. I obviously didn't take a very good look or I'd have noticed its 24 definitions not 21 (I think it was 21 last time I looked). > I read a well written essay but didn't see a clear easy link to "the > problem" that was being proposed as needing to be solved and my > predisposition to the view that friendly AI cannot be built that would > be friendly to everyone and would not just reflect the biases of the > designer was not removed in the time I was willing to commit. This criticism was premature. I retract it. I'd have liked to see more links in the original post but I can't in fairness say that a lot of the questions I have don't seem to be addressed at least in part on the SIAI site. So my bad, at least in part, for being a bit too lazy. Looks like the site has had an overhaul and is actually quite well put together. I'll do some more reading. Brett From harara at sbcglobal.net Sat Oct 23 02:52:56 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 19:52:56 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] PC & Gullible In-Reply-To: <00c401c4b626$a501af20$f1494842@kevin> References: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c4b626$a501af20$f1494842@kevin> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041022195112.02908f90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I can see it now, the compleate, ultraportable totally PC dictionary, consisting of one entry: doh At 02:57 PM 10/19/2004, you wrote: >Please tell me this is a joke! If this word is removed, that will open the >door to removal of all kinds of words that will be somehow offensive to one >group or another! >How could these people who removed it fromthe dictinary be so gullible? >Kevin Freels ================================== = 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 Oct 23 03:00:19 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:00:19 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] the culture of force In-Reply-To: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05> References: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED36@tpeex05> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041022195935.0292a9e8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Every time I post to this list there is an interaction between mind and matter - my mind, my fingers. >If PK (Psychokinesis) is really true (at least for some people under some >mental states on moving >other physical objects or changing the physical probabilities), does it >mean that there must be some >interaction (or force) between mind and matter? >Does this deserve a unified theory of mind and matter? > >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 joe at barrera.org Sat Oct 23 03:24:05 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 20:24:05 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] PC & Gullible In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041022195112.02908f90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c4b626$a501af20$f1494842@kevin> <6.0.3.0.1.20041022195112.02908f90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4179CED5.9060308@barrera.org> Hara Ra wrote: > I can see it now, the compleate, ultraportable totally PC dictionary, > consisting of one entry: > > doh "doh" is insulting and demeaning. I insist that it, too, be removed. - Joe From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 23 15:36:58 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:36:58 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win Message-ID: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men be content with their wives & mistresses and other 'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many Southerners trying to inflict their religion on America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? Northerners weren't particularly interested in abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely un-Christian measures to be instituted. Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of revenge. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From astapp at fizzfactorgames.com Sat Oct 23 15:45:02 2004 From: astapp at fizzfactorgames.com (Acy James Stapp) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 08:45:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D626@amazemail2.amazeent.com> > I ask of SIAI's donors: Speak up, and hold your heads high without shame! I donated, and here's why: Odds of SIAI even completing a strong AI: 20% Odds of SIAI being first: 5% Odds of SIAI being friendly: 50% Odds of strong AI bringing about the singularity: 10% So 0.05% odds, or a 2000:1 payoff. So my donation was ~1/2000 of the expected financial payoff for being on the good side of a friendly AI. Sort of like Pascal's wager :) Acy From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Oct 23 16:03:07 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:03:07 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c520410230903280083fa@mail.gmail.com> Trend, I completely understand your frustration, and found your explanation of why Bush will win interesting. (Unfortunately I also think he will probably win, but lets keep finger crossed and hope for the best, miracles can happen you know). But I wish to warn you that remarks like this can do more harm than good to our cause. In the same sentence you are going against southerners (half of the US population), rural Americans (maybe more than half), and christians (much more than half). Moreover you equate southerners and christians with rednecks, a unPC term with negative connotations. Now imagine that a columnist of the religious right is reading this (it maybe the case you know). Tomorrow he can publish an article quoting your words out of context and with a title like "Extremist extropian cultists insult the South, Christians, and rural Americans." Such an article could win a couple of votes to Bush, and if things are as tight as in 2000 these two votes could even make the difference. I think as you do but we must all learn, also on our own lists which perhaps are not so private as we think, to present our arguments without insulting others. G. On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:36:58 +0100 (BST), Trend Ologist wrote: > Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up > being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with > their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they > want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men > be content with their wives & mistresses and other > 'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl > approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity > I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many > Southerners trying to inflict their religion on > America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. > And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? > Northerners weren't particularly interested in > abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid > the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee > slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway > slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely > un-Christian measures to be instituted. > Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't > avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of > revenge From gregburch at gregburch.net Sat Oct 23 16:04:55 2004 From: gregburch at gregburch.net (Greg Burch) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:04:55 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Please stop this nonsense. I'm a southerner, an atheist and just don't this sort of thing belongs on this list. Thank you. > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Trend > Ologist > Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 10:37 AM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win > > > Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up > being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with > their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they > want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men > be content with their wives & mistresses and other > 'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl > approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity > I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many > Southerners trying to inflict their religion on > America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. > And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? > Northerners weren't particularly interested in > abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid > the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee > slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway > slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely > un-Christian measures to be instituted. > Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't > avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of > revenge. > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Oct 23 16:19:57 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:19:57 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <4179435A.8030608@pobox.com> References: <2D9FC6D73BBC474DBBC979CE094CB33C2396D5@exchange-hou.velaw.com> <4179435A.8030608@pobox.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041023091969f09fad@mail.gmail.com> Eliezer asks to those who donated to speak up. I just donated 50 bucks, I am sorry I was not able to donate more at this time. What Eliezer is doing is good, and we should support it. I am replying to the message with the question, why the Raelians are so much more successful than us. In another message in another thread (only on sl4), Ben Goertzel writes: "Religion is the one major case of people taking things distant from their everyday life seriously ... but this is arguably because religion gives people a lot of psychological comfort, and helps build comforting social structures." and I reply: "I think Ben is making a very, very good point here. Is there a way we could edit our message, without compromising it of course, in such a way as to provide *also* psychological comfort? I will risk heresy and confess that I am beginning to think current projects to "engineer a transhumanist religion" (see e.g. universalimmortalism.org) are actually good ideas." Now I wish to reply to the inevitable accusations of heresy before they are formulated, and elaborate some more. Imagine a Tiplerian omega-point scenario. Or if you think Tipler's physical assumptions are wrong, imagine some other scenario with the omega-point property: at some point in the future, a human civilization may develop the capability to acquire detailed high resolution information from the past (not against casuality), and use it to retrieve the information content of human minds in their past, perhaps including ourselves here and now. It seems plausible that a civilization with that kind of technology will also be able to easily upload such information to another body or a virtual environment. So we can build a worldview that includes a concept of resurrection while at the same time staying compatible with our rational scientific worldview. We can derive standard moral principles: for this to happen it is necessary that our specie survives, and, assuming resources will be large but limited, it seems reasonable to think that Mother Theresa will be revived before Hitler. Also, we can derive transhumanist moral principles: for this to happen it is necessary that our species evolves fast and acquires more and more control on mind and matter. All that and more in Tipler's book. Perhaps if this universal immortalism were a part of our message, or maybe even its front-end for those who need a religious worldview, it would be much easier to win minds and hearts. G. From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 23 17:11:17 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:11:17 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002d01c4b923$55c62760$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Trend Ologist > > Looks like Bush will win... I agree it is looking bad for Bush's opponent. But on a slightly more optimistic note, I found someone yesterday who had at least heard of him. I fear he will make a poor showing in the election however. He might pull 1% at best. > Whatever the tally ends up > being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with > their culture?... Trend, you seem to be getting caught up in the caracature of southerners. There are all kinds of people living everywhere. They have NASCAR in the north too (Indianapolis). spike From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Sat Oct 23 17:20:17 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:20:17 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] 140 year old Castro? In-Reply-To: <20041022065918.76789.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041022065918.76789.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 22 Oct 2004, at 08:59, Trend Ologist wrote: > AFP > > One of Fidel Castro's physicians, Eugenio Abdo, said > after 78 year old Castro's stairway fall in Cuba, a > tumble fracturing his right arm and left knee, that > with "the scientific progress and advances in embryo > stem cells" Castro is "heading for 140 (years), I am > not exaggerating" explained Abdo. > > Sounds like Commie propaganda to me. What about just boundless optimism in the future? :) best, patrick From hal at finney.org Sat Oct 23 17:46:08 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 10:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <20041023174608.CD9F557E2C@finney.org> Giu1i0 writes: > Is there a way we could edit our message, without compromising it of > course, in such a way as to provide *also* psychological comfort? I'm not sure whose message you mean here. It could be transhumanism, extropianism, singularitarianism. These are intended to be listed in somewhat increasing specificity. Transhumanism is a broad goal of improving humanity; extropianism adds a specific philosophical world view; and singularitarianism is a very specific path to an improved future that is actually not particularly extropian or transhuman. > I will risk heresy and confess that I am beginning to think current > projects to "engineer a transhumanist religion" (see e.g. > universalimmortalism.org) are actually good ideas." I remember Max More saying that he had hopes that extropianism could evolve into a social and cultural movement that could take the place of religion in people's minds. It would not just be the kind of online debating society that this list often becomes. Max talked about rituals and customs that could fill in for religion. In those somewhat light-hearted days we saw the extropian salute and the extropian handshake, Tom O'Morrow's childhood story of Solar Cause. You could imagine extropian hymns and myths. The movement hasn't pursued this direction much; I think the increasingly hostile reaction to transhumanism has forced us onto a war footing perhaps somewhat earlier than expected. Given the looming threats, these earlier concepts now seem frivolous and trivial. Computer communication also tends to be rather cold and lends itself to an analytical mode rather than the kinds of warm social interactions Max envisioned. For that I think you need more physical contacts. > Now I wish to reply to the inevitable accusations of heresy before > they are formulated, and elaborate some more. > Imagine a Tiplerian omega-point scenario. Or if you think Tipler's > physical assumptions are wrong, imagine some other scenario with the > omega-point property: at some point in the future, a human > civilization may develop the capability to acquire detailed high > resolution information from the past (not against casuality), and use > it to retrieve the information content of human minds in their past, > perhaps including ourselves here and now. It seems plausible that a > civilization with that kind of technology will also be able to easily > upload such information to another body or a virtual environment. > So we can build a worldview that includes a concept of resurrection > while at the same time staying compatible with our rational scientific > worldview. I'm not sure this is going to work to motivate people, especially in the context of singularitarianism. First you have the big problem that many people will object to calling this resurrection, raising all the philosophical issues of the nature of identity that we argue over fruitlessly. And second, the singularitarians hope to get their job done relatively soon, as I understand it. They're not aiming at success in 50 years. They hope to have results in just a few years, once they get going. So it would not be a motivation for the average person that believing in a singularitarian religion will lead to their own resurrection, unlike conventional religion. Third, if the motivation is supposed to be that the singularity will resurrect people in the past, while that is a plus, we can already envision enormous practical benefits from a successful outcome, and past resurrection would just be icing on the cake. I think a more direct formulation of a singularitarian religion is along the lines Acy James Stapp suggested, where investment is treated like Pascal's wager. It's like the old joke, where they fire up the big, all-knowing computer and ask, is there a God? And it says, there is now. That joke is going to come true if the singularitarian plans work. As Acy says, if this happens it can't hurt to be one of the guys who helped bring it about. Eliezer says he doesn't want to make any promises, but maybe it would make sense to have a religion which worships the God-to-be, and to make sure He exists, they are going to build Him. And they can believe that God will honor the wishes of those who contribute, so long as this is compatible with His basic goodness and can be done without harming anyone. Singularitarians already believe that their AI will usher in a world of ultimate peace and goodness, so I don't see it as that much of a stretch to call it God. Hal From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 23 17:49:40 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:49:40 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <002d01c4b923$55c62760$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041023174940.42584.qmail@web25210.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> ten days isn't much time to catch up, is it? I agree it is looking bad for Bush's opponent. But on a slightly more optimistic note, I found someone yesterday who had at least heard of him. I fear he will make a poor showing in the election however. He might pull 1% at best. Yeah. There's nice everywhere, you just have to get used to the different ambience, you just need the right attitude. We have to be more accepting, we have to avoid unfair criticism, we have to stop being so harsh & rigid. Trend, you seem to be getting caught up in the caracature of southerners. There are all kinds of people living everywhere. They have NASCAR in the north too (Indianapolis). spike _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 23 17:56:01 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:56:01 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041023175601.99533.qmail@web25206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Okay, I'll stop it, but if you're unfair concerning those who are govt. employees, I'll tell you to cut out the nonsense, I'll point out there are all kinds of people who work for the government. We mus'n't generalize to an extreme. Greg Burch wrote:Please stop this nonsense. I'm a southerner, an atheist and just don't this sort of thing belongs on this list. Thank you. > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of Trend > Ologist > Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 10:37 AM > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win > > > Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up > being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with > their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they > want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men > be content with their wives & mistresses and other > 'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl > approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity > I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many > Southerners trying to inflict their religion on > America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. > And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? > Northerners weren't particularly interested in > abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid > the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee > slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway > slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely > un-Christian measures to be instituted. > Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't > avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of > revenge. > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.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 --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sat Oct 23 18:07:16 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:07:16 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] my last post on the South In-Reply-To: <470a3c520410230903280083fa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041023180716.11740.qmail@web25207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> This will be my last post on the subject of Southern culture. BTW: 1. Who said being unPC is necessarily wrong? 2. Where did I say rednecks live in rural areas? Do liberals live in cities? Do real men eat quiche? Does a bear crap in the woods? Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: >unPC term with negative >connotations. --------------------------------- ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 23 18:04:31 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:04:31 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win References: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Trend Ologist" > Looks like Bush will win. Humans are not ready for prime time. Interesting that The American Conservative has come out for Kerry: http://www.amconmag.com/2004_11_08/cover.html Trend, the rest of your post puts you in essentially the same company with those whom you are attacking. Olga From hal at finney.org Sat Oct 23 19:08:21 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 12:08:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win Message-ID: <20041023190821.0A19957E2C@finney.org> For those who are interested in following the American election race, here are some useful links. http://pollingreport2.com/wh2004a.htm shows the recent national polls. Among likely voters, recent results show a tie or are within the margin of error. This is a slight reduction of a Bush advantage last week. http://www.electoral-vote.com/ shows the state by state results. This is the most-watched election site on the web. American presidents are elected by a system where states have a certain number of electoral votes, and most states assign their votes on a winner-take-all rule based on the popular vote in that state. So the national poll numbers above don't mean that much. More important is how it shakes out on a state by state basis. electoral-vote.com is run by an openly partisan supporter of Kerry, but in my judgement he is neutral and fair in reporting the state by state polling results. Apparently because of some pro-Kerry material on his site, it is under frequent attack, so there are mirrors at electoral-vote2.com through electoral-vote7.com. Personally I've never had any trouble getting through to the main site. You can click on a link to see the previous day's results and track the data back in that way. The data is extremely noisy. Kerry is ahead today; Bush yesterday; Kerry the 5 previous days; Bush for quite a while before that. You can also click on a state to see how it has been trending in graphical form, a wealth of information. Below the main map is a link to Predicted Final Results, visible at http://www.electoral-vote.com/pred/. This assumes that "decided" voters stick to their choice, and undecided voters break 2 to 1 for the challenger. The rationale for this assumption is explained at http://www.electoral-vote.com/oct/oct20.html ; it turns out that historically this is what has happened. Incumbents seldom draw more votes than their last poll numbers before the election. This prediction is showing a Kerry win. Several of the states that are tied or very close will go to Kerry on the 2-to-1-undecided assumption. So we see national polls showing a statistical tie, with Bush losing some ground from last week; day-to-day electoral vote counting seesawing and too close to call; and this prediction model pointing to a Kerry win. In opposition to this are the betting markets. This is a marvelous innovation and moves us closer to a world where Robin Hanson's ideas are given a real trial. http://128.255.244.60/graphs/graph_Pres04_WTA.cfm is the Iowa Electronic Market chart showing the market odds of winning. Bush has led consistently since the Republican Convention, reaching his peak just before the first debate. Since then he has lost some ground but is still the predicted winner. Keep in mind that these are not electoral vote count predictions, merely the odds of winning. Bush is currently predicted to have a 59% chance of winning. http://www.tradesports.com is potentially more accurate because it allows larger bets, unlike the IEM which puts a $500 cap on traders. At this point it also predicts a 59% chance of Bush winning. Of course we should keep in mind that a 59% chance is not that high. It's not the same as a candidate having a 59-41 lead in the polls, which would mean he is sure to win. If you had a biased coin which came up heads 59% of the time, you'd have to toss it quite a few times to distinguish it from a fair coin. So to some extent these markets are telling us that it is still an open race and could go either way. Based on these results I'd say it is premature to forecast a Bush win. The national polls do not show momentum in his favor, and the state by state model gives Kerry the advantage. Against this, the betting markets slightly predict Bush, but they're not that far from a coin flip. One final, personal prediction. I don't think the election will be that close, not as close as in 2000. You may hit the bullseye with your first arrow, but you're not likely to split the arrow with your second. Odds are against the election results being flippable if only a few hundred votes changed. On the other hand, now that the parties know it's possible, their lawyers will be out in earnest looking for any results they can challenge or contest. So it's possible that we won't see an immediate concession. But I suspect that it will be pretty obvious which guy won by the end of the evening. Hal From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 23 19:13:24 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:13:24 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023140628.01ac8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> What follows is not a party-political broadcast. It is not being posted by one of Mike Lorrey's ultra-socialist left loonies. No doubt evidence for this sad effect can be drawn from all sides or postures of politics. Still, this is striking stuff. First, the palpable lies that help forge the confusions itemized later: ===================== [from: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/23/opinion/23sat1.html?oref=login&th ] The Levin report is a primer on how intelligence can be cooked to fit a political agenda. It is another sad reminder of this administration's refusal to hold anyone accountable for the way the public was led into the war with Iraq. It focuses on the intelligence operation set up by Mr. Rumsfeld, who had been advocating an invasion of Iraq long before Mr. Bush took office and wanted more damning evidence against Baghdad after 9/11 than the Central Intelligence Agency had. This operation, run by Mr. Feith, tried to persuade the Pentagon's own espionage unit, the Defense Intelligence Agency, to change its conclusion that there was no alliance between Iraq and Al Qaeda. When the Defense Intelligence Agency rebuffed this blatant interference, Mr. Feith's team wrote its own report. It took long-discredited raw intelligence and resurrected it to create the impression that there was new information supporting Mr. Feith's preordained conclusions. It misrepresented the C.I.A.'s reports and presented fifth-hand reports as authoritative, all to depict Iraq as an ally of Al Qaeda. Bipartisan reports from the 9/11 commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that the intelligence community had been right and Mr. Feith wrong: there was no operational relationship between Iraq and Al Qaeda, and no link at all between Mr. Hussein and the 9/11 attacks. For those who were confused before the war, and still are, by all the Bush administration's claims - that the hijacker Mohamed Atta met with an Iraqi official shortly before 9/11, that a member of Al Qaeda set up a base in Iraq with the help of Mr. Hussein, that Iraq helped Al Qaeda learn to make bombs and provided it with explosives - the evidence is now clear. The Levin report, together with the 9/11 panel's findings and the Senate intelligence report, show that those claims were all cooked up by Mr. Feith's shop, which knew that the C.I.A. and the Defense Intelligence Agency had already shown them to be false. =================== [Now: how prior biases skew reality to a quite remarkable extent:] From: Program on International Policy Attitudes [ PIPA is a joint program of the Center on Policy Attitudes (COPA) and the Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM), School of Public Affairs, University of Maryland.] Even after the final report of Charles Duelfer to Congress saying that Iraq did not have a significant WMD program, 72% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47%) or a major program for developing them (25%). Fifty-six percent assume that most experts believe Iraq had actual WMD and 57% also assume, incorrectly, that Duelfer concluded Iraq had at least a major WMD program. Kerry supporters hold opposite beliefs on all these points. Similarly, 75% of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq was provid! ing substantial support to al Qaeda, and 63% believe that clear evidence of this support has been found. Sixty percent of Bush supporters assume that this is also the conclusion of most experts, and 55% assume, incorrectly, that this was the conclusion of the 9/11 Commission. Here again, large majorities of Kerry supporters have exactly opposite perceptions. These are some of the findings of a new study of the differing perceptions of Bush and Kerry supporters, conducted by the Program on International Policy Attitudes and Knowledge Networks, based on polls conducted in September and October. Steven Kull, director of PIPA, comments, "One of the reasons that Bush supporters have these beliefs is that they perceive the Bush administration confirming them. Interestingly, this is one point on which Bush and Kerry supporters agree." Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a ! major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda. Equally large majorities of Kerry supporters hear the Bush administration expressing these views--73% say the Bush administration is saying Iraq had WMD (11% a major program) and 74% that Iraq was substantially supporting al Qaeda. Steven Kull adds, "Another reason that Bush supporters may hold to these beliefs is that they have not accepted the idea that it does not matter whether Iraq had WMD or supported al Qaeda. Here too they are in agreement with Kerry supporters." Asked whether the US should have gone to war with Iraq if US intelligence had concluded that Iraq was not making WMD or providing support to al Qaeda, 58% of Bush supporters said the US should not have, and 61% assume that in this case the President would not have. Kull continues, "To support the president and to accept that he took the US to war based on mistaken assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and leads! Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information about prewar Iraq." This tendency of Bush supporters to ignore dissonant information extends to other realms as well. Despite an abundance of evidence--including polls conducted by Gallup International in 38 countries, and more recently by a consortium of leading newspapers in 10 major countries--only 31% of Bush supporters recognize that the majority of people in the world oppose the US having gone to war with Iraq. Forty-two percent assume that views are evenly divided, and 26% assume that the majority approves. Among Kerry supporters, 74% assume that the majority of the world is opposed. [...] The polls were conducted October 12-18 and September 3-7 and 8-12 with samples of 968, 798 and 959 respondents, respectively. Margins of error were 3.2 to 4% in the first and third surveys and 3.5% on September 3-7. The poll was fielded by Knowledge Networks using its nationwide panel, which is randomly selected from the entire adult population and subsequently provided internet access. ======================== Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 23 19:49:03 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:49:03 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cthuugle for your nameless eldritch searches Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023144612.01a46618@pop-server.satx.rr.com> For H. P. Lovecraft fans, a functioning search engine: http://www.cthuugle.com/ From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sat Oct 23 19:54:08 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:54:08 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how opportunism skews reality In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023140628.01ac8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041023195420.5BC51D541@vscan02.westnet.com.au> http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1125050,00.html The Guardian Saturday January 17, 2004 The $500 billion fire sale In a shattered postwar Iraq, there are rich pickings to be had - and for US businesses at least, it promises to be a risk-free bonanza. Naomi Klein joins those at a trade show jostling for a stake By Naomi Klein It's 8.40am, and the Sheraton Hotel ballroom thunders with the sound of plastic explosives pounding against metal. No, this is not the Sheraton in Baghdad, it's the one in Arlington, Virginia. And it's not a real terrorist attack, it's a hypothetical one. The screen at the front of the room is playing an advertisement for "bomb-resistant waste receptacles" - this trash can is so strong, we're told, it can contain a C4 blast. And its manufacturer is convinced that, given half a chance, these babies would sell like hot cakes in Baghdad - at bus stations, army barracks and, yes, upscale hotels. Available in Hunter Green, Fortuneberry Purple and Windswept Copper. This is ReBuilding Iraq 2, a gathering of 400 businesspeople itching to get a piece of the Iraqi reconstruction action. They're here to meet those doling out the cash, in particular the $18.6bn in contracts to be awarded in the next two months to companies from "coalition partner" countries. The people to meet are from the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), its new programme management office, the Army Corps of Engineers, the US Agency for International Development, Halliburton, Bechtel and members of Iraq's interim governing council. All these players are on the conference programme, and delegates have been promised that they'll get a chance to corner them at regular "networking breaks". There have been dozens of similar trade shows on the business opportunities created by Iraq's decimation, in hotels from London to Amman. By all accounts, the early conferences throbbed with the sort of cash-drunk euphoria not seen since the heady days before the dotcoms crashed. But it soon becomes apparent that something is not right at ReBuilding Iraq 2. Sure, the organisers do the requisite gushing about how "nonmilitary rebuilding costs could near $500bn" and that this is "the largest government reconstruction effort since the US helped to rebuild Germany and Japan after the second world war". But for the undercaffeinated crowd staring uneasily at exploding garbage cans, the mood is less gold rush than grim determination. Giddy talk of "greenfield" market opportunities has been supplanted by sober discussion of sudden-death insurance; excitement about easy government money has given way to controversy about foreign firms being shut out of the bidding process; exuberance about CPA chief Paul Bremer's ultraliberal investment laws has been tempered by fears that those laws could be overturned by a directly elected Iraqi government. At ReBuilding Iraq 2, held last December, it seems finally to have dawned on the investment community that Iraq is not only an "exciting emerging market", it's also a country on the verge of civil war. As Iraqis protest about layoffs at state agencies and make increasingly vocal demands for general elections, it's becoming clear that the White House's prewar conviction that Iraqis would welcome the transformation of their country into a free-market dream state may have been just as off-target as its prediction that US soldiers would be greeted with flowers. I mention to one delegate that fear seems to be dampening the capitalist spirit. "The best time to invest is when there is still blood on the ground," he assures me. "Will you be going to Iraq?" I ask. "Me? No, I couldn't do that to my family." He was still shaken, it seemed, by the afternoon's performance by ex-CIAer John MacGaffin, who had harangued the crowd like a Hollywood drill sergeant. "Soft targets are us!" he bellowed. "We are right in the bull's-eye ... You must put security at the centre of your operation!" Lucky for us, MacGaffin's own company, AKE Group, offers complete counterterrorism solutions, from body armour to emergency evacuations. Youssef Sleiman, managing director of Iraq Initiatives for the Harris Corporation, has a similarly entrepreneurial angle on the violence. Yes, helicopters are falling, he says, but "for every helicopter that falls there is going to be replenishment". I notice that many delegates are sporting a similar look: army-issue brush cuts paired with dark business suits. The guru of this gang is retired Major General Robert Dees, freshly hired out of the military to head Microsoft's "defence strategies" division. Dees tells the crowd that rebuilding Iraq has special meaning for him because, well, he was one of the people who broke it. "My heart and soul is in this because I was one of the primary planners of the invasion," he says with pride. Microsoft is helping to develop "e-government" in Iraq, which Dees admits is a little ahead of the curve, since there is no g-government in Iraq, not to mention functioning phone lines. No matter. Microsoft is determined to get in on the ground floor. In fact, it is so tight with Iraq's governing council that one Microsoft executive, Haythum Auda, was the official translator for the council's minister of labour and social affairs, Sami Azara al-Ma'jun, at the conference. "There is no hatred against the coalition forces at all," al-Ma'jun says, via Auda. "The destructive forces are very minor and these will end shortly ... Feel confident in rebuilding Iraq!" The speakers on a panel about managing risks have a very different message, however: feel afraid about rebuilding Iraq, very afraid. Unlike previous presenters, their concern is not the obvious physical risks, but the potential economic ones. These are the insurance brokers, the grim reapers of Iraq's gold rush. It turns out that there is a rather significant hitch in Bremer's bold plan to auction off Iraq while it is still under occupation: the insurance companies aren't going for it. Until recently, the question of who would insure multinationals in Iraq has not been pressing. The major reconstruction contractors such as Bechtel are covered by USAID for "unusually hazardous risks" encountered in the field. And Halliburton's pipeline work is covered under a law passed by Bush last May that indemnifies the entire oil industry from "any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process". But with bidding now starting on Iraq's state-owned firms, and foreign banks ready to open branches in Baghdad, the insurance issue is suddenly urgent. Many of the speakers admit that the economic risks of going into Iraq without coverage are huge: privatised firms could be renationalised, foreign ownership rules could be reinstated and contracts signed with the CPA could be torn up. Normally, multi-nationals protect themselves against this sort of thing by buying "political risk" insurance. Before he got the top job in Iraq, this was Bremer's business - selling political risk, expropriation and terrorism insurance at Marsh & McLennan Companies, the largest insurance brokerage firm in the world. Yet, in Iraq, he has overseen the creation of a business climate so volatile that private insurers, including his old colleagues at Marsh & McLennan, are simply unwilling to take the risk. Bremer's Iraq is, by all accounts, uninsurable. "The insurance industry has never been up against this kind of exposure before," R Taylor Hoskins, vice-president of Rutherford International insurance company, tells the delegates apologetically. Steven Sadler, managing director and chairman at Marsh Industry Practices, a division of Bremer's old firm, is even more downbeat: "Don't look to Iraq to find an insurance solution. Interest is very, very, very limited. There is very limited capacity and interest in the region." It's clear that Bremer knew Iraq wasn't ready to be insured: when he signed Order 39, opening up much of its economy to 100% foreign ownership, the insurance industry was specifically excluded. I ask Sadler, a Bremer clone with slicked-back hair and bright red tie, whether he thinks it's strange that a former Marsh & McLennan executive could have so overlooked the need for investors to have insurance before they enter a war zone. "Well," he says, "he's got a lot on his plate." Or maybe he just has better information. Just when the mood at ReBuilding Iraq 2 couldn't sink any lower, up to the podium strides Michael Lempres, vice-president of insurance at the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). With a cool confidence absent from the shellshocked proceedings so far, he announces that investors can relax: Uncle Sam will protect them. A US government agency, OPIC provides loans and insurance to US companies investing abroad. And while Lempres agrees with earlier speakers that the risks in Iraq are "extraordinary and unusual", he also says that "OPIC is different. We do not exist primarily to generate profit." Instead, OPIC exists to "support US foreign policy". And since turning Iraq into a free-trade zone is a top Bush policy goal, OPIC will be there to help out. Earlier that same day, Bush signed legislation providing "the agency with enhancements to its political risk-insurance programme", according to an OPIC press release. Armed with this clear political mandate, Lempres announces that the agency is now "open for business" in Iraq, and is offering financing and insurance, including the riskiest insurance of all: political risk. "This is a priority for us," he says. "We want to do everything we can to encourage US investment in Iraq." The news, as yet unreported, appears to take even the highest-level delegates by surprise. After his presentation, Lempres is approached by Julie Martin, a political risk specialist at Marsh & McLennan. "Is it true?" she demands. Lempres nods. "Our lawyers are ready." "I'm stunned," says Martin. "You're ready? No matter who the government is?" "We're ready," Lempres replies. "If there's an expro[priation] on January 3, we're ready. I don't know what we're going to do if someone sinks $1bn into a pipeline and there's an expro." Lempres doesn't seem too concerned about these possible "expros", but it's a serious question. According to its official mandate, OPIC works "on a self-sustaining basis at no net cost to taxpayers". But Lempres admits that the political risks in Iraq are "extraordinary". If a new government expropriates and re-regulates across the board, OPIC might have to compensate dozens of US firms for billions of dollars in lost investments and revenues, possibly tens of billions. What happens then? At the Microsoft-sponsored cocktail reception in the Galaxy Ballroom that evening, Dees urges us "to network on behalf of the people of Iraq". I follow orders and ask Lempres what happens if "the people of Iraq" decide to seize back their economy from the US firms he has so generously insured. Who bails out OPIC? "In theory," he says, "the US treasury stands behind us." That means the US taxpayer. Yes, them again: the same people who have already paid Halliburton, Bechtel et al to make a killing on Iraq's reconstruction would have to pay them again, this time in compensation for their losses. While the vast profits being made in Iraq are strictly private, it turns out that the entire risk is being shouldered by the public. For the non-US firms in the room, OPIC's announcement is anything but reassuring: since only US companies are eligible for its insurance, and the private insurers are sitting it out, how can they compete? The answer is that they likely cannot. Some countries may decide to match OPIC's Iraq programme. But, in the short term, not only has the US government barred companies from non-"coalition partners" from competing for contracts against US firms, it has made sure that the foreign firms that are allowed to compete will do so at a serious disadvantage. The reconstruction of Iraq has emerged as a vast protectionist racket, a neo-con New Deal that transfers limitless public funds - in contracts, loans and insurance - to private firms, and even gets rid of the foreign competition to boot, under the guise of "national security". Ironically, these firms are being handed this corporate welfare so they can take full advantage of CPA-imposed laws that systematically strip Iraqi industry of all its protections, from import tariffs to limits on foreign ownership. Michael Fleisher, head of private-sector development for the CPA, recently explained to a group of Iraqi businesspeople why these protections had to be removed. "Protected businesses never, never become competitive," he said. Quick, somebody tell OPIC and US deputy secretary of defence Paul Wolfowitz. The issue of US double standards comes up again at the conference when a CPA representative takes the podium. A legal adviser to Bremer, Carole Basri has a simple message: reconstruction is being sabotaged by Iraqi corruption. "My fear is that corruption will be the downfall," she says ominously, blaming the problem on "a 35-year gap in knowledge" in Iraq that has made Iraqis "not aware of current accounting standards and ideas on anti-corruption". Foreign investors, she adds, must engage in "education, bring people up to world-class standards". It's hard to imagine what world-class standards she's referring to, or who, exactly, will be doing this educating. Halliburton, with its accounting scandals back home and its outrageous overbilling for gasoline in Iraq? The CPA, with its two officers under investigation for bribe-taking and nonexistent fiscal oversight? On the final day of ReBuilding Iraq 2, the front- page headline in our complimentary copies of the Financial Times (a conference sponsor) is Boeing Linked To Perle Investment Fund. Perhaps Richard Perle, who supported Boeing's $18bn refuelling-tanker deal and extracted $20m from Boeing for his investment fund, can teach Iraq's politicians to stop soliciting "commissions" in exchange for contracts. For the Iraqi expats in the audience, Basri's is a tough lecture to sit through. "To be honest," says Ed Kubba, a consultant and board member of the American Iraqi Chamber of Commerce, "I don't know where the line is between business and corruption." He points to US companies subcontracting huge taxpayer-funded reconstruction jobs for a fraction of what they are getting paid, then pocketing the difference. "If you take $10m from the US government and sub the job out to Iraqi businesses for a quarter-million, is that business, or is that corruption?" These were the sorts of uncomfortable questions faced by George Sigalos, director of government relations for Halliburton KBR. In the hierarchy of Iraqi reconstruction, Halliburton is king, and Sigalos sits on stage, heavy with jewelled ring and gold cufflinks, playing the part. But the serfs are getting restless, and the room quickly turns into a support group for jilted would-be subcontractors: "Mr Sigalos, what are we going to have to do to get some subcontracts?" "Mr Sigalos, when are you going to hire some Iraqis in management and leadership?" "I have a question for Mr Sigalos. I'd like to ask what you would suggest when the army says, 'Go to Halliburton', and there's no response from Halliburton?" Sigalos patiently tells them all to register their firms on Halliburton's website. When they respond that they have already done so and haven't heard back, he invites them to "approach me afterward". The scene afterwards is part celebrity autograph session, part riot. Sigalos is swarmed by at least 50 men who elbow each other out of the way to shower the Halliburton VP with CD-roms, business plans and r?sum?s. When Sigalos spots a badge from Volvo, he looks relieved. "Volvo! I know Volvo. Send me something about what you can achieve in the region." But the small, no-name players who have paid their $985 entrance fees, here to hawk portable generators and electrical control panelling, are once again told to "register with our procurement office". There are fortunes being made in Iraq, but it seems they are out of reach for all but the chosen few. The next session is starting and Sigalos has to run. The serfs wander off through the displays of shatterproof glass and bomb-resistant trash cans, caressing Sigalos's business card and looking worried. From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sat Oct 23 19:56:39 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:56:39 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how business skews perception In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023140628.01ac8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041023195647.17ED0D656@vscan02.westnet.com.au> The following piece illustrates quite clearly how those who run the US get things done behind the scenes. I believe this article to be credible. Sean Sinclair is more than broadcasting Sinclair's connections explains the Kerry hit piece it wanted to broadcast By Karl W. B. Schwarz "Online Journal" Contributing Writer October 20, 2004-Many Americans do not know that before his days of crime at Enron, Andy Fastow was intimately involved in another "American Energy and Finance Scam" named Penn Central and that sleazy deal wound up toppling Continental Illinois Bank at a taxpayer costs of billions. Andy Fastow was an employee at Continental Illinois Bank and learned his "Special Purpose Entity (SPE)" skills from Michael Milken and others and was hired by Enron because he did so well at hiding stuff at Continental Illinois. In short, he was a trained and "uncaught" criminal already that was recruited to Enron to do the same. Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw (Richard Ben Veniste's law firm and him on the 9-11 Commission) prides itself in offshore SPEs to circumvent US law (ask Cheney), hide assets, offshore games, SPEs, etc., and was the major law firm representing Enron. Probably are still representing Cayman Islands based Prisma Energy International. Many of those Fastow SPEs were Cayman Islands entities. Most Americans do not know that Continental Illinois was based in Chicago, and so are the law firms of Mayer Brown, Rowe & Maw (Richard Ben Veniste, 9-11 Commission) and Winston Strawn (former Illinois Republican Governor James Thompson, also 9-11 Commission member). If you look under Prisma Energy International-"Corporate Governance"-there are many former Enron International and Halliburton people involved in the post-bankruptcy Enron. This is an excellent example of the "hired help" stealing the company from its owners (shareholders and vested employees). The reason that I point this out is that I learned many years ago to dig deeper than one inch to effect "due diligence" and know the facts. We have a situation where Sinclair Broadcasting had made it clear they intended to run a very negative film documentary about John Kerry, titled Stolen Honor. Now, that could be partisanship, or maybe there is a "highly-motivated party" here in Sinclair as to why they are taking such actions. They have come before this nation without clean hands and I will show you why that is so. Dig deep folks and always-follow the money. "FOLSOM, Calif., Sept. 28 /PRNewswire/$B%i(BJadoo Power Systems, Inc (Jadoo), a leading provider of portable power products, was awarded a contract to develop power systems for the US Special Operations Command (SOCOM). The program's goal is to reduce the weight of energy storage carried in the field by the Special Forces . . ." While the award of a government contract is not always newsworthy, a closer look reveals this: "Jadoo Power Systems, Inc. (Jadoo) is a market-focused company that has developed next-generation portable energy storage and power generation products. Jadoo is a privately-held company with individual and organizational investors." The two investors listed are: 1. Sinclair Ventures: a wholly owned subsidiary of Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. and 2. Contango Capital Management: formed to bring capital to innovative entrepreneurs who are working hard to answer the energy challenges facing our world today and in the near future. We know who Sinclair is (Stolen Honor), but check out where some Enron and Harvard Business School people now work: Contango Capital Partners-look at John Berger's "resume" John Berger Managing Partner Contango Capital Partners Mr. Berger is a founding partner of the General Partner and its Managing Partner. Mr. Berger has over eight years of experience in the energy industry, during which he managed energy trading books for Enron Corporation and initiated development of the new Enron Premium Power Division. As a Manager, he made the previously unprofitable southeast short term trading operation for the Enron East Power Trading Division profitable by approximately $30 million over a two year period. Under his management, the southeast short term trading operation successfully administered the largest long-term customer deal in the industry, and increased the average daily volume in the southeast trading hub by ten times the former volume. Mr. Berger also managed the Enron Hourly Trading Desk, and operated a utility system in the southeastern United States. At Enron Energy Services he led and developed Enron's corporate strategy for new energy technologies and energy reliability financial products. In addition, Mr. Berger spearheaded development, investment, and partnership opportunities in fuel cell technologies. Hmm, what a catchy name for a venture capital fund, "Con-tango." That Berger division of Enron is the exact one that was plundering the State of California. Both Enron and El Paso executives have pleaded guilty to criminal charges and Mr. Berger gets to go out and do more deals. Criminal charges are also pending against Dynegy in California too. Guess what, Enron, Dynegy, and El Paso are all involved in Pakistan and the Caspian Basin and would all benefit from the forced removal of the Taliban and Bridas Corporation. Of course, he worked under Thomas White, vice chairman of that Enron division that was promoted by Bush to Secretary of the Army during the period of time that BUSH & Co were planning and practicing the assault on Afghanistan and BRIDAS CORPORATION and take over that Afghanistan pipeline. Criminal charges were pending, and now confirmed with an Enron executive pleading guilty in California and an El Paso executive, too. What an easy way to co-opt someone into doing evil. Criminal charges- that up and vanish against all but an unlucky fall guy. Go an inch deeper. Who was representing Governor Gray Davis while all of this was under investigation and 21 US energy companies were caught red-handed fleecing $5.5 to $7.5 billion from California electricity customers? >From Chapter 13 of One-Way Ticket to Crawford, Texas, a Conservative Republican Speaks Out: Footnote 689: www.sacbee.com/static/archive/news/special/power/080401data.htm l Meanwhile, Joseph Fichera and Michael Hoffman, two Davis administration advisers who had been criticized for failing to disclose energy-related stock holdings, sent letters to Davis on Friday saying they owned no stock in firms involved in providing power to the state. Footnote 693: Special Consultants to Gov.; Name Agreement Date Service Term Date SEI Signed Notes Richard Ferreira 1/30/01 1/31/01 to 12/31/02 7/10/01 A-1 assets listed; $2k-$10k Calpine acquired 8/17/00; address redacted Joseph Fichera - Saber Partners 3/1/01 3/1/01 to 6/30/01 exemption 1 negotiated transmission line deal; commission contract ** Kevin Stacey (director) ** William Moore (director) ** Paul Sutherland (director) ** Alan Blinder (advisory board chair) Michael Hoffman - Blackstone Group 3/1/01 3/1/01 to 6/30/01 exemption 1 negotiated transmission line deal; commission contract ** Peter Peterson (chairman) ** Stephen Schwarzman (pres & ceo) ** Michael Puglisi (cfo) ** 15 staff working on the deal Of course, Mr. Schwartzman is a Skull & Bonesman, a year behind George W. Bush, and a Bush Pioneer. Talk about letting the fox watch the henhouse. Criminal conduct in California by the division of Enron that did it, and take one of the executives (Berger) and have him advising the prosecution (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission-FERC) as to what steps to take. John Berger Managing Partner Contango Capital Partners During 2002 and 2003, Mr. Berger served as an advisor to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission where he drafted governance guidelines for the Regional Transmission Organizations and served as an advisor to the drafters of the Standard Market Design regulatory document that is currently before the United States Congress. He also advised the Commission on distributed generation, demand response, information gathering and application issues, investigations, and trade clearing/credit issues in the North American energy markets. Mr. Berger graduated cum laude from Texas A&M University with a B.S. in Civil Engineering. In 2003, he earned an MBA from Harvard Business School where he founded and organized the first annual Harvard Business School Energy Symposium and was a finalist in the 2003 HBS Business Plan Contest. Oh yeah, and he is a good Texas A&M Aggie, too, which is the location of that George H. W. Bush Presidential Library that is off-limits so Americans can't know the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about Bush sleaze. Karl W. B. Schwarz lives in Little Rock, AR and is the author of "One-Way Ticket to Crawford, Texas, a Conservative Republican Speaks Out." He is the President and Chief Executive Officer of Patmos Nanotechnologies, LLC and I-nets Security Systems, a designer of intelligence and UAV systems. The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of Online Journal. Email editor at onlinejournal.com Copyright (c) 1998-2004 Online Journal(tm). All rights reserved. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. From mike99 at lascruces.com Sat Oct 23 20:59:42 2004 From: mike99 at lascruces.com (mike99) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 14:59:42 -0600 Subject: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <470a3c52041023091969f09fad@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: First, I, too, am a (modest) financial supporter of SIAI. It would certainly be good if a few people could give Eliezer's institute several thousand dollars apiece. But based on what Eli wrote about the criteria the IRS applies to non-profits at SIAI's stage of development, it might be even better if several hundred, or several thousand, people each gave a $100 or even just $50 or $10 or so dollars each. That would show a more broad base of public support. Second, I think we should be circumspect about making religious appeals. The Tiplerian scenario that Giulio described does, indeed, activate some of the same meme-receptors that respond to the memes promulgated by the major world religions. However, those religions claim to guarantee delivery of a paradisiacal afterlife in exchange for strict adherence to their doctrinal tenets, while any transhumanist claim can only be probabilistic and must admit to the need for a lot of very difficult work to have been accomplished over the course of a very long time in order for any hope of success to be realized. In short, the religions promise salvation through faith, while transhumanists can, at best, only promise paradise through works, and even then without any guarantees that any particular individual will ever see the promised land. Another aspect to religion is community. I suspect that very many so-called "believers" do not really believe all that strongly in the quite incredible claims of their religion, but they do enjoy being with fellow members of their religious community, sharing meals, sharing joys and sorrows, and experiencing the emotional support and comfort that comes from "being one of us." This is something that the few, scattered transhumanists around the Earth today cannot currently offer or enjoy (except in a few large urban areas and during the annual conferences). Building face-to-face transhumanist groups should be a major priority for us. Finally, I believe that a transhumanist spirituality (which I call Trans-Spirit) will be possible on the basis of rational, scientific investigation into the psycho-neurological bases of spiritual experience. This is a more personal, individual aspect of religion that does not necessarily entail any group activity, but which is at the core of every religious tradition. Spiritual experience supplies the foundational impetus in which the founders (and major figures in the later development of) every religion are rooted. (For more information about this, please go to my page http://groups.yahoo.com/group/trans-spirit/). Regards, Michael LaTorra mike99 at lascruces.com mlatorra at nmsu.edu "For any man to abdicate an interest in science is to walk with open eyes towards slavery." -- Jacob Bronowski "Experiences only look special from the inside of the system." -- Eugen Leitl Member: Extropy Institute: www.extropy.org World Transhumanist Association: www.transhumanism.org Alcor Life Extension Foundation: www.alcor.org Society for Technical Communication: www.stc.org > -----Original Message----- > From: wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org > [mailto:wta-talk-bounces at transhumanism.org]On Behalf Of Giu1i0 Pri5c0 > Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2004 10:20 AM > To: ExI chat list; sl4 at sl4.org; World Transhumanist Association > Discussion List > Subject: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and > Tomorrow > > > Eliezer asks to those who donated to speak up. I just donated 50 > bucks, I am sorry I was not able to donate more at this time. What > Eliezer is doing is good, and we should support it. > I am replying to the message with the question, why the Raelians are > so much more successful than us. In another message in another thread > (only on sl4), Ben Goertzel writes: > "Religion is the one major case of people taking things distant from > their everyday life seriously ... but this is arguably because > religion gives people a lot of psychological comfort, and helps build > comforting social structures." > and I reply: > "I think Ben is making a very, very good point here. > Is there a way we could edit our message, without compromising it of > course, in such a way as to provide *also* psychological comfort? > I will risk heresy and confess that I am beginning to think current > projects to "engineer a transhumanist religion" (see e.g. > universalimmortalism.org) are actually good ideas." > Now I wish to reply to the inevitable accusations of heresy before > they are formulated, and elaborate some more. > Imagine a Tiplerian omega-point scenario. Or if you think Tipler's > physical assumptions are wrong, imagine some other scenario with the > omega-point property: at some point in the future, a human > civilization may develop the capability to acquire detailed high > resolution information from the past (not against casuality), and use > it to retrieve the information content of human minds in their past, > perhaps including ourselves here and now. It seems plausible that a > civilization with that kind of technology will also be able to easily > upload such information to another body or a virtual environment. > So we can build a worldview that includes a concept of resurrection > while at the same time staying compatible with our rational scientific > worldview. We can derive standard moral principles: for this to happen > it is necessary that our specie survives, and, assuming resources will > be large but limited, it seems reasonable to think that Mother Theresa > will be revived before Hitler. Also, we can derive transhumanist moral > principles: for this to happen it is necessary that our species > evolves fast and acquires more and more control on mind and matter. > All that and more in Tipler's book. > Perhaps if this universal immortalism were a part of our message, or > maybe even its front-end for those who need a religious worldview, it > would be much easier to win minds and hearts. > G. > _______________________________________________ > wta-talk mailing list > wta-talk at transhumanism.org > http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk > From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 23 23:16:47 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:16:47 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Why SIAI is a nonprofit Message-ID: <417AE65F.7010306@pobox.com> An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Eliezer Yudkowsky Subject: Why SIAI is a nonprofit Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 17:20:09 -0400 Size: 7305 URL: From bjk at imminst.org Sun Oct 24 00:29:48 2004 From: bjk at imminst.org (Bruce J. Klein) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:29:48 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] ImmInst Update Message-ID: <417AF77C.2000202@imminst.org> IMMINST UPDATE FILM PROJECT - 10 Minute Preview I've put together a ten minute film preview of the ImmInst film project, "Exploring Life Extension". Interview Participants: -David Kekich -Aubrey de Grey -Michael MichaelChik -Justin Corwin -James Dale -Peter Voss View Video - Download: http://www.imminst.org/film/exploring.wmv = 22 Megs (Windows Media File) If you need help with the download, please go here: http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=142&t=3586&st=120&#entry39238 I'll be traveling more than 10,000 miles over the next four months to film 40 more interviews. Thanks for all the wonderful support! Bruce Klein Chair, ImmInst.org http://www.imminst.org/bjklein IMMINST CHAT Oct 24 - John Grigg - Creekside, Cryonics & Community in AZ Manager of the Creekside Preserve Lodge and Advisor and Secretary for The Society for Venturism, ImmInst member John Grigg helpfully answers questions about his life, cryonics and physical immortality. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=63&t=4358 IMMINST MEMBER ARTICLE David Pizer - Why Life Extension Former Alcor Vice President, current owner of the Creekside Preserve/Ventureville (Mayer, AZ), David Pizer grants ImmInst a continuing (more above in this thread) interview about Life Extension and Physical Immortality. http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?s=&act=ST&f=67&t=2717&#entry39070 ABOUT IMMINST Immortality Institute - For Infinite Lifespans Mission - Conquer the Blight of Involuntary Death Members: 1,745 - Full Members: 106 http://www.imminst.org/fullmembers From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 00:37:21 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 17:37:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <41797F11.10805@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041024003721.57894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > > Different people have different reasons for not helping. For some, > as Damien says, they will assign a zero probability of success to the > solution. (If it's a nonzero probability of success, and an > existential risk, then I have separate issues with the reasoning.) > Others (quite a few of whom just now donated) may have agreed on > the problem, thought SIAI had a decent chance at a solution, and > then been zapped by the bystander effect. On that score, and regarding the discussion/argument you and I had over beers at Extro5, have you read the interview in Wired with Jeff Hawkins? He asserts that AI research has been a failure because human intelligence is really just a massive memory machine: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/view.html?pg=3 I had made the same assertion that day in 2001: that intelligence is just a matter of a massive lookup table and an engine capable of using it effectively. Now the inventor of the PDA is making the same assertion. Perhaps people don't help because they don't think you are approaching the problem effectively. In keeping with my article "Unsafe at Any Law", creating a "Friendly AI", if one develops onee on my and Hawkins' theory, is simply a matter of creating a friendly environment of input for an AI kernel to create its lookup table from. Raising your AI in a laboratory or a factory would therefore not be conducive to creating Friendliness. It needs to have a family of some sort to become friendly. > > English is an annoying language. There's no good word to refer to a > question with an important and interesting answer, that doesn't > puzzle you because you know the answer, but would nonetheless be quite > intriguing to someone who didn't know the answer, because the > phenomenon is counterintuitive if you describe it in strictly > surface terms without referring to the underlying causes that > render it explicable. I call it a > "puzzle", and am careful not to say that I am puzzled by it. Puzzler, conundrum, poser, problem, riddle, parable, riddle, sphinx, stumbler, brain-teaser, bugaboo, bugbear, enigma, example, grabber, dilemma, quandary, ===== 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 Sun Oct 24 01:06:15 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Won't stay where we are not wanted, consequences... Message-ID: <20041024010615.93075.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Received this from a fellow NH Libertarian, who is a Marine veteran, for those that think that other countries can dis the US and not expect any consequences: Remember when Puerto Rico was raising heck about the US Navy using that nothing little island just off the coast of Puerto Rico for bombing practices, which they had used for the past 75 years? Demonstrations were held, Hollywood left wingers, Al Sharpton, and his fellow demagogues went down there to demonstrate to get the Navy out? I am sure it infuriated you just as it did me at the time. Wellllllllllllllll, here is our revenge. Always be careful what you ask for, you just may get it! One of the many headaches that the U. S. has had was the Puerto Rican Island of Vieques. In the waning years of the Clinton Administration, Protesters demanded that the US Navy abandon bombing and naval gun fire exercises that had taken place on the largely uninhabited island for nearly seventy years. Liberal icons bumped into one another to fly to Puerto Rico, boat over to the island, trespass (but never on a day that there was an exercise scheduled) and get arrested for the benefit of the New York Times or Newsweek. They included the Reverend Al Sharpton, Mrs. Jesse Jackson, Joan Baez, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Edward Olmos, Michael Moore and Ramsey Clark, just to name a few. In 2002, the bombing exercises were transferred to an Air Force bombing range in central Florida, not far from the Jacksonville and Pensacola Naval Air Stations. In January, many of the protesters were back in Puerto Rico, celebrating the final bombing exercise on Vieques and waved Puerto Rican flags and placards that read "U.S. Navy, get out of Puerto Rico." The following Feb, Rumsfeld announced that the U.S. Navy will close the Roosevelt Roads Naval Air Station in Puerto Rico in 2004, eliminating 1200 civilian jobs as well as 700 military positions. This naval facility is estimated to have put nearly $300 million annually into the local economy. The next day a stunned Governor Sila Calderon, held a news conference in San Juan, protesting the base closure as a serious blow to the Commonwealth's fragile economy. The governor stated that "The people of Puerto Rico don't now or never did have an interest in closing the Vieques bombing range or the Roosevelt Roads naval base. We are interested in both staying in Puerto Rico." When asked, the Commander-in Chief, Western Atlantic Command, said, "Without Vieques, I see no further need for the facility at Roosevelt Roads. None." So, Yankee go home? Fine. But we'll take our dollars with us. Hasta la vista, baby! On February 21, the Secretary of Defense also announced that starting this year, the U.S. European Command would begin moving most if not all of its active combat and support units from bases in Germany to others being established in Poland, The Czech Republic, Hungary and Turkey to "better position them for rapid deployment to likely hot spots in those parts of the world." Immediately the business and government leaders in the German states of Hesse, Rhineland and Wurttemburg, protested the loss of nearly $6 billion in revenue each year from the bases and manpower to be displaced. A spokesman for the Foreign Ministry speculated that the move may be "what the Americans call 'payback' for the actions of this government in opposing Military action in Iraq. " Does anyone know the German translation for "Hasta la vista, baby?" ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From sentience at pobox.com Sun Oct 24 01:08:00 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:08:00 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Approaching the end of Today and Tomorrow Message-ID: <417B0070.50301@pobox.com> SIAI's 72-hour lightning campaign ends in eight hours - 5AM Eastern time on Sunday morning. It's down to the last ninth. I'm sorry I wasn't able to answer all the questions asked in the time available. Hopefully people chose a sensible criterion in which they realize I can't answer everything, but reasonable answers to some questions are a good sign for those not yet answered. I hope to answer more, but that won't happen until after Today and Tomorrow. I think that transhumanism has some ways yet to go before we can compete with flying-saucer cults, but people still donated despite the naysaying, choosing to be strong without certainty. It looks to me like the stream of donations slowed substantially after people began sharing their justifications for not donating, and did not quite gain back the momentum even after donors also began speaking up. But the campaign had a fair run before the naysaying started. The right to disagree is both morally and pragmatically necessary. A bias in which thoughts we choose to communicate is a bias in collective reasoning. Still, just because our ethics mandate an act doesn't mean the act is without consequences. We've learned to show our disagreements with one another. I don't think we're quite as good at consciously choosing that it is possible to act coherently despite disagreements, even disagreements that seem important; or consciously correcting for the peer pressure felt when disagreement is more likely to be publicly aired than agreement. It takes work. It isn't natural to us. But I think we can do it if we try. Some of the justification for not donating to the Singularity Institute took the form, "Why aren't you further along / doing more?" Well, that's rather a Catch-22, isn't it? If you think the Singularity Institute should be doing XYZ... go ahead, don't let me stop you. It's your planet too. No, seriously, it's your planet too. We took responsibility. We didn't take responsibility away from you. The Singularity Institute is a banner planted in the ground, a line drawn in the sands of time: This is where humanity stops being a victim and starts fighting back. Sometimes humans wander up to the banner, see that not much of an army has gathered, and then wander away. It can be hard to get the party rolling, if people only want to join after the room is already crowded. No matter who else comes and goes, you will find Eliezer Yudkowsky standing by that banner, gnawing steadily away at the challenge of Friendly AI, which is one of the things that humanity needs to be doing at this point. For SIAI to grow another step we need three things: enough steady funding to pay one more person, one more person to pay, and a worthwhile job that person can do. It's the second requirement that's the most difficult, and what makes the second requirement difficult is the third requirement. It isn't easy to find people who can do worthwhile jobs. SIAI doesn't want to invent make-work, token efforts to show we're doing something. But even if there were *no* active workers yet present at the banner, not even Eliezer Yudkowsky, there would still need to be a Singularity Institute. There would still have to be a rallying point, a banner planted in the ground, a gathering place for the people who wanted to make it happen. It would have to begin somewhere, and how else would it ever begin? One year ago we didn't have Tyler Emerson or Michael Wilson or Michael Anissimov. Progress is being made. If it's too slow to suit you, get out and push. It's your planet and your problem. We took responsibility but we didn't take it from you. Those who still haven't donated anything at all - ask yourself whether the Singularity Institute has been worth more to you, and to the transhumanist community, than the price of a movie ticket. Our suggested donation was a hundred dollars, but if you can't afford that, ten dollars is better than nothing. http://singinst.org/donate.html -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From sentience at pobox.com Sun Oct 24 01:15:02 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:15:02 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041024003721.57894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024003721.57894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <417B0216.5060809@pobox.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > > On that score, and regarding the discussion/argument you and I had over > beers at Extro5, have you read the interview in Wired with Jeff > Hawkins? He asserts that AI research has been a failure because human > intelligence is really just a massive memory machine: Mike, I'm reasonably damn certain I didn't have a beer at Extro 5, nor indeed at any other point in my existence. > http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.10/view.html?pg=3 > > I had made the same assertion that day in 2001: that intelligence is > just a matter of a massive lookup table and an engine capable of using > it effectively. Now the inventor of the PDA is making the same > assertion. Perhaps people don't help because they don't think you are > approaching the problem effectively. I'm afraid I don't remember that conversation. But I'm more sure that intelligence is not a massive lookup table than I am that I never drank beer at Extro 5. In the latter case my memories of never drinking beer could have been faked by some deceiving demon, while the former is a matter of math. You tellin' me there ain't no Bayes in humans? Cuz Bayes ain't a lookup table. Sure, you can simulate the inputs and outputs of any finite process using a lookup table, but that doesn't mean the lookup table would be small enough to fit in the observed physical universe. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 01:14:57 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:14:57 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] spam virus? In-Reply-To: <20041023195420.5BC51D541@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <001601c4b966$e0778af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Ive been getting a pair of ads every 5 hrs, one trying to get me to buy medications, the other for discount software. Each one has a different sender and a different address to buy the stuff. But its exactly the same advertisement each time, except for the spam-evading nonsense words at the end. It was coming about once a day, now its every 5 hrs. Is this a virus or something? I cant imagine someone is actually getting away with sending this stuff. Ive been setting spam filters and it isn't catching any of them. This is the text: Best prices on software! Windows XP + office XP = $80! click here tractive intensive dazzler groundwork lists autoincrement vomiting victim persuader modularizes couples Gauguin Piedmont fragrant glued prototypically pelvic deserted ordinates kludge penalty hem beaming technicality Vaticanizes prescribe honeybee desiring wildest exertions obviousness earthenware displeasing loot sweated How do I kill this? Or failing that, is there a way to click on the link and send them a ton of fake orders? Or do I keep ignoring them, even tho they seem to be getting more frequent? I can imagine something like this happening in the minutes before the singularity: someone figures out how to get spam to send copies of itself faster and faster until they are more coming than can be downloaded, even with the best avialable link. Im willing to put some effort into fighting back against this, such as develop an answer-bot script. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 01:41:38 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:41:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <417B0216.5060809@pobox.com> Message-ID: <001901c4b96a$9b1038a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Eliezer Yudkowsky: > > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > On that score, and regarding the discussion/argument you > and I had over beers at Extro5... > > Mike, I'm reasonably damn certain I didn't have a beer at > Extro 5, nor indeed at any other point in my existence... > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky He's right Mike. Remember when we had that hootnanny at my place after E5 and the yahoos were devouring beer and carrying on and having the evil laugh contest and so forth? Eliezer was there, doing the hakosote thing (which must be a beer-drinking game) but he wasn't actually draining the suds. That was my recollection in any case. spike ps There was a young man who worked for Extropian Inst back then, I cannot recall his name. Remind me please? He was a student, nice guy, poet, very talented musician. Where is he now? He was the one who brought about 800 bottles of beer to that schmooze. s From brian at posthuman.com Sun Oct 24 02:03:33 2004 From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:03:33 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <001901c4b96a$9b1038a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <001901c4b96a$9b1038a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <417B0D75.40508@posthuman.com> E Shaun Russell http://www.transhumanist.biz/e_shaun.htm -- Brian Atkins Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence http://www.singinst.org/ From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 24 02:02:04 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:02:04 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041023174608.CD9F557E2C@finney.org> References: <20041023174608.CD9F557E2C@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041023185700.0293ef40@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Re this whole thread: I once saw Ram Dass speak at a psychedelics conference long ago, before his stroke. He said that personal ftf contact is what does the job. All other stuff, ads, media, etc are really a waste of time. IMHO our views will become popular for more folk, gradually, akin to the growth rate of cryonics, say 6% per year. (ahead of both economic and population curves by 2x or more, but nothing really spectacular). This is good fortune, if it were faster, we get co-opted and have to deal with social and business predators we are not equipped to handle now if ever. Let the mountain come to us, which IMO is inevetable. Kinda like Christians round time of Augustus. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 24 02:15:01 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:15:01 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Won't stay where we are not wanted, consequences... In-Reply-To: <20041024010615.93075.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024010615.93075.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041023191420.028f02a0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> kaput, bitte >" Does anyone know the German translation for "Hasta la vista, baby?" > >===== >Mike Lorrey ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 24 01:52:02 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:52:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] PC & Gullible In-Reply-To: <4179CED5.9060308@barrera.org> References: <20041019205416.71100.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <00c401c4b626$a501af20$f1494842@kevin> <6.0.3.0.1.20041022195112.02908f90@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <4179CED5.9060308@barrera.org> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041023185101.02916488@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> fer sure. duh. >Hara Ra wrote: > >> I can see it now, the compleate, ultraportable totally PC dictionary, >> consisting of one entry: >> >> doh > >"doh" is insulting and demeaning. I insist that it, too, be removed. > >- Joe ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 02:19:21 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:19:21 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <417B0D75.40508@posthuman.com> Message-ID: <001a01c4b96f$e5ae4b90$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Brian Atkins > > E Shaun Russell > > http://www.transhumanist.biz/e_shaun.htm > -- > Brian Atkins YES! E Shaun Russell, may he live a thousand years. Then upload forever. We went to the grocer before the schmooze, he bought a ton of beer, I said E Shaun, theres only about 30 guys coming to this. He said, thats what I am planning for. I said, pal there's enough beer there for at least 100 extropians. Then of course several of the extropians brought still more beer, wine and spirits, and only about half of them devoured any ethanol at all. But everyone seemed to be having great fun, it was a total hoot. People would make any kind of offhanded comment, and E Shaun would make up a song about it on the spot. {8^D E Shaun Russell, I miss that guy. spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 02:32:14 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:32:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <20041023153658.13835.qmail@web25204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024023214.23476.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? > Northerners weren't particularly interested in > abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid > the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee > slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway > slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely > un-Christian measures to be instituted. > Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't > avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of > revenge. > I don't know what school you went to, Trend, but you are seriously misinformed about the Civil War, its causes, and its cheerleaders. Northern industrialists needed cheap scab labor to combat the nascent labor movement. Many protestant sects saw slavery as a mortal sin. Who do you think instigated the attack on Harper's Ferry? Northern abolitionists, in control of northern governments, had sent agents into southern states for 20 years preceding the war to incite slaves to escape and assist escape, teaching slaves to read, and inciting slave revolts. The northern states had prohibited any new states north of the 36th parallel from permitting slavery, and tried to force Texas to disavow slavery for admission to the union. Nor, contrary to what you were probably taught in your textbooks, were Southern claims based on "states rights", despite what your socialist teachers like to claim. The fact is that it was the NORTHERN states, resisting the Fugitive Slave Act, claiming a state's rights argument to interposition against the Act and the articles of the Constitution they found repellent pillars of slavery enforcement, and they lost the argument in the nefarious Dredd Scott decision. The Southern States were arguing the proper enforcement of the US Constitution, particularly the "full faith and credit" clause, which REQUIRES that all states recognise the validity of court orders issued by a court in another state, including writs for return of property. The North attacked the South because almost all southern congressmen and senators walked out of congress in mid-session, leaving it in a rump state, a situation the Constitution was not constructed to be able to handle, and thus their walkout was an attack upon the Constitution. The only southern politician to remain in congress was Senator Andrew Johnson, of Tennessee, who became Lincoln's last Vice President. The South had legitimate gripes in addition to their clinging to the institution of slavery. For example, "Theses interests, in connection with the commercial and manufacturing classes, have also succeeded, by means of subventions to mail steamers and the reduction in postage, in relieving their business from the payment of about $7,000,000 annually, throwing it upon the public Treasury under the name of postal deficiency." (Georgia declaration of secession) i.e. US Postal Service subsidized the mailing costs for northern industry. Also, "The manufacturers and miners wisely based their demands upon special facts and reasons rather than upon general principles, and thereby mollified much of the opposition of the opposing interest. They pleaded in their favor the infancy of their business in this country, the scarcity of labor and capital, the hostile legislation of other countries toward them, the great necessity of their fabrics in the time of war, and the necessity of high duties to pay the debt incurred in our war for independence. These reasons prevailed, and they received for many years enormous bounties by the general acquiescence of the whole country." (Georgia declaration of secession) i.e. very high tariffs upon imported cloth (even cloth manufactured in Europe from Southern cotton) to protect the northern cloth and clothing industries. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From max at maxmore.com Sun Oct 24 02:39:12 2004 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:39:12 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <20041023190821.0A19957E2C@finney.org> References: <20041023190821.0A19957E2C@finney.org> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041023213703.03ae4d88@mail.earthlink.net> In addition to the links that Hal provided, I would especially recommend the Political Forecasting site, run by brilliant forecasting expert J. Scott Armstrong: http://morris.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast/Political/ This site combines the indicators that have a good forecasting record. 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 Sun Oct 24 02:41:14 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:41:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023140628.01ac8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > What follows is not a party-political broadcast. It is not being > posted by > one of Mike Lorrey's ultra-socialist left loonies. No doubt evidence > for > this sad effect can be drawn from all sides or postures of politics. > Still, > this is striking stuff. 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? ===== 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 spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 02:57:50 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:57:50 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <001a01c4b96f$e5ae4b90$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <001e01c4b975$424ad850$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > > E Shaun Russell > > > > http://www.transhumanist.biz/e_shaun.htm > ... People would make any kind of offhanded comment, and > E Shaun would make up a song about it on the spot. {8^D Someone made some kind of comment about extropians being interested in healthy living and healthy eating. He was at the piano and starting singing a song about: ...think Ill eat a... biiiig juicy steak... with a coupla beers from the bar... then a dish of vanilla and a loooong cuban cigar... He just made it up right on the spot. I thought I would wet my diapers laughing at the kid. He is a breathing mass of musical talent. I want to be like him when I grow up. {8^D spike From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 03:01:28 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:01:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <417B0216.5060809@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041024030128.26592.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > On that score, and regarding the discussion/argument you and I had > > over beers at Extro5, have you read the interview in Wired with Jeff > > Hawkins? He asserts that AI research has been a failure because > > human intelligence is really just a massive memory machine: > > Mike, I'm reasonably damn certain I didn't have a beer at Extro 5, > nor indeed at any other point in my existence. I didn't say that you had any beer. Beers were drunk, by myself and I think one or two others, when we took a stroll for lunch one of those days. Does this mean my lookup table is more complex than yours? ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 03:04:42 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:04:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <001901c4b96a$9b1038a0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041024030442.74446.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > > Eliezer Yudkowsky: > > > > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > > > > On that score, and regarding the discussion/argument you > > and I had over beers at Extro5... > > > > Mike, I'm reasonably damn certain I didn't have a beer at > > Extro 5, nor indeed at any other point in my existence... > > -- > > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky > > > He's right Mike. Remember when we had that hootnanny at > my place after E5 and the yahoos were devouring beer > and carrying on and having the evil laugh contest and > so forth? Eliezer was there, doing the hakosote > thing (which must be a beer-drinking game) but he wasn't > actually draining the suds. That was my recollection in > any case. Argh. Now I'm the one complaining about the limits of English... ;) Eli, I, and two others, I think Robert Bradbury and someone else, took a stroll from the hotel to grab lunch one day. > > spike > > ps There was a young man who worked for Extropian Inst back > then, I cannot recall his name. Remind me please? He was a > student, nice guy, poet, very talented musician. Where is he > now? He was the one who brought about 800 bottles of beer to > that schmooze. E Shaun Russell, was it 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!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Oct 24 03:06:15 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:06:15 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023140628.01ac8ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023215858.01a55ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:41 PM 10/23/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote: >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? Aside from the fact that this is a grotesque misapplication of the Delphi principle (perhaps intended as a joke at the expense of democrats), it completely misses the point that what was investigated by the study I cited was (1) the *absence* of mass consensus in the currently polarized atmosphere, and (2) the striking degree in which the two major subsets of the population yielded contrary consensus, not just in their own opinions but in their (meta)opinion of what Bush thought to be the case and why. Damien Broderick From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 03:38:07 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041023215858.01a55ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041024033807.60413.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:41 PM 10/23/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >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? > > Aside from the fact that this is a grotesque misapplication of the > Delphi principle (perhaps intended as a joke at the expense of > democrats), it completely misses the point that what was > investigated by the study I cited was (1) the *absence* of mass > consensus in the currently polarized atmosphere, and (2) the > striking degree in which the two major subsets of the population > yielded contrary consensus, not just in their own opinions > but in their (meta)opinion of what Bush thought to be the case and > why. True, but most Democrats have almost never been right about anything, so their opinions don't really matter. Whether they have been wrong in their public statements intentionally for propaganda, dating back to the Roosevelt administration: denying Alger Hiss' guilt, Harry Dexter White's treason, the accuracy of the Venona intercepts, the treason of Kim Philby, the denial of communist international agression, denials that mid-west grain subsidies and 'aid' to Iran cause the revolution there, claims that gun control, welfare, medicare, medicaid, housing projects, etc. would reduce crime, illiteracy, unemployment, or poverty, claims that 'engagement' would make China less agressive toward Taiwan or more disposed to political liberalization, claims that the Palestinian Authority is interested at all in mutual coexistence with Israel, claims that the ANWAR holds only one day's worth of oil, the assertion that terrorism can be treated like any other crime, the refusal to recognise bin Laden's declaration of war against the US several years before 9/11.... do I have to go on? Perhaps that EVERY American convicted of spying against the US has been a registered Democrat or other flavor of socialist? Perhaps that Tereza Heins Kerry is a prime financier of the Ruckus Society's boot camp for luddite left-anarchist insurgents and saboteurs? The extreme reactionary and IMHO unconstitutional policies being enacted by the Bush administration on the domestic front are a natural reaction to the decades of subversion and insurgency by the Treason Party. As much as I hate what the Bush administration is doing with the Patriot Acts and the 9/11 Commission recommendations, I despise the actions and policies of the Democratic Party which have created the problems the Bush admin is dealing with so poorly. You don't have to choose between the Treason Party and the Fascist Party. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 03:47:46 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 20:47:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Open Secrets Message-ID: <20041024034746.61843.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> For those of you who think it is the Bush administration who is in the pockets of corporate special intrests, peruse this compilation of political donations (especially look at the last industry, Oil & Gas): http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.asp?party=A&cycle=2004 Top Industries Giving to Members of Congress 2004 Cycle Top Industries Who's got the most juice on Capitol Hill? Here's a list of the top industries contributing to members of the 108th Congress during the 2003-2004 election cycle. The first list shows the overall 50 biggest industries. The other two highlight the top 25 industries giving to members of each of the two major parties. In all cases, the Top Recipient listed is the individual member of the 108th Congress who received the most from the industry. Totals shown here include only the money that went to current incumbents in Congress. Top 50 Industries Top Republican Industries Top Democratic Industries 2004 Rank Industry Total Dem GOP Top Recipient 1 Lawyers/Law Firms $73,725,894 82% 18% John Kerry (D) 2 Retired $40,051,487 69% 31% John Kerry (D) 3 Real Estate $26,869,682 58% 42% John Kerry (D) 4 Health Prfssionals $25,288,245 49% 51% John Kerry (D) 5 Securities/Invest $22,779,925 65% 35% John Kerry (D) 6 Insurance $15,273,992 41% 59% John Kerry (D) 7 Lobbyists $14,481,510 51% 48% John Kerry (D) 8 Joint Cmtes $14,368,028 100% 0% John Kerry (D) 9 Misc Business $13,385,185 80% 20% John Kerry (D) 10 Education $13,078,866 88% 12% John Kerry (D) 11 Commercial Banks $12,496,663 44% 56% John Kerry (D) 12 Misc Finance $12,221,015 60% 40% John Kerry (D) 13 Business Services $12,144,043 69% 31% John Kerry (D) 14 TV/Movies/Music $11,396,130 74% 25% John Kerry (D) 15 Leadership PACs $11,109,058 25% 75% Richard Burr (R-NC) 16 Computers/Internet $9,563,189 64% 36% John Kerry (D) 17 Transport Unions $9,241,163 77% 23% Richard A. Gephardt (D) 18 Electric Utilities $8,830,167 38% 62% Richard Burr (R-NC) 19 General Contractors$8,197,218 37% 63% John Kerry (D) 20 Public Sctr Unions $8,130,736 82% 18% Stephanie Herseth (D-SD) 21 Pharm/Health Prod $7,863,642 40% 60% John Kerry (D) 22 Oil & Gas $7,320,974 25% 75% John Kerry (D) ===== 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 velvethum at hotmail.com Sun Oct 24 03:50:06 2004 From: velvethum at hotmail.com (Slawomir Paliwoda) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 23:50:06 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win References: <20041023190821.0A19957E2C@finney.org> <6.1.2.0.2.20041023213703.03ae4d88@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: It's all about Ohio and Florida right now where Bush or Kerry can still win. If one of the candidates wins both states, he will claim overall victory. If, however, Kerry wins only one of the two states, he will be forced to win two out of three states in the north (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa). He will probably carry Minnesota, but I'm not so sure about the rest. In any case, this thing can go either way, but Kerry has still a very good chance of getting more electoral college votes than Bush despite growing chance of losing popular vote. Slawomir From extropians at perception.co.nz Sun Oct 24 04:38:18 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:38:18 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D626@amazemail2.amazee nt.com> References: <725F1C117A3EF440A4190D786B8053FE0188D626@amazemail2.amazeent.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041024173750.05ec7d50@127.0.0.1> At 04:45 24/10/2004, you wrote: >> I ask of SIAI's donors: Speak up, and hold your heads high without >shame! > >I donated, and here's why: > >Odds of SIAI even completing a strong AI: 20% >Odds of SIAI being first: 5% >Odds of SIAI being friendly: 50% >Odds of strong AI bringing about the singularity: 10% > >So 0.05% odds, or a 2000:1 payoff. So my donation was ~1/2000 of the >expected financial payoff for being on the good side of a friendly AI. >Sort of like Pascal's wager :) That's absolutely classic!! Love the logic.. and thanks for the laugh :) Si From fauxever at sprynet.com Sun Oct 24 04:48:59 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 21:48:59 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception References: <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <08af01c4b984$c7160ff0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Mike Lorrey" > Firstly, they are not MY ultra-socialists. Well, you do talk about them so much (using such a variety of endearments). Socialists are yours in the sense that they are YOUR b?te noire. No one else here seems to be as intimately involved with them, eh? Olga From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Sun Oct 24 05:15:53 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:15:53 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041024003721.57894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024003721.57894.qmail@web12903.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Oct 23, 2004, at 5:37 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > I had made the same assertion that day in 2001: that intelligence is > just a matter of a massive lookup table and an engine capable of using > it effectively. Now the inventor of the PDA is making the same > assertion. Perhaps people don't help because they don't think you are > approaching the problem effectively. Stating that a computational model can be described as a giant lookup table is, well, pretty circular and a really long way from profound. This is equivalent to saying "intelligence is possible on finite state machinery", a basic, necessary, and well-founded assumption in AI research. I've stated in the past that there is precious little computation to "intelligence", and with good reason, but there is a little more to it than just "big memory" or we would have had mag-reel AI many decades ago. The problem is not having enough memory per se -- we have disk arrays with plenty of space today -- but in storing all the *other* information beyond the data stream isolate, which is not really a space problem, and in a structure with tractable access. There are very tough theory and design problems here that are being glossed over as though they don't exist that are really at the core of all this. A study of the relevant mathematics will show quite clearly that you really can't beat this problem space with faster hardware and more storage, contrary to popular belief. At least vanilla exponential complexity can be brute-forced into interesting spaces with better hardware; geometric complexity functions can't be brute-forced in our universe as we know it, ever. > In keeping with my article "Unsafe at Any Law", creating a "Friendly > AI", if one develops onee on my and Hawkins' theory, is simply a matter > of creating a friendly environment of input for an AI kernel to create > its lookup table from. Raising your AI in a laboratory or a factory > would therefore not be conducive to creating Friendliness. It needs to > have a family of some sort to become friendly. I haven't really read Hawkin's stuff in detail, so I'll assume you are misrepresenting his position. There are gross and obvious errors in theory here, as well as some more subtle errors related to what I wrote above. Your above assertion is not supported by some pretty basic theorems and mathematics relevant to the discussion at hand. Hell, if it was that simple there would be nothing to talk about. Rule of Thumb: If you come up with a simple and obvious solution to a problem space that has been thoroughly combed over for many years by people with a great deal of expertise in the field, you are almost certainly mistaken about your "solution". Doubly so if you do not have expertise in the theoretical foundations of the field. j. andrew rogers From joe at barrera.org Sun Oct 24 05:25:36 2004 From: joe at barrera.org (Joseph S. Barrera III) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:25:36 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Open Secrets In-Reply-To: <20041024034746.61843.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024034746.61843.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <417B3CD0.4010905@barrera.org> Mike Lorrey wrote: > For those of you who think it is the Bush administration who is in > the pockets of corporate special intrests, peruse this compilation of > political donations (especially look at the last industry, Oil & Gas): Well, duh. Only one of the presidential candidates is in this list. If you look at 2002 numbers, the GOP got 72% of Oil & Gas. - Joe From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 05:38:42 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:38:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <08af01c4b984$c7160ff0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041024053842.21752.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > From: "Mike Lorrey" > > > Firstly, they are not MY ultra-socialists. > > Well, you do talk about them so much (using such a variety of > endearments). > Socialists are yours in the sense that they are YOUR b?te noire. No > one else here seems to be as intimately involved with them, eh? You mean you are not? From your posts, I was nearly convinced you headed up the King County Central Committee. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 05:41:08 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:41:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] slaveholders got their just desserts In-Reply-To: <20041024023214.23476.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024054108.97087.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Scab labor? Since when did libertarians oppose scab labor? > cheerleaders. > Northern industrialists needed cheap scab labor to > combat the nascent > labor movement. Humans can only be deemed 'property' by a degraded consciousness. > the validity of court orders > issued by a court in > another state, including writs for return of > property. The South did have legitimate gripes, so did Nazi Germany. In fact I think Germany was more pressured than the Confederacy, Germany was squeezed between Stalinism and the West. The Confederates could have been left alone as they desired to be if they hadn't attacked Fort Sumter. It is true later on Slavery would have died by the lack of new slaves being 'imported' (as you might say), but that's the breaks. It was utter foolishness for slaveholders to think slavery would go on indefinitely. Though the South as a whole didn't deserve the war, the slaveholders got what was coming to them, their own bible imformed them, "he who leads another into captivity will be made captive himself". > The South had legitimate gripes in addition to their > clinging to the > institution of slavery. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From hal at finney.org Sun Oct 24 05:45:31 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:45:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception Message-ID: <20041024054531.D018657E2A@finney.org> Mike Lorrey writes: > 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? The error here is assuming that the consensus of a futures market is the same as the consensus revealed by a poll. If this were correct then the idea futures concept would be worthless and polls would do just as well. Actually, there is little need, reason or incentive for the average person to bother to learn the true facts about the kinds of issues queried in this poll. The average person's beliefs have essentially no impact on the relevant policies. Being right or wrong on whether Iraq had WMDs or worked with Al Qaeda makes no difference in how successful the average person will be in his life. Given this reality, it is perfectly reasonable for people to adopt positions on these issues based on what is convenient or comfortable, rather than on what is true. However, once a person chooses to participate in a betting market, the situation changes dramatically. Now, it suddenly matters whether they are right or not. Real money is on the line. Errors are costly. Anyone reasonable person proposing to invest in a futures market will take the time to acquaint himself with the facts, as best he can. So I don't think it makes sense to assume that people's opinions about a factual matter in a poll are particularly likely to be accurate, unless it's an issue that really matters in people's lives. The principle behind idea futures markets is completely different than the kind of consensus revealed by a poll. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 05:55:06 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:55:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041024055506.11371.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- "J. Andrew Rogers" wrote: > > Rule of Thumb: If you come up with a simple and obvious solution to > a problem space that has been thoroughly combed over for many years by > people with a great deal of expertise in the field, you are almost > certainly mistaken about your "solution". Doubly so if you do not > have expertise in the theoretical foundations of the field. Theoretical foundations of a field which has produced exactly zero AIs? You are saying that I need to first learn about all the ways that everybody else has been failing for decades before I can have any meaningful contribution? Perhaps you are right, at least so I'd know exactly all the ways to NOT create an AI. Oh, BTW: NO, we don't have enough memory yet today. A brain capable of remembering details of events dating back decades likely has a data capacity far in excess of anything existing today, maybe even the NSA. I can tell you exactly when a human intelligence starts to create the majority of its basic rules: that precious agen when the child asks 'why' and/or 'can I' about so many things and is told why, or no or yes, or maybe. From this point on, it is all about experiencing and associating, and categorizing things in accordance with these rules, and their later enhancements. Just look at that dog boy found in Siberia recently: raised by a dog, he'll never learn language, and never develop any significant 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!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 05:58:19 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:58:19 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Won't stay where we are not wanted, consequences... In-Reply-To: <20041024010615.93075.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024055819.41943.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Auf Wiedersehen? I would go far as to say the ultimate source of Nazism was America. It was no coincidence WWI & totalitarianism began when America became a world power. The economic depression of 1929-'39, which was the immediate trigger for Nazism, derived from America more than from Europe. It's interesting, Mike, you should have so much sympathy for Confederate grievances, but so little sympathy for Germany's troubles. Even my father, whose life was ruined by WWII, had sympathy for Germany. My Dad only hated Hitler, "Hitler should have been tortured", he once said. > " Does anyone know the German translation for "Hasta > la vista, baby?" > Mike Lorrey ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 05:59:37 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] slaveholders got their just desserts In-Reply-To: <20041024054108.97087.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024055937.24055.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Scab labor? Since when did libertarians oppose scab > labor? > > > cheerleaders. > > Northern industrialists needed cheap scab labor to > > combat the nascent > > labor movement. > > Humans can only be deemed 'property' by a degraded > consciousness. Your lack of comprehension is striking. I never said I opposed scab labor, that is your assumption. Your lack of ability to judge people in the context of their time is also striking. Northern industrialists were only slightly less, or just as guilty as slaveholders of lacking the conciousness to note that humans are not property. In the context of the times, and in the clear language of the Constitution (at that time a flawed document), it was a just attitude. ===== 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 trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 06:02:21 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:02:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Perhaps it does take one to know one, eh Olga? > Trend, the rest of your post puts you in essentially > the same company with > those whom you are attacking. > Olga ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 06:17:44 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:17:44 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] slaveholders got their just desserts In-Reply-To: <20041024055937.24055.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024061744.43787.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I don't comprehend what you have against the North: the North waited until Fort Sumter was attacked, the North won the war, freed the slaves, Andrew Jackson tried to oppose the radical reconstructionists, and finally the election of 1876 resulted in a deal that removed Federal occupation forces from the South. From 1861- 1876 the South was freed. Not bad for fifteen years. BTW, I notice you said nothing, so far, concerning my comments on German grievances. Perhaps you dislike Germany because Germans have long had ties with Iraq-- a nation you were wounded in? You don't like the French too much, either, do you? But of course I'm assuming again, and assuming is a grave sin, isn't it? > Your lack of comprehension is striking. I never said > I opposed scab > labor, that is your assumption. > Your lack of ability to judge people in the context > of their time is > also striking. Northern industrialists were only > slightly less, or just > as guilty as slaveholders of lacking the > conciousness to note that > humans are not property. > > In the context of the times, and in the clear > language of the > Constitution (at that time a flawed document), it > was a just attitude. > > ===== > 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 > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 06:17:49 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:17:49 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024033807.60413.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024061750.CB68DC860@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 Mike Lorrey --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:41 PM 10/23/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote: > > >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? > > Aside from the fact that this is a grotesque misapplication of the > Delphi principle (perhaps intended as a joke at the expense of > democrats), it completely misses the point that what was > investigated by the study I cited was (1) the *absence* of mass > consensus in the currently polarized atmosphere, and (2) the > striking degree in which the two major subsets of the population > yielded contrary consensus, not just in their own opinions > but in their (meta)opinion of what Bush thought to be the case and > why. True, but most Democrats have almost never been right about anything, so their opinions don't really matter. Whether they have been wrong in their public statements intentionally for propaganda, dating back to the Roosevelt administration: denying Alger Hiss' guilt, Harry Dexter White's treason, the accuracy of the Venona intercepts, the treason of Kim Philby, the denial of communist international agression, denials that mid-west grain subsidies and 'aid' to Iran cause the revolution there, claims that gun control, welfare, medicare, medicaid, housing projects, etc. would reduce crime, illiteracy, unemployment, or poverty, claims that 'engagement' would make China less agressive toward Taiwan or more disposed to political liberalization, claims that the Palestinian Authority is interested at all in mutual coexistence with Israel, claims that the ANWAR holds only one day's worth of oil, the assertion that terrorism can be treated like any other crime, the refusal to recognise bin Laden's declaration of war against the US several years before 9/11.... do I have to go on? Perhaps that EVERY American convicted of spying against the US has been a registered Democrat or other flavor of socialist? Perhaps that Tereza Heins Kerry is a prime financier of the Ruckus Society's boot camp for luddite left-anarchist insurgents and saboteurs? The extreme reactionary and IMHO unconstitutional policies being enacted by the Bush administration on the domestic front are a natural reaction to the decades of subversion and insurgency by the Treason Party. As much as I hate what the Bush administration is doing with the Patriot Acts and the 9/11 Commission recommendations, I despise the actions and policies of the Democratic Party which have created the problems the Bush admin is dealing with so poorly. You don't have to choose between the Treason Party and the Fascist Party. ======================================== No, but the big problem, as even a cursory glance through history by anyone with a modicum of political and economic comprehension clearly indicates, is we are witness to the endgame of rampant, unchecked capitalism. Without wanting to inflame this list with heated debates as to the veracity of my claim, one only needs to consider the fact the nearly a third of the planet's population does not have running water in the home to perceive the undeniable fact that capitalism as an economic system is a failure on a grand scale. That does not mean that capitalism has not provided beneficial functions, nor does it vindicate inferior models used by many of the various non-democratic political systems throughout the world. Capitalism is the Sword of Damocles, hanging over the heads of anyone not firmly contained above the firewall separating 95% of the population from the ruling class. What the ruling class fail to see is the Sword is hanging equally over their heads, no matter how much wealth and power they may have accumulated. In this sense, it does not matter a jot whether the right or left is in power in any of the main western democracies, as the collective human system is eating itself logarithmically faster than anyone is able to comprehend, much less make adjustments or insert checks and balances. David's book The Spike missed observing the biggest of ironies - the only hope for humanity is The Spike itself, as the paradigm shifts urgently needed to reset the course of humanity coincide with the hope that such technologies which lie beyond The Spike will actually arrive. For me, there is deep irony that technological advances, at times the feared enemy of all sides of politics, will be the only thing that can promulgate the political and economical paradigm shifts which will allow recovery from resource-hungry capitalist structures built by the ruling class. Further irony lies in the ruling class being unable to keep this technology for themselves (which they will surely try to do), as the only way for us to "re-source" the planet's resources is through worldwide deployment of technological solutions on a global scale, throughout all levels of society, irrespective of class based systems. Failure of the ruling elite to recognise this will ensure there is no future beyond The Spike (well, not a future which includes us). The natural inclination of the ruling class is to funnel technological advances into the military, maintaining absolute control over deployment of such technologies and periodically waging war to prop up the last economic vestiges of rampant capitalism, with compassion being the number one casualty. Control is what it is all about, no matter which political system you subscribe to. Yet this modus operandi is starting to come apart, with capitalistic systems headed to be the catalyst for global economic, social, humanitarian and resource catastrophes. Very soon, China is going to be a MAJOR problem for the western world, and there are a number of credible studies which show impending massive increases in demand for resources such as oil by China, Taiwan, Korea et al may be a principle (but unstated) motivation behind the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and the formation of the PNAC group of US ruling class planners and enablers. Bush is just an enabler....and he is brilliant in the role. The issue really is whether the PNAC model is just an old way of dealing with a new and potentially insurmountable problem. The latest fashion symbols in China are Hummer/Humvees. What does that tell you? As a mate of mine recently said to me: ------------------------ "Mark my words, it's going to happen soon that there will be a big hassle over oil and energy generally. China is going to be the big thing. There was a big attack on Iraq's infrastructure yesterday that has stopped all production from it's northern fields. Iraq at full production should do about 1.8 million barrels per day and it has world's 2nd largest reserves.. Current global DAILY consumption is 82 Million barrels! The sums are all wrong. Something will happen especially in the context of the US election. The yanks are no way going to allow downgrading of their economic status over oil. www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=oil+consumption www.english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2004030851648 I just worked out that people in the USA are currently paying about 68 cents Australian for a litre of petrol. Their gallon is only 3.7854118 litres and the exchange rate is about 70 cents. The are paying between $1.80 and $1.86 US per US gallon. They think this is high and their "human rights" view of "lifestyle" is based on low fuel prices for gas guzzling vehicles. Imagine what would happen if their fuel went to say Australian prices of $1.10 a litre (ie $4 per gallon). They currently use about 19 million barrels a day; about 4 times the daily consumption of the next closest country which is either Japan or China depending on who you're listening to. Much of China's industry is on reduced output due to energy shortage but their economy is still growing in spades. I just read that if China used the same energy per capita as the US then their consumption would be 80 Million barrels a day which just about equates to current global daily consumption! There is war in the middle east and there have been big problems ( over Chavez) in Venezuela which has the world's 5th largest reserves and is a major exporter to US. I jut heard in passing last night on a news item that there has been a big drop recently in US reserves. As long ago as the 70's Kissinger said that the US was prepared to go to war to protect its resources and "lifestyle". NO matter which way you look at it, all this arithmetic means only one outcome - ongoing and increasing war unless some alternative source of energy materialises soon or the US make "lifestyle" sacrifices like driving smaller cars ( bit this is an impossibility in the current US political climate- " WHAT???!!! drive small energy efficient cars!!! - this is the US of A dude - we don't do that shit".) Alternatively they can put the brakes on China somehow?" ---------------------------------- At 44 years of age, the larger picture is still something that somehow is slightly out of reach to me, the game is somehow just a bit too big, the playing field just a bit too wide. Not that political and economic concepts were/are difficult to understand/assimilate. More that things are changing so fast and other forces are involved beyond political, social, power and resources. Technology is the factor that will enable a new revolution....as it is the only way to deal with the unrepairable issue of resources. Nowadays, one cannot purely live a life based on political imperatives. Within the next generation, the very nature of what it is to be human will change. And, according to many of the people involved, such as most of you on this list, reality as we know it will have changed beyond all recognition within 25 to 50 years (for better or worse). Once you try to incorporate such FACTS (and the evidence is already right in front of our eyes), the recognition of a new (as yet unheralded and uncertain) revolution in political systems, tools and perhaps even a significant change in the great divide between the ruling class and everyone else... We now have corporatisation forcing businesses to replace families, globalisation supplanting entire workforces in one country for cheaper labour in another, the thought process zeitgeist which generates "conglomerate power" viewpoints commencing within the capitalist business mentality and growing like a cancer from there.... I'm reminded of an often quoted saying which I now apply to my considerations of the forthcoming Spike (for want of a better term): "If the human mind were so simple we could understand it, we'd be so simple, we couldn't." I apply the same dictum to trying to assimilate technology into my political views....it is somewhere just beyond my reach, but there actually are many potent minds examining such things, as you all know only too well. This list seems to have a go at it every now and then, but science is generally concerned with the technology itself, not the repercussions. In my view, technology is the only source for more re-sources. Yes, Bill Joy's pieces scared me, but no, we should not stop all research as he suggests, otherwise we will have no response to the endgame of unchecked rampant capitalism and nearly complete rape of the so called third world. To misquote old Winston, it IS the beginning of the end for capitalism as an economic construct. We now have corporatisation forcing businesses to replace families, globalisation supplanting entire workforces in one country for cheaper labour in another, the thought process zeitgeist which generates "conglomerate power" viewpoints commencing within the capitalist business mentality and growing like a cancer from there....and many young people do attempt to mobilise against this onslaught. But they mostly fail to generate anything even approaching critical mass. Some diehard activists on the extreme left (I'm not one of them) may well go on with the same type of activism/efforts for another 15 years, with perhaps the same minor percentile results, but eventually capitalism will eat itself....and be replaced by another system due to the desire for change within the masses. A minority does not grow by persuasion, it grows by NEED. It grows by filling a void, a gap, which may be growing due to the shrinkage or decay of a competing system. No amount of activism will serve any useful purpose to the cause unless the time has come for mass acceptance of the cause promoted by the activist/s. And we must figure out better ways of destroying control of media and entertainment by a select few. Re-spell Rupert Murdoch's surname, change it to Mordor and it's very easy to see him wanting the One Ring. Is he really Sauron? Yes, he qualifies, in my opinion. And Bush, who is his fictional analogy? Is the grotesque Baron Vladimir Harkonnen from Dune. No, not at all. The US supports and feeds plenty of those types, stooges running various countries and entities on behalf of the US. No, Bush is more like an ambassador/enabler for that mysterious all powerful group in Dune known as The Guild... There are BIG CHANGES afoot, and I want to be around to witness the results, but there will be dreadful struggles along the way. No doubt, some existing political and economic systems make compelling sense on a variety of levels. But despite this, things are NOT going to get better and egalitarianism, socialism or a libertarian society (of any dimension) are NOT going to become omnipotent any time soon. But the time MAY come when society will be ready to choose similar structures. Despite the FUD, I have placed all my hopes in technology. I have lost my hope/faith in human nature, as history shows the true colours of human nature. Like dumb sheep, we will eat the grass to the ground, all the while accusing each other of eating too much grass. Politics of any persuasion will hardly matter. In my view, most political systems ultimately become tools of the ruling class, no matter how the system/s begin. They just tinker around with the upward trickle of money and power. So my hopes lie with bio and nano...and I consider the people directly involved in bio/nano as being valid contributors to the "which way forward?" debate. So I disagree with Bill Joy. I think the future DOES need us, and it does need those who still yearn for better political and economic systems to replace those based on capitalist objectives. There are other factors of course - I fully comprehend the existence and usefulness of broad socialist and environmental causes and the ongoing struggle against the misguided Right and their cloud dwelling ruling class. Yet nothing changes the fact that the rug is being pulled from under most of us as we speak..... Sean (also a libertarian at heart) From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 06:26:51 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:26:51 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024054531.D018657E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041024062651.C36F5C0E8@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 "Hal Finney" Being right or wrong on whether Iraq had WMDs or worked with Al Qaeda makes no difference in how successful the average person will be in his life. Given this reality, it is perfectly reasonable for people to adopt positions on these issues based on what is convenient or comfortable, rather than on what is true. -------------------------------- "Blind faith in your leaders will get you killed" Bruce Springsteen, introducing the song "War". People who put their head in the sand and utter "I'm alright, Jack" and then, as you suggest, adopt positions based on untruth, are the moral equivalent of fascists. The most notable characteristic fascists separation and persecution or denial of equality to a specific segment of the population based upon superficial qualities or belief systems. This is propagated by ignorance and failure to contemplate truth or reality. And you suggest this is perfectly reasonable? Am I missing something? Sean From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 06:35:12 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:35:12 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024062651.C36F5C0E8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041024063512.74624.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Don't forget how pernicious Communists were/are. I am a former Marxist and now despise Communists, they are little more than left-wing fascists. > The most notable > characteristic fascists is separation > and persecution or denial of equality to a specific > segment of the > population based upon superficial qualities or > belief systems. This is > propagated by ignorance and failure to contemplate > truth or reality. And you > suggest this is perfectly reasonable? Am I missing > something? > > Sean > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 06:54:59 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:54:59 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024063512.74624.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024065500.94543CC2A@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 Trend Ologist Don't forget how pernicious Communists were/are. I am a former Marxist and now despise Communists, they are little more than left-wing fascists. > The most notable > characteristic fascists is separation > and persecution or denial of equality to a specific > segment of the > population based upon superficial qualities or > belief systems. This is > propagated by ignorance and failure to contemplate > truth or reality. And you > suggest this is perfectly reasonable? Am I missing > something? > > Sean > --------------------------------------------------------- Naturally I comprehend your statement Trend, but that in no way excuses Hal's statement. And there is no denying Marx was right about one thing - there IS a ruling class...and then there is "everyone else". Do you support such a divide? Perhaps a quick reminder of a few basic things from Marx, as posted by to another list I subsrcibe to, will jog your memory on other matters relating to some of the sensible components of "Marxism". His definitions of systems are still useful tools. And those who still examine all political constructs to find a way to re-work and improve old ideas try not to despise or hate. There are utter pragmatic pernicious bastards within ALL political constructs.....that is a by product of power and the loss of compassion it engenders. Sean Extracts follow, which I hope someone on this list finds interesting: --------------------------------------------------------- > I don't know that the market can, or should, or would, be totally suppressed even in a socialist democracy. Alexandra, this reveals that you accept the existence of the market, a basic tenet of liberalist thinking. "The market" is predicated on two things, firstly the appropriation of the means of production by those who thereby become capitalists (ie, through processes of expropriation of lands, such as the land clearing acts in England to establish capitalist farming, and the industrial revolution/s that built bigger factories that therefore made goods cheaper that therefore ruined handcraft manufacturing / independent small producers), and secondly by a pricing system that factors in the profit overhead and relative shortages to maintain prices (especially in conditions of monopoly or collusion among producers). A socialist system solves the first through working people running their own enterprises where everyone votes on all matters including their own equal remuneration (with perhaps some differences according to skill). Working examples exist in some socialist states, and in Argentina where economic collapse in this capitalist state has seen quite a few enterprises abandoned by their capitalist owners due to a lack of a sufficient profit stream. The second is solved by a continuous process of decommodification, predicated on understanding that price is a rationing mechanism essentially, along with reflecting the costs of the commodities that make up the commodity in question. The initial step is that through workers taking control of their enterprises, the profit motive and its overhead are taken out of the system. This then works itself through the economy as each element / commodity feeds into the next process up through production levels. The second step is to ensure that the basics of life (housing, food, clothing, transport, education) are met, ie that there is enough production to satisfy these equitably so that any shortages of these are eliminated. This eliminates pricing as a supply / demand signal, the only remaining question is of the cost of the elements / commodities that go to make up the particular basic good. The cheapening of these basic items then works itself through the economy, deflating the cost of other parts of the economy. The third step is to engender automation of as much of production as possible, this being impossible in a capitalist economy due to the unemployment this would cause and the resulting imbalance / contradiction of falling demand for the goods produced, but entirely possible under socialism, going hand in hand with lowering of working hours (but not pay) throughout the economy. Sustainable energy production and consumption of raw materials would be a priority here. This would cheapen goods even further, and such deflation would then work itself through the economy, cheapening other goods. Part of this cheapening of goods would include cutting out as much as possible of the wasteful sales / advertising effort (and its engendering of socially useless wants) that is an essential part of capitalism, as well as the greater efficiency involved in communal / social solutions as opposed to production geared to individual solutions. This would then be an ongoing, iterative process, working towards the communistic ideal of a society where people only work because they want to in some desired field, and people simply rock up to be allocated their essential goods. However, there will still be markets, on the side of society, say for ancient Grecian urns, or rare stamps (as Dick Nichols once put it). But the main things of life will no longer be allocated by the biased and class based allocation system of the "market" (I once wrote an essay at uni asserting that Adam Smith's blind "hand" of God in the market wasn't so much blind as authoritarian and directive in the Calvinist predestination sense of the then emerging late 18th century understanding of the nature of human society as ordered, rational, scientific and bourgeois). I will tackle other areas you have mentioned in later posts. Suffice to say that only after the capitalist market is mostly removed in human society can we truly move to address the environment as part of a rationally social solution to human problems. ? Paul Oboohov A lowly denizen of the State --------------------------------------------- : Alexandra, Your analysis of capital is one-sided. Essentially the logic of capital is not to get people to consume but rather to valorise, to reproduce its own dynamic and transcend all barriers. Capital produces surplus value from workers but the surplus value is locked into the commodities - thus as you point out a barrier to capital reproducing and expanding is a lack of consumption therefore, they must encourage people to consume more. But things are not so straight foward. Capital needs to exploit workers but needs to stimulate new needs in consumers so that the surplus labour taken from workers can be unlocked from the commodities produced and capital can valorise. The problem is that workers are consumers. Thus, capital in general is constantly stimulating new needs in the working class but is at the same time doing everything it can to maximise the exploitation of the working class. And this contradiction can't be overcome easily because the form that capital takes is in individual capitals, thus, individual capitals sells to the working class as a whole while exploiting its own particular workers. Thus, every capitalist wishes to see their own workers exploited as much as possible but to see workers uin general being able to consume as much as possible. This contradiction between developing new needs within the working class while suprressing it is the seed for class struggle for when the working class needs attempts to fulfil its own needs - it needs to do so against the will of the capital its tied to, in short it must struggle against capital. Thus, the working class under capitalism has developed the need for education, excellent health care, access to culture as well as access to consumer goods. Thats because workers are humans and the logic of humans is develop themselves through thier society Alexandra argues that we should only focus on what are our needs and eliminate our 'wants' - or at least restrict them. But what are 'needs' and 'wants'? Unless you believe in living a completely primative lifestyle that only reproduces your daily physical life (enough nutrients to survive, a form of shelter and the appropriate clothing), than everything above that would be a want (not just consumer goods but any form of cultural development at all). But i don't think there are many human beings in the world that want to live in that kind of poverty - espeically when they have lived in a society thatg has moved beyond it. However, nothing could be further from Marx and Marxism than the belief in a fixed set of necessaries. From his earliest days, Marx rejected a concept of 'Abstract Man' and stressed the emergence of new human needs with the development of society. In the Grundrisse, he noted needs develop "only with the forces of production" and in the course of economic development "the producers change, too, in that they bring out new qualities in themselves, develop themselves in production, transform themselves, develop new powers and ideas, new modes of intercourse, new needs and new language'. Nor, did Marx think this was a bad thing. He asked: "what is wealth other than the universality of individual needs, capacities, pleasures, productive forces, etc, created through universal exchange" and was very critical of other bourgeois political economists who viewed workers as naturally determined and unchanging. However Marx did differentiate between different degrees of need: 1) Physiological needs - the use-values needed to reproduce the worker as a natural subject, the bare minimum for physical survival. 2) Necessary Needs - this is the level of needs rendered necessary by habit and custom 3) Social needs - this is the needs of the worker as a socally developed human being at a given point: it constitutes the upper limit in needs for use-values in a commodity form. Thus, i think while Alexandra is confused about needs and wants what she is probably referring to this the inherent drive of capital to fetishise consumption through the constant raising of social needs. However, if these needs are socially developed in humans, then they cannot be on a large scale taken away through the spreading of individual consciousness. It will have to be through the self- transformation of the working class through class struggle and in the creation of a society that develops different types of social needs in the human being from 'retail therapy'. : There's a mistake we could make with regard to Alexandra's latest posting (see below) - politically, to take it too seriously. She calls on us to consider whether or not people who Vote conservative should "be absolved of responsibility for new wars". She says: "I agree with those who say no and who believe it is wrong and counter productive to absolve individuals of personal responsibility. We must tell the truth about their corruption, our corruption." Individual responsibility exists. We choose to respond to oppression other than by terrorism. But terrorism is one absolutely inevitable response to the social oppression - that is, it is a social, a mass, phenomenon, existing independently of the responsibility and action of any one individual. This is the basis for our argument that oppression is the cause of terrorism. As hopeful activists, our task is to explain and join with other people in resolving the social causes of environmental destruction, exploitation and oppression. To turn the issue to one of individual responsibility is to turn our attention away from how to solve these problems. The task of individual absolution lies with other institutions. Some of these have whole hierarchies, equipped with robes and/or rituals, expert in the task. If that's what anyone wants, they are easy enough to find. Just not around here. Jonathan Strauss From kpj at sics.se Sun Oct 24 07:04:39 2004 From: kpj at sics.se (KPJ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:04:39 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Won't stay where we are not wanted, consequences... In-Reply-To: <20041024010615.93075.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <200410240704.i9O74ds31110@r2d2.sics.se> It appears as if Der Lorrey sagt: | |" Does anyone know the German translation for "Hasta la vista, baby?" You should ask the Governator. The film "Bladerunner" is available with a German language soundtrack. There is a scene where the character Gaff talks cityspeak and says "Hai!". That was translated into German as "Yes, monsieur.". From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 07:14:21 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:14:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024065500.94543CC2A@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041024071421.47992.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I like the Marxist professors I've talked to, they know what is going on. However 'rank & file', 'grass roots' Communists are mostly thugs, they want revenge for being raised in lower class households, they want power. Sean, I've served my sentence in the Marxist mind-prison, no more probation. Please, don't ever forget the Communism of 1917 gave birth to the fascism of 1922. No aside this, it's a central issue. > And there is no denying Marx was right about one > thing - there IS a ruling > class...and then there is "everyone else". Do you > support such a divide? > > Perhaps a quick reminder of a few basic things from > Marx, as posted by to > another list I subsrcibe to, will jog your memory on > other matters relating > to some of the sensible components of "Marxism". > His definitions of systems > are still useful tools. And those who still examine > all political constructs > to find a way to re-work and improve old ideas try > not to despise or hate. > There are utter pragmatic pernicious bastards within > ALL political > constructs.....that is a by product of power and the > loss of compassion it > engenders. > > Sean > > Extracts follow, which I hope someone on this list > finds interesting: > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > I don't know that the market can, or should, or > would, be totally > suppressed even in a socialist democracy. > > Alexandra, this reveals that you accept the > existence of the market, a basic > tenet of liberalist thinking. "The market" is > predicated on two things, > firstly > the appropriation of the means of production by > those who thereby become > capitalists (ie, through processes of expropriation > of lands, such as the > land clearing acts in England to establish > capitalist farming, and the > industrial revolution/s that built bigger factories > that therefore made > goods cheaper that therefore ruined handcraft > manufacturing / independent > small producers), and secondly by a pricing system > that factors in the > profit overhead and relative shortages to maintain > prices (especially in > conditions of monopoly or collusion among > producers). > > A socialist system solves the first through working > people running their own > enterprises where everyone votes on all matters > including their own equal > remuneration (with perhaps some differences > according to skill). Working > examples exist in some socialist states, and in > Argentina where economic > collapse in this capitalist state has seen quite a > few enterprises abandoned > by their capitalist owners due to a lack of a > sufficient profit stream. The > second is solved by a continuous process of > decommodification, predicated on > understanding that price is a rationing mechanism > essentially, along with > reflecting the costs of the commodities that make up > the commodity in > question. The initial step is that through workers > taking control of their > enterprises, the profit motive and its overhead are > taken out of the system. > This then works itself through the economy as each > element / commodity feeds > into the next process up through production levels. > The second step is to > ensure that the basics of life (housing, food, > clothing, transport, > education) are met, ie that there is enough > production to satisfy these > equitably so that any shortages of these are > eliminated. This eliminates > pricing as a supply / demand signal, the only > remaining question is of the > cost of the elements / commodities that go to make > up the particular basic > good. The cheapening of these basic items then works > itself through the > economy, deflating the cost of other parts of the > economy. The third step is > to engender automation of as much of production as > possible, this being > impossible in a capitalist economy due to the > unemployment this would cause > and the resulting imbalance / contradiction of > falling demand for the goods > produced, but entirely possible under socialism, > going hand in hand with > lowering of working hours (but not pay) throughout > the economy. Sustainable > energy production and consumption of raw materials > would be a priority here. > This would cheapen goods even further, and such > deflation would then work > itself through the economy, cheapening other goods. > > Part of this cheapening of goods would include > cutting out as much as > possible of the wasteful sales / advertising effort > (and its engendering of > socially useless wants) that is an essential part of > capitalism, as well as > the greater efficiency involved in communal / social > solutions as opposed to > production geared to individual solutions. This > would then be an ongoing, > iterative process, working towards the communistic > ideal of a society where > people only work because they want to in some > desired field, and people > simply rock up to be allocated their essential > goods. > > However, there will still be markets, on the side of > society, say for > ancient Grecian urns, or rare stamps (as Dick > Nichols once put it). But the > main things of life will no longer be allocated by > the biased and class > based allocation system of the "market" (I once > wrote an essay at uni > asserting that Adam Smith's blind "hand" of God in > the market wasn't so much > blind as authoritarian and directive in the > Calvinist predestination sense > of the then emerging late 18th century understanding > of the nature of human > society as ordered, rational, scientific and > bourgeois). > > I will tackle other areas you have mentioned in > later posts. Suffice to say > that only after the capitalist market is mostly > removed in human society can > we truly move to address the environment as part of > a rationally social > solution to human problems. > ? > Paul Oboohov > A lowly denizen of the State > --------------------------------------------- > : > > Alexandra, > Your analysis of capital is one-sided. Essentially > the logic of > capital is not to get people to consume but rather > to valorise, to > reproduce its own dynamic and transcend all > barriers. > Capital produces surplus value from workers but the > surplus value is > locked into the commodities - thus as you point out > a barrier to > capital reproducing and expanding is a lack of > consumption === message truncated === ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 07:33:56 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:33:56 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time Message-ID: <20041024073356.13769.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Don't you want to avoid bad politics & bad religion? You don't want to put bad ideology/religion into your mind anymore than you want to put bad food into your gullet. I want to avoid Communist thugs as I want to avoid apples with worms in them, I despise Communists because they despicably want to fill impressionable young heads with their outmoded ideology. It's not hatred, it's more like wanting to keep cockroaches out of your dwelling; you don't hate the roaches, you just want to keep them away from you. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Oct 24 07:41:17 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:41:17 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024073356.13769.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <20041024073356.13769.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c52041024004133faa33e@mail.gmail.com> So you hate southerners, rednecks, christians, communists... What else? From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 07:51:00 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:51:00 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <470a3c52041024004133faa33e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041024075100.16013.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Don't be coy. I don't like rednecks, hard-line christians, and Communists. Madonna! I'm not like you, Giulio, I'm not filled with an overflowing respect for every alligator that crawls out of the swamp. --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > So you hate southerners, rednecks, christians, > communists... > What else? ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 08:02:50 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:02:50 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024073356.13769.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024080251.4E669CE0E@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 Trend Ologist Don't you want to avoid bad politics & bad religion? You don't want to put bad ideology/religion into your mind anymore than you want to put bad food into your gullet. I want to avoid Communist thugs as I want to avoid apples with worms in them, I despise Communists because they despicably want to fill impressionable young heads with their outmoded ideology. It's not hatred, it's more like wanting to keep cockroaches out of your dwelling; you don't hate the roaches, you just want to keep them away from you. ----------------------------- I don't really care about your particular views Trend, alhough it seems to me you have become rather intolerant and you have also closed your mind to the egalitarian aspects of Marx et al by throwing all of the concept into one big "communist thugs" bin. I post to lists for all the readers, not just for the benefit (or to the detriment) of the poster to whom I'm responding. But let me pose this one question to you - do you deny the great divide between the ruling class (for want of a better term) and the rest of us and, if so, are you comfortable with it ? How about another question - what political concepts have you now adopted to replace "outmoded ideology" and how well are you concepts functioning? (please note: I'm not a Marxist, nor am I a Communist, but I support many of Marx's definitions how human systems function.) Here's another question - what political contructs will suit Extropians? Educate me. Sean BTW, I never waste my time. From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Oct 24 08:14:37 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:14:37 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024075100.16013.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c52041024004133faa33e@mail.gmail.com> <20041024075100.16013.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204102401142e906722@mail.gmail.com> Indeed, I respect alligators as living beings. Of course, if one is about to eat me and shooting is the only thing I can do to protect my life, I will shoot. But I prefer trying to find some way to protect both my life and the alligator's. Interesting your use of the term "Madonna!", are you also of Italian origin? G. On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:51:00 +0100 (BST), Trend Ologist wrote: > Don't be coy. > I don't like rednecks, hard-line christians, and > Communists. Madonna! I'm not like you, Giulio, I'm not > filled with an overflowing respect for every alligator > that crawls out of the swamp. > > > > > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > So you hate southerners, rednecks, christians, > > communists... > > What else? > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 08:24:21 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:24:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024080251.4E669CE0E@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041024082421.45853.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Ruling classes will continue for generations. Best we can do is promote multi-racial ruling classes, rather than having whites forever at the top of the food chain. Now, you are young and it is only fitting you should be interested in Marxism or liberation theology or whatever-it-may be. I am intolerant but don't actually hate Communists, fundamentalists & rednecks, just want to AVOID THEM. Can you understand that? If one were to genuinely hate another, one might wish to lynch them, put them in an oven, or convert their skin into a lampshade. One more time: It's not true hatred or vicious intolerance, it is the desire to avoid those who want to suck me into their religion/ideology. Is the above too hard to comprehend? > But let me pose this one question to you - do you > deny the great divide > between the ruling class (for want of a better term) > and the rest of us and, > if so, are you comfortable with it ? > > How about another question - what political concepts > have you now adopted to > replace "outmoded ideology" and how well are you > concepts functioning? > > (please note: I'm not a Marxist, nor am I a > Communist, but I support many of > Marx's definitions how human systems function.) > > Here's another question - what political contructs > will suit Extropians? > > Educate me. > > Sean > > BTW, I never waste my time. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 08:30:09 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:30:09 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204102401142e906722@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041024083009.53115.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> I now politely avoid those who want to convert me to their religion, their politics. > Interesting your use of the term "Madonna!", are you > also of Italian origin? > G. No, grew up with Italians ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 09:27:24 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:27:24 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024082421.45853.qmail@web25208.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024092724.A7B9DD298@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 Trend Ologist Ruling classes will continue for generations. Best we can do is promote multi-racial ruling classes, rather than having whites forever at the top of the food chain. Now, you are young and it is only fitting you should be interested in Marxism or liberation theology or whatever-it-may be. I am intolerant but don't actually hate Communists, fundamentalists & rednecks, just want to AVOID THEM. Can you understand that? If one were to genuinely hate another, one might wish to lynch them, put them in an oven, or convert their skin into a lampshade. One more time: It's not true hatred or vicious intolerance, it is the desire to avoid those who want to suck me into their religion/ideology. Is the above too hard to comprehend? --------------------------------------------- Nope. Got it. But I'm not "young" in a knowledge sense. 44 years of knowledge absorption under my belt. 44 laps of the sun. Maybe that's young to you, but I feel pretty old sometimes when I finish my day's work..... Ruling classes will not be able to continue _as they are now_ after The Spike. That was the entire point of my original post earlier today. And how many generations are we now talking before the spike hits? This is the interesting aspect, politically. The concept that technology is the main hope for movement towards a more egalitarian system applied globally to humanity is tantalizing, yes? And I truly believe it could change the limitations of ALL existing political, economical and social systems. My point was, unless this happens at the same time as capitalism eats itself, the future is VERY uncertain and, indeed, frightening. It's like a strange kind of "cross-fade" phenomenon, which (as an audio engineer) I'm very familiar with. Maybe that could be the tile of David's next book? "The Cross-Fade" - a book describing how we will (or wont) handle transition....... Sean From pharos at gmail.com Sun Oct 24 10:51:31 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:51:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] spam virus? In-Reply-To: <001601c4b966$e0778af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> References: <20041023195420.5BC51D541@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <001601c4b966$e0778af0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: On Sat, 23 Oct 2004 18:14:57 -0700, Spike wrote: > > How do I kill this? Or failing that, is there a > way to click on the link and send them a ton of > fake orders? Or do I keep ignoring them, even > tho they seem to be getting more frequent? > MailWasher will catch all these and mark them as SPAM on your mailserver. Then once a day you delete them and try to bounce them back. (Most will have invalid or forged addresses, though). Other anti-spam packages can do much the same. BillK From trendologist at yahoo.co.uk Sun Oct 24 10:52:18 2004 From: trendologist at yahoo.co.uk (Trend Ologist) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:52:18 +0100 (BST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024092724.A7B9DD298@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041024105218.98679.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> This is the $64,000 question-- when will it hit? 2025-50? 2050-2100? > And how many generations are we now talking before > the spike hits? ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From samantha at objectent.com Sun Oct 24 10:55:18 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 03:55:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Objectivist-Extropian Synthesis In-Reply-To: <60710-2200410320151144388@M2W054.mail2web.com> References: <60710-2200410320151144388@M2W054.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <31A0DA90-25AB-11D9-9909-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> ??? Please elaborate. On Oct 20, 2004, at 8:11 AM, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > > Let's not go backwards. Extropy is forward. > > Natasha > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Oct 24 11:04:33 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:04:33 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Ben Bova: Science fiction can teach us something if we stop to learn Message-ID: <470a3c5204102404042aecbf68@mail.gmail.com> Ben Bova: Science fiction can teach us something if we stop to learn By BEN BOVA, Special to the Daily News October 24, 2004 http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/pe_columnists/article/0,2071,NPDN_14960_3276900,00.html A few months ago the once-and-present mayor of Naples wrote an editorial piece for the Daily News in which he twitted my political opinions on the grounds that I am a writer of science fiction. The mayor's implication was clear: science fiction, in his view, is outlandish, silly stuff, not to be taken seriously. I disagree. In fact, I think that if more people read science fiction we would have a much clearer understanding of today's world and tomorrow's possibilities, both for good and ill. Very likely, Hizzoner hasn't read any serious science fiction. Most people haven't. Their views of science fiction come from watching "sci-fi flicks" in movie theaters or watching science fiction shows on TV. With the exception of Star Trek and a precious few big-screen movies, Hollywood's "sci fi" bears the same relationship to real science fiction as Popeye cartoons bear to naval history. Okay, then, what is real science fiction? And why should people take it seriously? Real science fiction, in my view, consists of stories in which some aspect of future science or technology is so integral to the plot that, if you take the scientific part out, the story collapses. Think of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, for example. Take out the science and the story evaporates. Since science and technology are the major driving forces in our society, this means that science fiction deals with the vital issues of our day. Take a look at today's news headlines: supersonic warplanes dropping smart bombs, stem cell research, computer viruses, robotic probes of deep space and private space launches, nuclear power and the proliferation of nuclear weapons, dangers of environmental disasters, global warming ? each of these issues (and more) have been examined in science fiction stories 10, 20, even 50 years ago. In essence, science fiction stories serve as simulations laboratories where various visions of the future can be tried out, tested to see how the might work and what effect they will have on us. Behind the alien masks are very real concerns about our world and its future. Science fiction stories have predicted just about everything that's happened in past century or so, and many things that haven't happened. The latter is true because some stories are written as warnings, precautions, pointing out dangers that lie ahead. As Ray Bradbury famously put it, "I'm not trying to predict the future; I'm trying to prevent it!" In my own work I've managed to predict the space race of the 1960s, solar power satellites, the discovery of organic chemicals in interstellar space, virtual reality, human cloning, the Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars), the discovery of life on Mars, the advent of international peacekeeping forces, the discovery of ice on the Moon, electronic book publishing and zero-gravity sex. I often tell people that my books are really historical novels, but the history hasn't happened yet. I've been at this business for so long, though, that some of my science fiction has indeed turned out to be history. If more people read science fiction, and paid attention to it, we would have realized in 1940 that someone would build nuclear bombs. And that a global nuclear balance of terror would lock international politics into a stalemate that lasted until a defense against nuclear-armed missiles began to take shape. Moreover, we would have realized decades ago that nuclear weapons could be used by terrorists to further their own murderous causes. The sudden collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s took most pundits and politicians by surprise. But not science fiction readers. As Alvin Toffler put it in his best-selling book, science fiction is the antidote to "future shock." The thing is, though, that so many science fiction stories have presented so many different future scenarios that you must read widely in the field to get your anti-shock vaccine. Most of what you read won't happen, but whatever actually does happen, you'll have read about long before it comes to pass. That's because there is no such thing as "the future." There isn't a single, preordained, immutable future. We build the future for ourselves. The future is created, minute by minute, by what we do - and what we fail to do. Reading science fiction can help you to make informed, intelligent choices about the future that you want to see, the world of tomorrow that you want to live in. If you can picture the history of the human race as a vast migration of people across the landscape of time, then science fiction writers are the scouts who travel on ahead and bring back reports on what the territory of tomorrow may be like. They can warn us against badlands and arid deserts. They can guide us toward sunny, well watered grasslands and orchards of fruit-laden trees. That's what I try to do in my fiction. I use the latest scientific information available to produce a believable background, and then place realistic human characters with all their strengths and weaknesses, all their loves and hates, joys and fears, into that background of the future. My characters may be walking the rust-red deserts of Mars, or living in a giant space habitat in orbit around the ringed planet Saturn. They may be living a century in the future or a millennium in the past. But wherever they are, whatever time frame there are in, they are as realistic, as warm-bloodedly alive, as I can make them. Their conflicts and their passions are the same as yours and mine, even though they may exist far from here and now. Science fiction throws strong highlights on today's world by going beyond the here-and-now to show what the future might hold for us. Because it deals with the future, which is the only part of our lives that we might change, it is the most realistic form of literature in the world. Try it, and see for yourself. Naples resident Ben Bova has written more than 100 science fiction novels and nonfiction books about science. His latest novel is "The Silent War." Dr. Bova's web site address is www.benbova.net. From Walter_Chen at compal.com Sun Oct 24 11:40:20 2004 From: Walter_Chen at compal.com (Walter_Chen at compal.com) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 19:40:20 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Ben Bova: Science fiction can teach us somethi ng ifwe stop to learn Message-ID: <3F596B56355C7C4EA723ECAB3EC2F42605B7ED60@tpeex05> In fact, I strongly believe that any ideas people have thought about could really happen. Any ideas include the serious sci. fictions, or even pure imaginations (like paradise or hell) etc. This is what David Bohm said: "... the whole universe is in some way enfolded in everything and that each thing is enfolded in the whole...". Whatever you are thinking about is, in fact, part of the universe and just could happen in the future. Thanks. Walter. --------- -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Giu1i0 Pri5c0 Sent: Sunday, October 24, 2004 7:05 PM To: ExI chat list; transhumantech at yahoogroups.com Subject: [extropy-chat] Ben Bova: Science fiction can teach us something ifwe stop to learn Ben Bova: Science fiction can teach us something if we stop to learn By BEN BOVA, Special to the Daily News October 24, 2004 http://www.naplesnews.com/npdn/pe_columnists/article/0,2071,NPDN_14960_32769 00,00.html A few months ago the once-and-present mayor of Naples wrote an editorial piece for the Daily News in which he twitted my political opinions on the grounds that I am a writer of science fiction. The mayor's implication was clear: science fiction, in his view, is outlandish, silly stuff, not to be taken seriously. I disagree. In fact, I think that if more people read science fiction we would have a much clearer understanding of today's world and tomorrow's possibilities, both for good and ill. Very likely, Hizzoner hasn't read any serious science fiction. Most people haven't. Their views of science fiction come from watching "sci-fi flicks" in movie theaters or watching science fiction shows on TV. With the exception of Star Trek and a precious few big-screen movies, Hollywood's "sci fi" bears the same relationship to real science fiction as Popeye cartoons bear to naval history. Okay, then, what is real science fiction? And why should people take it seriously? Real science fiction, in my view, consists of stories in which some aspect of future science or technology is so integral to the plot that, if you take the scientific part out, the story collapses. Think of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, for example. Take out the science and the story evaporates. Since science and technology are the major driving forces in our society, this means that science fiction deals with the vital issues of our day. Take a look at today's news headlines: supersonic warplanes dropping smart bombs, stem cell research, computer viruses, robotic probes of deep space and private space launches, nuclear power and the proliferation of nuclear weapons, dangers of environmental disasters, global warming - each of these issues (and more) have been examined in science fiction stories 10, 20, even 50 years ago. In essence, science fiction stories serve as simulations laboratories where various visions of the future can be tried out, tested to see how the might work and what effect they will have on us. Behind the alien masks are very real concerns about our world and its future. Science fiction stories have predicted just about everything that's happened in past century or so, and many things that haven't happened. The latter is true because some stories are written as warnings, precautions, pointing out dangers that lie ahead. As Ray Bradbury famously put it, "I'm not trying to predict the future; I'm trying to prevent it!" In my own work I've managed to predict the space race of the 1960s, solar power satellites, the discovery of organic chemicals in interstellar space, virtual reality, human cloning, the Strategic Defense Initiative (Star Wars), the discovery of life on Mars, the advent of international peacekeeping forces, the discovery of ice on the Moon, electronic book publishing and zero-gravity sex. I often tell people that my books are really historical novels, but the history hasn't happened yet. I've been at this business for so long, though, that some of my science fiction has indeed turned out to be history. If more people read science fiction, and paid attention to it, we would have realized in 1940 that someone would build nuclear bombs. And that a global nuclear balance of terror would lock international politics into a stalemate that lasted until a defense against nuclear-armed missiles began to take shape. Moreover, we would have realized decades ago that nuclear weapons could be used by terrorists to further their own murderous causes. The sudden collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s took most pundits and politicians by surprise. But not science fiction readers. As Alvin Toffler put it in his best-selling book, science fiction is the antidote to "future shock." The thing is, though, that so many science fiction stories have presented so many different future scenarios that you must read widely in the field to get your anti-shock vaccine. Most of what you read won't happen, but whatever actually does happen, you'll have read about long before it comes to pass. That's because there is no such thing as "the future." There isn't a single, preordained, immutable future. We build the future for ourselves. The future is created, minute by minute, by what we do - and what we fail to do. Reading science fiction can help you to make informed, intelligent choices about the future that you want to see, the world of tomorrow that you want to live in. If you can picture the history of the human race as a vast migration of people across the landscape of time, then science fiction writers are the scouts who travel on ahead and bring back reports on what the territory of tomorrow may be like. They can warn us against badlands and arid deserts. They can guide us toward sunny, well watered grasslands and orchards of fruit-laden trees. That's what I try to do in my fiction. I use the latest scientific information available to produce a believable background, and then place realistic human characters with all their strengths and weaknesses, all their loves and hates, joys and fears, into that background of the future. My characters may be walking the rust-red deserts of Mars, or living in a giant space habitat in orbit around the ringed planet Saturn. They may be living a century in the future or a millennium in the past. But wherever they are, whatever time frame there are in, they are as realistic, as warm-bloodedly alive, as I can make them. Their conflicts and their passions are the same as yours and mine, even though they may exist far from here and now. Science fiction throws strong highlights on today's world by going beyond the here-and-now to show what the future might hold for us. Because it deals with the future, which is the only part of our lives that we might change, it is the most realistic form of literature in the world. Try it, and see for yourself. Naples resident Ben Bova has written more than 100 science fiction novels and nonfiction books about science. His latest novel is "The Silent War." Dr. Bova's web site address is www.benbova.net. _______________________________________________ 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 Sun Oct 24 13:35:57 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 06:35:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Won't stay where we are not wanted, consequences... In-Reply-To: <20041024055819.41943.qmail@web25201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024133557.322.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > Auf Wiedersehen? I would go far as to say the ultimate > source of Nazism was America. It was no coincidence > WWI & totalitarianism began when America became a > world power. The economic depression of 1929-'39, > which was the immediate trigger for Nazism, derived > from America more than from Europe. What idiotic history book have you been reading? Really. Any 6th grade school child knows that US President Wilson opposed the heavy imposition of war penalties by the european allies on Germany. Totalitarianism is squarely the fault of moronic european politics. So is the depression, as any fool can tell you that it was the idiotic British monetary policies (partly tied to their collection of worthless fortunes in German Marks) that caused the whole mess. > It's interesting, Mike, you should have so much > sympathy for Confederate grievances, but so little > sympathy for Germany's troubles. Even my father, whose > life was ruined by WWII, had sympathy for Germany. My > Dad only hated Hitler, "Hitler should have been > tortured", he once said. You have such a capacity for irrational and illogical thinking. What makes you think I have 'sympathy for confederate grievances'? I state facts, uncomfortable facts, which irrational fools like you and Democrats don't know or refuse to admit. Okay, this is it: you are done. You are nothing but a troll. ===== 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 Sun Oct 24 14:09:48 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:09:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024061750.CB68DC860@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041024140948.71340.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > ======================================== > > No, but the big problem, as even a cursory glance through history by > anyone with a modicum of political and economic comprehension clearly > indicates, is we are witness to the endgame of rampant, unchecked > capitalism. Without wanting to inflame this list with heated debates > as to the veracity of my claim, one only needs to consider the fact > the nearly a third of the planet's population does not have running > water in the home to perceive the undeniable fact that capitalism > as an economic system is a failure on a grand scale. A 'fact' which is meaningless outside of the context that that a large chunk of that third of the planets population lives in non-capitalist countries, and wrt capitalist countries, there are fewer people with running water now than at any time in history.... thanks to capitalism. Please leave the anti-capital agitprop at the door. You won't find any sympathy here, except maybe from James Hughes. > > David's book The Spike missed observing the biggest of ironies - the > only hope for humanity is The Spike itself, as the paradigm shifts > urgently needed to reset the course of humanity coincide with the > hope that such technologies which lie beyond The Spike will actually > arrive. For me, there is deep irony that technological advances, > at times the feared enemy of all sides of politics, will be the only > thing that can promulgate the political and economical paradigm > shifts which will allow recovery from resource-hungry capitalist > structures built by the ruling class. pshaw. Firstly, it is Damien's book, not 'David's. Secondly, resource hungriness is a function of the market. A centrally planned market is so ignorant of price signals that it cannot help to be inefficient, hence socialism/communism are more IN-efficient resource consumers than a free market. Ergo, a capitalist system will use the least resources in achieving the Singularity. Pull your head out of Das Kapital and smell the market. > Further irony lies in the ruling class being unable to keep this > technology for themselves (which they will surely try to do), as > the only way for us to "re-source" the planet's resources is > through worldwide deployment of technological solutions on a global > scale, throughout all levels of society, irrespective of class based > systems. Failure of the ruling elite to recognise this will ensure > there is no future beyond The Spike (well, not a future which > includes us). WHO let all these commies in the door? Sheesh, they're like Kudzu, as soon as a bad infestation is more than a decade gone, the idiots are back to believing in its BS. The ruling class DON'T WANT TO keep this technology for themselves. If you'd looked at ImmInst's movie, Peter Voss was clear on this: technological advances are subsidized by the rich, because they are the early adopters, they pay the most per unit for tech, subisidizing development and implementation of mass production so that the poor can access the same tech at a far lower price. And you commies keep claiming capitalists don't do welfare. It is clear that the market functions as a massive technological wefare system for the poor in a way which the market is able to handle at its maximum resource efficiency. This is why the 'poor' in the US have multiple cars, stereos, televisions, plenty of hot water and sanitary living conditions, computers, DVD players, etc. The poverty stricken areas of the world are as they are because their nations do not respect or allow the creation of institutions which help protect private property rights, or educate people in how free markets work. > > The natural inclination of the ruling class is to funnel > technological advances into the military, maintaining absolute > control over deployment of such technologies and periodically > waging war to prop up the last economic vestiges of rampant > capitalism, with compassion being the number one casualty. Control > is what it is all about, no matter which political system you > subscribe to. Yet this modus operandi is starting to come apart, > with capitalistic systems headed to be the catalyst for global > economic, social, humanitarian and resource catastrophes. Man, I didn't think anyone could make someone, over the internet, see them waving their little red book, but you take the cake. The military doesn't 'let the ruling class funnel technological advances into it'. It has realized, since WWII, that being the technological top dog was the only route to national security against a numerically superior horde of communist buffoonery. > > Very soon, China is going to be a MAJOR problem for the western > world, and there are a number of credible studies which show > impending massive increases in demand for resources such as oil > by China, Taiwan, Korea et al may be a principle (but unstated) > motivation behind the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts and the > formation of the PNAC group of US ruling class planners and > enablers. Bush is just an enabler....and he is brilliant in the > role. The issue really is whether the PNAC model is just an old > way of dealing with a new and potentially insurmountable problem. > It is no doubt that Chinese demand for oil for its expanding automotive industry is a principal contributor to the current oil situation. However, you are ignorant of a few other factors, such as the communist inspired instability in Venezuela, hurricane damage to oil platforms, and the muslim inspired instability in Nigeria. The $54 oil prices we are seeing are specifically for light sweet crude oils, typical of North Sea, Venezuela, and Nigeria. Prices for sour crudes, which are much higher in sulphur and harder to refine, are currently running about $40/bbl. These are proper market prices, and I'll tell you why. Prior to the Iraq war, most developing or undeveloped nations tied their currencies to the US dollar in order to help stabilize their economies. It was the most stable currency, partly because it was subsidizing these other economies, and partly because it was so easy for foreigners to bank their assets in the US. The US for decades has been the rest of the world's tax shelter. Because of the US response to 911, restrictions on banking went into effect that drove away international depositors, and thus lowered the backing of and the demand for the US dollar internationally. Following this, developing and undeveloped nations untied their currencies and retied them to the Euro, partly as a response to the reduction in value of the dollar caused by their leaders pulling their loot out of US banks. This de-tying caused those countries to release large amounts of US dollars, held in reserve by their banks, into the open market, which further devalued the dollar. All of this 50% devaluation of the dollar has resulted in inflation of oil prices. A $50/bbl oil price today is internationally no different from a $25/bbl oil price in 2002. > The latest fashion symbols in China are Hummer/Humvees. What does > that tell you? It tells me that chinese people are learning attitudes of individuality they are going to need to tell their government to go eff itself. > > As a mate of mine recently said to me: > > ------------------------ > "Mark my words, it's going to happen soon that there will be a big > hassle > over oil and energy generally. China is going to be the big thing. > There was > a big attack on Iraq's infrastructure yesterday that has stopped all > production from it's northern fields. Iraq at full production should > do > about 1.8 million barrels per day and it has world's 2nd largest > reserves.. > Current global DAILY consumption is 82 Million barrels! The sums are > all > wrong. Something will happen especially in the context of the US > election. > The yanks are no way going to allow downgrading of their economic > status > over oil. > > www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&q=oil+consumption > > > www.english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2004030851648 > > > I just worked out that people in the USA are currently paying about > 68 cents > Australian for a litre of petrol. Their gallon is only 3.7854118 > litres and > the exchange rate is about 70 cents. The are paying between $1.80 and > $1.86 > US per US gallon. They think this is high and their "human rights" > view of > "lifestyle" is based on low fuel prices for gas guzzling vehicles. > Imagine > what would happen if their fuel went to say Australian prices of > $1.10 a > litre (ie $4 per gallon). They currently use about 19 million barrels > a day; > about 4 times the daily consumption of the next closest country which > is > either Japan or China depending on who you're listening to. > > Much of China's industry is on reduced output due to energy shortage > but > their economy is still growing in spades. I just read that if China > used the > same energy per capita as the US then their consumption would be 80 > Million > barrels a day which just about equates to current global daily > consumption! > > There is war in the middle east and there have been big problems ( > over > Chavez) in Venezuela which has the world's 5th largest reserves and > is a > major exporter to US. I jut heard in passing last night on a news > item that > there has been a big drop recently in US reserves. > > As long ago as the 70's Kissinger said that the US was prepared to go > to war > to protect its resources and "lifestyle". NO matter which way you > look at > it, all this arithmetic means only one outcome - ongoing and > increasing war > unless some alternative source of energy materialises soon or the US > make > "lifestyle" sacrifices like driving smaller cars ( bit this is an > impossibility in the current US political climate- " WHAT???!!! > drive small > energy efficient cars!!! - this is the US of A dude - we don't do > that > shit".) Alternatively they can put the brakes on China somehow?" > ---------------------------------- > > At 44 years of age, the larger picture is still something that > somehow is > slightly out of reach to me, the game is somehow just a bit too big, > the > playing field just a bit too wide. Not that political and economic > concepts > were/are difficult to understand/assimilate. More that things are > changing > so fast and other forces are involved beyond political, social, power > and > resources. Technology is the factor that will enable a new > revolution....as > it is the only way to deal with the unrepairable issue of resources. > > Nowadays, one cannot purely live a life based on political > imperatives. > Within the next generation, the very nature of what it is to be human > will > change. And, according to many of the people involved, such as most > of you > on this list, reality as we know it will have changed beyond all > recognition > within 25 to 50 years (for better or worse). Once you try to > incorporate > such FACTS (and the evidence is already right in front of our eyes), > the > recognition of a new (as yet unheralded and uncertain) revolution in > political systems, tools and perhaps even a significant change in the > great > divide between the ruling class and everyone else... > > We now have corporatisation forcing businesses to replace families, > globalisation supplanting entire workforces in one country for > cheaper > labour in another, the thought process zeitgeist which generates > "conglomerate power" viewpoints commencing within the capitalist > business > mentality and growing like a cancer from there.... > > I'm reminded of an often quoted saying which I now apply to my > considerations of the forthcoming Spike (for want of a better term): > > "If the human mind were so simple we could understand it, we'd be so > simple, > we couldn't." > > I apply the same dictum to trying to assimilate technology into my > political > views....it is somewhere just beyond my reach, but there actually are > many > potent minds examining such things, as you all know only too well. > This list > seems to have a go at it every now and then, but science is generally > concerned with the technology itself, not the repercussions. > > In my view, technology is the only source for more re-sources. Yes, > Bill > Joy's pieces scared me, but no, we should not stop all research as he > suggests, otherwise we will have no response to the endgame of > unchecked > rampant capitalism and nearly complete rape of the so called third > world. To > misquote old Winston, it IS the beginning of the end for capitalism > as an > economic construct. We now have corporatisation forcing businesses to > replace families, globalisation supplanting entire workforces in one > country > for cheaper labour in another, the thought process zeitgeist which > generates > "conglomerate power" viewpoints commencing within the capitalist > business > mentality and growing like a cancer from there....and many young > people do > attempt to mobilise against this onslaught. But they mostly fail to > generate > anything even approaching critical mass. Some diehard activists on > the > extreme left (I'm not one of them) may well go on with the same type > of > activism/efforts for another 15 years, with perhaps the same minor > percentile results, but eventually capitalism will eat itself....and > be > replaced by another system due to the desire for change within the > masses. A > minority does not grow by persuasion, it grows by NEED. It grows by > filling > a void, a gap, which may be growing due to the shrinkage or decay of > a > competing system. No amount of activism will serve any useful purpose > to the > cause unless the time has come for mass acceptance of the cause > promoted by > the activist/s. And we must figure out better ways of destroying > control of > media and entertainment by a select few. Re-spell Rupert Murdoch's > surname, > change it to Mordor and it's very easy to see him wanting the One > Ring. Is > he really Sauron? Yes, he qualifies, in my opinion. > > And Bush, who is his fictional analogy? Is the grotesque Baron > Vladimir > Harkonnen from Dune. No, not at all. The US supports and feeds plenty > of > those types, stooges running various countries and entities on behalf > of the > US. No, Bush is more like an ambassador/enabler for that mysterious > all > powerful group in Dune known as The Guild... > > There are BIG CHANGES afoot, and I want to be around to witness the > results, > but there will be dreadful struggles along the way. No doubt, some > existing > political and economic systems make compelling sense on a variety of > levels. > But despite this, things are NOT going to get better and > egalitarianism, > socialism or a libertarian society (of any dimension) are NOT going > to > become omnipotent any time soon. But the time MAY come when society > will be > ready to choose similar structures. > Despite the FUD, I have placed all my hopes in technology. I have > lost my > hope/faith in human nature, as history shows the true colours of > human > nature. Like dumb sheep, we will eat the grass to the ground, all the > while > accusing each other of eating too much grass. Politics of any > persuasion > will hardly matter. In my view, most political systems ultimately > become > tools of the ruling class, no matter how the system/s begin. They > just > tinker around with the upward trickle of money and power. So my hopes > lie > with bio and nano...and I consider the people directly involved in > bio/nano > as being valid contributors to the "which way forward?" debate. > > So I disagree with Bill Joy. I think the future DOES need us, and it > does > need those who still yearn for better political and economic systems > to > replace those based on capitalist objectives. There are other factors > of > course - I fully comprehend the existence and usefulness of broad > socialist > and environmental causes and the ongoing struggle against the > misguided > Right and their cloud dwelling ruling class. Yet nothing changes the > fact > that the rug is being pulled from under most of us as we speak..... > > Sean > (also a libertarian at heart) > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 14:10:52 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:10:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024065500.94543CC2A@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041024141052.77621.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > > Don't forget how pernicious Communists were/are. I am > a former Marxist and now despise Communists, they are > little more than left-wing fascists. What, you thought we had not noticed? I think the only thing you despise about communists is that they failed. You are still shucking the communist jive. ===== 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 Sun Oct 24 14:13:38 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 07:13:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024071421.47992.qmail@web25203.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024141338.71716.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Trend Ologist wrote: > I like the Marxist professors I've talked to, they > know what is going on. However 'rank & file', 'grass > roots' Communists are mostly thugs, they want revenge > for being raised in lower class households, they want > power. Sean, I've served my sentence in the Marxist > mind-prison, no more probation. > Please, don't ever forget the Communism of 1917 gave > birth to the fascism of 1922. No aside this, it's a > central issue. Ah, one more admits to communism. I prescribe for the both of you to read "The Road to Serfdom" by FA Hayek, "The Machinery of Freedom" by David Friedman, and "It's Good to Be King" by Michael Badnarik. Once you've done that, come back and we'll talk. ===== 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 bphillips211 at sprintpcs.com Sun Oct 24 14:15:39 2004 From: bphillips211 at sprintpcs.com (bphillips211 at sprintpcs.com) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:15:39 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win Message-ID: <217757.1098627339712.JavaMail.root@dedicated169-bos> T.O. I read statements like the one below and have to ask.. " Is he serious about this or is it just trolling of some kind?" I'm a southerner. I speak English with a drawl. I come from a long line of bible-thumpers (though I'm a rationalist/buddhist sort myself). And I'm 2 generations off the farm. And yet I'm here on this list and a part of the transhumanist community. We could sit in a cafe and discuss music, politics, philosophy, martial arts.. any number of subjects.. and you might find I'm far more versed about things that (statistically) I'd expect you to know next to nothing about. DOubtless you have similar areas of private expertise. There is absolutely no excuse for the sort of post below, it's irrational in the extreme. Broad generalizations are not excusable simply by noting the offense just after you commit it. Thanks, Brian "Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men be content with their wives & mistresses and other 'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many Southerners trying to inflict their religion on America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? Northerners weren't particularly interested in abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely un-Christian measures to be instituted. Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of revenge. -------------------- This message was sent from a PCS Phone from Sprint. Get a free PCS Mail account! Sign up via the Web Browser on your Sprint Phone or at http://www.sprintpcs.com. From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Sun Oct 24 15:02:07 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 17:02:07 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024140948.71340.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024140948.71340.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 24 Oct 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: >further devalued the dollar. All of this 50% devaluation of the dollar >has resulted in inflation of oil prices. A $50/bbl oil price today is >internationally no different from a $25/bbl oil price in 2002. That's quite true. The Euro zone is not seeing such a marked increase of the oil price as the dollar zone, since the dollar fell in the meantime. Gas prices here are around 15% higher than in 2002, without taking inflation into account, so in real terms it's a bit less. Alfio From anyservice at cris.crimea.ua Sun Oct 24 14:37:42 2004 From: anyservice at cris.crimea.ua (Gennady Ra) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:37:42 +0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20041024173818.00af3f00@pop.cris.net> Can't resist a desire to share: http://context.themoscowtimes.com/index.php?aid=131199 Pin Heads If enacted, the Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States into a theocracy, where the arbitrary dictates of a "higher power" can override law. By Chris Floyd ===== Will then there be any place for us in the Universe, any extropian refuge, reservation, enclave, niche or ivory tower? Euphemism: I doubt it. Gennady Simferopol Crimea Ukraine From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 15:49:17 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:49:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041024173818.00af3f00@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <20041024154917.90790.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gennady Ra wrote: > Can't resist a desire to share: > > http://context.themoscowtimes.com/index.php?aid=131199 > > Pin Heads > If enacted, the Constitution Restoration Act will effectively > transform the > United States into a theocracy, where the arbitrary dictates of a > "higher power" can override law. No, but it won't. I would bet, though, that extropy would find far more success packaged as a form of unitarianism. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 15:55:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 08:55:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041024173818.00af3f00@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <20041024155553.91494.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> >From the Act: "In interpreting and applying the Constitution of the United States, a court of the United States may not rely upon any constitution, law, administrative rule, Executive order, directive, policy, judicial decision, or any other action of any foreign state or international organization or agency, other than the constitutional law and English common law." This essentially will prevent any court in the US from using anything besides the Common Law and our own previous constitutional precedents. The only thing that concerns me about this is that it may interpret the constitutions of the 50 states as being those of foreign states, since prior Supreme Court rulings have stated that the states are foreign to the 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!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 24 16:03:30 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:03:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20041024173818.00af3f00@pop.cris.net> Message-ID: <20041024160330.26988.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com> --- Gennady Ra wrote: > http://context.themoscowtimes.com/index.php?aid=131199 > > Pin Heads > If enacted, the Constitution Restoration Act will > effectively transform the > United States into a theocracy, where the arbitrary > dictates of a "higher > power" can override law. > By Chris Floyd > ===== > > Will then there be any place for us in the Universe, > any extropian refuge, > reservation, enclave, niche or ivory tower? > > Euphemism: I doubt it. Full text of the bill is at http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/HR3799ConstitutionRestorationAct.html But its chances of passing are irrelevant. It is entirely and completely unconstitutional on its face, and the Constitution gives the Supreme Court the right to review such laws no matter what the laws say. It would be interesting if Congress passed it, and the Supreme Court overruled it, and Congress tried to pretend that was an illegal ruling and ignored it. I wonder if repeatedly passing blatantly unconstitutional laws with the effect of triggering a crisis in confidence in the government, is itself criminal negligence and/or treason (insofar as to attempt to destroy the government of the United States is to make oneself an enemy of said nation)? From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 16:12:30 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:12:30 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024140948.71340.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024161230.D81196FC49@vscan01.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey --- Sean Diggins wrote: > ======================================== > > No, but the big problem, as even a cursory glance through history by > anyone with a modicum of political and economic comprehension clearly > indicates, is we are witness to the endgame of rampant, unchecked > capitalism. Without wanting to inflame this list with heated debates > as to the veracity of my claim, one only needs to consider the fact > the nearly a third of the planet's population does not have running > water in the home to perceive the undeniable fact that capitalism > as an economic system is a failure on a grand scale. A 'fact' which is meaningless outside of the context that that a large chunk of that third of the planets population lives in non-capitalist countries, and wrt capitalist countries, there are fewer people with running water now than at any time in history.... thanks to capitalism. Please leave the anti-capital agitprop at the door. You won't find any sympathy here, except maybe from James Hughes. =------------------------------------------------------- Choose to see it that way if you wish. But your "and wrt capitalist countries, there are fewer people with running water now than at any time in history.... thanks to capitalism." was actually my point. Perhaps I do not possess the tools you possess to convey what I am thinking, but it is not agitprop. "capitalist countries"??? what is that?? Do you mean "democratic countries?". Because capitalism is almost an infinite neural network now. It crosses all country boundaries. Show me one country completely free of any systems where capitalism is not a controlling or significantly contributing component. > > David's book The Spike missed observing the biggest of ironies - the > only hope for humanity is The Spike itself, as the paradigm shifts > urgently needed to reset the course of humanity coincide with the > hope that such technologies which lie beyond The Spike will actually > arrive. For me, there is deep irony that technological advances, > at times the feared enemy of all sides of politics, will be the only > thing that can promulgate the political and economical paradigm > shifts which will allow recovery from resource-hungry capitalist > structures built by the ruling class. pshaw. Firstly, it is Damien's book, not 'David's. ------------------------------------------ Yes, my apologies. Blame it on my sweeping ignorance eh? Must be because I had my head in Das Kapital eh? Jeez, the condescension is dripping....just a typo - I'm a VERY big fan of Damien's, even the reviews he used to write in newspapers here in Australia. I am not a Marxist, nor am I a communist, nor a socialist. However, I see the increasingly great divide between the "haves/have mores" and the "have nots" Marx terminologies still fit the bill when attempting to describe the divide. At least I did not say proletariat. Or lumpen.... Using the term "ruling class" obviously labels me as an idiot savant commie, yes? Did you actually disagree with the thrust of my sentences, which is that the singularity technologies represent the best and most hopeful catalyst to achieve more egalitarian societies? ------------------------------------------- Secondly, resource hungriness is a function of the market. A centrally planned market is so ignorant of price signals that it cannot help to be inefficient, hence socialism/communism are more IN-efficient resource consumers than a free market. Ergo, a capitalist system will use the least resources in achieving the Singularity. Pull your head out of Das Kapital and smell the market. -------------------------------------------- I am and it stinks. Pull your head out of your compassionless "market" and consider this from a (trans)human perspective. I work the "the market" every day and am paid well to analyse it. My signature allows certain activities to occur within "the market" (and no, I'm not a banker). I get sued if I'm wrong. I fact, that's the only reason my opinion is sought on paper - so there is someone to sue. Ain't capitalism grand? "Resource hungriness is a function of the market" - that is utter twaddle. It is a meaningless statement. It's like saying "resource hungriness (??) is a function of the wind and the tide" And since when has it been OK to imply "the market" is the best road, via capitalism, to achieve the Singularity, simply because you conclude allowing it to occur via capitalism will consume less resources? At what human cost? And what other collateral damage is allowable to hasten down the wind? BTW, where did I even mention socialism or communism as being better or even useful? I am talking about a new paradigm, not some neocommunist regression. I just don?t know how to describe my instincts adequately in this respect. ----------------------------------------------- > Further irony lies in the ruling class being unable to keep this > technology for themselves (which they will surely try to do), as > the only way for us to "re-source" the planet's resources is > through worldwide deployment of technological solutions on a global > scale, throughout all levels of society, irrespective of class based > systems. Failure of the ruling elite to recognise this will ensure > there is no future beyond The Spike (well, not a future which > includes us). WHO let all these commies in the door? Sheesh, they're like Kudzu, as soon as a bad infestation is more than a decade gone, the idiots are back to believing in its BS. The ruling class DON'T WANT TO keep this technology for themselves. If you'd looked at ImmInst's movie, Peter Voss was clear on this: technological advances are subsidized by the rich, because they are the early adopters, they pay the most per unit for tech, subisidizing development and implementation of mass production so that the poor can access the same tech at a far lower price. -------------------------------------------------- Mate, you gotta nice way of engaging in conversation. Trust me, I'm not an idiot. It may seem so to you, but perhaps I am just not expressing myself in a way acceptable to you, or maybe my terminologies are setting off your alarm bells...but it is presumptuous to assume. That last sentence of yours above is a doozy. So the motivation of investment from the rich is "to help the poor access the tech at a lower price"? You gotta be kidding, right? And exactly where in this setting does the ruling class let go of their principle asset: CONTROL?? Presumably, you'll next tell me everyone will get free life extending medical procedures in the mail... The market is driven by profit. Nothing else. There is NO SUCH THING as an egalitarian market. Not in capitalist systems anyway. At the risk of a redundant "repost" can we recap a piece I posted earlier? Amah yes, the so called "aspirational class". It's all becoming a bit like a pyramid scheme.... I feel a simplistic cream and milk analogy coming on, but fear I'll be ridiculed for that as well. I'll respond in more detail later. It's late here and I'm gonna sleep. Bottom line though - drop the "your just a na?ve commie crap" and give me (or list members if I'm not worthy) your ideas on how the "Cross Fade" (transition between pre and post singularity) I alluded to will occur, if at all. Presumably, you perceive capitalism in its current form to be infinitely sustainable? If so, I'd like to hear why and how...and I love to know how it will exist post singularity. But lets say, just for example, that the Cross Fade needs to start soon by necessity, due to flaws in our current systems reaching critical mass and decaying or distorting into dangerous turf. In your view, what would propagate such change, if anything? Sean From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 16:24:23 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:24:23 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024141052.77621.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024162423.2ABEB5FBBF@vscan01.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey Sent: Sunday, 24 October 2004 10:11 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception --- Sean Diggins wrote: > > Don't forget how pernicious Communists were/are. I am > a former Marxist and now despise Communists, they are > little more than left-wing fascists. What, you thought we had not noticed? I think the only thing you despise about communists is that they failed. You are still shucking the communist jive. ===== That quote was not from me. I did not write it, nor would I. And I'm not shucking communist jive. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm closer to being an "egalitarian libertarian", if such a thing is possible. Could be I'm still feeling my way around a bit, also. I'm open minded to being wrong. I think it was the old ham Julius Sumner Miller who said "the only times I've ever learnt something is when I've been wrong" But I will never shill for capitalism, as you seem willing to do. Please correctly select your " wrote:" attibutions. Sean From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Oct 24 16:29:02 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 18:29:02 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041024155553.91494.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20041024173818.00af3f00@pop.cris.net> <20041024155553.91494.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204102409295d00c11@mail.gmail.com> This is very scary. See also this website: http://www.yuricareport.com/ Usually I don't pay much attemption to extreme conspiration theories, but this confirms what everyone can understand by carefully reading the press: there are people and groups trying to turn the US into a fundamentalist theocracy. What does this mean? (http://www.aemman.net/letao/archive/000257.html) "Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element's or officer's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government." The legalese is a bit heavy, but does this mean that whoever declares that he is acting in the name of God is efefctively out of the scope of the Law? From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 24 16:16:04 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:16:04 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cats in Heat In-Reply-To: <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Meeeeerrrrrroooooooooaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww At 11:02 PM 10/23/2004, you wrote: >Perhaps it does take one to know one, eh Olga? > > > Trend, the rest of your post puts you in essentially > > the same company with > > those whom you are attacking. > > Olga ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Sun Oct 24 16:23:27 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:23:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024075100.16013.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c52041024004133faa33e@mail.gmail.com> <20041024075100.16013.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041024092044.028f7258@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Lemme see here, Extropians eat RoadKill cuz it's PC, is nice to the roads, suports the ecology and the self helping libertarian. Right? Tabasco Sauce, anyone? At 12:51 AM 10/24/2004, Trend Ologist >Don't be coy. > I don't like rednecks, hard-line christians, and >Communists. Madonna! I'm not like you, Giulio, I'm not >filled with an overflowing respect for every alligator >that crawls out of the swamp. > > > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > So you hate southerners, rednecks, christians, > > communists... > > What else? > > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! >Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.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 wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 24 16:40:37 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:40:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041024055506.11371.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024164037.58464.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- "J. Andrew Rogers" > wrote: > > Rule of Thumb: If you come up with a simple and > obvious solution to > > a problem space that has been thoroughly combed > over for many years > by > > people with a great deal of expertise in the > field, you are almost > > certainly mistaken about your "solution". Doubly > so if you do not > > have expertise in the theoretical foundations of > the field. > > Theoretical foundations of a field which has > produced exactly zero AIs? > You are saying that I need to first learn about all > the ways that > everybody else has been failing for decades before I > can have any > meaningful contribution? Perhaps you are right, at > least so I'd know > exactly all the ways to NOT create an AI. That would seem to be an accurate restatement of that rule of thumb as applied to the AI field. "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat its mistakes," and all - and as you've acknowledged, those who have tried to make AIs have generally failed to do so. Which means they've shown many paths that don't work. Not that you need to study all of them. Just those efforts anywhere near your own route, so you can see mistakes that they made and avoid them. (The odds of any new project - even yours - avoiding said mistakes without this kind of deliberate study and guidance are practically zero. Of course, once the mistakes are avoided, your success is all yours...) BTW - the "mistakes" may very well include some of the theoretical foundations. This wouldn't be the first field to which this has happened (witness common theories about the aerodynamics of heavier-than-air flying machines before the Wright brothers). But even then, they are likely to contain at least a grain of truth that will be of use to you. From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 16:41:47 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:41:47 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <20041024092724.A7B9DD298@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <001401c4b9e8$5ad2eb60$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Sean Diggins ... > > Maybe that could be the tile of David's next book? > > Sean Who is this David you are referring to? Brin? It was Damien Broderick who wrote The Spike. spike From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 16:47:59 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:47:59 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sean, don't waste your time In-Reply-To: <001401c4b9e8$5ad2eb60$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041024164759.DD5DCC7AC@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 > Sean Diggins ... > > Maybe that could be the tile of David's next book? > > Sean Who is this David you are referring to? Brin? It was Damien Broderick who wrote The Spike. spike ------------------------------ Yeah, I know. Alreay corrected it in a previous post. I had less than 3 hours sleep last night and worked hard today, so my neurons arent firing as they should. Least I didn't call you Darren (or Derwood....) Sorry. As someone very used to being called Shane, Shaun, Seen, Shawn and other variations of Sean, I understand your annoyance spike. Sean From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 16:53:28 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204102409295d00c11@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041024165328.26038.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > This is very scary. See also this website: > http://www.yuricareport.com/ > Usually I don't pay much attemption to extreme conspiration theories, > but this confirms what everyone can understand by carefully reading > the press: there are people and groups trying to turn the US into a > fundamentalist theocracy. > > What does this mean? > (http://www.aemman.net/letao/archive/000257.html) > "Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme > Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of > certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is > sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or > against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or > not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that > element's or officer's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source > of law, liberty, or government." > > The legalese is a bit heavy, but does this mean that whoever declares > that he is acting in the name of God is efefctively out of the scope > of the Law? No. What it means is that it is restoring Natural Law, as stated in the constitution, created by who or whatever you believe caused the universe, as an abstraction of the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and evolution (as I happen to believe) or you can short-cut it all and say "God", "Ghu", "Uberhacker", "Metasysop", "The Great Gamer", etc. has embedded objective truth in the universe. This law restores Natural Law to its proper place as the only basis of our Constitution, of Common Law, Equity Law, etc as the framers so frequently stated. This quoted section specifically is saying that the Court cannot reverse the actions of an officer or agency of the federal government on the basis that the officer or agency based its actions in Natural Law. It does not say that the officer or agency HAS to base its actions on the will of God, or even that they may or must do so. Those who believe that all rights are negotiated and have no concrete or objective basis in truth will repell at this law. The subjectivists, the revisionists, those who legislate from the bench, the moral relativists, and other apologists and equivocators who have been seeking to tear down the US Constitution for the last century or so will hate this law, will lie about this law, and will try to claim that it is what it is 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!? Y! Messenger - Communicate in real time. Download now. http://messenger.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 24 17:06:40 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:06:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041024165328.26038.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024170640.94231.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > What does this mean? > > (http://www.aemman.net/letao/archive/000257.html) > > "Notwithstanding any other provision of this > chapter, the Supreme > > Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by > appeal, writ of > > certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent > that relief is > > sought against an element of Federal, State, or > local government, or > > against an officer of Federal, State, or local > government (whether or > > not acting in official personal capacity), by > reason of that > > element's or officer's acknowledgment of God as > the sovereign source > > of law, liberty, or government." > > > > The legalese is a bit heavy, but does this mean > that whoever declares > > that he is acting in the name of God is > efefctively out of the scope > > of the Law? > > No. What it means is that it is restoring Natural > Law, as stated in the > constitution, created by who or whatever you believe > caused the > universe, as an abstraction of the laws of physics, > chemistry, biology, > and evolution (as I happen to believe) or you can > short-cut it all and > say "God", "Ghu", "Uberhacker", "Metasysop", "The > Great Gamer", etc. > has embedded objective truth in the universe. Umm...actually, no. The God referred to is as whoever is in power happens to define it, especially if they claim to have support from a bunch of others (e.g., quoting the Bible or somesuch). Which means that if they believe that your discussion of evolution is sinful and should be made illegal, so be it. Those who refer to "God" in this manner often don't care for those who promote "Natural Law". And if you object, what could you do? Your Natural Law has no place in the eyes of their God - emphasis on "their". > Those who believe that all rights are negotiated and > have no concrete > or objective basis in truth will repell at this law. As will some of those who believe that this would enable efforts to suppress their objectively-based rights, based on what those who propose this legislation have attempted through other means. [They] > will try to claim that > it is what it is not. Don't dismiss the opposition as liars just because you happen to disagree with them at first. From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 24 17:17:30 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:17:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Cats in Heat In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024171730.95361.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> --- Hara Ra wrote: > Meeeeerrrrrroooooooooaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Now, now. There's no need to be insulting to cats. ;P From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 24 17:23:51 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:23:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041024170640.94231.qmail@web81606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024172351.45865.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > > Umm...actually, no. The God referred to is as whoever > is in power happens to define it, especially if they > claim to have support from a bunch of others (e.g., > quoting the Bible or somesuch). Which means that if > they believe that your discussion of evolution is > sinful and should be made illegal, so be it. Um, actually, no. This is pretty well gone over during the early US. The "separation of church and state" is a phrase you'll find in the Communist Manifesto, but not in the Constitution. The first amendment states:"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.." This only means that congress shall not endorse, subsidize, or prohibiting the right of any person to exercise the religion of their choice and/or definition. Furthermore, the Declaration of Independence specifically stated at its start that "When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation." As numerous scholars have elucidated over the years, the Decl of Ind and the Constitution are inseparable and interdependent documents, as each bolsters the cause of the other. > > Those who refer to "God" in this manner often don't > care for those who promote "Natural Law". And if you > object, what could you do? Your Natural Law has no > place in the eyes of their God - emphasis on "their". On the contrary. Whether they believe in my interpretation of reality is immaterial, so long as we all respect the idea that individual liberties are not granted by mere men, they originate in our natures. Whether that nature is a result of evolution, intelligent design, the Matrix, or divine creation is immaterial to the spirit of comity and support of the inalienability of individual liberties. ===== 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Oct 24 17:34:43 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 12:34:43 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] what's in a name, Fortesque? In-Reply-To: <20041024164759.DD5DCC7AC@vscan02.westnet.com.au> References: <001401c4b9e8$5ad2eb60$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <20041024164759.DD5DCC7AC@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041024122830.01c2c638@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:47 AM 10/25/2004 +0800, Sean D. wrote: > >Who is this David you are referring to? Brin? It >was Damien Broderick who wrote The Spike. > >spike > >----------------- >Least I didn't call you Darren (or Derwood....) As I just mentioned to Sean offlist, this correction wasn't from me but from long-time extropian poster Spike Jones. I suspect a few newbies get his posts and mine confused. I've never been called `Spike'. The part of my @ reading `thespike' is just a mnemonic for my book title. Sorry for the confusion. We could deal with this easily by persuading Spike Jones to use his real name, Cecil Faulteroy Jones. Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 24 17:51:39 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:51:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041024172351.45865.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041024175139.43534.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > The first amendment states:"Congress shall make no > law respecting an > establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free > exercise thereof.." > > This only means that congress shall not endorse, > subsidize, or > prohibiting the right of any person to exercise the > religion of their > choice and/or definition. Including forcing other people to exercise the same religion. A Buddhist or a Muslim, for instance, would not have to acknowledge the Christian God. This legislation would set up situations where they would have to, for instance by requiring them to argue for their rights in court from a Christian perspective or risk the judge saying they have no rights. (Any judge who took issue with that could be impeached for doing so.) > As numerous scholars have elucidated over the years, > the Decl of Ind > and the Constitution are inseparable and > interdependent documents, as > each bolsters the cause of the other. They are separable: the DoI isn't the law, but the Constitution is. > > Those who refer to "God" in this manner often > don't > > care for those who promote "Natural Law". And if > you > > object, what could you do? Your Natural Law has > no > > place in the eyes of their God - emphasis on > "their". > > On the contrary. Whether they believe in my > interpretation of reality > is immaterial, so long as we all respect the idea > that individual > liberties are not granted by mere men, they > originate in our natures. But which liberties? The set of liberties that you believe Nature gives you is different from the set of liberties certain priests believe God gives you. Who is to say which prevails? This is why we have laws in the first place: to spell out which liberties are, in fact, in effect. These laws may justify themselves as a clarification of the rights granted to us by Nature, but the fact remains that reasonable people have disagreed enough over these rights to require laws. (Example: I believe that I should be free to voice support for whichever candidate I wish to handle the administrative duties of the government. Some others may believe that I should only be free to voice support for the candidates supported by the current government, since to support anyone else would be to lend support to our enemies who do not agree that our government is doing God's will under His direct inspiration - which means that any action of our government is unquestionably the correct action - and obviously God never intended to allow me to support an enemy unless I myself was an enemy.) From matus at matus1976.com Sun Oct 24 17:46:17 2004 From: matus at matus1976.com (Matus) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:46:17 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024162423.2ABEB5FBBF@vscan01.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <000001c4b9f1$5db7ccc0$6401a8c0@hplaptop> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > > Don't forget how pernicious Communists were/are. I am > a former Marxist and now despise Communists, they are > little more than left-wing fascists. What, you thought we had not noticed? I think the only thing you despise about communists is that they failed. You are still shucking the communist jive. ===== That quote was not from me. I did not write it, nor would I. And I'm not shucking communist jive. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm closer to being an "egalitarian libertarian", if such a thing is possible. ------- No, it's not possible, unless you can explain to us how you plan to enforce equality amongst libertarians. With guns, no noubt... making sure none get too rich, have too many reserves in case of famine, and think too far in the future. You will be forcibly holding every man down to the lowest achiever, the laziest. It's not fair that anyone should have more than anyone else, even though you want to let everyone do whatever they want. How exactly do you reconcile making sure everyone is exactly the same with the live and let live philosophy of libertarianism? " But your "and wrt capitalist countries, there are fewer people with running water now than at any time in history.... thanks to capitalism." And though I wont speak for Mike Lorrey, I will wager that is was a typo, and he meant to say that fewer people are 'without' running water than ever before in the history of humanity. Michael From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 17:56:25 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:56:25 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] unusual names In-Reply-To: <20041024164759.DD5DCC7AC@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <001601c4b9f2$c784f460$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Sean Diggins > ... > > Yeah, I know. > Alreay corrected it in a previous post... People with unusual names must go thru hell in elementary school. Jeez it was hard enough being Greg Jones. Somehow the kids managed to come up with wordplay, or failing that, Pope Gregory. Imagine if I had been Mortimer Phlegmhorker. Perhaps Damien is common in Australia? ... > As someone very used to being called Shane, Shaun, Seen, > Shawn and other > variations of Sean, I understand your annoyance spike. > > Sean Not annoyed, just curious. I hadn't followed the entire thread, and didn't know if you were referring to one of David Brin's books and had the title off a little. My brother-in-law's name is Sean. He got so tired of being called Seen that he changed it to Scott. {8^D spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 18:03:03 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 11:03:03 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] what's in a name, Fortesque? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041024122830.01c2c638@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <001701c4b9f3$b4e9cff0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > >Least I didn't call you Darren (or Derwood....) > > As I just mentioned to Sean offlist, this correction wasn't > from me but from long-time extropian poster Spike Jones. I suspect a few > newbies get his posts and mine confused... You flatter me sir. But thanks in any case. {8^D > Sorry for the confusion... Oh I don't mind one bit. I was fortunate indeed to have been given that nickname back in the mid 80s, long before I ever heard of the Spike. > We could deal with this easily by persuading Spike Jones to > use his real name, Cecil Faulteroy Jones. Damien Broderick Well that is a bit extreme. I shall however continue to differentiate myself from the Spike by signing with the lower case s. spike From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 18:08:01 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:08:01 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] what's in a name, Fortesque? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041024122830.01c2c638@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041024180801.D04FFC00F@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 Sent: Monday, 25 October 2004 1:35 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [extropy-chat] what's in a name, Fortesque? At 12:47 AM 10/25/2004 +0800, Sean D. wrote: > >Who is this David you are referring to? Brin? It >was Damien Broderick who wrote The Spike. > >spike > >----------------- >Least I didn't call you Darren (or Derwood....) As I just mentioned to Sean offlist, this correction wasn't from me but from long-time extropian poster Spike Jones. I suspect a few newbies get his posts and mine confused. I've never been called `Spike'. The part of my @ reading `thespike' is just a mnemonic for my book title. Sorry for the confusion. We could deal with this easily by persuading Spike Jones to use his real name, Cecil Faulteroy Jones. Damien Broderick ------------------------------- ------------------------------- And, as I repied to Damien: Cripes, I'm having a VERY bad night! It's 2.00am here in Western Australia. I'm goin' to bed before I trip over my own feet in here again. Consider me very much "oh dear, oh dear, oh deared..." I need a cup of hot milk and 12 hours sleep... Sean From janhschmidt at hotmail.com Sun Oct 24 18:11:00 2004 From: janhschmidt at hotmail.com (Jan Hendrik Schmidt) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:11:00 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Development of returns on capital investments as we approach the Singularity Message-ID: Here are two questions I've been wondering about for some time: 1. What are the driving forces that determine the average returns on invested capital in our world? Does anyone know the fundamental economic reasons why these returns have so far been around 5-15%? 2. Applying such an economic understanding to Singularity theory (as thought out by Eliezer Yudkowsky, Vernor Vinge, and others), how should we expect capital investment returns to develop as we approach the Singularity? Will they go to zero or to infinity, or stay as they are now? Does anyone know of a good economic treatment of this issue? I'd be most grateful for enlightenment on these issues. Jan Hendrik Schmidt -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Sun Oct 24 18:26:05 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:26:05 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <000001c4b9f1$5db7ccc0$6401a8c0@hplaptop> Message-ID: <20041024182604.02981C98D@vscan02.westnet.com.au> That quote was not from me. I did not write it, nor would I. And I'm not shucking communist jive. Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm closer to being an "egalitarian libertarian", if such a thing is possible. ------- No, it's not possible, unless you can explain to us how you plan to enforce equality amongst libertarians. With guns, no noubt... making sure none get too rich, have too many reserves in case of famine, and think too far in the future. You will be forcibly holding every man down to the lowest achiever, the laziest. It's not fair that anyone should have more than anyone else, even though you want to let everyone do whatever they want. How exactly do you reconcile making sure everyone is exactly the same with the live and let live philosophy of libertarianism? -------------------------------------- Sean: By wanting to be somewhere in the middle. I just havent figured out where. I have never been able to fully embrace libertarianism, or egalitarianism, but I am compellingly attracted to elements of both. I'll have to get back to this later...need sleep. ---------------------------------------- " But your "and wrt capitalist countries, there are fewer people with running water now than at any time in history.... thanks to capitalism." And though I wont speak for Mike Lorrey, I will wager that is was a typo, and he meant to say that fewer people are 'without' running water than ever before in the history of humanity. Michael ------------------------------------------------------- You win, I lose. Obvious, in hindsight...this has NOT been one of my better nights at the keyboard. My brain has exposed itself as being mainly salt water in a boney container! Sean From thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Oct 24 19:04:33 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:04:33 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024182604.02981C98D@vscan02.westnet.com.au> References: <000001c4b9f1$5db7ccc0$6401a8c0@hplaptop> <20041024182604.02981C98D@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041024135426.01c8fdc8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> >" But your "and wrt capitalist countries, there are fewer people with >running water now than at any time in history.... thanks to capitalism." > >And though I wont speak for Mike Lorrey, I will wager that is was a >typo, and he meant to say that fewer people are 'without' running water >than ever before in the history of humanity. > >Michael > >------------------------------------------------------- >You win, I lose. Obvious, in hindsight... Well, the typo was obvious, but not necessarily the truth of the intended observation. For a start, it might be that Mike should have written `...thanks to the increase in technological knowledge', since a lot of the running water infrastructure in the world has been put in place by non-capitalist societies. (Farther back in the chain of logic, one might argue that this knowledge would not have existed were it not for early capitalism in Europe, but then we might as well praise autocracy and monarchy, which would be foolish, since these links were historically contingent.) The question then is whether fewer people really *are* without running water than ever in history. If history starts 10,000 years ago, this has a certain plausibility (although access to streams and rivers might count, which means for the longest portions of early history *almost nobody* was without access to running water, since nobody could live anywhere without it). But since the populations of the `underdeveloped' parts of the world are larger and growing faster than the rich remainder, I suspect that at least the *proportion* without running water might be *increasing*. But I'm too busy just now to go hunting for data. Just checking the underlying logic here... Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 24 19:40:30 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 12:40:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] unusual names In-Reply-To: <001601c4b9f2$c784f460$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041024194030.68729.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > Sean Diggins > > ... > > > > Yeah, I know. > > Alreay corrected it in a previous post... > > People with unusual names must go thru hell in > elementary school. Jeez it was hard enough being > Greg Jones. Somehow the kids managed to come up > with wordplay, or failing that, Pope Gregory. > Imagine if I had been Mortimer Phlegmhorker. Try Tymes. Especially if you hang around those well versed in science fiction. Double-especially if your professional work and interests include turning into reality what some people thought would only be science fiction in their lifetimes - and if the course of your life often reminds people of old sayings (like a certain famous Chinese curse) about interesting, ah, "current events". But despite all that, I wouldn't give up the advantages of an (apparently) unique name. No possibility of being confused for anyone else, save for people deliberately pretending to be me. This counts extra when people can google for your name, and all the results with your full name really are about you - if people see something wierd or unexpected: no, that really is a side of me they hadn't seen before, as opposed to the "must be someone else with the same name" that is usually true for most people in that situation. Even my usual pseudonym (reserved for forums which use such) appears so far to be unique, in that I haven't seen anyone else use it (again, unless someone was deliberately pretending to be me). > My brother-in-law's name is Sean. He got so tired > of > being called Seen that he changed it to Scott. {8^D Try Adrian - which some organizations from time to time assume is actually Adrienne or the like, and in any case a female-only name (so my self-identification as male "must be a mistake"). And no, I didn't change my name to be unique. This is what I was given at birth. I do not know if I would have changed it while in K-12 had I not already had a unique name; I know I was aware of my uniqueness back then. From amara.graps at gmail.com Sun Oct 24 22:37:30 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:37:30 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] One thousand and one dreams Message-ID: (and now for something completely different) http://www.amara.com/thousand/Onethousandandone.html "In my dreams, I travel along the Silk Road, carrying the notes of the oud, dancing the oldest dance in the world, trading gold for saffron, whirling with the dervishes, and curling my toes deep in carpet stories. Discovering Istanbul in January 2004 helped me to synthesize my 1001 dreams." * Arabic Music Maqamat / Some Instruments / the Arabic Language * The Oldest Dance * Picture Words * Story Weaving * Waiting for the Performance (Turkey / EU) Amara From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 24 23:44:26 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 16:44:26 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041024135426.01c8fdc8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <002b01c4ba23$66117ba0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > ... But since the populations of the `underdeveloped' parts > of the world are larger and growing faster than the rich remainder, I > suspect that at least the *proportion* without running water might be > *increasing*... > > Damien Broderick Hard to say about the proportion, but the absolute number of humans without running water is surely increasing. We see this as a great tragedy, but until fairly recently in history, no one had running water. Humanity somehow dealt with it. As kind of an aside, in the current presidential election there is a big deal being made about the shortage of flu vaccine. This struck me as so odd, for it is not clear what a US president has to do with the availability of a vaccine. Does he have a vaccine staff? (Hey you guys, get a bucket, and somebody get those germy things so we can, you know, distillerate it or whatever we do to get vaccines.) No. In any case people seem to be all in a dither because they may miss their flu shot this year. But until a few years ago no one had a flu shot. Somehow we managed to cope. We will again. spike From andrew at ceruleansystems.com Mon Oct 25 03:54:32 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 20:54:32 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] SIAI: Donate Today and Tomorrow In-Reply-To: <20041024055506.11371.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024055506.11371.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <94117C98-2639-11D9-BFAD-003065C9EC00@ceruleansystems.com> On Oct 23, 2004, at 10:55 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > Theoretical foundations of a field which has produced exactly zero AIs? > You are saying that I need to first learn about all the ways that > everybody else has been failing for decades before I can have any > meaningful contribution? Perhaps you are right, at least so I'd know > exactly all the ways to NOT create an AI. In essence, yes, if you knew a lot about theory you would understand WHY so many attempts have failed from a theoretical standpoint. We know a lot more about intelligent systems these days than I think you think we do. What do you think are the theoretical foundations of intelligence? What is its mathematical description? The reason so many AI projects failed is because there were no real theoretical foundations. Most AI has been a random sampling of the computer science phase space. > Oh, BTW: NO, we don't have enough memory yet today. A brain capable of > remembering details of events dating back decades likely has a data > capacity far in excess of anything existing today, maybe even the NSA. Nonsense. You are wrong on two accounts. First, memory of the kind useful for intelligence is not like a tape recorder. It is stored extremely efficiently in an information theoretic sense. That we do not store our computer data even remotely as efficiently is not an indication of capability, though there are good engineering reasons that we choose not to. Second, people remember almost nothing except a few bits of metadata that allow them to reconstruct virtual memories. Do you remember anything about May 16, 1997 (picked at random)? What you wore, what you ate, where you went, what the weather was like? Neither do I. Everything that you know about that day is reconstructed from scant bits of metadata that are shared by many other indistinguishable days that might have actually happened but which you don't remember anything about. This does not require extraordinary amounts of memory at all, particularly not when you have extremely efficient lossy memory per my first point. > I can tell you exactly when a human intelligence starts to create the > majority of its basic rules: that precious agen when the child asks > 'why' and/or 'can I' about so many things and is told why, or no or > yes, or maybe. From this point on, it is all about experiencing and > associating, and categorizing things in accordance with these rules, > and their later enhancements. This has nothing to do with creating basic rules. Intelligence learns patterns it is exposed to, period. A parent may intentionally provide some additional context for those patterns, but that is hardly absolute as those are patterns like any other. You act like those patterns are special and immutable, when their evaluation will drift and bias with experience like all the others. Unless you have ironclad control of all experience and can predict how the experiences that do happen will modify the overall context, you have no guarantees. And what use is an AI where you already can deterministically know every answer it will give you before it gives it to you? j. andrew rogers From hal at finney.org Mon Oct 25 05:05:25 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Development of returns on capital investments as we approach the Singularity Message-ID: <20041025050525.7A07B57E2A@finney.org> Jan Hendrik Schmidt writes: > Here are two questions I've been wondering about for some time: > > 1. What are the driving forces that determine the average returns on > invested capital in our world? Does anyone know the fundamental economic > reasons why these returns have so far been around 5-15%? > > 2. Applying such an economic understanding to Singularity theory (as > thought out by Eliezer Yudkowsky, Vernor Vinge, and others), how should > we expect capital investment returns to develop as we approach the > Singularity? Will they go to zero or to infinity, or stay as they are > now? Does anyone know of a good economic treatment of this issue? You might be interested in looking at Robin Hanson's papers on this subject, available at http://hanson.gmu.edu/econofsf.html. In particular, his papers "Economic Growth Given Machine Intelligence", "If Uploads Come First: The Crack of a Future Dawn", "Is a singularity just around the corner? What it takes to get explosive economic growth", and "Long-Term Growth As A Sequence of Exponential Modes" all discuss issues of growth in the face of extreme technology change. However, Robin's papers make sophisticated use of economic models, so you will need a background in macroeconomics in order to understand them. Another source you might enjoy is David D. Friedman's online book in progress, Future Imperfect, http://patrifriedman.com/prose-others/fi/commented/Future_Imperfect.html. It is largely about the impact of computer technologies from a cypherpunk perspective, but the last few chapters discuss Extropian concepts like biotech, life extension, cryonics, nanotech, and AI. Chapter 18 in particular talks about the impact of human level AI. However I have only skimmed parts of the book and I don't think it goes into much detail on any one topic. Hal From pgptag at gmail.com Mon Oct 25 05:28:02 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 07:28:02 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041024165328.26038.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c5204102409295d00c11@mail.gmail.com> <20041024165328.26038.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204102422282c771ff0@mail.gmail.com> Mike, thanks for the explanation, but now I find this even more disturbing. You interpret the reference to "Natural Law" in terms of rights, and believe it will be used to protect individual rights. I am afraid it will be interpreted in terms of duties and things forbidden, and used to take individual rights away. "Natural Law" is a beautiful philosophic concept, but it is not defined precisely, and cannot be defined precisely. So it is very, very open to interpretation, and since we are talking of law and legislation, the interpretation will be provided by those in power. Suppose they want to outlaw stem cell research, abortion, sex out of marriage, etc., as things against Natural Law. Suppse they want to outlaw this very extropy-chat list, or your Free State. Suppose they want to outlaw the Libertarian Party. It seems to me that if a judge simply claims that these things are against Natural Law, he can get away with it without even having to prove his claim, and nobody can criticize or reverse his decision. On Sun, 24 Oct 2004 09:53:28 -0700 (PDT), Mike Lorrey wrote: > > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > > This is very scary. See also this website: > > http://www.yuricareport.com/ > > Usually I don't pay much attemption to extreme conspiration theories, > > but this confirms what everyone can understand by carefully reading > > the press: there are people and groups trying to turn the US into a > > fundamentalist theocracy. > > > > What does this mean? > > (http://www.aemman.net/letao/archive/000257.html) > > "Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme > > Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of > > certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is > > sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or > > against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or > > not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that > > element's or officer's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source > > of law, liberty, or government." > > > > The legalese is a bit heavy, but does this mean that whoever declares > > that he is acting in the name of God is efefctively out of the scope > > of the Law? > > No. What it means is that it is restoring Natural Law, as stated in the > constitution, created by who or whatever you believe caused the > universe, as an abstraction of the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, > and evolution (as I happen to believe) or you can short-cut it all and > say "God", "Ghu", "Uberhacker", "Metasysop", "The Great Gamer", etc. > has embedded objective truth in the universe. > > This law restores Natural Law to its proper place as the only basis of > our Constitution, of Common Law, Equity Law, etc as the framers so > frequently stated. This quoted section specifically is saying that the > Court cannot reverse the actions of an officer or agency of the federal > government on the basis that the officer or agency based its actions in > Natural Law. It does not say that the officer or agency HAS to base its > actions on the will of God, or even that they may or must do so. > > Those who believe that all rights are negotiated and have no concrete > or objective basis in truth will repell at this law. The subjectivists, > the revisionists, those who legislate from the bench, the moral > relativists, and other apologists and equivocators who have been > seeking to tear down the US Constitution for the last century or so > will hate this law, will lie about this law, and will try to claim that > it is what it is not. From scerir at libero.it Mon Oct 25 06:12:51 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:12:51 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac><20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410511 'Controlled Antihydrogen Propulsion for NASA's Future in Very Deep Space' by Michael Martin Nieto, Michael H. Holzscheiter, Slava G. Turyshev. 12 pages, 3 figures, to be published in the Prceedings of the 2004 NASA/JPL Workshop on Physics for Planetary Exploration 'To world-wide notice, in 2002 the ATHENA collaboration at CERN (in Geneva, Switzerland) announced the creation of order 100,000 low energy antihydrogen atoms. Thus, the concept of using condensed antihydrogen as a low-weight, powerful fuel (i.e., it produces a thousand times more energy per unit weight of fuel than fission/fusion) for very deep space missions (the Oort cloud and beyond) had reached the realm of conceivability. We briefly discuss the history of antimatter research and focus on the technologies that must be developed to allow a future use of controlled, condensed antihydrogen for propulsion purposes. We emphasize that a dedicated antiproton source (the main barrier to copious antihydrogen production) must be built in the US, perhaps as a joint NASA/DOE/NIH project. This is because the only practical sources in the world are at CERN and the proposed facility at GSI in Germany. We outline the scope and magnitude of such a dedicated national facility and identify critical project milestones. We estimate that, starting with the present level of knowledge and multi-agency support, the goal of using antihydrogen for propulsion purposes may be accomplished in ~50 years.' ------------- [Next step should be the controlled 'unmatter' propulsion, or the controlled teleported antimatter propulsion, of course :-)] From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 25 06:43:11 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2004 23:43:11 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041024232237.02966280@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Read the paper, I have to cynically say, Hey, found some mice, now let's build a mousetrap industry. After 35 years of watching hot fusion making lotsa baby steps, always we'll have something in 30 years, and the splotchy history of the NIF at Livermore LRL I smellith another boondoggle in the making. A few basics to consider: 1) 1 milligram of anti H2 is 2 mg of energy, approx 1KiloTon of explosive energy here. This is considerably MORE than the worst possible nuclear plant breakdown, say Chernobyl, involving an order less energy over much longer time. Point is, once we get beyond micrograms, the facility must be space based. 1A) The high energy gamma output of such an incident goes almost entirely into radioactives when hitting other matter. Not nice. 2) Production efficiency is exhorbitantly low. SPSS anyone? 3) Merely a tiny complaint here - you need a really GOOOOOOOD vaccuum for this stuff. Cosmic radiation and natural radiation will be unavoidable and create a fairly strong radiation source no matter what you do. 4) I cannot see any way to make the matter-antimatter reaction be containable into a beam with enough directionality to be of any use. As mentioned in the paper for containment, 10^12 Teslas for the ions. The Gammas can't be contained by anything. (Well, if you want to use the kind of grazing incidence technology used for Gamma Ray satellites, but the mass ratio of such a thing is truly unreasonable.) (sigh. Remember, uploads, nano and 1% lightspeed are doable, no need for this stuff....) (so, no matter ...... ((:(( ) At 11:12 PM 10/24/2004, you wrote: >http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0410511 > >'Controlled Antihydrogen Propulsion >for NASA's Future in Very Deep Space' ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From eliasen at mindspring.com Mon Oct 25 07:23:40 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 01:23:40 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041024232237.02966280@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024232237.02966280@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <417CA9FC.2000609@mindspring.com> Hara Ra wrote: > A few basics to consider: > > 1) 1 milligram of anti H2 is 2 mg of energy, approx 1KiloTon of > explosive energy here. This is considerably MORE than the worst possible > nuclear plant breakdown, say Chernobyl, involving an order less energy > over much longer time. No, you're not even close. 2 milligrams is equal to 0.04 kilotons of TNT, or about the amount of energy in 1300 gallons of gasoline. Try using Frink: http://futureboy.homeip.net/fsp/frink.fsp Enter: 2 mg c^2 -> kilotons TNT or 2 mg c^2 -> gallons gasoline > Point is, once we get beyond micrograms, the facility must be space based. Should my local gas station be space-based too, considering? -- 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 25 07:34:53 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 00:34:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Presidents and vaccines In-Reply-To: <002b01c4ba23$66117ba0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041025073453.77506.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > As kind of an aside, in the current presidential > election > there is a big deal being made about the shortage of > flu > vaccine. This struck me as so odd, for it is not > clear > what a US president has to do with the availability > of a > vaccine. It is true that the US President's staff does not directly manufacture vaccine. However, there used to be more companies that manufactured this vaccine; they left the market because it was unprofitable. Directing corporate welfare is definitely within the powers of said office. It is also worth noting that this is one of the more concrete scenarios the military predicted, when asked about how bioweapon-based terrorism (which the current US President had made a big deal of defending the US against) might manifest. Damage to the US in terms of lost productivity, lost morale, and so forth - not to mention negative effects from the shortage of the vaccine itself, which we are now seeing. (People fighting each other for shots, medical personnel under threat of legal action - and probably at least one medic actually fined or jailed who would not otherwise be - for violating the government's rationing of the vaccine, opportunists soaking up capital for providing a service that would otherwise have been commonplace, more distrust of the government when politicians allocate some of the vaccine to themselves, et cetera.) Not as dramatic as 9/11, but far more insidious, and perhaps more damaging overall for that. In fact, al-Quaeda could issue a statement taking responsibility for it and, based purely on what's been happening and is likely to happen, be widely believed if there is otherwise even a shred of doubt that the vaccine contamination was accidental. (Short version: the US President made a big fuss over protecting us from stuff like this, and then this happened anyway.) > No. In any case people seem to be all in a dither > because > they may miss their flu shot this year. But until a > few > years ago no one had a flu shot. Somehow we managed > to > cope. We will again. This is true. It's hardly doomsday (except for the few people who will die of the flu, which is part of why we'd been encouraged to get flu shots these past few years). But note that we didn't have the Internet until a few decades ago, nor did we have a US President (or a US) merely two and a half centuries ago. Our current standard of living, including our current life span, depends largely on things that most of us can do without in theory, especially for a very short while. From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Mon Oct 25 13:34:56 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:34:56 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win Message-ID: Although I live in Atlanta, I'm not your Southerner, but a Southerner, as I migrated here 4 years ago. If you look at demographics in the south, you'll see that most of us and our ancesters weren't around 140 years ago. Just look at Southern states areas like South Florida, Atlanta, Austin, Dallas, North Carolina's research triangle and you'll see large portions of the population moved down from northern states for various reasons. It's interesting that you complain about a group of perceived bigots by being an uninformed cyber-redneck. Perhaps the reason Bush will win is because of ineffectual complaining and hand-wringing instead of suitable action. Try to belittle someone's relgious and political beliefs again and I'll spit on the ground. :) BAL >From: Trend Ologist >To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >Subject: [extropy-chat] looks like Bush will win >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 16:36:58 +0100 (BST) > >Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up >being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with >their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they >want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men >be content with their wives & mistresses and other >'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl >approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity >I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many >Southerners trying to inflict their religion on >America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. > And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? >Northerners weren't particularly interested in >abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid >the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee >slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway >slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely >un-Christian measures to be instituted. >Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't >avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of >revenge. > > > > > >___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! >Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >http://uk.messenger.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 Mon Oct 25 13:37:47 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 09:37:47 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] my last post on the South Message-ID: Interesting and comical that you say this is your "last post" and then ask several questions. BAL >From: Trend Ologist >To: Giu1i0 Pri5c0 , ExI chat list > >Subject: [extropy-chat] my last post on the South >Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 19:07:16 +0100 (BST) > >This will be my last post on the subject of Southern culture. BTW: >1. Who said being unPC is necessarily wrong? >2. Where did I say rednecks live in rural areas? Do liberals live in >cities? Do real men eat quiche? Does a bear crap in the woods? > >Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > >unPC term with negative > >connotations. > >--------------------------------- > ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 25 14:04:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 07:04:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <002b01c4ba23$66117ba0$6501a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041025140424.74152.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > > Damien Broderick > > > ... But since the populations of the `underdeveloped' parts > > of the world are larger and growing faster than the rich remainder, > > I suspect that at least the *proportion* without running water might > > be *increasing*... > > > > Hard to say about the proportion, but the absolute number > of humans without running water is surely increasing. > We see this as a great tragedy, but until fairly recently > in history, no one had running water. Humanity somehow > dealt with it. As I've said before: if a nation fails to develop (running water, among other things) it is because that nation fails to or refuses to establish institutions that protect private property rights. It is no fault of ours. Third world thugs would rather spend their meager resources, and whatever aid they can beg, borrow, or steal, for weaponry and more thuggish underlings, to subject their citizens and expand their tyranny. Typically this is with the assistance of so-called 'liberation' forces backed by socialist/communist causes. ===== 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 Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Mon Oct 25 14:27:01 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:27:01 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Cthuugle for your nameless eldritch searches In-Reply-To: <1098710041.11399.1.camel@osculation.free2air.net> References: <97D26BB2-266E-11D9-8BAB-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> <1098710041.11399.1.camel@osculation.free2air.net> Message-ID: Check out: http://hello-cthulhu.com/ >>> From: Damien Broderick >>> Date: 23 October 2004 21:49:03 GMT+02:00 >>> To: "'ExI chat list'" >>> Subject: [extropy-chat] Cthuugle for your nameless eldritch searches >>> Reply-To: ExI chat list >>> >>> For H. P. Lovecraft fans, a functioning search engine: >>> >>> http://www.cthuugle.com/ >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat >>> From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 25 14:54:14 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 07:54:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204102422282c771ff0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20041025145414.82933.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > Mike, thanks for the explanation, but now I find this even more > disturbing. > You interpret the reference to "Natural Law" in terms of rights, and > believe it will be used to protect individual rights. I am afraid it > will be interpreted in terms of duties and things forbidden, and used > to take individual rights away. > "Natural Law" is a beautiful philosophic concept, but it is not > defined precisely, and cannot be defined precisely. So it is very, > very open to interpretation, and since we are talking of law and > legislation, the interpretation will be provided by those in power. No, really, it isn't. I understand that those of you in countries without Common Law don't have the experience with this, but this is one of the advantages that the anglo countries have had for several centuries. Natural Law starts off recognising that all power, rights, and responsibility originates in the individual as a sovereign entity in a state of nature. There are no societal rights, no group rights of any kind. And what is the matter with duty, which is just another word for responsibility? ANY free person is responsible for themselves. The path to tyranny begins with people who seek to shuck their responsibilities. It is through giving up responsibility that one loses individual liberties. Irresponsibility |=| 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 25 15:39:39 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 08:39:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FRINK ERROR: Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: <417CA9FC.2000609@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041025153939.8697.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> From: 7 grams c^2 To: bushels TNT Result: Conformance error Left side is: 157282156278943087/250 (approx. 6.291286251157722e14) m^2 s^-2 kg (energy) Right side is: 162525.07684181936305 m^5 s^-2 (unknown unit type) Suggestion: divide left side by mass_density For help, type: units[mass_density] to list known units with these dimensions. Yeah, I'm a smart-ass. --- Alan Eliasen wrote: > > Hara Ra wrote: > > A few basics to consider: > > > > 1) 1 milligram of anti H2 is 2 mg of energy, approx 1KiloTon of > > explosive energy here. This is considerably MORE than the worst > possible > > nuclear plant breakdown, say Chernobyl, involving an order less > energy > > over much longer time. > > No, you're not even close. 2 milligrams is equal to 0.04 kilotons > of TNT, > or about the amount of energy in 1300 gallons of gasoline. > > Try using Frink: > > http://futureboy.homeip.net/fsp/frink.fsp > > Enter: > > 2 mg c^2 -> kilotons TNT > or > 2 mg c^2 -> gallons gasoline > > > Point is, once we get beyond micrograms, the facility must be space > based. > > Should my local gas station be space-based too, considering? > > -- > 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 > _______________________________________________ > 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Mon Oct 25 16:35:13 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 00:35:13 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041025140424.74152.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041025163513.2B6F98D2FD@vscan01.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey Sent: Monday, 25 October 2004 10:04 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception --- Spike wrote: > > Damien Broderick > > > ... But since the populations of the `underdeveloped' parts > > of the world are larger and growing faster than the rich remainder, > > I suspect that at least the *proportion* without running water might > > be *increasing*... > > > > Hard to say about the proportion, but the absolute number > of humans without running water is surely increasing. > We see this as a great tragedy, but until fairly recently > in history, no one had running water. Humanity somehow > dealt with it. As I've said before: if a nation fails to develop (running water, among other things) it is because that nation fails to or refuses to establish institutions that protect private property rights. It is no fault of ours. ----------------------------------------- You really ARE a true libertarian Mike. No grey/gray areas for you. It's ALL clear as day. That last sentence....what a wonderful thing to be able to say that to the mirror each morning. I'm with you, Mike. ------------------------------------------- Third world thugs would rather spend their meager resources, and whatever aid they can beg, borrow, or steal, for weaponry and more thuggish underlings, to subject their citizens and expand their tyranny. Typically this is with the assistance of so-called 'liberation' forces backed by socialist/communist causes. -------------------------------------------- And you, as a wise, informed "Vice Chair" (still one rung to go eh?) have personally witnessed this "backing by socialist/communist causes"? But somehow, during your travels, you missed all the backing by manifestly corrupt, cynical capitalist administrations of various western democracies? Or the fact that a large proportion of your so called "third world thugs" are actually stooges? And just which socialist/communist causes around the place today have sufficient resources to be backing up thugs, despots and dictators? Maybe Castro is their banker, eh? Sooner or later, it all comes down to plundering. Who are the plunderers? Communists? Sheesh...and you tried to paint me as being bonkers. I gotta say though, I like the new title to the thread. Certainly applied to some of my previous posts. You been awake too long also? Sean From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Oct 25 17:19:16 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:19:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Natural law In-Reply-To: <20041025145414.82933.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> References: <470a3c5204102422282c771ff0@mail.gmail.com> <20041025145414.82933.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041025121111.01bfd2d0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:54 AM 10/25/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote: >Natural Law starts off recognising that all power, rights, and >responsibility originates in the individual as a sovereign entity in a >state of nature. There are no societal rights, no group rights of any >kind. And this is where the analysis fails even before it kicks into first gear. The proposition is ahistorical and absurd. The worth of the individual is a perception or choice that emerged very slowly indeed against an absolutely apodictic sense that individuals were role-bearers in a small tightly-knit community of people entirely dependent upon each other for survival, knitted together by bonds of annual liturgy. If one wanted a slightly more plausible Natural Law doctrine today, still run on the same Rousseauesque lines as Mike's claim, probably it would have to take the (no less bizarre and misleading) form: `Natural Law starts off recognising that all power, rights, and responsibility originates in the gene as a [etc] > Damien Broderick From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 25 17:28:29 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:28:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Natural law In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041025121111.01bfd2d0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041025172829.43508.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 07:54 AM 10/25/2004 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote: > >Natural Law starts off recognising that all power, > rights, and > >responsibility originates in the individual as a > sovereign entity in a > >state of nature. There are no societal rights, no > group rights of any > >kind. > > And this is where the analysis fails even before it > kicks into first gear. > The proposition is ahistorical and absurd. The worth > of the individual is a > perception or choice that emerged very slowly indeed > against an absolutely > apodictic sense that individuals were role-bearers > in a small tightly-knit > community of people entirely dependent upon each > other for survival, > knitted together by bonds of annual liturgy. Distinction: the worth of the individual was there all along, but the *decision and wisdom to recognize this worth* is a perception or choice that emerged... If a "natural" right is ignored by others, does it still exist? In theory it does - even if it is rendered mostly meaningless in that (common) situation. From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 25 17:58:10 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041025145414.82933.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041025175810.54546.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > > Mike, thanks for the explanation, but now I find > this even more > > disturbing. > > You interpret the reference to "Natural Law" in > terms of rights, and > > believe it will be used to protect individual > rights. I am afraid it > > will be interpreted in terms of duties and things > forbidden, and used > > to take individual rights away. > > "Natural Law" is a beautiful philosophic concept, > but it is not > > defined precisely, and cannot be defined > precisely. So it is very, > > very open to interpretation, and since we are > talking of law and > > legislation, the interpretation will be provided > by those in power. > > No, really, it isn't. I understand that those of you > in countries > without Common Law don't have the experience with > this, but this is one > of the advantages that the anglo countries have had > for several > centuries. I'm not only in an anglo country, I'm in America, but I agree with the likely negative interpretation. Part of the problem is that many of those in power have been trying to move away from rule-by-law, since the laws keep them from imposing their visions on other people. ("[Other group] is allowed to exist?" "Sorry, murder is against the law." "Then change the law." "Sorry, the rest of America would rather not legalize murder." "Then get rid of the law - all of it.") Natural Law is fine in theory. So's Communism. But just like Communism, the problem comes with how it gets implemented by those in power: if "laws that are obvious from Nature with no need for being stated" is the supreme authority, then it becomes very easy to abuse NL simply by ignoring some of its fundamental concepts, for example that > Natural Law starts off recognising that all power, > rights, and > responsibility originates in the individual as a > sovereign entity in a > state of nature. There are no societal rights, no > group rights of any > kind. and instead just claim that NL recognizes the "rights" of citizens to serve their government (or words to that effect). Similar perversions of original intent fuel many religious neo-Luddites, who see in the holy words of their founders only encouragement to hate those who seek to unlock human nature, even if their founders (if alive today) might have only nice things to say about transhumanity. Our current system of laws is not perfect, but at least it somewhat protects against abuses like that. This protection alone is perhaps responsible for most of the difference between first world and third world countries. (And note that the second world arguably was somewhere between absence of laws and rule of law in terms of the protection given to citizens against abuse by the powerful, in part because the ideology of their government was in conflict with the reality of control by a few elites.) From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 25 18:22:25 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:22:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041025163513.2B6F98D2FD@vscan01.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041025182225.23935.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Lorrey > > As I've said before: if a nation fails to develop (running water, > among > other things) it is because that nation fails to or refuses to > establish institutions that protect private property rights. It is no > fault of ours. > > ----------------------------------------- > You really ARE a true libertarian Mike. No grey/gray areas for you. > It's ALL clear as day. > That last sentence....what a wonderful thing to be able to say that > to the mirror each morning. > I'm with you, Mike. You're not that good at sarcasm, Sean, any more than Penn is. > > Third world thugs would rather spend their meager resources, and > whatever aid they can beg, borrow, or steal, for weaponry and more > thuggish underlings, to subject their citizens and expand their > tyranny. Typically this is with the assistance of so-called > 'liberation' forces backed by socialist/communist causes. > > -------------------------------------------- > > And you, as a wise, informed "Vice Chair" (still one rung to go eh?) > have personally witnessed this "backing by socialist/communist > causes"? You are new here, so I won't get ticked at your ignorance. > But somehow, during your travels, you missed all the backing by > manifestly corrupt, cynical capitalist administrations of various > western democracies? What makes you think they are capitalist administrations? Most of the western democracies are quite socialized, even most of the US. The US as a whole is not capitalist, it is mercantilist. > Or the fact that a large proportion of your so called "third world > thugs" are actually stooges? Stooges for who? Yes, I know who in quite a few cases. > And just which socialist/communist causes around the place today have > sufficient resources to be backing up thugs, despots and dictators? > Maybe Castro is their banker, eh? Chinese Communist Party, Peoples Revolutionary Army (the largest business owner in China), The 5th ComIntern (profits from the looting of the USSR, and operatives from the former-KGB), the US and EU labor movements. As well as FARC. > > Sooner or later, it all comes down to plundering. Who are the > plunderers? > Communists? Who is the biggest cocaine trafficker right now? FARC, a communist organization, with revinues in the billions. They could be a Fortune 500 company if they wanted to be. What would happen to them if the US ended the drug war? FARC would lose hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars in profits. Why would the US administrations allow them to earn so many profits? > > Sheesh...and you tried to paint me as being bonkers. > > I gotta say though, I like the new title to the thread. Certainly > applied to some of my previous posts. > You been awake too long also? Not physically. Philosophically, politically, and mentally I've been awake for several years now. ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From thespike at satx.rr.com Mon Oct 25 18:27:31 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 13:27:31 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] entanglement and mass Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041025132702.01b45b08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> [a somewhat waffly piece perhaps of interest:] By MICHAEL BROOKS New Scientist If you thought that quantum entanglement - the weird effect that allows two particles to behave as one, no matter how far apart they are - is too subtle to affect your daily life, think again. The phenomenon could be responsible for something as significant as the mass of everyday objects, yourself included, and could finally explain why the fundamental particles of matter have the mass they do. Sometimes, the interaction of two particles, say electrons, causes their individual properties, such as spin, to become ?entangled?. If you then change the spin of one particle it will instantly affect the spin of the other, regardless of the distance between them. There is mounting evidence that entanglement has consequences in the macroscopic world. Last year physicist Vlatko Vedral of the University of Leeds, UK, showed that entanglement is involved in superconductivity. Now, he has shown in a paper submitted to the journal Physical Review Letters that entanglement can explain one of the defining traits of superconductivity ? the Meissner effect, in which a magnet will levitate above a piece of superconducting material. The magnetic field induces a current in the surface of the superconductor, and this current effectively excludes the magnetic field from the interior of the material, causing the magnet to hover. Photons in treacle Only a current composed of entangled electrons in the superconductor can achieve this effect, Vedral says. The current halts the photons of the magnetic field after they have travelled only a short distance through the superconductor. For the normally massless photons it is as if they have suddenly entered treacle, effectively giving them a mass. Vedral also claims that a similar mechanism may be behind the mass of all particles. The standard model of physics says that matter is made of particles such as electrons, neutrinos, and quarks, while the various forces in the universe, such as the strong and weak nuclear forces, act through ?mediator? particles such as the gluon. In theory, these mediators are all massless, and so all the fundamental forces should act over infinite distances. In reality, they do not: the forces have a limited range, and the mediator particles have mass. Physicists believe that the source of this mass is something called the Higgs field that fills the universe and is mediated by a particle known as the Higgs boson. These bosons are thought to exist in a ?condensed? state that excludes the mediator particles such as gluons in the same way that a superconductor?s entangled electrons exclude the photons of a magnetic field. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 25 18:36:53 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:36:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041025175810.54546.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041025183653.65692.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Natural Law starts off recognising that all power, > > rights, and > > responsibility originates in the individual as a > > sovereign entity in a > > state of nature. There are no societal rights, no > > group rights of any > > kind. > > and instead just claim that NL recognizes the "rights" > of citizens to serve their government (or words to > that effect). Similar perversions of original intent > fuel many religious neo-Luddites, who see in the holy > words of their founders only encouragement to hate > those who seek to unlock human nature, even if their > founders (if alive today) might have only nice things > to say about transhumanity. Problem is such an abuse cannot be treated as a right. You can't be obligated to do anything for anyone which you have not specifically contracted to do. It is hard enough to draft people for national defense, you aren't going to do it for anything else. > > Our current system of laws is not perfect, but at > least it somewhat protects against abuses like that. > This protection alone is perhaps responsible for most > of the difference between first world and third world > countries. (And note that the second world arguably > was somewhere between absence of laws and rule of law > in terms of the protection given to citizens against > abuse by the powerful, in part because the ideology of > their government was in conflict with the reality of > control by a few elites.) You are sadly mistaken if you think the current laws protect us against it. The fact is that the laws you think protect against it are actually the laws that impose it: a) income tax: fractional slavery b) zoning laws: land fascism c) sign, parade, advertising, etc laws: confiscation of free speech d) McCain-Feingold: more confiscatino of free speech e) 20,000 gun-control laws: victim-disarmament and confiscation of self-defense rights I could go on all day long in this. The problem with the above laws, and millions more I could name, are that they are not authorized by the US Constitution, congress doesn't have the power to pass them, state legislatures don't have the power to pass them, and local governments don't have the power to pass them. The Common Law is all you need, or, in its absence, its modern equivalent, the Common Economic Protocol (version 1.0 is out, btw). ===== 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!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com From wingcat at pacbell.net Mon Oct 25 18:47:57 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 11:47:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Constitution Restoration Act will effectively transform the United States... In-Reply-To: <20041025183653.65692.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041025184757.70540.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > Natural Law starts off recognising that all > power, > > > rights, and > > > responsibility originates in the individual as a > > > sovereign entity in a > > > state of nature. There are no societal rights, > no > > > group rights of any > > > kind. > > > > and instead just claim that NL recognizes the > "rights" > > of citizens to serve their government (or words to > > that effect). Similar perversions of original > intent > > fuel many religious neo-Luddites, who see in the > holy > > words of their founders only encouragement to hate > > those who seek to unlock human nature, even if > their > > founders (if alive today) might have only nice > things > > to say about transhumanity. > > Problem is such an abuse cannot be treated as a > right. You can't be > obligated to do anything for anyone which you have > not specifically > contracted to do. It is hard enough to draft people > for national > defense, you aren't going to do it for anything > else. Oh, it's easy enough. You've contracted to be a citizen of the US, right? (Else you're on a visa or some other special and more explicit contract, or you risk being deported.) But they change the nature of that contract all the time without your direct and explicit consent, by changing the laws. (There is an agent who represents you and many many others in the committee that drafts and passes the law. You may or may not have voted for that agent; it is quite possible that agent was elected by the 60% of the people in your group who disagree with you. And in any case your agent may be effectively voiceless in certain situations where most of the other agents are convinced of the "need" for something yet your agent sees through the false request.) > > Our current system of laws is not perfect, but at > > least it somewhat protects against abuses like > that. > > This protection alone is perhaps responsible for > most > > of the difference between first world and third > world > > countries. (And note that the second world > arguably > > was somewhere between absence of laws and rule of > law > > in terms of the protection given to citizens > against > > abuse by the powerful, in part because the > ideology of > > their government was in conflict with the reality > of > > control by a few elites.) > > You are sadly mistaken if you think the current laws > protect us against > it. I'm not saying they do - fully. I'm just saying that, even with all the bad things they allow through, they still do a better job than the system you're proposing as it would likely be enacted. (For example, "fractional slavery" through income tax is better than absolute slavery through formal slavery. No slavery would be better, of course - but neither the current system nor your proposed alternate would in fact achieve that. The same argument applies to most other flaws you can find in the current system. Good luck finding a system which can not be abused at all, other than pure anarchy - which tends to get replaced by rule-by-whim-of-the-strong quickly...) From harara at sbcglobal.net Mon Oct 25 19:03:55 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 12:03:55 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: <417CA9FC.2000609@mindspring.com> References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024232237.02966280@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <417CA9FC.2000609@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041025115306.0290cab8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I tried Frink, couldn't get it to work for me. So, basics: 1 Kg matter by E=Mc^2 gives 10^17 Joules 1 Kiloton TNT gives 4 x 10 ^ 12 Joules 1 mg Matter gives 10^11 Joules, 2mg (1mg H x 1mg AntiH) gives 2 x 10^11 Joules 1 mg AntiMatter leads to 50000 grams of TNT. BlockBuster Bomb size. I checked my comments about Nuclear Reactors, way off. Sorry. Anyway, 1g or more antimatter is serious stuff. Thanks for corrections. At 12:23 AM 10/25/2004, you wrote: >Hara Ra wrote: > > A few basics to consider: > > > > 1) 1 milligram of anti H2 is 2 mg of energy, approx 1KiloTon of > > explosive energy here. This is considerably MORE than the worst possible > > nuclear plant breakdown, say Chernobyl, involving an order less energy > > over much longer time. > > No, you're not even close. 2 milligrams is equal to 0.04 kilotons of TNT, >or about the amount of energy in 1300 gallons of gasoline. > > Try using Frink: > > http://futureboy.homeip.net/fsp/frink.fsp > > Enter: > > 2 mg c^2 -> kilotons TNT >or > 2 mg c^2 -> gallons gasoline > > > Point is, once we get beyond micrograms, the facility must be space based. > > Should my local gas station be space-based too, considering? > >-- > 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 >_______________________________________________ >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 gingell at gnat.com Mon Oct 25 20:37:10 2004 From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 16:37:10 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041025115306.0290cab8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024232237.02966280@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <417CA9FC.2000609@mindspring.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041025115306.0290cab8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <16765.25590.100414.862756@nile.gnat.com> Hara Ra writes: > Anyway, 1g or more antimatter is serious stuff. Just to add a little more perspective, a 20 megaton hydrogen bomb annihilates about a kilogram of matter. So macroscopic quantities of antimatter are indeed to be taken seriously, but short of truck loads not blow up the world seriously. Literally blowing up the world, as in generating a yield comparable to the gravitation binding energy of the planet and accelerating the residue cloud of planet Earth to escape velocity, would require a smidge more that a million, million tons of antimatter, eg: Frink Copyright 2000-2004 Alan Eliasen, eliasen at mindspring.com http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/ Enter calculations in the text field at bottom. Use up/down arrows to repeat/modify previous calculations. # Lower bound on GBE of Earth in Joules. 2.24*10^32 J 224.00000000000000000e+30 m^2 s^-2 kg (energy) # Expressed as megatons * c^2 2.24*10^32 J -> megatons c^2 2.7473303018303695101e+6 Though of course, short of dilithium crystals, there's no way to convert the whole bang into KE and in real life you mostly end up with heat - so rest assured boiling vapor cloud Earth abides and ought to congeal good as new in umpteen billion years. (Though likely with some rather peculiar geology and a bit more radiation than, you know, complex proteins are likely to find comfortable.)) -Matt From hal at finney.org Mon Oct 25 21:02:00 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:02:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion Message-ID: <20041025210200.DBAEA57E2A@finney.org> Hara Ra writes: > 1 mg AntiMatter leads to 50000 grams of TNT. BlockBuster Bomb size. I think you have confused grams with tons. 50 kilotons of TNT would be a big bomb. But you have 50 kilograms of TNT. Maybe you could blow up a bridge with that. Hal From mlorrey at yahoo.com Mon Oct 25 21:02:01 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:02:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function Message-ID: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> From: (ft/s^2)*(1 year) To: .9 c Result: 0.035648925264461071933 From: (ft/s^2)*(1 year) To: .99 c Result: 0.032408113876782792666 From: (ft/s^2)*(1 year) To: .999 c Result: 0.032116148886901866606 Alan, can you tell my why either I am doing this wrong, or my results are wrong. It seems to say the less I accelerate, the faster I can go... which is obviously wrong. Please advise. Other than this, and the lack of the bushel as a unit, I like frink server pages. BTW: Do you have a palm version, or at least a palmOne Treo smartphone sized version, so I can use it from browsing the web on the Treo? ===== 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 gingell at gnat.com Mon Oct 25 21:27:45 2004 From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:27:45 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <16765.28625.880191.283797@nile.gnat.com> Mike Lorrey writes: > From: (ft/s^2)*(1 year) > To: .9 c > Result: > 0.035648925264461071933 What are you trying to do? You want to write something like: (1 foot / second ^ 2) * 1 year -> c 0.03208403273801496474 or (.032 c) / (1 foot / second ^2) -> years 0.9973808548725423151 etc. > > Other than this, and the lack of the bushel as a unit, It does have bushels: 1 bushel 0.03523907016688 m^3 (volume) The expression you tried previously, eg: 7 grams c^2 -> bushels TNT doesn't work because you are trying to convert something with units m^2/kg^2 into something with units m^5/s^2. (a bushel is a volume of something, not a mass. ) From gingell at gnat.com Mon Oct 25 21:27:45 2004 From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 17:27:45 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <16765.28625.880191.283797@nile.gnat.com> Mike Lorrey writes: > From: (ft/s^2)*(1 year) > To: .9 c > Result: > 0.035648925264461071933 What are you trying to do? You want to write something like: (1 foot / second ^ 2) * 1 year -> c 0.03208403273801496474 or (.032 c) / (1 foot / second ^2) -> years 0.9973808548725423151 etc. > > Other than this, and the lack of the bushel as a unit, It does have bushels: 1 bushel 0.03523907016688 m^3 (volume) The expression you tried previously, eg: 7 grams c^2 -> bushels TNT doesn't work because you are trying to convert something with units m^2/kg^2 into something with units m^5/s^2. (a bushel is a volume of something, not a mass. ) From eliasen at mindspring.com Tue Oct 26 00:42:00 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:42 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion Message-ID: Hara Ra wrote: > I tried Frink, couldn't get it to work for me. Even cutting and pasting 2 mg c^2 -> kilotons TNT Into the to: box didn't work? I'll have to look at my web logs and see what you were trying to do. > So, basics: > > 1 Kg matter by E=Mc^2 gives 10^17 Joules > 1 Kiloton TNT gives 4 x 10 ^ 12 Joules > 1 mg Matter gives 10^11 Joules, 2mg (1mg H x 1mg AntiH) gives 2 x 10^11 Joules These are basically correct. Your terminology is off, by the way. The "k" prefix is *always* written as lowercase. Maybe that's where it was going wrong, but the web-based interface would have told you that explicitly, and how to fix it, and pointed you here: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/prefixes.html > 1 mg AntiMatter leads to 50000 grams of TNT. BlockBuster Bomb size. This is wrong. Total conversion of 2 mg (1 mg antimatter, 1 mg matter) is equivalent to about 39000 kilograms of TNT. > Anyway, 1g or more antimatter is serious stuff. Agreed. -- 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 > Thanks for corrections. > > At 12:23 AM 10/25/2004, you wrote: > > >Hara Ra wrote: > > > A few basics to consider: > > > > > > 1) 1 milligram of anti H2 is 2 mg of energy, approx 1KiloTon of > > > explosive energy here. This is considerably MORE than the worst possible > > > nuclear plant breakdown, say Chernobyl, involving an order less energy > > > over much longer time. > > > > No, you're not even close. 2 milligrams is equal to 0.04 kilotons of TNT, > >or about the amount of energy in 1300 gallons of gasoline. > > > > Try using Frink: > > > > http://futureboy.homeip.net/fsp/frink.fsp > > > > Enter: > > > > 2 mg c^2 -> kilotons TNT > >or > > 2 mg c^2 -> gallons gasoline > > > > > Point is, once we get beyond micrograms, the facility must be space based. > > > > Should my local gas station be space-based too, considering? > > > >-- > > 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 > >_______________________________________________ > >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 = > ================================== > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Oct 26 06:17:01 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:17:01 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041025230849.0291cf80@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> to both messages re numbers. 0.05 KiloTons is 50 TONs of TNT, A blockbuster bomb in WWII was 1 TON TNT. I guess I just can't count zeros. A programmer doesn't know if bits are 1 or 0 anyway. Yer right the 39K number is closer, but BANg vs BANG is good enuf. BTW, the harm to the planet might be not much, but the loss of all those pricey protron accellerators and the like kinda hits the economy, space program and physics in general a bit, y'all know? My phyziks is rusty, back in the transition between cgs and mks. One k OKs to you thanx. ================================== = 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 Oct 26 06:06:52 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:06:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] (Link) Antihydrogen Propulsion In-Reply-To: <16765.25590.100414.862756@nile.gnat.com> References: <002f01c4b92a$e1d5d9b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> <20041024060221.3374.qmail@web25205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024091441.028f9c28@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <000b01c4ba59$a8e608c0$bbc21b97@administxl09yj> <6.0.3.0.1.20041024232237.02966280@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <417CA9FC.2000609@mindspring.com> <6.0.3.0.1.20041025115306.0290cab8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> <16765.25590.100414.862756@nile.gnat.com> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041025230535.0295cac0@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> I remember doing about the same calc about blammo the world. However, 1 gm in NYC would certainly be noticeable. At 01:37 PM 10/25/2004, you wrote: >Hara Ra writes: > > Anyway, 1g or more antimatter is serious stuff. > > Just to add a little more perspective, a 20 megaton hydrogen bomb > annihilates about a kilogram of matter. So macroscopic quantities of > antimatter are indeed to be taken seriously, but short of truck loads > not blow up the world seriously. > > Literally blowing up the world, as in generating a yield comparable > to the gravitation binding energy of the planet and accelerating the > residue cloud of planet Earth to escape velocity, would require a > smidge more that a million, million tons of antimatter, eg: ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From samantha at objectent.com Tue Oct 26 06:46:32 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:46:32 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] thorium for reactors In-Reply-To: <20041022033125.95465.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041022033125.95465.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hello, how so? We in the US could do damn well to convert our own reactors to something more benign and economical from multiple perspectives. I really don't see what it has to do with one of your favorite hobby horses, why we should be belligerent hither and yon, Mike. As the data is not fully in on thorium we can't expect Iran to be using it already, can we? As I have said before here, if I was a citizen of a Middle East country I would be clamoring for nukes. States with nukes don't become a target for American aggression. Of course there is that awkward point where we claim the right to preemptively attack a country just for preparing to defend itself against attack. If it is OK for Pakistan and Israel to have nukes, states known for some belligerence, then why is it automatically wrong for Iran to have them? It would be great if no country had nukes of course and if no one ever wanted to harm anyone while we are about it. But that is not the world we live in. In the face of a country with overwhelming force and the will to use it in one's neighborhood it is quite rational to want weapons powerful enough to lessen the odds of attack. Yes, there is the inherent danger involved. But is this really reason enough that any government would not seek to defend itself if it believes it is in danger? - samantha On Oct 21, 2004, at 8:31 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote: > The existence of this technology exposes the lie by Iran, et al, that > their nuclear programs are solely for electricity production. > > --- Damien Broderick wrote: > >> This might be old news, but still: >> >> http://cavendishscience.org/bks/nuc/thrupdat.htm > > ===== > 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 From samantha at objectent.com Tue Oct 26 06:53:56 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 23:53:56 -0700 Subject: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians In-Reply-To: <103650-2200410421215729336@M2W096.mail2web.com> References: <103650-2200410421215729336@M2W096.mail2web.com> Message-ID: Our goals in practice often require the investment of capital and other resources in producing necessary technologies and choices. It is not at all clear that the market will produce what is required in a timely manner. I do not believe it would be at all bad to create a Fund (or whatever form is appropriate) that could be used to capitalize various efforts essential to our goals. Nor are sufficient funds completely irrelevant to effective widespread evangelizing a cause. - samantha On Oct 21, 2004, at 2:57 PM, natashavita at earthlink.net wrote: > Taking the burden off members for monetary substance might be a wise > decision in the long run. This cannot be realized by comparing > philosophical organizations to religious organizations. It can be > accomplished by considering what makes organizations financially > successful. > > Natasha > > > > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Hughes, James J. james.hughes at trincoll.edu > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:45:33 -0400 > To: natashavita at earthlink.net, wta-talk at transhumanism.org, > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: RE: [wta-talk] Re: [extropy-chat] Raelians > > > >> I do not think that it is necessarily a bad >> thing that transhumanists do not feel the need or are not >> driven to donate money, as the practice is with religious >> organizations (passing the cup). I am not so certain that >> "membership" is a positive variable or a necessary one. It >> could very well be a limiting one. > > Unfortunately the builders of successful nonprofits, parties and > churches disagree. As I said, having 10,000 cultists donate 100% of > their income and time can have less influence than 10,000 influentials > who donate 0.5% of their time and money, if the cultists are isolated > and the influentials respected. And it may be that there is a trade off > to some degree between intensity of commitment and breadth of > influence. > But I don't think ExI or the WTA would sacrifice any of our "influence" > by having members that gave twice as much time or money. > > J. > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > mail2web - Check your email from the web at > http://mail2web.com/ . > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Tue Oct 26 08:06:55 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:06:55 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041025182225.23935.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041026080654.BD74D6E5D2@vscan01.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey > From: Mike Lorrey > > As I've said before: if a nation fails to develop (running water, > among > other things) it is because that nation fails to or refuses to > establish institutions that protect private property rights. It is no > fault of ours. > > ----------------------------------------- > You really ARE a true libertarian Mike. No grey/gray areas for you. > It's ALL clear as day. > That last sentence....what a wonderful thing to be able to say that > to the mirror each morning. > I'm with you, Mike. You're not that good at sarcasm, Sean, any more than Penn is. --------------------------------- Never claimed to be good at it. Normally, on the internet, I studiously avoid it. But you deliberately cursed my presence on this list, likening me to Kudzu. Not a good way to engage me, when all I ask for is a discourse I can learn from. But the word "ours" set me off, Mike. Just who do you mean? Do you mean anyone NOT within the nation lacking the ability to provide basic needs? Or do you mean other libertarians? Or just people on this list? At the end of the day, you seem to be suggesting humanity has no collective duty of care. This is one element of libertarianism which I reject. Maybe I'm just reading your sentence badly, but to me, it doesn?t matter where the blame lies. I sure hope "it's not my fault" is not an attitude which survives The Spike, singularity or whatever leads into post-humanism. ---------------------------------- > > Third world thugs would rather spend their meager resources, and > whatever aid they can beg, borrow, or steal, for weaponry and more > thuggish underlings, to subject their citizens and expand their > tyranny. Typically this is with the assistance of so-called > 'liberation' forces backed by socialist/communist causes. > > -------------------------------------------- > > And you, as a wise, informed "Vice Chair" (still one rung to go eh?) > have personally witnessed this "backing by socialist/communist > causes"? You are new here, so I won't get ticked at your ignorance. -------------------------------- I don?t post much, true. But I have lurked here since May. There are 3772 extropian posts in my Inbox. I've read most of them, in various states of sleep deprivation. But you are correct, I don?t know your personal history. That's why I asked. I should not have prefixed the question with a sneer at the contents of your signature. I'm sure you have good reason for decaring your "rank" and I apologies for the sneer. It was reactive. But I would like to know the sources and evidence for all your claims. Educate me. ----------------------------------- > But somehow, during your travels, you missed all the backing by > manifestly corrupt, cynical capitalist administrations of various > western democracies? What makes you think they are capitalist administrations? Most of the western democracies are quite socialized, even most of the US. The US as a whole is not capitalist, it is mercantilist. ------------------------------------------ OK. Please explain to me where one ends and the other begins with respect to the US, particularly with respect to the global tentacles the US has wrapped around much of the planet. Mercantilism is as dated and outmoded as the communism and socialism you originally accused me of waving around in here. Globalisation, corporatisation - these two terms alone are more interesting to dissect in the context of this discussion. And if most of the capitalist administrations have become quite socialist in your view, which capitalist systems are left functioning? I'm quite confused regarding your views on this. All I have time for now... But once again, at the risk of being redundant, are you prepared to dissect the machinations behind the piece I posted from Naomi Klein? No one on this list made any comments. The article is re-posted below. Thanks...and I'll suspend any attempts to out-sneer you if you'd please educate me rather than belittle me. I'm here to learn, not trade insults or be publicly humiliated. Sean http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,1125050,00.html The Guardian Saturday January 17, 2004 The $500 billion fire sale In a shattered postwar Iraq, there are rich pickings to be had - and for US businesses at least, it promises to be a risk-free bonanza. Naomi Klein joins those at a trade show jostling for a stake By Naomi Klein It's 8.40am, and the Sheraton Hotel ballroom thunders with the sound of plastic explosives pounding against metal. No, this is not the Sheraton in Baghdad, it's the one in Arlington, Virginia. And it's not a real terrorist attack, it's a hypothetical one. The screen at the front of the room is playing an advertisement for "bomb-resistant waste receptacles" - this trash can is so strong, we're told, it can contain a C4 blast. And its manufacturer is convinced that, given half a chance, these babies would sell like hot cakes in Baghdad - at bus stations, army barracks and, yes, upscale hotels. Available in Hunter Green, Fortuneberry Purple and Windswept Copper. This is ReBuilding Iraq 2, a gathering of 400 businesspeople itching to get a piece of the Iraqi reconstruction action. They're here to meet those doling out the cash, in particular the $18.6bn in contracts to be awarded in the next two months to companies from "coalition partner" countries. The people to meet are from the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), its new programme management office, the Army Corps of Engineers, the US Agency for International Development, Halliburton, Bechtel and members of Iraq's interim governing council. All these players are on the conference programme, and delegates have been promised that they'll get a chance to corner them at regular "networking breaks". There have been dozens of similar trade shows on the business opportunities created by Iraq's decimation, in hotels from London to Amman. By all accounts, the early conferences throbbed with the sort of cash-drunk euphoria not seen since the heady days before the dotcoms crashed. But it soon becomes apparent that something is not right at ReBuilding Iraq 2. Sure, the organisers do the requisite gushing about how "nonmilitary rebuilding costs could near $500bn" and that this is "the largest government reconstruction effort since the US helped to rebuild Germany and Japan after the second world war". But for the undercaffeinated crowd staring uneasily at exploding garbage cans, the mood is less gold rush than grim determination. Giddy talk of "greenfield" market opportunities has been supplanted by sober discussion of sudden-death insurance; excitement about easy government money has given way to controversy about foreign firms being shut out of the bidding process; exuberance about CPA chief Paul Bremer's ultraliberal investment laws has been tempered by fears that those laws could be overturned by a directly elected Iraqi government. At ReBuilding Iraq 2, held last December, it seems finally to have dawned on the investment community that Iraq is not only an "exciting emerging market", it's also a country on the verge of civil war. As Iraqis protest about layoffs at state agencies and make increasingly vocal demands for general elections, it's becoming clear that the White House's prewar conviction that Iraqis would welcome the transformation of their country into a free-market dream state may have been just as off-target as its prediction that US soldiers would be greeted with flowers. I mention to one delegate that fear seems to be dampening the capitalist spirit. "The best time to invest is when there is still blood on the ground," he assures me. "Will you be going to Iraq?" I ask. "Me? No, I couldn't do that to my family." He was still shaken, it seemed, by the afternoon's performance by ex-CIAer John MacGaffin, who had harangued the crowd like a Hollywood drill sergeant. "Soft targets are us!" he bellowed. "We are right in the bull's-eye ... You must put security at the centre of your operation!" Lucky for us, MacGaffin's own company, AKE Group, offers complete counterterrorism solutions, from body armour to emergency evacuations. Youssef Sleiman, managing director of Iraq Initiatives for the Harris Corporation, has a similarly entrepreneurial angle on the violence. Yes, helicopters are falling, he says, but "for every helicopter that falls there is going to be replenishment". I notice that many delegates are sporting a similar look: army-issue brush cuts paired with dark business suits. The guru of this gang is retired Major General Robert Dees, freshly hired out of the military to head Microsoft's "defence strategies" division. Dees tells the crowd that rebuilding Iraq has special meaning for him because, well, he was one of the people who broke it. "My heart and soul is in this because I was one of the primary planners of the invasion," he says with pride. Microsoft is helping to develop "e-government" in Iraq, which Dees admits is a little ahead of the curve, since there is no g-government in Iraq, not to mention functioning phone lines. No matter. Microsoft is determined to get in on the ground floor. In fact, it is so tight with Iraq's governing council that one Microsoft executive, Haythum Auda, was the official translator for the council's minister of labour and social affairs, Sami Azara al-Ma'jun, at the conference. "There is no hatred against the coalition forces at all," al-Ma'jun says, via Auda. "The destructive forces are very minor and these will end shortly ... Feel confident in rebuilding Iraq!" The speakers on a panel about managing risks have a very different message, however: feel afraid about rebuilding Iraq, very afraid. Unlike previous presenters, their concern is not the obvious physical risks, but the potential economic ones. These are the insurance brokers, the grim reapers of Iraq's gold rush. It turns out that there is a rather significant hitch in Bremer's bold plan to auction off Iraq while it is still under occupation: the insurance companies aren't going for it. Until recently, the question of who would insure multinationals in Iraq has not been pressing. The major reconstruction contractors such as Bechtel are covered by USAID for "unusually hazardous risks" encountered in the field. And Halliburton's pipeline work is covered under a law passed by Bush last May that indemnifies the entire oil industry from "any attachment, judgment, decree, lien, execution, garnishment, or other judicial process". But with bidding now starting on Iraq's state-owned firms, and foreign banks ready to open branches in Baghdad, the insurance issue is suddenly urgent. Many of the speakers admit that the economic risks of going into Iraq without coverage are huge: privatised firms could be renationalised, foreign ownership rules could be reinstated and contracts signed with the CPA could be torn up. Normally, multi-nationals protect themselves against this sort of thing by buying "political risk" insurance. Before he got the top job in Iraq, this was Bremer's business - selling political risk, expropriation and terrorism insurance at Marsh & McLennan Companies, the largest insurance brokerage firm in the world. Yet, in Iraq, he has overseen the creation of a business climate so volatile that private insurers, including his old colleagues at Marsh & McLennan, are simply unwilling to take the risk. Bremer's Iraq is, by all accounts, uninsurable. "The insurance industry has never been up against this kind of exposure before," R Taylor Hoskins, vice-president of Rutherford International insurance company, tells the delegates apologetically. Steven Sadler, managing director and chairman at Marsh Industry Practices, a division of Bremer's old firm, is even more downbeat: "Don't look to Iraq to find an insurance solution. Interest is very, very, very limited. There is very limited capacity and interest in the region." It's clear that Bremer knew Iraq wasn't ready to be insured: when he signed Order 39, opening up much of its economy to 100% foreign ownership, the insurance industry was specifically excluded. I ask Sadler, a Bremer clone with slicked-back hair and bright red tie, whether he thinks it's strange that a former Marsh & McLennan executive could have so overlooked the need for investors to have insurance before they enter a war zone. "Well," he says, "he's got a lot on his plate." Or maybe he just has better information. Just when the mood at ReBuilding Iraq 2 couldn't sink any lower, up to the podium strides Michael Lempres, vice-president of insurance at the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC). With a cool confidence absent from the shellshocked proceedings so far, he announces that investors can relax: Uncle Sam will protect them. A US government agency, OPIC provides loans and insurance to US companies investing abroad. And while Lempres agrees with earlier speakers that the risks in Iraq are "extraordinary and unusual", he also says that "OPIC is different. We do not exist primarily to generate profit." Instead, OPIC exists to "support US foreign policy". And since turning Iraq into a free-trade zone is a top Bush policy goal, OPIC will be there to help out. Earlier that same day, Bush signed legislation providing "the agency with enhancements to its political risk-insurance programme", according to an OPIC press release. Armed with this clear political mandate, Lempres announces that the agency is now "open for business" in Iraq, and is offering financing and insurance, including the riskiest insurance of all: political risk. "This is a priority for us," he says. "We want to do everything we can to encourage US investment in Iraq." The news, as yet unreported, appears to take even the highest-level delegates by surprise. After his presentation, Lempres is approached by Julie Martin, a political risk specialist at Marsh & McLennan. "Is it true?" she demands. Lempres nods. "Our lawyers are ready." "I'm stunned," says Martin. "You're ready? No matter who the government is?" "We're ready," Lempres replies. "If there's an expro[priation] on January 3, we're ready. I don't know what we're going to do if someone sinks $1bn into a pipeline and there's an expro." Lempres doesn't seem too concerned about these possible "expros", but it's a serious question. According to its official mandate, OPIC works "on a self-sustaining basis at no net cost to taxpayers". But Lempres admits that the political risks in Iraq are "extraordinary". If a new government expropriates and re-regulates across the board, OPIC might have to compensate dozens of US firms for billions of dollars in lost investments and revenues, possibly tens of billions. What happens then? At the Microsoft-sponsored cocktail reception in the Galaxy Ballroom that evening, Dees urges us "to network on behalf of the people of Iraq". I follow orders and ask Lempres what happens if "the people of Iraq" decide to seize back their economy from the US firms he has so generously insured. Who bails out OPIC? "In theory," he says, "the US treasury stands behind us." That means the US taxpayer. Yes, them again: the same people who have already paid Halliburton, Bechtel et al to make a killing on Iraq's reconstruction would have to pay them again, this time in compensation for their losses. While the vast profits being made in Iraq are strictly private, it turns out that the entire risk is being shouldered by the public. For the non-US firms in the room, OPIC's announcement is anything but reassuring: since only US companies are eligible for its insurance, and the private insurers are sitting it out, how can they compete? The answer is that they likely cannot. Some countries may decide to match OPIC's Iraq programme. But, in the short term, not only has the US government barred companies from non-"coalition partners" from competing for contracts against US firms, it has made sure that the foreign firms that are allowed to compete will do so at a serious disadvantage. The reconstruction of Iraq has emerged as a vast protectionist racket, a neo-con New Deal that transfers limitless public funds - in contracts, loans and insurance - to private firms, and even gets rid of the foreign competition to boot, under the guise of "national security". Ironically, these firms are being handed this corporate welfare so they can take full advantage of CPA-imposed laws that systematically strip Iraqi industry of all its protections, from import tariffs to limits on foreign ownership. Michael Fleisher, head of private-sector development for the CPA, recently explained to a group of Iraqi businesspeople why these protections had to be removed. "Protected businesses never, never become competitive," he said. Quick, somebody tell OPIC and US deputy secretary of defence Paul Wolfowitz. The issue of US double standards comes up again at the conference when a CPA representative takes the podium. A legal adviser to Bremer, Carole Basri has a simple message: reconstruction is being sabotaged by Iraqi corruption. "My fear is that corruption will be the downfall," she says ominously, blaming the problem on "a 35-year gap in knowledge" in Iraq that has made Iraqis "not aware of current accounting standards and ideas on anti-corruption". Foreign investors, she adds, must engage in "education, bring people up to world-class standards". It's hard to imagine what world-class standards she's referring to, or who, exactly, will be doing this educating. Halliburton, with its accounting scandals back home and its outrageous overbilling for gasoline in Iraq? The CPA, with its two officers under investigation for bribe-taking and nonexistent fiscal oversight? On the final day of ReBuilding Iraq 2, the front- page headline in our complimentary copies of the Financial Times (a conference sponsor) is Boeing Linked To Perle Investment Fund. Perhaps Richard Perle, who supported Boeing's $18bn refuelling-tanker deal and extracted $20m from Boeing for his investment fund, can teach Iraq's politicians to stop soliciting "commissions" in exchange for contracts. For the Iraqi expats in the audience, Basri's is a tough lecture to sit through. "To be honest," says Ed Kubba, a consultant and board member of the American Iraqi Chamber of Commerce, "I don't know where the line is between business and corruption." He points to US companies subcontracting huge taxpayer-funded reconstruction jobs for a fraction of what they are getting paid, then pocketing the difference. "If you take $10m from the US government and sub the job out to Iraqi businesses for a quarter-million, is that business, or is that corruption?" These were the sorts of uncomfortable questions faced by George Sigalos, director of government relations for Halliburton KBR. In the hierarchy of Iraqi reconstruction, Halliburton is king, and Sigalos sits on stage, heavy with jewelled ring and gold cufflinks, playing the part. But the serfs are getting restless, and the room quickly turns into a support group for jilted would-be subcontractors: "Mr Sigalos, what are we going to have to do to get some subcontracts?" "Mr Sigalos, when are you going to hire some Iraqis in management and leadership?" "I have a question for Mr Sigalos. I'd like to ask what you would suggest when the army says, 'Go to Halliburton', and there's no response from Halliburton?" Sigalos patiently tells them all to register their firms on Halliburton's website. When they respond that they have already done so and haven't heard back, he invites them to "approach me afterward". The scene afterwards is part celebrity autograph session, part riot. Sigalos is swarmed by at least 50 men who elbow each other out of the way to shower the Halliburton VP with CD-roms, business plans and r?sum?s. When Sigalos spots a badge from Volvo, he looks relieved. "Volvo! I know Volvo. Send me something about what you can achieve in the region." But the small, no-name players who have paid their $985 entrance fees, here to hawk portable generators and electrical control panelling, are once again told to "register with our procurement office". There are fortunes being made in Iraq, but it seems they are out of reach for all but the chosen few. The next session is starting and Sigalos has to run. The serfs wander off through the displays of shatterproof glass and bomb-resistant trash cans, caressing Sigalos's business card and looking worried. I Sean From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Oct 26 08:18:29 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:18:29 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Wikipedia for news Message-ID: <470a3c52041026011866f0f284@mail.gmail.com> Via BoingBoing: Wikinews is to news what Wikipedia is to encylopedic-style reference material: a publicly editable site for comprehensive coverage of current affairs. It has posted a mission-statement and requirements and is calling for votes from the public on whether it should actually launch. http://www.boingboing.net/2004/10/25/wikipedia_for_news.html From amara at amara.com Tue Oct 26 10:02:55 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:02:55 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] pic of Florida voting machine help? Message-ID: Hi Folks, I am going to an Italian Halloween party this Sunday, and I think that I want my costume to be a broken Florida voting machine. The problem is I don't know what they look like, and I need to begin with the premise of something that looks like a real voting machine, even if I am only working with pieces of cardboard. Searching with Google doesn't find me pictures though. Can anybody help me find a picture of a voting machine, please? Grazie, 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/ ******************************************************************** "Math is Hard." --Barbie From scerir at libero.it Tue Oct 26 12:10:33 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 14:10:33 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] entanglement and mass References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041025132702.01b45b08@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000e01c4bb54$cbaebd10$6bbc1b97@administxl09yj> From: "Damien Broderick" > [a somewhat waffly piece perhaps of interest:] http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0410021 by Vlatko Vedral << "Conclusions. In one of our previous publications we argued that macroscopic entanglement exists at high temperatures ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ and is related to high temperature superconductivity. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ In the present work we showed that the consequences of that entanglement are the standard features of superconductors: the Meissner effect and flux quantisation. Therefore any experiments confirming these two effects are also automatically offering evidence for macroscopic entanglement. We have speculated that if the Higgs mechanism for mass generation is proven to be correct, then the resulting Higgs bosons will be found to be entangled [*]. Be that as it may, one question remains open, both for superconductors, or for any other more general field. Can we extract this existing entanglement and use it ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ for information processing? This would be very useful ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ in practice, and it would seem that natural macroscopic ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ entanglement could offer an infinite amount of quantum ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ non-locality for genuine quantum information processing. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This is the subject of an ongoing research.">> [*] The relevant entanglement for superconductivity and Higgs bosons is the spatial entanglement between numbers of electrons at different space points. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Tue Oct 26 12:48:43 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 05:48:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] thorium for reactors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041026124843.626.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Samantha Atkins wrote: > Hello, how so? We in the US could do damn well to convert our own > reactors to something more benign and economical from multiple > perspectives. > > I really don't see what it has to do with one of your favorite hobby > horses, why we should be belligerent hither and yon, Mike. As the > data is not fully in on thorium we can't expect Iran to be using it > already, can we? The technology has been around for a decade already, Samantha, which you'd notice if you had looked at the dates on the papers.... > > As I have said before here, if I was a citizen of a Middle East > country I would be clamoring for nukes. States with nukes don't > become a target for American aggression. Of course there is that > awkward point where we claim the right to preemptively attack a > country just for preparing to defend itself against attack. If > it is OK for Pakistan and Israel to have nukes, states known for > some belligerence, then why is it automatically wrong for Iran to > have them? Ah, one more treat of Samantha Atkins' massively selective memory at work. Hmmmmm, I seem to recall a 45 year period called by some the Cold War, of US agression against the Soviet Union, a nuclear power with, for much of that period, greater nuclear capacity than the US. Because while Israel and Pakistan have been belligerent, they have not been belligerent toward us, or toward anyone that wasn't similarly belligerent toward them, who was also numerically superior. > > It would be great if no country had nukes of course and if no one > ever wanted to harm anyone while we are about it. But that is not the > world we live in. In the face of a country with overwhelming force and > the will to use it in one's neighborhood it is quite rational to want > weapons powerful enough to lessen the odds of attack. Yes, there is > the inherent danger involved. But is this really reason enough that > any government would not seek to defend itself if it believes it is > in danger? Both Brazil and South Africa have shelved nuke programs, as has Libya, which did so specifically BECAUSE it thought it was next on our list. Nations pursue nuclear programs because up until recently, nobody has been willing to enforce the terms of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. What I find so amusing here, Samantha, is that you have historically been someone who has deplored the nuclear arms race, you claim to be a libertarian, yet you are endorsing the use of mass destruction weapons as a means of self defense. Why are you now endorsing Mutual Assured Destruction? ===== 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 Tue Oct 26 13:02:15 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 06:02:15 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] pic of Florida voting machine help? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041026130215.54857.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.diebold.com/dieboldes/accuvote_tsx.htm ===== 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 Tue Oct 26 14:32:35 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 07:32:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] VIRGIN GALACTIC: Profitable already Message-ID: <20041026143235.17295.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> http://saveenterprise.com/kirkinspace.htm William Shatner, Captain Kirk of the original Star Trek show, has ponied up $276,000.00, along with 7000 other people, for tickets on Branson's fledgling fleet of suborbital rocket ships. This translates to $1.77 Billion in ticket sales before a single vehicle has been built. Can you say, "Good bet"???? Now, who wants to continue to claim that the private exploration of space can't be profitable? DOWN WITH NASA. Demolish the space shuttles. The new mantra of space is: Better, Faster, Cheaper, MORE PRIVATE ===== 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 amara at amara.com Tue Oct 26 16:07:16 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 17:07:16 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] pic of Florida voting machine help? Message-ID: Mike Lorrey: >http://www.diebold.com/dieboldes/accuvote_tsx.htm Hey, I thought it might look like a flat screen monitor with a touch screen, but instead it looks a little like a slot machine. :-) (I like this idea too: http://www.sover.net/~auc/vote.jpg) This will be fun! Amara From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Oct 26 15:55:45 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 08:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] pic of Florida voting machine help? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041026155545.17419.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > Mike Lorrey: > >http://www.diebold.com/dieboldes/accuvote_tsx.htm > > Hey, I thought it might look like a flat screen > monitor with a touch screen, > but instead it looks a little like a slot machine. > :-) I dunno. "Video poker" is closer to what comes to my mind. > (I like this idea too: > http://www.sover.net/~auc/vote.jpg) Ah, but the lawyers would argue that allows, even encourages, overvotes which would have to be discarded. > This will be fun! Indeed, it is usually for the best to see the humor in bad situations. And no matter which one wins... From wingcat at pacbell.net Tue Oct 26 16:05:58 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 09:05:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] VIRGIN GALACTIC: Profitable already In-Reply-To: <20041026143235.17295.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041026160558.60409.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > Now, who wants to continue to claim that the private > exploration of > space can't be profitable? Space tourism != space exploration. We've been to LEO; now we're pushing towards making it so we can all go there. That said, exploration with economic incentive could definitely work. It's just that this label applies more to asteroid or lunar mining than simple access to orbit. (And this isn't even getting all the way to true orbit, just to orbital altitude.) From alex at ramonsky.com Tue Oct 26 17:08:37 2004 From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 18:08:37 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] what's in a name, Fortesque? References: <001401c4b9e8$5ad2eb60$6501a8c0@SHELLY> <20041024164759.DD5DCC7AC@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <6.1.1.1.0.20041024122830.01c2c638@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <417E8495.7010205@ramonsky.com> According to MS spellchecker, it was Damn Roderick who wrote "The Spike", actually... : ) AR ************** Damien Broderick wrote: > At 12:47 AM 10/25/2004 +0800, Sean D. wrote: > >> >> Who is this David you are referring to? Brin? It >> was Damien Broderick who wrote The Spike. >> >> spike >> >> ----------------- > > >> Least I didn't call you Darren (or Derwood....) > > > As I just mentioned to Sean offlist, this correction wasn't from me > but from long-time extropian poster Spike Jones. I suspect a few > newbies get his posts and mine confused. I've never been called > `Spike'. The part of my @ reading `thespike' is just a mnemonic for my > book title. Sorry for the confusion. > > We could deal with this easily by persuading Spike Jones to use his > real name, Cecil Faulteroy Jones. > > Damien Broderick > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From pgptag at gmail.com Tue Oct 26 17:11:26 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 19:11:26 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Can the Sciences Help Us to Make Wise Ethical Judgments? Message-ID: <470a3c52041026101182bc059@mail.gmail.com> Skeptical Inquirer - Dramatic breakthroughs on the frontiers of science provide new powers to humans, but they also pose perplexing moral quandaries. Should we use or limit these scientific discoveries, such as the cloning of humans? Much of this research is banned in the United States and restricted in Canada. Should scientists be permitted to reproduce humans by cloning (as we now do with animals), or is this too dangerous? Should we be allowed to make "designer babies?" Many theologians and politicians are horrified by this; many scientists and philosophers believe that it is not only inevitable but justifiable under certain conditions. There were loud cries against in vitro fertilization, or artificial insemination, only two generations ago, but the procedure proved to be a great boon to childless couples. Many religious conservatives are opposed to therapeutic stem-cell research on fetal tissues, because they think that "ensoulment" occurs with the first division of cells. Scientists are appalled by this censorship of scientific research, since the research has the potential to cure many illnesses; they believe those who oppose it have ignored the welfare of countless numbers of human beings. There are other equally controversial issues on the frontiers of science: Organ transplants-who should get them and why? Is the use of animal organs to supply parts for human bodies wrong? Is transhumanism reforming what it means to be human? How shall we control AIDS-is it wicked to use condoms, as some religious conservatives think, or should this be a high priority in Africa and elsewhere? Does global warming mean we need a radical transformation of industry in affluent countries? Is homosexuality genetic, and if so, is the denial of same-sex marriage morally wrong? How can we decide such questions? What criteria may we draw upon? http://www.csicop.org/si/2004-09/scientific-ethics.html From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Oct 26 18:37:09 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:37:09 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041026133648.01b17a00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> http://www.planetary.org/news/2004/cassini_titan00a_approach-images_1026.html From sjvans at ameritech.net Tue Oct 26 18:47:18 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 11:47:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] VIRGIN GALACTIC: Profitable already In-Reply-To: <20041026143235.17295.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041026184718.3770.qmail@web81201.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > William Shatner, Captain Kirk of the original Star > Trek show, has > ponied up $276,000.00, along with 7000 other people, > for tickets on > Branson's fledgling fleet of suborbital rocket > ships. This translates > to $1.77 Billion in ticket sales before a single > vehicle has been > built. I don't think this is correct. 7000 people have "expressed interest". Nobody has put up any money. Tickets have *not* been sold. And it was pretty easy to "express interest", since it was a selection when you sign up for the Virgin Galactic mail list. I checked one of the lesser choices, since there is no way I could afford it, but it would have been easy enough to exagerate slightly and say I could. That said, I think he will have no problem at all finding enough business to make a tidy profit. From hal at finney.org Tue Oct 26 19:04:52 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:04:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: <20041026190452.5CABD57E2A@finney.org> Damien points to: > http://www.planetary.org/news/2004/cassini_titan00a_approach-images_1026.html This one picture, http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/titan/images/PIA06107.jpg&type=image , is especially spectacular. It's amazing how well they can penetrate the clouds using the right filters and wavelengths. Those dark areas sure look like oceans to me. The only comparable features I can think of are on Io, which are thought to be lakes of sulfur; Mars, where there is evidence of primordial water; and of course Earth. Fortunately the close flyby will/did zoom in on the left part of the dark area so we should get a good look at it and the "coastlines". There is to be a broadcast/webcast at 6:30 tonight PDT (01:30 tomorrow morning GMT) linked from http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/home/index.cfm . Hal From harara at sbcglobal.net Tue Oct 26 19:15:05 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:15:05 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] pic of Florida voting machine help? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041026121045.02929c98@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Just find a box of chad and some tar and roll in it. http://www.usatoday.com/gallery/todayphotos/contenttemplate7.htm via googling "florida voting machiine" with Images Tab At 03:02 AM 10/26/2004, you wrote: >Hi Folks, > >I am going to an Italian Halloween party this Sunday, and I think >that I want my costume to be a broken Florida voting machine. The >problem is I don't know what they look like, and I need to begin >with the premise of something that looks like a real voting machine, >even if I am only working with pieces of cardboard. > >Searching with Google doesn't find me pictures though. Can anybody >help me find a picture of a voting machine, please? > >Grazie, >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/ >******************************************************************** >"Math is Hard." --Barbie >_______________________________________________ >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 Oct 26 19:08:51 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:08:51 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041026080654.BD74D6E5D2@vscan01.westnet.com.au> References: <20041025182225.23935.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <20041026080654.BD74D6E5D2@vscan01.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041026120733.02928330@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> >Never claimed to be good at it. Normally, on the internet, I studiously >avoid it. But you deliberately cursed my presence on this list, likening me >to Kudzu. How low can this get, to a creepy vinal level of dyscourse? ================================== = 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 Oct 26 19:08:51 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:08:51 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041026080654.BD74D6E5D2@vscan01.westnet.com.au> References: <20041025182225.23935.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <20041026080654.BD74D6E5D2@vscan01.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041026120733.02928330@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> >Never claimed to be good at it. Normally, on the internet, I studiously >avoid it. But you deliberately cursed my presence on this list, likening me >to Kudzu. How low can this get, to a creepy vinal level of dyscourse? ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From eliasen at mindspring.com Tue Oct 26 22:12:00 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 16:12 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function Message-ID: > Mike Lorrey writes: > > From: (ft/s^2)*(1 year) > > To: .9 c > > Result: > > 0.035648925264461071933 Matthew Gingell wrote: > What are you trying to do? You want to write something like: > > (1 foot / second ^ 2) * 1 year -> c > 0.03208403273801496474 > > or > > (.032 c) / (1 foot / second ^2) -> years > 0.9973808548725423151 It wasn't quite clear what the calculations were trying to calculate, but it appeared that you were trying to solve for the needed acceleration (over the course of a year) to reach a fair fraction of the speed of light. Here's a hint: you generally put the thing you want to solve for on the right side of the -> operator, or in the To: box (same thing.) You can think of the -> operator as a very-low-precendence divide operator, if that helps. So, if you wanted to see what constant acceleration you'd need to reach .9 c in a year, the (overly-simplified) calculation would be: .9 c / (1 year) -> ft/s^2 Which gives a needed acceleration of about 28.05 ft/s^2 Which is hopefully what you were trying to calculate. By the way, you can replace the ft/s^2 with "gravity" or "gee", too, to give something in human terms. (It's just under 1 gee.) This calculation is, of course, oversimplified, and neglects the Lorentz transformations which are necessary to give a correct answer, which are left as an exercise for the reader. Your original calculation, (ft/s^2)*(1 year) -> .9 c actually calculates the fraction of .9 c that you'd reach after accelerating at 1 ft/s^2 for a year. The numbers that you were getting were thus showing you what fraction of .9 c you'd reach--about 3%. If the right side were just c, they'd show what fraction of lightspeed you'd reach. Make sense? > > Other than this, and the lack of the bushel as a unit, > > It does have bushels: > > 1 bushel > 0.03523907016688 m^3 (volume) Thanks to Matthew for pointing this out correctly. I'm going to hire him for tech support. :) If you don't think Frink has a particular unit, type in all or part of its name after one or two question marks (two is more verbose): ??bushel returns: [canada_oatbushel = 771107029/50000000 (exactly 15.42214058) kg (mass), wheatbushel = 136077711/5000000 (exactly 27.2155422) kg (mass), brheapedbushel = 0.04647922416 m^3 (volume), barleybushel = 136077711/6250000 (exactly 21.77243376) kg (mass), bushel = 0.03523907016688 m^3 (volume), ricebushel = 408233133/20000000 (exactly 20.41165665) kg (mass), imperialbushel = 454609/12500000 (exactly 0.03636872) m^3 (volume), irishbushel = 0.028526467849440879327 m^3 (volume), brbushel = 454609/12500000 (exactly 0.03636872) m^3 (volume), soybeanbushel = 136077711/5000000 (exactly 27.2155422) kg (mass), cornbushel = 317514659/12500000 (exactly 25.40117272) kg (mass), oatbushel = 45359237/3125000 (exactly 14.51495584) kg (mass), ryebushel = 317514659/12500000 (exactly 25.40117272) kg (mass)] Showing what a fuddled mess of units that humans have contrived to represent different measures. Note, even, that many of the "bushels", (normally a measure of volume) defined for commerce are actually measures of mass (presumably because it's easier to weigh a truck than determine its volume.) Ah, the tower of Babel that Frink was designed to topple. -- Alan Eliasen | "Whenever you find you are on the side of eliasen at mindspring.com | the majority, it is time to pause and http://futureboy.homeip.net/ | reflect." --Mark Twain From amara.graps at gmail.com Tue Oct 26 22:48:28 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:48:28 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: Hal Finney >Those dark areas sure look like oceans to me. Still not clear. The operating assumption since July is that those dark features are craters, relaxed. No one since the orbit insertion is thinking that there is liquid on the surface, but let's see after more enhancement of the images and data from the other instruments. BTW: The Cassini "Saturn Universe" Workshop was in Capri a few weeks ago. A good and intense time was had by all...You can read the titles on the link below.. At some point soon, we'll have the presentations online. http://www1.ifsi.rm.cnr.it (click on the "Capri" link) 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 sean at valuationpartners.com.au Wed Oct 27 00:16:39 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:16:39 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] how sleep deprivation skews perception In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041026120733.02928330@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041027001639.1F1B66DBEE@vscan01.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Hara Ra >Never claimed to be good at it. Normally, on the internet, I studiously >avoid it. But you deliberately cursed my presence on this list, likening me >to Kudzu. How low can this get, to a creepy vinal level of dyscourse? ---------------------------------------- I'm not pushing it lower, I was hoping it would be lifted back up into something useful. I thought my last post could be summarized with two words: "Olive branch...." Sean From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Oct 27 05:03:41 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 07:03:41 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] China Daily: Legislation better than blanket ban in cloning Message-ID: <470a3c520410262203157191fd@mail.gmail.com> It is always interesting to read what the Chinese think: from the China Daily - Scientific exploration in human cloning is inevitable. Britain granted a group of scientists at a university a first-ever licence to begin therapeutic cloning efforts in August. Earlier this year, scientists in the Republic of Korea became the first to successfully clone human embryos. Instead of pretending that a total ban on human cloning will stop it from occurring, we humans would be much better served by allowing cloning in a controlled environment. Laboratories around the world are working on technologies related to cloning. It may enable us to better understand, if not overcome, a number of diseases, such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and diabetes, for which there is no present medical cure. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-10/27/content_386045.htm From scerir at libero.it Wed Oct 27 06:45:41 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:45:41 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function References: Message-ID: <001801c4bbf0$945d63b0$51c51b97@administxl09yj> > To: .9 c > Result: > 0.035648925264461071933 But why just .9 c ? Lucien Hardy has already shown that the first signal principle of SR does not work if we insert a particle and an antiparticle in a peculiar (double, or nested) Mack-Zehnder interferometer. According to Hardy (and David Bohm, and the Geneva quantum optics group, and many others) it is well possible that there is a - cosmic - preferred reference frame. Abner Shimony introduced the expression 'passion-at-a-distance' for a subtle form of nonlocality, namely that it is possible to think in terms of FTL causation between two space-like separated events. It is only the 'uncontrollability' resulting from indeterminism that stands in the way of FTL uncontrollable communication via 'passion-at-a-distance'. So this kind of FTL communication, or FTL causation, actually is an 'uncontrollable nonlocality', which produces no conflict with the first signal principle of SR, just because of that 'uncontrollability'. Evidently a cosmic preferred reference frame would - should - avoid causal paradoxes. http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0408153 http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0410160 - Abner Shimony: 'Controllable and Uncontrollable Non-Locality'in 'Foundations of Quantum Mechanics in the Light of New Technology', Tokyo, Japan Physical Society, (Kamefuchi et al. eds), 1984; - Abner Shimony: 'Events and Processes in the Quantum World', in 'Quantum Concepts in Space and Time', (Penrose and Isham eds), Oxford U.P., 1986. (Frink calculator already knows all that!). s :-) In the early days of World War II, physicists around the world were intently watching the pages of the Physical Review, waiting for updates on one of the century's greatest revelations: fission, the splitting of an atom's nucleus accompanied by a prodigious release of energy. But they waited in vain. Because of fears that Germany would use American research to pursue an atomic weapon, the Physical Review agreed to withhold reports of significant advances. It was not until several months after an atomic bomb exploded over Nagasaki, Japan, that Phys. Rev. published the paper announcing the discovery of plutonium, the material used in that bomb. Physicist Abraham Pais later called the journal's silence on the subject "the most important nonevent in the history of the Physical Review." (G. T. Seaborg et al., Phys. Rev. 69, 366; G. T. Seaborg et al., Phys. Rev. 69, 367; and J. W. Kennedy et al., Phys. Rev. 70, 555) Links to the papers: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PR/v69/p366/s2 http://link.aps.org/abstract/PR/v69/p367/s1 http://link.aps.org/abstract/PR/v70/p555 Focus story at http://focus.aps.org/story/v14/st17 From amara at amara.com Wed Oct 27 08:59:57 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 09:59:57 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: By the way, the camera is not the best instrument to see through the cloud layers onto the surface of Titan. VIMS, the infrared instrument of the group where I work in Italy, is one good instrument well-suited for this environment. (Another is radar.) Some press pictures from VIMS are at the Cassini web site now. http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/titan/images/vims-1.jpg&type=image 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 samantha at objectent.com Wed Oct 27 08:31:35 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 01:31:35 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] how partisanship skews perception In-Reply-To: <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041024024114.2442.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9D05F9DB-27F2-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> 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 From samantha at objectent.com Wed Oct 27 08:59:43 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 01:59:43 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041027001639.1F1B66DBEE@vscan01.westnet.com.au> References: <20041027001639.1F1B66DBEE@vscan01.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <8B248033-27F6-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> I just saw an interesting article on CNN online, not exactly a bastion of liberalism in recent years. http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/10/26/iraq.spending.ap/index.html I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this monstrously incompetent moron in office. - samantha From pgptag at gmail.com Wed Oct 27 11:06:17 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:06:17 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] genetically engineered hypo-allergenic cats available Message-ID: <470a3c5204102704067088cf02@mail.gmail.com> Slashdot: Allerca Inc is now taking reservations for genetically engineered hypo-allergenic cats, which it calls 'lifestyle pets'... and apparently they are just the beginning... Read the press release here... and you can take delivery of a cuddy non-sinus bothering bundle of joy for just $3500. 'The hypoallergenic cats produced by ALLERCA will allow consumers to enjoy the love and companionship of a pet without the cost, inconvenience, risk, and limited effectiveness of current allergy treatments. Clients will take delivery of the first ALLERCA kittens in 2007. The hypoallergenic cat is the first of a planned series of lifestyle pets that ALLERCA will develop over the next few years. http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/10/26/2139244 From natashavita at earthlink.net Wed Oct 27 14:26:10 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:26:10 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: <291440-2200410327142610995@M2W062.mail2web.com> Thanks Damien! Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Damien Broderick thespike at satx.rr.com Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:37:09 -0500 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in http://www.planetary.org/news/2004/cassini_titan00a_approach-images_1026.htm l _______________________________________________ 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 27 15:28:02 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 08:28:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041027152802.12444.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alan Eliasen wrote: > > You can think of the -> operator as a very-low-precendence divide > operator, if that helps. I had thought it was an equals sign. > > So, if you wanted to see what constant acceleration you'd need to > reach .9 c in a year, the (overly-simplified) calculation would be: > > .9 c / (1 year) -> ft/s^2 > > Which gives a needed acceleration of about > > 28.05 ft/s^2 > > Which is hopefully what you were trying to calculate. By the way, > you can > replace the ft/s^2 with "gravity" or "gee", too, to give something in > human terms. (It's just under 1 gee.) > > This calculation is, of course, oversimplified, and neglects the > Lorentz transformations which are necessary to give a correct answer, > which are left as an exercise for the reader. Can one do Lorentz transformations in Frink? ===== 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 hal at finney.org Wed Oct 27 16:46:31 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 09:46:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars Message-ID: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> Samantha Atkins writes: > I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this > monstrously incompetent moron in office. So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you? I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to beliefs in the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which would suggest that in fact the issues (in this case, which candidate would make a better president) are quite uncertain. Hal From hal at finney.org Wed Oct 27 17:19:38 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 10:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: <20041027171938.5EE7E57E2A@finney.org> Amara writes: > By the way, the camera is not the best instrument to see through > the cloud layers onto the surface of Titan. VIMS, the infrared > instrument of the group where I work in Italy, is one good instrument > well-suited for this environment. (Another is radar.) Some press > pictures from VIMS are at the Cassini web site now. > > http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/titan/images/vims-1.jpg&type=image Will your VIMS produce a spectrum that provides clues to what the dark and light material are on the surface? It would be interesting to know if the black area is just dark rock, or is it some kind of tar- or oil-like substance? Hal From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Wed Oct 27 17:32:59 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:32:59 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <3F0E7C3A-283E-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 27 Oct 2004, at 18:46, Hal Finney wrote: > I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to beliefs in > the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which would suggest > that in fact the issues (in this case, which candidate would make a > better president) are quite uncertain. Come on we do this all the time and for good reason. The fact that 30% of Americans are Born Again Christians doesn't make me question my religious beliefs or lack thereof. I am sure that most people who are Libertarians on this list don't constantly question the correctness of their beliefs based on what the majority think. Perhaps Samantha has already sat down and carefully weighed up all the evidence and decided that Bush is a moron. best, patrick From gingell at gnat.com Wed Oct 27 17:42:41 2004 From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 13:42:41 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <16767.56849.516951.642140@nile.gnat.com> Hal Finney writes: > I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to > beliefs in the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which > would suggest that in fact the issues (in this case, which > candidate would make a better president) are quite uncertain. I don't think this is a difficult problem to understand. You just have to get used to the idea that most of the electorate isn't in the business of forming good judgments on the basis of rationally evaluated evidence, they're in the business of voting for "us" and against "them." People don't believe Saddam Hussein planned 9/11, or George Bush planned 9/11, because they know something we don't or they've made some correct inference we haven't stumbled into. They believe it because they want to, and they've build a model of the world for themselves based on reasoning from the conclusions they prefer to the facts which would support them. What we're witnessing isn't for the most part an intellectually honest dispute among informed, dispassionate theory generators. It's media age tribalism, and the fact large numbers of people have had their brains eaten by non-rational belief systems doesn't suggest anything at all about the actual factual realities of the situation. Matt From thespike at satx.rr.com Wed Oct 27 17:58:39 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:58:39 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <3F0E7C3A-283E-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> <3F0E7C3A-283E-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041027124743.01adeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 07:32 PM 10/27/2004 +0200, Patrick.Wilken wrote: >Perhaps Samantha has already sat down and carefully weighed up all the >evidence and decided that Bush is a moron. Or perhaps that he holds very silly and dangerous ideas, and is under the sway of smarter people with very silly and dangerous ideas who are ideologically constrained from modifying those ideas under empirical test. I was surprised by the recent NYT report on the comparative IQs of Bush and Kerry (and startled that the NYT used as its source the racist site Vdare.com, but that's another story). Using SATs and the like, it was decided that Bush's IQ is c. 125 (SAT 1206), and Kerry's c. 120. Gore's allegedly is around 135. This is a bit disturbing; I wouldn't imagine many of the frequent posters on this list would clock in under 135, and many would be one or two sigma higher, with several higher still. But as the old British saw had it, pollies (and a fortiori the general population, I should think) want clever people `on tap, not on top'. As a visitor to the States, I still don't really understand how much raw power an elected POTUS has. Finger on the nuke button, right? Power to declare war or go to war without declaring it or something? Unless he's genuinely a compliant puppet under the control of a clever cabal, or truly smart himself, this seems a recipe for doom. Damien Broderick From samantha at objectent.com Wed Oct 27 18:10:34 2004 From: samantha at objectent.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:10:34 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <7F463582-2843-11D9-ABE7-000A95B1AFDE@objectent.com> On Oct 27, 2004, at 9:46 AM, Hal Finney wrote: > Samantha Atkins writes: >> I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this >> monstrously incompetent moron in office. > > So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want > to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? > No, I think they are mostly good people who have been successfully misinformed. This has happened many many times in history. > How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right > and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you? > As I have worked pretty hard to understand what is going on, harder than most, I have very little doubt as to what is going on. It casts a very very bad light on Bush. So I discount that possibility almost totally. But why hide behind the coattails of the masses? If you have good arguments for Bush then lets hear them. Tis the season. > I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to beliefs in > the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which would suggest > that in fact the issues (in this case, which candidate would make a > better president) are quite uncertain. > Simple. They think and draw conclusions. You must do the same. How many agree or disagree is relevant for winning a popular but not relevant for your understanding and judgment. Also, this little aside misses most of the real content of the piece quoted. I find that interesting. - s From mlorrey at yahoo.com Wed Oct 27 18:37:01 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:37:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041027124743.01adeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041027183701.34026.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > As a visitor to the States, I still don't really understand how much > raw power an elected POTUS has. Finger on the nuke button, right? Power > to declare war or go to war without declaring it or something? Unless > he's genuinely a compliant puppet under the control of a clever cabal, > or truly smart himself, this seems a recipe for doom. He can go to war for 90 days when congress is in session without asking for congressional approval. When congress is out of session he can do anything he wants internationally, he can make recess appointments of judges and other officials without needing Senate approval (Clinton used this power quite a bit to put commies on the bench). With natural disasters, he can declare large areas of states as disaster areas qualified to receive FEMA funds and support, impose National Guard control over areas, etc. >From the US Constitution, the presidential power: "Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices, and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment. He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments. The President shall have power to fill up all vacancies that may happen during the recess of the Senate, by granting commissions which shall expire at the end of their next session. Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States. Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." ===== 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 brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Oct 27 19:55:16 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:55:16 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office Message-ID: Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? For a standard deviation of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. I also think that IQ does not directly correlate to leadership ability. I've some super geniuses who were useless and some average (110) who could run an organization quite well. The POTUS isn't omnipotent but is the most powerful elected official in the US. BAL >From: Damien Broderick >To: ExI chat list >Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 12:58:39 -0500 > >At 07:32 PM 10/27/2004 +0200, Patrick.Wilken wrote: > >>Perhaps Samantha has already sat down and carefully weighed up all the >>evidence and decided that Bush is a moron. > >Or perhaps that he holds very silly and dangerous ideas, and is under the >sway of smarter people with very silly and dangerous ideas who are >ideologically constrained from modifying those ideas under empirical test. > >I was surprised by the recent NYT report on the comparative IQs of Bush and >Kerry (and startled that the NYT used as its source the racist site >Vdare.com, but that's another story). Using SATs and the like, it was >decided that Bush's IQ is c. 125 (SAT 1206), and Kerry's c. 120. Gore's >allegedly is around 135. This is a bit disturbing; I wouldn't imagine many >of the frequent posters on this list would clock in under 135, and many >would be one or two sigma higher, with several higher still. But as the old >British saw had it, pollies (and a fortiori the general population, I >should think) want clever people `on tap, not on top'. > >As a visitor to the States, I still don't really understand how much raw >power an elected POTUS has. Finger on the nuke button, right? Power to >declare war or go to war without declaring it or something? Unless he's >genuinely a compliant puppet under the control of a clever cabal, or truly >smart himself, this seems a recipe for doom. > >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 Wed Oct 27 20:02:34 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:02:34 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars Message-ID: What I find comical is that there is probably some anti-samantha out there who holds pretty strong feelings for Bush. They are probably posting to their preferred listserv with comments like "How can anyone not vote for Bush..." We all have our opinions and we all like to think that we are more informed and better at decision making that the great unwashed masses, but we'll never truly know if we are as right as we think we are. Comments like "I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this monstrously incompetent moron in office." merely show someone's lack of belief/understanding/intelligence/empathy rather than showing how stupid everyone else is. If only you studied the responses closer you could understand that some people don't find Bush monstrouly incompetent. And please don't jump on my political beliefs, I'm not voting for Bush. I just try to see how some people feel very strongly for views other than those I support. BAL >From: Samantha Atkins >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 11:10:34 -0700 > > >On Oct 27, 2004, at 9:46 AM, Hal Finney wrote: > >>Samantha Atkins writes: >>>I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this >>>monstrously incompetent moron in office. >> >>So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want >>to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? >> > >No, I think they are mostly good people who have been successfully >misinformed. This has happened many many times in history. > >>How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right >>and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you? >> > >As I have worked pretty hard to understand what is going on, harder than >most, I have very little doubt as to what is going on. It casts a very >very bad light on Bush. So I discount that possibility almost totally. > >But why hide behind the coattails of the masses? If you have good >arguments for Bush then lets hear them. Tis the season. > >>I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to beliefs in >>the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which would suggest >>that in fact the issues (in this case, which candidate would make a >>better president) are quite uncertain. >> > >Simple. They think and draw conclusions. You must do the same. How many >agree or disagree is relevant for winning a popular but not relevant for >your understanding and judgment. Also, this little aside misses most of >the real content of the piece quoted. I find that interesting. > >- s > > >_______________________________________________ >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 Oct 27 20:17:44 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 15:17:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041027150740.01a39ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:55 PM 10/27/2004 -0400, Brian Lee wrote: >Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? For a standard deviation >of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. Sorry, 15 or 16. (I can't be bothered going to Vdare.com either.) The NYT sez Bush is 95th percentile (1 person in 21), Kerry in the 91st percentile (1 person in 11). 135 is about 1 percent of population. Cf. e.g. http://members.shaw.ca/delajara/IQtable.html IQ probably doesn't correlate well with running prowess, say, but it might have something to do with running a meeting or a country. But my impression is that companies and nations don't want people who are *too* smart at the top. You can't trust the fork-tongued bastards, they're always waffling and looking for evidence instead of crisply reaching A vs. Z decisions that anyone can grasp and get behind. Damien Broderick From amara.graps at gmail.com Wed Oct 27 20:33:03 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:33:03 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Titan images start to come in Message-ID: Hal Finney: >Will your VIMS produce a spectrum that provides clues to what the dark >and light material are on the surface? It would be interesting to know >if the black area is just dark rock, or is it some kind of tar- or >oil-like substance? Much more than a single spectrum. It produces cubes of infrared spectra. To understand the measurements, you can go here: http://wwwvims.lpl.arizona.edu/more_new.htm The goal is to determine composition, and VIMS is pretty successful so far. For example, some compositional results of Saturn's rings: http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/rings/images/PIA06349.jpg&type=image http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gs2.cgi?path=../multimedia/images/rings/images/PIA06350.jpg&type=image I saw some amazing stuff today for Titan, that will blow your socks off. It should be at the JPL web site in the next ~day(s). 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 hemm at openlink.com.br Wed Oct 27 20:41:43 2004 From: hemm at openlink.com.br (Henrique Moraes Machado) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:41:43 -0300 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office References: Message-ID: <02af01c4bc65$5e4fbfa0$fe00a8c0@HEMM> I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I think leadership ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off course too low an IQ would render one useless for even being leaded. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brian Lee" To: Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office | Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? For a standard deviation | of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. | | I also think that IQ does not directly correlate to leadership ability. I've | some super geniuses who were useless and some average (110) who could run an From amara.graps at gmail.com Wed Oct 27 20:44:23 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:44:23 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Howling at the Moon (Eclipse tonight) Message-ID: By the way, there is an total lunar eclipse tonight, the totality in Europe (CET):~ 3:30 am to ~4:30 am. details here: http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/OH/OH2004.html http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2004Oct28T.GIF Amara From gingell at gnat.com Wed Oct 27 20:49:58 2004 From: gingell at gnat.com (Matthew Gingell) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:49:58 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <16768.2550.81904.212546@nile.gnat.com> Alan Eliasen writes: > You can think of the -> operator as a very-low-precendence divide > operator, if that helps. How can I do stuff like convert Fahrenheit to Kelvin then? eg: 1 degreeFahrenheit -> "kelvin" => 5/9 (approx. 0.5555555555555556) kelvin Is there something in Frink like the operator "in" in the Google calculator language, eg: 1 degree Fahrenheit in Kelvin => 1 degree Fahrenheit = 255.927778 Kelvin (In fairness I think the fault here lies with Herr Fahrenheit, rather than with Mr. Eliasen.) Also, it's nice that Google accepts "degree Fahrenheit" rather than expecting "degreeFahrenheit." It guess though that the dynamic nature of Frink would make implementing that pretty silly - the lexer would have to know at run time the full symbol table, and defining new identifiers could potentially ambiguate existing ones... From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Wed Oct 27 21:23:30 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:23:30 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office Message-ID: I think I read somewhere that your IQ drops 1 point every time you tell someone else :) BAL >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" >To: "ExI chat list" >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:41:43 -0300 > >I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I think leadership >ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off course too low an IQ >would render one useless for even being leaded. > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Brian Lee" >To: >Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > >| Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? For a standard >deviation >| of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. >| >| I also think that IQ does not directly correlate to leadership ability. >I've >| some super geniuses who were useless and some average (110) who could run >an > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From wingcat at pacbell.net Wed Oct 27 21:38:19 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:38:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Closer to the truth: especially at high levels, your IQ primarily measures your skill at taking IQ tests. (And if the tests aren't calibrated to accurately measure high IQ, then anything above 130 or maybe above 145 is statistically the same/within the margin of error as most other scores within that range, no?) --- Brian Lee wrote: > I think I read somewhere that your IQ drops 1 point > every time you tell > someone else :) > > BAL > > >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" > > >To: "ExI chat list" > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:41:43 -0300 > > > >I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I > think leadership > >ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off > course too low an IQ > >would render one useless for even being leaded. > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Brian Lee" > >To: > >Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM > >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > > > >| Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? > For a standard > >deviation > >| of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. > >| > >| I also think that IQ does not directly correlate > to leadership ability. > >I've > >| some super geniuses who were useless and some > average (110) who could run > >an > > > >_______________________________________________ > >extropy-chat mailing list > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > From eliasen at mindspring.com Wed Oct 27 22:48:56 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 16:48:56 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: <20041027152802.12444.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041027152802.12444.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <418025D8.50007@mindspring.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: > Can one do Lorentz transformations in Frink? Certainly. There's no built-in function, but the equation for the Lorentz transform can be defined very simply: Lorentz[v] := 1 / sqrt[1-v^2/c^2] You just pass it a velocity less than c. And then you can just call it. To find out the time dilation factor, at say, .9 c: Lorentz[.9 c] which gives a value of about 2.294. This is the factor by which clocks slow down, lengths are contracted, or masses increase. It, of course also works for any velocity: Lorentz[55 mph] Applying this properly to the acceleration problem requires defining which observer measures the acceleration, etc, and whose clock we're looking at. Another exercise for the reader? -- Alan Eliasen | "Whenever you find you are on the side of eliasen at mindspring.com | the majority, it is time to pause and http://futureboy.homeip.net/ | reflect." --Mark Twain From extropy at unreasonable.com Wed Oct 27 23:17:07 2004 From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:17:07 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20041027182755.09a3e6c0@unreasonable.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: >Closer to the truth: especially at high levels, your >IQ primarily measures your skill at taking IQ tests. >(And if the tests aren't calibrated to accurately >measure high IQ, then anything above 130 or maybe >above 145 is statistically the same/within the margin >of error as most other scores within that range, no?) I don't want to put the time into a detailed response if no one's interested in the subject, but: I know psychometricians who are very familiar with IQ research. (If the discussion goes beyond my competence, I can relay questions to them.) What I gather from my own study and what they report -- IQ is actually the best predictor available for some purposes. For example, the correlation between poverty and IQ is higher than it is for years of education or ethnic group. IQ tests are each designed for a valid range, and most tests cannot accurately measure the intelligence of someone smarter than the author of the test. For example, analogy problems are commonly seen. W is to X as Y is to ?, with a choice of A, B, C, D, or E. The author is looking for answer C but a smarter test-taker chooses D, seeing a connection that the author was not aware of. I've suggested that tests be modified to allow the subject to justify their answer. The high-end limit of current tests is roughly 165. There are tests that purport to measure higher IQs, but there is no consensus that they can. On the other hand, there's a new category of test, based on research that the time to complete elementary tasks correlates well with IQ, that directly measures neural characteristics. To the extent that these can be developed and validated, we'd have a culturally neutral, broad-range measurement tool. They'd also be pretty cool for optimizing doses of nootropics and quantifying the cognitive impact of environmental factors in your life. -- David Lubkin. From sentience at pobox.com Wed Oct 27 23:50:16 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 19:50:16 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] On doing the impossible Message-ID: <41803438.2020209@pobox.com> "I wonder what Ted Williams will think when he finds out the Red Sox finally won." -- Emil Gilliam, on #sl4 If they win, spread the meme. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From eliasen at mindspring.com Wed Oct 27 23:52:55 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:52:55 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: <16768.2550.81904.212546@nile.gnat.com> References: <16768.2550.81904.212546@nile.gnat.com> Message-ID: <418034D7.3030007@mindspring.com> > Alan Eliasen writes: > > > You can think of the -> operator as a very-low-precendence divide > > operator, if that helps. Matthew Gingell wrote: > How can I do stuff like convert Fahrenheit to Kelvin then? To answer that, I'd need to you to clarify, and so does Frink. There are two totally different measures that you may mean: 1.) An absolute temperature 2.) The *size* of a degree Fahrenheit vs. the size of a Kelvin. The distinction is subtle, but critical. Since it's impossible for Frink (or me) to guess which one you mean, it makes you disambiguate them. Since Fahrenheit and Celsius are silly temperature systems that don't have their zero points at absolute zero, they have to be treated specially. Let me illustrate the difference through an erroneous news report that a friend sent to me: -----begin quote ---------------- The extended hot spell has seen temperatures cross the 50 degrees Celsius (122 Fahrenheit) mark. Media reports said the temperature hit 52.1 degrees Celsius (125.8 Fahrenheit) in the northern town of Kottagudam on Monday. The temperatures are about five to seven degrees Celsius (41 to 44.6 Fahrenheit) above normal. ------end quote ----------------- What's wrong with those conversions? If you were doing temperature conversions through the web-based interface ( http://futureboy.homeip.net/frink/ ,) you'd note that it usually gives you helpful hints on how to do them (when it notices certain keywords): ------------- If you didn't get the answer you expected: * Are you doing a temperature calculation? Keep in mind that if you're using the Celsius or Fahrenheit system, the zero point is not at absolute zero, so these units can't be written as normal multiplicative units. You also need to be clear whether you're specifying an absolute temperature or the size of a degree in the Fahrenheit or Celsius system. (You use the size only when you're indicating the difference between two temperatures.) Frink can do it all, but you need to be unambiguous as to which you mean, so you don't get a wrong answer. For more information, please see the Temperature Scales section of the documentation. --------------- And it gives a link to the relevant part of the documentation: http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/index.html#TemperatureScales In short, 1.) If you mean an absolute temperature, say, converting room temperature to the equivalent temperature in Kelvin, you need to use the functions c[] or F[] or Celsius[] or Fahrenheit[] to indicate that it's an absolute temperature. F[72] -> K Gives 295.37 K. You can also write F[72] -> C or C[10] -> F (Technical aside: The C[] and F[] functions work differently if they're called with a dimensionless number vs. a unit with dimensions of temperature. The -> operator will also try to call a one-argument-function if the right side can't be made to conform.) 2.) If you mean the *difference* between two temperatures, such as when you're showing the difference between average temperatures, such as in the news story above, you'd use "degC" and "degF" or just "K" which indicate the *size* of a degree in those scales (a constant factor of 9/5). 5 degC -> degF The last paragraph of the story should have actually read: "The temperatures are about five to seven degrees Celsius (9 to 12.6 Fahrenheit) above normal." Using the *size* of a degree is necessary when doing thermodynamic calculations where the *difference* in temperatures is the critical element. The difference is important, so I've decided, rather than guessing what the user means, and often guessing wrong, to be a little pedantic, and show them how their calculation may be ambiguous, and showing them how to fix it. After all, if I help someone to learn something, and think and communicate more clearly, I've done my job. I don't try to read minds, and guess drastically wrong sometimes like the Google calculator does. Case in point. Try to guess in advance what the Google Calculator will return for each the following: 1 F + 1 C 1 K + 1 F 1 K + 1 F + 1 F 1 K + 2 F 1 F + 1 F 1 F / 1 C 1 K - 1 C 1 K / 1 C I prefer unambiguity and a wee bit of pedantry over such unpredictable behavior. Better to teach a man to fish, than quietly slip a squid in his pants... > 1 degreeFahrenheit -> "kelvin" > 5/9 (approx. 0.5555555555555556) kelvin > > Is there something in Frink like the operator "in" in the Google > calculator language, eg: The -> operator serves the same purpose. If you're using the two-line interface, it puts the -> between the "from" and "to" for you. > (In fairness I think the fault here lies with Herr Fahrenheit, rather > than with Mr. Eliasen.) Thanks for not laying the blame for such a silly standard on me! The Rankine system has the same size degrees as Fahrenheit, but starts, logically, at absolute zero. That would work too. Sigh. > Also, it's nice that Google accepts "degree Fahrenheit" rather than > expecting "degreeFahrenheit." It guess though that the dynamic nature > of Frink would make implementing that pretty silly - the lexer would > have to know at run time the full symbol table, and defining new > identifiers could potentially ambiguate existing ones... Precisely. If someone redefines a local variable called "degree," the results are potentially very unexpected and hard to catch. I'd certainly paint myself into an inextensible, unmaintainable, untrustable corner cluttered with special cases for everything if I allowed that. -- Alan Eliasen | "Whenever you find you are on the side of eliasen at mindspring.com | the majority, it is time to pause and http://futureboy.homeip.net/ | reflect." --Mark Twain From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Wed Oct 27 22:33:17 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:33:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> Intelligence is subjective. Also, testing ability can vary with environmental conditions and with changes in mental states such as anger, anxiety and emotional stress. Also, I never understood how you could quantify such a thing with a number when people have such a hard time agreeing on what intelligence is to begin with. Most can;t even agree on whether or not dolphins and chimpanzees are intelligent. So I pose this question: What is intelligence? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Tymes" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:38 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > Closer to the truth: especially at high levels, your > IQ primarily measures your skill at taking IQ tests. > (And if the tests aren't calibrated to accurately > measure high IQ, then anything above 130 or maybe > above 145 is statistically the same/within the margin > of error as most other scores within that range, no?) > > --- Brian Lee wrote: > > > I think I read somewhere that your IQ drops 1 point > > every time you tell > > someone else :) > > > > BAL > > > > >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" > > > > >To: "ExI chat list" > > > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:41:43 -0300 > > > > > >I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I > > think leadership > > >ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off > > course too low an IQ > > >would render one useless for even being leaded. > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Brian Lee" > > >To: > > >Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM > > >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > > > > > > >| Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? > > For a standard > > >deviation > > >| of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. > > >| > > >| I also think that IQ does not directly correlate > > to leadership ability. > > >I've > > >| some super geniuses who were useless and some > > average (110) who could run > > >an > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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 sentience at pobox.com Thu Oct 28 01:20:43 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:20:43 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> <02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> Message-ID: <4180496B.1040202@pobox.com> Kevin Freels wrote: > Intelligence is subjective. Also, testing ability can vary with > environmental conditions and with changes in mental states such as anger, > anxiety and emotional stress. Also, I never understood how you could > quantify such a thing with a number when people have such a hard time > agreeing on what intelligence is to begin with. > Most can;t even agree on whether or not dolphins and chimpanzees are > intelligent. > > So I pose this question: What is intelligence? Eliezer-2002 says: "Intelligence" is the ability to model, predict, and manipulate reality. See also http://singinst.org/LOGI/foundations.html. Eliezer-2004 says: "Intelligence" is the idiosyncratic human implementation of optimization. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From trichrom at optusnet.com.au Thu Oct 28 01:25:22 2004 From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:25:22 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> <02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> Message-ID: <000601c4bc8d$012fb190$0da11dd3@turtle> How about ability of effective (coordinated and successful) and timely (speed and timing) use in depth (measurable?) of consideration/thought/contemplation in logical and emphatic mental processes, in conjunction with awareness and control of subconscious and primal motivator's influences. Rob KPO ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Freels So I pose this question: What is intelligence? From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 28 01:45:16 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:45:16 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com><02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> <4180496B.1040202@pobox.com> Message-ID: <009401c4bc8f$c6888f00$5eeafb44@kevin> So Eliezer even disagrees with Eliezer. This is exactly whatI mean. :-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eliezer Yudkowsky" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > Kevin Freels wrote: > > Intelligence is subjective. Also, testing ability can vary with > > environmental conditions and with changes in mental states such as anger, > > anxiety and emotional stress. Also, I never understood how you could > > quantify such a thing with a number when people have such a hard time > > agreeing on what intelligence is to begin with. > > Most can;t even agree on whether or not dolphins and chimpanzees are > > intelligent. > > > > So I pose this question: What is intelligence? > > Eliezer-2002 says: "Intelligence" is the ability to model, predict, and > manipulate reality. See also http://singinst.org/LOGI/foundations.html. > > Eliezer-2004 says: "Intelligence" is the idiosyncratic human > implementation of optimization. > > -- > Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ > Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 28 01:45:49 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 20:45:49 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com><02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> <000601c4bc8d$012fb190$0da11dd3@turtle> Message-ID: <009a01c4bc8f$da22b770$5eeafb44@kevin> Does a Bonobo fit this model? ----- Original Message ----- From: "RobKPO" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 8:25 PM Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > How about ability of effective (coordinated and successful) and timely > (speed and timing) use in depth (measurable?) of > consideration/thought/contemplation in logical and emphatic mental > processes, in conjunction with awareness and control of subconscious and > primal motivator's influences. > > Rob KPO > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Kevin Freels > So I pose this question: What is 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 Thu Oct 28 01:39:34 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 18:39:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041028013934.97841.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> It doesn't appear America has anything to lose by turning Bush out. At least doing so would break up the momentum of the Bush dynasty-- though Bushes will keep trying to run for office later on, no matter what. Think of voting Bush out of office as being term limits. Samantha Atkins writes: > I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this > monstrously incompetent moron in office. So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you? I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to beliefs in the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which would suggest that in fact the issues (in this case, which candidate would make a better president) are quite uncertain. Hal _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Oct 28 02:13:22 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:13:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <009a01c4bc8f$da22b770$5eeafb44@kevin> References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> <02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> <000601c4bc8d$012fb190$0da11dd3@turtle> <009a01c4bc8f$da22b770$5eeafb44@kevin> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041027211229.01b6aec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:45 PM 10/27/2004 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: >Does a Bonobo fit this model? A bonobo fits *anything*, that's the fun of being a bonobo. Damien Broderick From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 28 03:08:13 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:08:13 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] spam Message-ID: <005a01c4bc9b$5da6c5e0$5eeafb44@kevin> I don't know what's happening, but I have been rejecting an unusually heavy amount of spam as the moderator for the exi-midwest list today. A typical week leaves me 1 or 2 spam messages to reject and I think I have rejected 8-10 today alone. Has anyone else had a similar experience? Any idea what may be happening? I have noticed a generally higher level of spam this week on all of my email accounts as well. None of it is political. It's all the same Viagra/remove spyware/overseas medications crap as usual, just more of it. Kevin Freels -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Thu Oct 28 04:18:38 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:18:38 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Small Archaic Humans Message-ID: <005901c4bca5$334fa5a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> ... and not bonobos: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/science/28tiny.html?hp&ex=1099022400&en=8d66c9bb7753fc24&ei=5094&partner=homepage Olga From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Oct 28 04:19:02 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:19:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20041027182755.09a3e6c0@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <20041028041902.68602.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- David Lubkin wrote: > I don't want to put the time into a detailed > response if no one's > interested in the subject Rest assured, your report is interesting even if no one has much to say about it. :) From jrd1415 at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 05:35:48 2004 From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 22:35:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] 140 year old Castro? In-Reply-To: <20041022065918.76789.qmail@web25209.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041028053548.65366.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com> Even western/capitalist science is subject to over-hype, so a well tuned bogosity meter is useful no matter the source. That said, I have heard, but cannot verify, that Cuba has some degree of achievement in biotech. Thus one might reasonably ask if the claim made by Dr. Eugenio Abdo originates from some degree of expertise not widely published/known in the US? Does anyone have hard specifics on the state of Cuban biotech capability? Setting aside ideological issues--frayed, antique, and perhaps by now somewhat quaint--this should be a matter of genuine interest to transhumanists. Similarly, technological capability is likely (my opinion) a more significant factor for a society's future importance than political stripe. YMMV. Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles --- Trend Ologist wrote: > AFP > > One of Fidel Castro's physicians, Eugenio Abdo, said > after 78 year old Castro's stairway fall in Cuba, a > tumble fracturing his right arm and left knee, that > with "the scientific progress and advances in embryo > stem cells" Castro is "heading for 140 (years), I am > not exaggerating" explained Abdo. > > Sounds like Commie propaganda to me. > > > > > > ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW > Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From eliasen at mindspring.com Thu Oct 28 05:54:39 2004 From: eliasen at mindspring.com (Alan Eliasen) Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 23:54:39 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041025210201.9517.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4180899F.80102@mindspring.com> Mike Lorrey wrote: (about Frink) > BTW: Do you have a palm version, or at least a palmOne > Treo smartphone sized version, so I can use it from browsing the web on > the Treo? Does the Treo still use the web-clipping applications? That is, a .pqa file? I have one that I used to use on my wireless Palm VII. If so, get it here: http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/#Wireless Otherwise, point it at: http://futureboy.homeip.net/frink/ Which detects a lot of browser configurations (and should probably notice that it's a Palm, and behave accordingly.) -- 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 sean at valuationpartners.com.au Thu Oct 28 06:57:15 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:57:15 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041028065719.693EDC405@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 "Hal Finney" Samantha Atkins writes: > I am out of belief that anyone has any good reason to keep this > monstrously incompetent moron in office. So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you? I am interested in understanding how people cling so hard to beliefs in the face of evidence of widespread disagreement, which would suggest that in fact the issues (in this case, which candidate would make a better president) are quite uncertain. ------------------------------------- I am interested in how many members of this list are Libertarians (emphasis on capital L) and, of those, how many consider themselves to be "hard core, no matter what" (ie True Believers). I have a hard time coming to terms with the conflict between libertarian philosophy and issues such as egalitarianism, particularly regarding whether the human race collectively has a duty of care to its members. Yes, I understand the difference between positive and negative rights, but a "right" is different to the desirability and hope for movement towards egalitarian outcomes. Presumably, despite being opposed to anarchism, contemporary libertarians do not share the complete lack of compassion for others which I (probably mistakenly) identified within some of Mike Lorrey's recent posts. Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the term "libertarian" is used within this list. There seems to be many definitions, from libertarian socialism to anarchic definitions to US liberalism, depending on whether one has a US perspective or European. I like the way this page hows the confusion (and hence, my need to know more about the views of the libertarians within this email list) http://www.free-definition.com/Libertarianism.html I would have thought that a more egalitarian world would be a desirable outcome post-singularity. Am I wrong or misguided to hope for this? If this is a desirable outcome, what is the hope or motivation to achieve such an outcome without acceptance of a global "duty of care"? Surely, egalitarian outcomes should apply to all, not just those in countries wealthy enough to afford the benefits of new technologies? For the record, despite Mike's assumptions to the contrary. I am not a communist. I actually support capitalism. What I do not support is what I call "rampant, unchecked capitalism" where there are no clearly functioning constraints on massive abuses of the system. Any system can be destroyed by those who persist in subverting the nature of the system to suit their own purposes. Clearly, the current capitalist systems are in a cancerous state, or am I wrong? Am I the only person on this list who feels we are operating within dangerous economic, social and environmental problems across the globe, with no one taking responsibility for decisions which affect all of us being made by a small section of society, with a history of propagating cynical outcomes which may or may not include massive tragedy? (ie the ruling classes, for want of a better terminology) Why bring this up within this thread? Perhaps because I do not believe in blind faith in ANYTHING and am yet to see a belief, philosophical stance or political/economic system which does not contain flaws, paradoxes or "tautological themes". In this respect, it is worth noting that many of Bush's constituency still believe in The Rapture (including Bush himself AFAIK...) and are all very excited at the prospect of "End Times being upon us soon". www.raptureready.com www.raptureready.com/rap2.html www.rr-bb.com/ The third link above is easily the busiest bulletin board I have ever seen on the web, by several orders of magnitude. A cursory read through the posts gives the reader a good idea of Bush's prime constituency beyond the large corporate and small business demographics. Sean From pharos at gmail.com Thu Oct 28 07:20:57 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:20:57 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041027211229.01b6aec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041027213819.93471.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> <02dc01c4bc74$f5373240$5eeafb44@kevin> <000601c4bc8d$012fb190$0da11dd3@turtle> <009a01c4bc8f$da22b770$5eeafb44@kevin> <6.1.1.1.0.20041027211229.01b6aec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:13:22 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > At 08:45 PM 10/27/2004 -0500, Kevin Freels wrote: > > >Does a Bonobo fit this model? > > A bonobo fits *anything*, that's the fun of being a bonobo. > On the internet nobody can tell that you're a bonobo. :) BillK From alex at ramonsky.com Thu Oct 28 09:13:11 2004 From: alex at ramonsky.com (Alex Ramonsky) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:13:11 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Happy Thursday References: Message-ID: <4180B827.4060602@ramonsky.com> ..."What if a tree falls down when we're underneath it?" said Piglet (who was concerned about the singularity) ..."What if it doesn't?" said Pooh... : ) From amara at amara.com Thu Oct 28 10:08:44 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:08:44 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office Message-ID: This was sure dumb: "Access Denied" to most non US domains (I heard that from .mil works) http://www.georgewbush.com/ But these work: http://65.172.163.222/ http://www.anonymization.net/1/1/000001A/http://www.georgewbush.com Amara From amara at amara.com Thu Oct 28 10:29:28 2004 From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:29:28 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Howling at the Moon (Eclipse tonight) Message-ID: total lunar eclipse(s): http://flickr.com/photos/tags/eclipse/ Yes the eclipse was nice. Not perfect clear sky, but good enough to see all of it. A large red ball hanging over the lights of Rome was a nice sight. I was writing sms' to my sisters (one in SoCalif. and another one in NoCalif.), who were watching the eclipse too, telling the each other about the views. I am so lazy... I could see the eclipse perfectly through the windowed doors of my terrace from my bed... :-) 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 seems like once people grow up, they have no idea what's cool." --Calvin From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Oct 28 12:52:04 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:52:04 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2B4CEEEE-28E0-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 27 Oct 2004, at 22:02, Brian Lee wrote: > What I find comical is that there is probably some anti-samantha out > there who holds pretty strong feelings for Bush. They are probably > posting to their preferred listserv with comments like "How can anyone > not vote for Bush..." Ahhh. Wouldn't that LISTSERV be Extropy-Chat, and anti-Sam is Mike? :) best, patrick From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Oct 28 13:16:05 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:16:05 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041027124743.01adeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> <3F0E7C3A-283E-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> <6.1.1.1.0.20041027124743.01adeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <85FFDAF6-28E3-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> On 27 Oct 2004, at 19:58, Damien Broderick wrote: > I was surprised by the recent NYT report on the comparative IQs of > Bush and Kerry (and startled that the NYT used as its source the > racist site Vdare.com, but that's another story). Using SATs and the > like, it was decided that Bush's IQ is c. 125 (SAT 1206), and Kerry's > c. 120. Gore's allegedly is around 135. But without proper estimates of error these numbers are meaningless. A properly administered IQ test has a SD of 10 or 15 depending on the test, but you have to take into account that there is additional noise in these estimates when attempting to convert from SAT scores to estimated IQ. I would guess that there is going to a SD of at least 25 IQ points in these estimates (actually given the ability to train for SATs I am sure the actual noise estimates are considerably higher). That would mean that we have an 95% estimate of Bush or Kerry's IQ somewhere in the range of 70-75 and 170-175! So all we can conclude from this is that either or both candidates IQ falls somewhere in the v. superior - v. impaired range. I am pretty sure that simply listening to the candidates speak, even in an artificial situation like the public debates where the candidates have been extensively rehearsed, will give a much better estimate of their actual IQs. If you take into account what they have achieved with their lives and how this was done you will get an even better guesstimate of their actual smarts. best, patrick From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Oct 28 15:52:58 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:52:58 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <217757.1098627339712.JavaMail.root@dedicated169-bos> Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041028085145.035ae280@mail.earthlink.net> Thank you for this post. Trendologist is having fun, but I think that it has gone too far. Time to bring in the list moderators. Best, Natasha At 02:15 PM 10/24/04 +0000, you wrote: >T.O. > I read statements like the one below and have to ask.. >" Is he serious about this or is it just trolling of some kind?" > I'm a southerner. I speak English with a drawl. I come from >a long line of bible-thumpers (though I'm a rationalist/buddhist sort >myself). And I'm 2 generations off the farm. > And yet I'm here on this list and a part of the transhumanist >community. > We could sit in a cafe and discuss music, politics, philosophy, >martial arts.. any number of subjects.. and you might find I'm >far more versed about things that (statistically) I'd expect you to >know next to nothing about. DOubtless you have similar areas of >private expertise. > There is absolutely no excuse for the sort of post below, >it's irrational in the extreme. Broad generalizations are not >excusable simply by noting the offense just after you >commit it. > >Thanks, >Brian > >"Looks like Bush will win. Whatever the tally ends up >being, must redneck Southerners be so aggressive with >their culture? They don't like Yankee culture so they >want to push something worse on us? Can't Southern men >be content with their wives & mistresses and other >'nookie'? I swear, the next time a guy with a drawl >approaches to attempt to convert me to Christianity >I'll spit on the ground. I'm totally tired of so many >Southerners trying to inflict their religion on >America; it's not love, it's hate disguised as love. >And they want us to pity them for 140 years ago? >Northerners weren't particularly interested in >abolishing slavery, they bent over backwards to avoid >the war yet Southerners wanted the Feds to guarantee >slavery by using Federal agents to retrieve runaway >slaves-- plus the South wanted other completely >un-Christian measures to be instituted. >Sure, this is all a generalization however I can't >avoid thinking very many Southerners want some sort of >revenge. > >-------------------- >This message was sent from a PCS Phone from Sprint. >Get a free PCS Mail account! >Sign up via the Web Browser on your Sprint Phone >or at http://www.sprintpcs.com. >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Oct 28 14:22:09 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:22:09 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office Message-ID: You're right that IQ tests just test what psychologists think is intelligence. But the difference between 130 and 170 is extremely statistically significant (especially with standard deviation of 10). It measures your percentile so lets say 130 is in the 99% and 170 is in the 99.999%. That's a big difference (and there's no real "margin of error" in IQ tests like there are in polls as IQ tests simply compare you to the mean and the sample). Of course you can probably give someone 10 tests and get 10 different scores out of them, so IQ tests aren't perfect but they're the best test we can perform to get an idea of a person's intelligence. Also, the younger the test is administered the more accurate. Since an IQ is supposed to test intelligence and not knowledge. A knowledgable 10 year old can really clean up on an IQ test but at 30 could get a much lower score. BAL >From: Adrian Tymes >To: ExI chat list >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 14:38:19 -0700 (PDT) > >Closer to the truth: especially at high levels, your >IQ primarily measures your skill at taking IQ tests. >(And if the tests aren't calibrated to accurately >measure high IQ, then anything above 130 or maybe >above 145 is statistically the same/within the margin >of error as most other scores within that range, no?) > >--- Brian Lee wrote: > > > I think I read somewhere that your IQ drops 1 point > > every time you tell > > someone else :) > > > > BAL > > > > >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" > > > > >To: "ExI chat list" > > > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:41:43 -0300 > > > > > >I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I > > think leadership > > >ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off > > course too low an IQ > > >would render one useless for even being leaded. > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > >From: "Brian Lee" > > >To: > > >Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM > > >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > > > > > > >| Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? > > For a standard > > >deviation > > >| of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. > > >| > > >| I also think that IQ does not directly correlate > > to leadership ability. > > >I've > > >| some super geniuses who were useless and some > > average (110) who could run > > >an > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > >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 brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Oct 28 15:01:55 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:01:55 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office Message-ID: I think that tested intelligence is subjective to the testing body. But true Intelligence is absolute and spans culture, time, etc. Intelligence is the ability to comprehend spatial concepts, relate to others, etc etc. Sort of like raw computational power of the brain. I read this book once by David Wingrove called "Chun Kwo" or something many years ago. Sort of pulpy sci-fi (future alternate history where china's culter dominates) but anyway... One of the characters was extremely intelligent and he was able to picture the entire night sky with his eyes closed and then rotate all of the stars as they would throughout the night's movement. I think the character was an uneducated, poor child who had raw capacity. It's sort of a balance between raw brain power and not be autistic. I also think it has a lot to do with concept synthesis, not just memorization. BAL >From: "Kevin Freels" >To: "ExI chat list" >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:33:17 -0500 > >Intelligence is subjective. Also, testing ability can vary with >environmental conditions and with changes in mental states such as anger, >anxiety and emotional stress. Also, I never understood how you could >quantify such a thing with a number when people have such a hard time >agreeing on what intelligence is to begin with. >Most can;t even agree on whether or not dolphins and chimpanzees are >intelligent. > >So I pose this question: What is intelligence? > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Adrian Tymes" >To: "ExI chat list" >Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:38 PM >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > > Closer to the truth: especially at high levels, your > > IQ primarily measures your skill at taking IQ tests. > > (And if the tests aren't calibrated to accurately > > measure high IQ, then anything above 130 or maybe > > above 145 is statistically the same/within the margin > > of error as most other scores within that range, no?) > > > > --- Brian Lee wrote: > > > > > I think I read somewhere that your IQ drops 1 point > > > every time you tell > > > someone else :) > > > > > > BAL > > > > > > >From: "Henrique Moraes Machado" > > > > > > >To: "ExI chat list" > > > > > > >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > >Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:41:43 -0300 > > > > > > > >I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I > > > think leadership > > > >ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off > > > course too low an IQ > > > >would render one useless for even being leaded. > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > > > >From: "Brian Lee" > > > >To: > > > >Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM > > > >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > > > > > > > > > >| Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? > > > For a standard > > > >deviation > > > >| of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. > > > >| > > > >| I also think that IQ does not directly correlate > > > to leadership ability. > > > >I've > > > >| some super geniuses who were useless and some > > > average (110) who could run > > > >an > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > > > >extropy-chat mailing list > > > >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > extropy-chat mailing list > > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > > > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > extropy-chat mailing list > > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 15:14:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:14:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: <02af01c4bc65$5e4fbfa0$fe00a8c0@HEMM> Message-ID: <20041028151447.95157.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Leadership ability, I think, can be either natural or learned. Inherent ability I think can be stunted by high IQ if for some reason the person doesn't develop social skills very early on. --- Henrique Moraes Machado wrote: > I am 147 and my leadership ability tends to zero. I think leadership > ability has no relation at all with IQ levels. Off course too low an > IQ would render one useless for even being leaded. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Brian Lee" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 4:55 PM > Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] morons in office > > > | Were they using a standard deviation of 10 or 15? For a standard > deviation > | of 10, Gore is near genius with a 135. > | > | I also think that IQ does not directly correlate to leadership > ability. I've > | some super geniuses who were useless and some average (110) who > could run an > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Thu Oct 28 15:17:15 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:17:15 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars Message-ID: >From: "Sean Diggins " >To: "'ExI chat list'" >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars >Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:57:15 +0800 > >In this respect, it is worth noting that many of Bush's constituency still >believe in The Rapture (including Bush himself AFAIK...) and are all very >excited at the prospect of "End Times being upon us soon". >www.raptureready.com >www.raptureready.com/rap2.html >www.rr-bb.com/ > >The third link above is easily the busiest bulletin board I have ever seen >on the web, by several orders of magnitude. A cursory read through the >posts >gives the reader a good idea of Bush's prime constituency beyond the large >corporate and small business demographics. > >Sean Come on man, I know it's nice to think about how much better you are than the "Rapture Ready" people, but this is like posting some links to fetish bulliten boards and then saying that it is a prime example of Bush's constituency. BAL From Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE Thu Oct 28 15:19:38 2004 From: Patrick.Wilken at Nat.Uni-Magdeburg.DE (Patrick Wilken) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:19:38 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 28 Oct 2004, at 16:22, Brian Lee wrote: > You're right that IQ tests just test what psychologists think is > intelligence. But the difference between 130 and 170 is extremely > statistically significant (especially with standard deviation of 10). It all depends on your measurement devices. Standard IQ tests give meaningless results past about 150. > It measures your percentile so lets say 130 is in the 99% and 170 is > in the 99.999%. Usually SD is of the population IQ is 15 so 130 is 2 SDs or in the top 95%, and 145 is in the top 99% (which is about as high standard IQ test measure). Keep in mind that one of the big problems with designing test for v. high IQs is finding a large enough population (min. 200-300 people??) to standardize them properly. > That's a big difference (and there's no real "margin of error" in IQ > tests like there are in polls as IQ tests simply compare you to the > mean and the sample). I am not sure I understand what you mean. All IQ are estimates, the question is what is the standard error of the estimate. I stated in a previous email that this was about 15 for IQ test (I was thinking of the WAIS(-R?) in particular). However, this was something I remember being taught years ago and I haven't been able to confirm it doing a quick Google search. I do remember being surprised by how large the range of a typically estimated IQ was, but of course my memory might be conflating the SD of IQ of the population with the SE of an individual test. > Of course you can probably give someone 10 tests and get 10 different > scores out of them, so IQ tests aren't perfect but they're the best > test we can perform to get an idea of a person's intelligence. Well let's say that someone has an IQ of 150 on the WAIS. They obviously are pretty smart at the things the test measures: verbal skills and spatial reasoning, but they might be very dumb on other things we consider smart. For instance, a musical prodigy like Bach might have had an IQ <100 since IQ tests don't measure musical intelligence (I am also not sure how well a mathematical prodigy would necessarily do on the WAIS - and certainly your physical smarts in bed are not measured by standardized IQ tests). Even someone with a high general IQ might have a relatively low verbal IQ but high spatial IQ or visa versa. Surely in the end IQ doesn't matter. Its what you do that counts. I sometimes wonder if the people who care most about their IQ scores are those who haven't actually got so much to show for their lives. > Also, the younger the test is administered the more accurate. Since an > IQ is supposed to test intelligence and not knowledge. A knowledgable > 10 year old can really clean up on an IQ test but at 30 could get a > much lower score. IQ tests are age normalized. So even though you do more poorly as you age (at least for non-crystalline factors) your estimated IQ is adjusted for this decline. So in absolute terms an 50 years old with an IQ of 150 is not as smart as a 25 year old with an IQ of 150. best, patrick ------------------- Measured Intelligence and Education WAIS Mean IQ Educational Equivalent 125 Mean of persons receiving Ph.D. and M.D. degrees 115 Mean of college graduates 105 Mean of high school graduates 100 Average for total population 75 About 50-50 chance of reaching ninth grade Matarazzo, Joseph D. Wechsler's Measure and Appraisal of Adult Intelligence, 5th Edition. Oxford University Press, 1972. -------------------- Best Estimate of IQ Differences for Adults in Different Occupations WAIS-R Mean IQ Range Occupational Category 110-112 Professional and technical 103-104 Managers, clerical, sales 100-102 Skilled workers 92-94 Semiskilled workers 87-89 Unskilled workers Kaufman, Alan S. Assessing Adolescent and Adult Intelligence. Allyn and Bacon, 1990. ? From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 15:27:09 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:27:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Howling at the Moon (Eclipse tonight) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041028152709.97130.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> We took a break from our Freedom Forum meeting last night to watch the eclipse occur. This is the second I've witnessed in my life and it was great. I heard that this will be the last one for 46 years. Incidentally, last night the Red Sox finally beat the Curse of the Bambino, winning the World Series in a 4 game sweep against the St. Louis Cardinals, setting other records including most scores, most errors, among others. Coincident? I think not. That the second biggest choker team could sweep both the pennant and the world series belies the odds. It will likely be another 46 years before they win it again. --- Amara Graps wrote: > By the way, there is an total lunar eclipse tonight, > the totality in Europe (CET):~ 3:30 am to ~4:30 am. > > details here: > http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/OH/OH2004.html > http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/LEplot/LEplot2001/LE2004Oct28T.GIF > > Amara > _______________________________________________ > 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 Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 15:49:47 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041028154947.43965.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brian Lee wrote: > I think I read somewhere that your IQ drops 1 point every time you > tell > someone else Thank ghu it can't go to negative numbers then, given this is a post to a list with hundreds of subscribers.... ===== 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 sean at valuationpartners.com.au Thu Oct 28 15:51:24 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:51:24 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041028155127.D27FE6F7E1@vscan01.westnet.com.au> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Lee > >The third link above is easily the busiest bulletin board I have ever seen >on the web, by several orders of magnitude. A cursory read through the >posts >gives the reader a good idea of Bush's prime constituency beyond the large >corporate and small business demographics. > >Sean Come on man, I know it's nice to think about how much better you are than the "Rapture Ready" people, but this is like posting some links to fetish bulliten boards and then saying that it is a prime example of Bush's constituency. ----------------------------- You couldn't be more wrong about me. I do NOT consider myself to be better than anyone. I fully respect their right to believe whatever they want to believe. I have no idea if any religion on the planet is right or wrong, but I try to form a viewpoint based on my own instincts and reasoning that none of the religions are useful beyond being a means to organise pepole and give their lives meaning. My point was, these are people of robust conviction and they also often (mostly) occupy the far right of politics. There are HUGE numbers of "reborn" Christians in the US, among them George W Bush. If you read my post in the context of the post I replied to (from Hal), he asked this: "So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you?" And my answer was to point out that a large part of Bush's constituency is sourced from the Christian Fundamentalists...and he is milking it for all he is worth. Maybe cynically, maybe not - I dunno. I once read a statistics article which said something like "nearly 50% of the US population consider themselves to be re-born Christians". That statistic seems manifestly incorrect to me, but I imagine it's possible that 25% could be calssified in that manner. The site I linked is hardly a small fetish site. It is massive. Some of the subjects have received well over 100,000 posts. I know of no other bulletin board which has such responses to individual threads. It really is astonishing. To answer Hal's question "How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right and you wrong?", I would not consider it very seriously, personally. The views of the Christian right (when angered) scare me more than most of the other religions in the world (when angered)...and Bush has repeatedly used "mission from God" imagery. He even invoked The Crusades at one point. So no, I don't seriously consider "they" might be right, but I will concede it is possible. After all, anything is possible. But Bush is almost certain to defeat Kerry. So far, it seems to me (from distant Australia) he is doing a VERY good job at getting re-elected. Except for the strange fact that over the past few days he has excluded people from outside the US from visiting his website. Weird...or maybe DOS attacks...who knows? The only chance Kerry has is a surge in people voting _against_ Bush...and choosing Kerry instead of Nader. That's an outside chance, I suspect. In other words, Kerry wont win by people voting _for_ him. Instead, he has a slight chance of getting the edge from freshly enrolled voters determined to remove Bush and the neocons. The young, who don't have landline phones and therefore don't show up in the polls, may be a factor. But Bush has good advisors who keep him on message. Cynical they may be, but stupid they are not. Bush is just the figurehead enabler. A rich man of conviction who proudly "is what he is" against a rich man pretending to have conviction while wearing ill fitting "I'm for the people" duds...nope, Kerry is facing a losing battle... Sean From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 15:59:54 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 08:59:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20041028085145.035ae280@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20041028155954.98937.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> I spoke with Trend today, giving him a good talking-to about venting his spleen on extropy-chat. He wont be posting anymore, this is a solemn promise. >Thank you for this post. Trendologist is having fun, but I think that it has gone too far. >Time to bring in the list moderators. >Best, >Natasha >> I read statements like the one below and have to ask.. >>Is he serious about this or is it just trolling of some kind?" .>I'm a southerner. I speak English with a drawl. I come from >>a long line of bible-thumpers (though I'm a rationalist/buddhist sort >>myself). And I'm 2 generations off the farm. >> And yet I'm here on this list and a part of the transhumanist >>community. >>We could sit in a cafe and discuss music, politics, philosophy, >>martial arts.. any number of subjects.. and you might find I'm >>far more versed about things that (statistically) I'd expect you to >>know next to nothing about. DOubtless you have similar areas of >>private expertise. >>There is absolutely no excuse for the sort of post below, >>it's irrational in the extreme. Broad generalizations are not >>excusable simply by noting the offense just after you >>commit it. >>Thanks, >>Brian --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 16:02:56 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:02:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041028013934.97841.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041028160256.35954.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- Al Brooks wrote: > It doesn't appear America has anything to lose by turning Bush out. > At least doing so would break up the momentum of the Bush dynasty-- > though Bushes will keep trying to run for office later on, no matter > what. > Think of voting Bush out of office as being term limits. > We already have term limits on presidential power: two terms. Why don't liberals ever read the constitution? I don't recall Kerry ever endorsing term limits for Senators from Massachusetts. This country would be a much better place if there were. ===== 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 Thu Oct 28 16:26:22 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 09:26:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Small Archaic Humans In-Reply-To: <005901c4bca5$334fa5a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041028162622.86555.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Hmmmm, lived in caves, made tools and weapons, were 3.5 feet high, smaller cousins of stocky Neanderthals, and killed dragons. So they must be either Hobbits or Dwarves. --- Olga Bourlin wrote: > ... and not bonobos: > > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/science/28tiny.html?hp&ex=1099022400&en=8d66c9bb7753fc24&ei=5094&partner=homepage > > 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!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 28 16:53:35 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:53:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Small Archaic Humans References: <005901c4bca5$334fa5a0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <007a01c4bd0e$abe79810$5eeafb44@kevin> Woohoo! That is an AMAZING discovery! I've been hoping for something like this! No doubt the religious right is skittering about this moment looking for a religious explanation. :-) Kevin Freels ----- Original Message ----- From: "Olga Bourlin" To: "ExI chat list" Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 11:18 PM Subject: [extropy-chat] Small Archaic Humans > ... and not bonobos: > > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/28/science/28tiny.html?hp&ex=1099022400&en=8d66c9bb7753fc24&ei=5094&partner=homepage > > Olga > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Oct 28 16:52:20 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:52:20 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars Message-ID: Sorry, your post seemed a little "These people are stupid and so is Bush". I guess you haven't seen the fetish sites I've seen :) 100,000 isn't that large of a post amount. A site that a friend of mine visits (not me of course) just hit it's 10,000,000th post in just under a few years. BAL >From: "Sean Diggins " >To: "'ExI chat list'" >Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars >Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:51:24 +0800 > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Brian Lee > > > >The third link above is easily the busiest bulletin board I have ever >seen > >on the web, by several orders of magnitude. A cursory read through the > >posts > >gives the reader a good idea of Bush's prime constituency beyond the >large > >corporate and small business demographics. > > > >Sean > >Come on man, I know it's nice to think about how much better you are than >the "Rapture Ready" people, but this is like posting some links to fetish >bulliten boards and then saying that it is a prime example of Bush's >constituency. > >----------------------------- >You couldn't be more wrong about me. >I do NOT consider myself to be better than anyone. >I fully respect their right to believe whatever they want to believe. >I have no idea if any religion on the planet is right or wrong, but I try >to >form a viewpoint based on my own instincts and reasoning that none of the >religions are useful beyond being a means to organise pepole and give their >lives meaning. >My point was, these are people of robust conviction and they also often >(mostly) occupy the far right of politics. >There are HUGE numbers of "reborn" Christians in the US, among them George >W >Bush. >If you read my post in the context of the post I replied to (from Hal), he >asked this: > >"So how do you explain to yourself why about 50% of Americans do want >to keep Bush in office? Do you think they are all wicked people? > >How seriously do you consider the possibility that they might be right >and you wrong? Is that completely out of the question for you?" > >And my answer was to point out that a large part of Bush's constituency is >sourced from the Christian Fundamentalists...and he is milking it for all >he >is worth. >Maybe cynically, maybe not - I dunno. I once read a statistics article >which >said something like "nearly 50% of the US population consider themselves to >be re-born Christians". That statistic seems manifestly incorrect to me, >but >I imagine it's possible that 25% could be calssified in that manner. > >The site I linked is hardly a small fetish site. It is massive. >Some of the subjects have received well over 100,000 posts. >I know of no other bulletin board which has such responses to individual >threads. >It really is astonishing. > >To answer Hal's question "How seriously do you consider the possibility >that >they might be right >and you wrong?", I would not consider it very seriously, personally. The >views of the Christian right (when angered) scare me more than most of the >other religions in the world (when angered)...and Bush has repeatedly used >"mission from God" imagery. He even invoked The Crusades at one point. So >no, I don't seriously consider "they" might be right, but I will concede it >is possible. After all, anything is possible. > >But Bush is almost certain to defeat Kerry. >So far, it seems to me (from distant Australia) he is doing a VERY good job >at getting re-elected. >Except for the strange fact that over the past few days he has excluded >people from outside the US from visiting his website. Weird...or maybe DOS >attacks...who knows? >The only chance Kerry has is a surge in people voting _against_ Bush...and >choosing Kerry instead of Nader. >That's an outside chance, I suspect. >In other words, Kerry wont win by people voting _for_ him. Instead, he has >a >slight chance of getting the edge from freshly enrolled voters determined >to >remove Bush and the neocons. The young, who don't have landline phones and >therefore don't show up in the polls, may be a factor. > >But Bush has good advisors who keep him on message. >Cynical they may be, but stupid they are not. >Bush is just the figurehead enabler. > >A rich man of conviction who proudly "is what he is" against a rich man >pretending to have conviction while wearing ill fitting "I'm for the >people" >duds...nope, Kerry is facing a losing battle... > >Sean > > > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Thu Oct 28 17:05:29 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:05:29 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] IQ [WAS:morons in office] References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org><3F0E7C3A-283E-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de><6.1.1.1.0.20041027124743.01adeec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <85FFDAF6-28E3-11D9-9478-000D932F6F12@nat.uni-magdeburg.de> Message-ID: <012501c4bd10$54602510$5eeafb44@kevin> Here's an interesting link I received on another message board: Intelligence tests with higher g-loadings show higher correlations with body symmetry: Evidence for a general fitness factor mediated by developmental stability Mark D. Prokosch, Ronald A. Yeo and Geoffrey F. Miller Department of Psychology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131-1161, United States Received 29 April 2004; revised 20 July 2004; accepted 22 July 2004. Available online 5 October 2004. Abstract Just as body symmetry reveals developmental stability at the morphological level, general intelligence may reveal developmental stability at the level of brain development and cognitive functioning. These two forms of developmental stability may overlap by tapping into a "general fitness factor." If so, then intellectual tests with higher g-loadings should show higher correlations with a composite measure of body symmetry. We tested this prediction in 78 young males by measuring their left-right symmetry at 10 body points, and by administering five cognitive tests with diverse g-loadings. As predicted, we found a significant (z=3.64, p<0.003) relationship between each test's rank order g-loading and its body symmetry association. We also found a substantial correlation (r=0.39, p<0.01) between body symmetry and our most highly g-loaded test (Ravens Advanced Progressive Matrices). General intelligence is apparently a valid indicator of general developmental stability and heritable fitness, which may partly explain its social and sexual attractiveness. Keywords: Intelligence; g-loadings; Body symmetry Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 505 277 4121; fax: +1 505 277 1394. Address: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W4M-4DGDG78-1&_coverDate=10%2F05%2F2004&_alid=208916661&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_qd=1&_cdi=6546&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=7f5a6718755b3fe26a6f4729976efca1 From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 17:15:01 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:15:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041028065719.693EDC405@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041028171501.3524.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > egalitarian outcomes. Presumably, despite being opposed to > anarchism, contemporary libertarians do not share the complete lack of > compassion for others which I (probably mistakenly) identified within > some of Mike Lorrey's recent posts. Quite mistakenly. What I have a lack of compassion for are communists, socialists, and other looters who automatically assume that someone, who is against jackbooted confiscatory government thuggery performed to obtain "your fair share" "for the children" or other excuses, is bereft of compassion for the unfortunate or needy. As anybody who has been on this list for the last year knows, I am far from lacking in compassion. I quit my job to nurse my mother for 8 months after she finished 10 months in the hospital. I have donated thousands of hours in my past to volunteering at hospitals, ski instructing disadvantaged kids, and as a director for a shooting club. I have donated thousands of hours to the liberty movement in the last several years, promoting the Free State Project and the LPNH. What people like you resent is that I didn't donate that time in a way and for a purpose that the state dictates, at the barrel of a gun. I want to help those less well off in this world, but I want it done ethically, without coersion, and in the way that I deem proper. > > Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the term "libertarian" is used within > this list. There seems to be many definitions, from libertarian > socialism to anarchic definitions to US liberalism, depending on > whether one has a US perspective or European. The idea that one can have freedom and self-ownership without having the right to own and reinvest the fruits of one's labor, and the profits from that investment, is laughable, erroneous, and truly irrational. > > I like the way this page hows the confusion (and hence, my need to > know more about the views of the libertarians within this email list) > > http://www.free-definition.com/Libertarianism.html > > I would have thought that a more egalitarian world would be a > desirable outcome post-singularity. Am I wrong or misguided to hope > for this? If this is a desirable outcome, what is the hope or > motivation to achieve such an outcome without acceptance of a global > "duty of care"? Surely, egalitarian outcomes should apply to all, > not just those in countries wealthy enough to afford the benefits > of new technologies? The definition of a Libertarian is a person who believes that it is wrong to initiate force against another individual for any reason. That is all. This includes initiating force against others in order to steal their property to pay for your 'egalitarianism'. Economic equality and Liberty do not mix. ===== 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 Thu Oct 28 17:29:01 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 12:29:01 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041028065719.693EDC405@vscan02.westnet.com.au> References: <20041027164631.0A52157E2A@finney.org> <20041028065719.693EDC405@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028122619.01b42ee0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:57 PM 10/28/2004 +0800, Sean wrote: >In this respect, it is worth noting that many of Bush's constituency still >believe in The Rapture (including Bush himself AFAIK...) and are all very >excited at the prospect of "End Times being upon us soon". > >www.raptureready.com Yeah, but it don't stop them bad boys havin' a real good time. I was excited (in a godly way) to find this ad on the lefthand side of the page: Ads by Goooooogle Sexy Rapture Singles Free photos, personals and hot profiles of local singles. Free www.infobert.com Damien Broderick From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Thu Oct 28 17:40:13 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:40:13 +0200 (MEST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Howling at the Moon (Eclipse tonight) In-Reply-To: <20041028152709.97130.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041028152709.97130.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 28 Oct 2004, Mike Lorrey wrote: >We took a break from our Freedom Forum meeting last night to watch the >eclipse occur. This is the second I've witnessed in my life and it was >great. I heard that this will be the last one for 46 years. Not really. Lunar eclipses occur quite regularly about two times a year, and almost half of them are total. The geometry is such that the eclipse is visible from most of the world. Look at http://sunearth.gsfc.nasa.gov/eclipse/LEcat/LEdecade2001.html for a list of past and future lunar eclipses from 2001 to 2010. Alfio From wingcat at pacbell.net Thu Oct 28 17:42:01 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 10:42:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Busy Boards In-Reply-To: <20041028065719.693EDC405@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041028174201.81149.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > www.raptureready.com > > www.raptureready.com/rap2.html > > www.rr-bb.com/ > > > The third link above is easily the busiest bulletin > board I have ever seen > on the web, by several orders of magnitude. It's busy, but I've seen a few busier. http://forums.megatokyo.com/ is the busiest one I've seen anywhere, even more than any of the Usenet groups I've checked. (Perhaps Usenet as a whole is busier, but that doesn't really count as a single BB since people who can get to certain parts of it can't necessarily get to others, especially in the alt.* hierarchy, even leaving out the cases where restricted access is intentional.) Partly to put the Rapture Ready stuff into perspective, but also partly to ponder about the feasability of AI agents that might wade into these highly-busy spaces on behalf of their users, where merely reading most of what is said - to say nothing of understanding a good portion of it, or responding to a significant percent of whatever fraction of the discussions one might be able to usefully contribute to - would take far more time per day than most people have available to allocate to such things, even if they - being human beings - might gain from or yearn for said socialization. The agents would have to not simply pass for a human being, but for a specific human being, and be able to download what they learn into their human being in a highly compressed form (relative to how they took this information in). (One might even wonder about such an agent that got disconnected from its human, but then went on to do things - charm people, philosophize, perhaps even find out that two sides of an offline war frequented the same online space, so introduced them and negotiated peace between them - differently than the human being, who possibly might have wound up drawn into criminal activity - not the human's fault at first, until repeated exposure lead to enjoyment, perhaps even sociopathy. Then again, I suspect that someone's already written that story.) From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 18:46:57 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 11:46:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] funky frink function In-Reply-To: <4180899F.80102@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <20041028184657.19501.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alan Eliasen wrote: > > Mike Lorrey wrote: (about Frink) > > BTW: Do you have a palm version, or at least a palmOne > > Treo smartphone sized version, so I can use it from browsing the > web on > > the Treo? > > Does the Treo still use the web-clipping applications? That is, a > .pqa file? I have one that I used to use on my wireless Palm VII. > If so, get it here: > > http://futureboy.homeip.net/frinkdocs/#Wireless "Document is too big" Treo 600 says. Suggest breaking that up into a structured page set. Downloaded "application is incompatible with this version of PalmOS. (3402) [Frink.pqa]" fsp/frink.fsp seems to work. It would be nice to have a downloadable to use when I'm out of wireless internet range. The treo is a palmOne product. Its applications suite is called Applications v 5.2H. It runs Palm OS v 5.2.1 ===== 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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 21:29:03 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 14:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041028171501.3524.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041028212904.3730.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Not only do I have no compassion for Communists, I coldly hate them as only an ex-Marxist can hate Communists (it's better to acknowledge our hatred than to bury it in pretending it doesn't exist). However, Socialists & Social Democrats (SDs) are basically harmless-- from what I've seen of them they mostly schedule meetings that get cancelled or few show up; Socialists & SDs are rather clueless. On the other hand Communists know precisely what they want: outright autocracy by representatives of the working class. Communists and Fascists deserve each other. > Quite mistakenly. What I have a lack of compassion > for are communists, > socialists, and other looters who automatically > assume that someone, > who is against jackbooted confiscatory government > thuggery performed to > obtain "your fair share" "for the children" or other > excuses, is bereft > of compassion for the unfortunate or needy. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From amara.graps at gmail.com Thu Oct 28 21:57:31 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 23:57:31 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Science Links page Message-ID: My Science Links page is a meta-links page I made for myself when the web started up ~10 years ago. I update it every couple years from my bookmarks and from other interesting URLs I pick up. It has a physics and astronomy and numerical analysis slant. Here's an update. http://www.amara.com/science/science.html Enjoy... Amara From mlorrey at yahoo.com Thu Oct 28 22:00:24 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 15:00:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria Message-ID: <20041028220024.50818.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> 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 From amara.graps at gmail.com Thu Oct 28 22:43:21 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 00:43:21 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria Message-ID: mlorrey at yahoo.com forwards: >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. Do you believe it? And explosives at Al Qaqaa seem to have been stolen *after* US occupation.. http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1 (Isn't this fun?) Amara From natashavita at earthlink.net Thu Oct 28 23:23:05 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 19:23:05 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] META: Maximum No. of Post per day Message-ID: <141340-220041042823235917@M2W029.mail2web.com> Friends, This is one paragraph from the list rules: "Given the number of subscribers to the Extropy-Chat mailing list, we strongly recommend that you restrain yourself to a MAXIMUM of eight posts per day. Those who exceed the eight posts per day limit will receive a private warning. Repeat offenders will be subject to other measures such as temporary or permanent bans from the list." http://www.extropy.org/emaillists.htm The very maximum is 8 a day. We prefer 6. Keep 8 for really exciting conversations where you just can't help yourself from chiming in. Many thanks, Natasha Vita-More President, Extropy Institute -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From sjatkins at mac.com Thu Oct 28 23:59:18 2004 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 16:59:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Administration Misleads on Missing Explosives In-Reply-To: <19390853.1098995166175.JavaMail.SchedTaskAcct@CTSG-WEB01> References: <19390853.1098995166175.JavaMail.SchedTaskAcct@CTSG-WEB01> Message-ID: <8188136.1099007958473.JavaMail.sjatkins@mac.com> From: The Daily Mislead TO: CC: Date: Thu Oct 28, 2004 01:26:07 PM PDT Subject: Administration Misleads on Missing Explosives =============================== THE DAILY MIS-LEAD < www.Misleader.org > =============================== ADMINISTRATION MISLEADS ON MISSING EXPLOSIVES The Bush administration is pushing the theory that the 380 tons of explosives were missing from the Al Qaqaa storage facility before the March 2003 invasion of Iraq. Administration spokesman Dan Senor said on CNN that "there's a very high probability that those weapons weren't even there before the war."[1] For days, this theory has been in direct conflict with a Pentagon official, who told the Associate Press on Monday, "US-led coalition troops had searched Al Qaqaa in the immediate aftermath of the March 2003 invasion and confirmed that the explosives, which had been under IAEA seal since 1991, were intact."[2] Now, video shot in Iraq by a Minneapolis news team provides further proof that the administration's theory is bogus. After the invasion - on April 18, 2003 - the Minneapolis ABC news crew was stationed just south of the Al Qaqaa facility.[]3 That day, they drove 2 to 3 miles north with the 101st Airborne Division. There, "members of the 101st Airborne Division showed the 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS news crew bunker after bunker of material labeled 'explosives.'"[4] Some of the boxes were marked "Al Qaqaa."[5] One soldier told the crew: "we can stick [detonation cords] in those and make some good bombs."[6] Watch the video: http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65509. Sources: 1. "Paula Zahn Now," CNN, 10/26/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65510. 2. "380 tons of explosives missing in Iraq," Associated Press, 10/25/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65511. 3. "5 EYEWITNESS NEWS video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq," KSTP.com, 10/28/04, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65512. 4. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65512. 5. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65512. 6. Ibid, http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=2413479&l=65512. Visit www.Misleader.org for more about Bush Administration distortion. > =========================================================== Subscribe to the Daily Mislead! Go to http://www.misleader.org and enter your e-mail address in the "Receive the Daily Mislead" box in the top-left corner of the page. To unsubscribe send an email to latest at daily.misleader.org with only the word "remove" in the subject line of your e-mail, or visit http://daily.misleader.org/unsubscribe/ and follow the instructions listed there. From sjvans at ameritech.net Fri Oct 29 00:35:10 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:35:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041029003510.50311.qmail@web81203.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > > 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. > > Do you believe it? Actually, I do find it quite believable. Quite a large number of people have claimed that the missing WMDs were in Syria, and that our so called UN "allies" had been bribed and stabbing us in the back. It is every bit as believable as: > And explosives at Al Qaqaa seem to have been stolen > *after* US occupation.. > > http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1 Do either or both of these revelations lead you to suspect that maybe Saddam was a menace after all, and the invasion needed? Or are you simply laughing at them? It is hard to tell. > (Isn't this fun?) Not really. From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 29 01:01:51 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:01:51 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria References: <20041028220024.50818.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001c01c4bd52$e1d706b0$5eeafb44@kevin> 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 From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Fri Oct 29 02:16:50 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:16:50 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041028171501.3524.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@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 Mike Lorrey >What people like you resent is that I didn't donate that time in a way and for a purpose that the state dictates, at the barrel of a gun. ----------------------------------------- No No NO! I do not advocate communism. But speaking of "the barrel of a gun", I fear such things as the NRA... As an aside, I recently listened to a monk who one considered explored communism/socialism. He attended one of those meetings decades ago in England during Vanessa Redgrave's prime activist period. After she spoke, he stood up and said "presumably, to achieve your goals, you must change the mindset of everyone who does not agree with you. But you cannot ever do this. Therefore, the only other answer is to kill them. And who is going to do that? You, Vanessa? Everyone here in this building?" - silence..... As another aside, Bush says "you are either with us, or against us" - seems to me that was about bringing the entire world to heel. I think you really were triggered by my use of marxist terminologies to describe the huge and widening gap between the mega rich and everyone else. The compassion I speak of is not individual, either. I'm talking about collective compassion built into the philosophical/political/economic construct. Currently, this doesn't exist in any meaningful way as far as I can tell, in ANY system except some of the remaining tribal communities, as all have been usurped in one way or another. When I speak of compassion, I see it as a "verb" in the sense that true compassion requires an activity reflecting the empathy/sympathy. But yes, I am guilty in this respect of one thing - when corporations and/or individuals amass HUGE fortunes, there are always sources for those fortunes. Winners, losers. It is not an endless, infinite bucket of money/resources. I ask "how much is enough?" Should there be requirements to return such wealth beyond a certain point? Should the current checks and balances be restructured from the top down, philosophically, economically, politically? Will emerging technologies make it easier to implement such restructuring, particularly with respect to renewal of resources? One of the reasons I posted the Naomi Klein article was that it described the carve up of another country's resources "at the barrel of a gun" by corporate entities who seem to be very good examples of my terminology "rampant, unchecked capitalism" of which war profiteering is surely the ugliest example. ----------------------------------------------- >I want to help those less well off in this world, but I want it done ethically, without coersion, and in the way that I deem proper. -------------------------------- I like that sentence a lot, but I'm not sure about the last bit.... ---------------------------------- > > Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the term "libertarian" is used within > this list. There seems to be many definitions, from libertarian > socialism to anarchic definitions to US liberalism, depending on > whether one has a US perspective or European. The idea that one can have freedom and self-ownership without having the right to own and reinvest the fruits of one's labor, and the profits from that investment, is laughable, erroneous, and truly irrational. ------------------------------------- I agree. But I am not an "absolutist". At what cost? What is the responsibility towards the inevitable losers? Should economic and political power be attached to wealth? Should unfeeling, cynical exploitation of the ignorant or weak be fair game? Should exploitation of limited resources be fair game? Is war "fair game"? ------------------------------------- > > I like the way this page hows the confusion (and hence, my need to > know more about the views of the libertarians within this email list) > > http://www.free-definition.com/Libertarianism.html > > I would have thought that a more egalitarian world would be a > desirable outcome post-singularity. Am I wrong or misguided to hope > for this? If this is a desirable outcome, what is the hope or > motivation to achieve such an outcome without acceptance of a global > "duty of care"? Surely, egalitarian outcomes should apply to all, > not just those in countries wealthy enough to afford the benefits > of new technologies? The definition of a Libertarian is a person who believes that it is wrong to initiate force against another individual for any reason. That is all. This includes initiating force against others in order to steal their property to pay for your 'egalitarianism'. Economic equality and Liberty do not mix. ---------------------------------- Presumably, that is _your_ definition, as there are many others. And when a libertarian observes another entity "initiating force" against a third party, does the libertarian then take the initiative, or stand by and allow it to occur? When, if ever, is intervention supported? How does this work on a micro and macro level? (i.e. individual/society, individual property/town/city/state/country/global) I did not mention force against others to pay for egalitarian outcomes, nor do I advocate this. Rather, my fervent hope is that technology makes it _easier_ (and therefore desirable) to obtain more egalitarian outcomes. Your final sentence seems to imply such a hope is futile. Do you reject the notion that a more egalitarian world would be a better place to live in, if a way could be found to arrive closer to a mix of equality and liberty? Sean From cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 29 03:03:28 2004 From: cmcmortgage at sbcglobal.net (Kevin Freels) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:03:28 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPAM: Fighting back Message-ID: <002901c4bd63$ddaa1620$5eeafb44@kevin> I received a spam today that used all the fake headers and evil techniques to get through the filters. I clicked the link and it is active. The website is here: http://rem0925.biz/ebay2/ I clicked on the order form and guess what. I can enter garbage informatoin, it processes the form and sends it somewhere, and then I can keep repeating this by clicking my back button and then re-sending the same bogus order information! SO I will be busy for a while. If you want to have some fun, feel free to visit them! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fortean1 at mindspring.com Fri Oct 29 03:07:02 2004 From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:07:02 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (SK) Peace in Palestine and Israel [new subj] Message-ID: <4181B3D6.D61DB419@mindspring.com> I just finished a two-day adult ed class on the U.N., which required a short paper. I proposed a plan to end the Israeli-Palestininan war, based on the notion that both populations want peace, so should be allowed to jam it down their governments' throats: ******************************************************* A MODEST PROPOSAL Jim Giglio GVPT399Q, Fall 2004 University of Maryland University College Inis Claude [1] discusses the role of the U.N. in the maintenance of peace, a discussion complicated by the then current U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war. The policy problems he lists include peacekeeping vs peace enforcement, the role of the U.S. in relation to each, and the extent to which the U.S. can or should serve as world policeman, with or without the assistance or approval of the U.N. Claude sees no straightforward solution to any of these problems. And 35 years later, the situation appears basically unchanged. Illustrative of the peacekeeping problems faced by the world is the Palestinian-Israeli war, arguably the most dangerous such situation in the world, since one side (Israel) is a nuclear power and at least one of the allies of the Palestinian side (Iran) appears to be engaged in a serious effort to acquire a nuclear capability. This conflict has been running since the onset of the Cold War and has outlasted it. Multiple attempts have been undertaken by various intermediaries, the U.N. included, to defuse it. Now it has metastasized into a global campaign of terrorism against the U.S., to include direct attacks on our own soil. The Standard Model of previous efforts has consistently involved some kind of step-by-step process for settling the issues in dispute. All these efforts, including the recent road map, have failed, either because one government or the other balked somewhere along the line, or because some fanatic or group of fanatics carried out an act of violence that derailed the process. These outcomes are not accidental; they result from basic flaws in the Standard Model: 1) The plans leave numerous disputed issues to be negotiated later, and these are invariably the most difficult issues, most likely to result in one side or the other balking at further progress. 2) The plans require good faith cooperation and negotiation between governing bodies that cannot possibly trust each other, and which are divided internally as to whether or not the other side should be negotiated with at all. Herewith, then, a modest proposal to settle the Israeli Palestinian war, to include the terms of the settlement, a mechanism for getting it accepted, and suggested roles for the U.N., the U.S., and other members of the world community. Principal Terms of the Settlement Proposal: 1) We start with Jerusalem. Both sides want it all and cannot compromise, so neither should get any of it. Jerusalem becomes an International Religious Reservation; nobody comes to Jerusalem from anywhere for any purpose other than religious observance. The city is run by an administrator appointed by the U.N. Secretary General and ratified by both the Security Council and General Assembly. Policing is carried out by a multinational force from nations that have no (or only tiny minorities of) Christians, Muslims, or Jews, and adherents of these faiths cannot be members of the force. 2) There will be two states. The border between them will be the demarcation line that existed prior to the 1967 war, except for the cordon around Jerusalem. Israel will be required to relocate large sections of the barrier currently under construction. The two sides can fortify or barricade this border as they see fit; neither is obligated to allow citizens of the other to cross the border. 3) It is completely unrealistic of Israel to expect that peace can ever be had when its nationals occupy Palestinian land, so Israel must remove all settlements from the territory of the Palestinian state. 4) It is equally unrealistic of the Palestinians to hold the notion that Israel will ever allow the refugees from the various wars to return to their former homes; that would be national suicide. Palestinian refugees must give up any right of return. If they cannot gain acceptance as citizens of the nations where they currently reside, they are to be accepted into the new Palestinian state. 5) The Palestinian government must demobilize all private militias and suppress all terrorist activity and attacks originating on its soil. International economic assistance will be withheld in the event such demobilizations and suppressions are not successful. This settlement, if implemented, will not make the two nations happy. In fact, no such settlement is possible. It is only possible to equalize the unhappiness in exchange for stopping the war. This should be recognized at the outset and any information campaign to promote the settlement should be completely candid on this point. Scenario for Implementation of the Settlement: 1) The U.S. (or some other nation, if it so desires) introduces resolutions in both the Security Council and General assembly setting the terms above as the official U.N. policy, and the basis for formal agreements ending the war. 2) The U.S. and other wealthy nations set up a LARGE fund (and deposit actual money into it, not just promises) for economic assistance in implementing the settlement should it be adopted, and for economic development in both nations after adoption. The fund might be administered by a new U.N. agency or an existing agency with a good track record in economic development. 3) The Security Council assembles an international conference to draw up a detailed treaty implementing the official settlement basis. 4) Upon conference approval of the treaty and any necessary subsidiary agreements, the Security Council adopts a second resolution requiring (a) both governments to submit the treaty and agreements to their respective populations for approval via referendum, (b) both governments to allow full access to their media and other communications channels by a U.N. commission charged with promoting a yes vote in the referendum, and (c) further requiring that both governments agree that the treaty is binding on them upon approval by those populations [2]. 5) Economic assistance from the fund listed under point 2 above flows to both nations to effect implementation and promote economic development. Activities supported include rebuilding the Palestinian infrastructure, large scale desalination projects to increase water supplies in both nations, and relocating Palestinian refugees and displaced Israeli settlers. None of the activities listed in implementing the proposed settlement are particularly novel, nor with minor exceptions do they require that the U.N. do anything it has never done before. U.N. agencies routinely hold international conferences, carry out international economic development activities, supervise elections, police disputed borders, and even maintain what amounts to a system of national parks under the World Heritage program; the setting aside of Jerusalem as a religious reservation differs from this latter program only in the need for heavy policing. One novel aspect of the suggested plan is the election campaign designed to persuade the two voting populations to say yes. Another is the idea of the direct referendum itself; the U.N., in effect would go over the heads of the two governing bodies so that people could impose peace by popular will. There can be little doubt that the populations involved will in fact say yes; opinion surveys reported in the press have found repeatedly that both populations want the war to stop. We know for a fact that every other standard diplomatic approach will not work; the time has come to try something else. NOTES [1] Claude, Inis L. The United States and International Organization: The Changing Setting International Organization 23:621 36 (July 1969). [2] The idea of a peace agreement established by direct popular vote is not original with me. It appeared in an op ed piece in the Washington Post about a year ago. Its only shortcoming was that the writer failed to emphasize the necessity for a FULL agreement, with all the is dotted and the ts crossed, and nothing left for future negotiations. -- "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 Fri Oct 29 03:22:46 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:22:46 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20041027182755.09a3e6c0@unreasonable.com> Message-ID: <006901c4bd66$938a8860$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Adrian Tymes wrote: > > >Closer to the truth: especially at high levels, your > >IQ primarily measures your skill at taking IQ tests... Im one of the lucky ones who is of average intelligence but has always been good at IQ tests. Or perhaps unlucky: people get to know me and find out that I am dumber than they originally thought. Speaking of IQ tests, there is a wicked cool one going around, the GLAT, or Google Labs Aptitude Test, which is inserted in some magazines this month, such as Wired, Astronomy, and probably some others that I don't read. (Which?) The GLAT is actually a job application to work at Google here in Mountain View. I'm not looking for a job, but there are some waaaay cool puzzles in there. I've solved all but one of them, and Im hot on the trail of that last one, which is: given an infinite array of one-ohm resistors, what is the equivalent resistance of two nodes that are a knight move apart? I calculated way back in my collge days that the resistance of two nodes diagonally adjacent on an infinite grid is is 2/pi. I approximated that two adjacent nodes is about 0.38. If you set up a subset of the grid with only 7 resistors and calculate the hard way, the knight-move nodes Req is 7/5. I *think* that the answer will somehow converge to exactly 1, but maybe not. In any case, find a GLAT and check it out. spike From extropians at perception.co.nz Fri Oct 29 03:26:24 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:26:24 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] SPAM: Fighting back In-Reply-To: <002901c4bd63$ddaa1620$5eeafb44@kevin> References: <002901c4bd63$ddaa1620$5eeafb44@kevin> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041029162349.055f7ed0@127.0.0.1> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 29 03:28:25 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:28:25 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Peace in Palestine and Israel In-Reply-To: <4181B3D6.D61DB419@mindspring.com> References: <4181B3D6.D61DB419@mindspring.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028222510.01ad1ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> >A MODEST PROPOSAL > >Jim Giglio >1) We start with Jerusalem. Both sides want it all and cannot >compromise, so neither should get any of it. Jerusalem becomes an >International Religious Reservation; nobody comes to Jerusalem >from anywhere for any purpose other than religious observance. >The city is run by an administrator appointed by the U.N. >Secretary General and ratified by both the Security Council and >General Assembly. Policing is carried out by a multinational >force from nations that have no (or only tiny minorities of) >Christians, Muslims, or Jews, and adherents of these faiths >cannot be members of the force. This part alone is worth its weight in gold, frankincense and myrrh. It's much gentler and more sensible than another scheme, volatilizing the city with a directed meteor after giving everyone ample warning to get out. Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 29 03:32:35 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:32:35 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <006901c4bd66$938a8860$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20041027182755.09a3e6c0@unreasonable.com> <006901c4bd66$938a8860$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028223146.01a148d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 08:22 PM 10/28/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: > > >If you set up a subset of the grid with only 7 resistors >and calculate the hard way, the knight-move nodes Req is 7/5. Not 1.414, by any chance? Damien Broderick From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 03:39:08 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:39:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041029033909.71497.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Forget Bush for now, the monk was right. You don't seriously want to be a neo-Marxist at the age of 44, do you? It's all based on rope-a-dope, tricking men (or boys) into being troubadors. Sean, Marxism is a particularly bad religion, not good politics-- take it from someone who knows. > As an aside, I recently listened to a monk who one > considered explored > communism/socialism. He attended one of those > meetings decades ago in > England during Vanessa Redgrave's prime activist > period. After she spoke, he > stood up and said "presumably, to achieve your > goals, you must change the > mindset of everyone who does not agree with you. But > you cannot ever do > this. Therefore, the only other answer is to kill > them. And who is going to > do that? You, Vanessa? Everyone here in this > building?" - silence..... > > As another aside, Bush says "you are either with us, > or against us" - seems > to me that was about bringing the entire world to > heel. > > I think you really were triggered by my use of > marxist terminologies to > describe the huge and widening gap between the mega > rich and everyone else. > > The compassion I speak of is not individual, either. > I'm talking about > collective compassion built into the > philosophical/political/economic > construct. > Currently, this doesn't exist in any meaningful way > as far as I can tell, in > ANY system except some of the remaining tribal > communities, as all have been > usurped in one way or another. > When I speak of compassion, I see it as a "verb" in > the sense that true > compassion requires an activity reflecting the > empathy/sympathy. > > But yes, I am guilty in this respect of one thing - > when corporations and/or > individuals amass HUGE fortunes, there are always > sources for those > fortunes. Winners, losers. It is not an endless, > infinite bucket of > money/resources. I ask "how much is enough?" Should > there be requirements to > return such wealth beyond a certain point? > Should the current checks and balances be > restructured from the top down, > philosophically, economically, politically? > Will emerging technologies make it easier to > implement such restructuring, > particularly with respect to renewal of resources? > > One of the reasons I posted the Naomi Klein article > was that it described > the carve up of another country's resources "at the > barrel of a gun" by > corporate entities who seem to be very good examples > of my terminology > "rampant, unchecked capitalism" of which war > profiteering is surely the > ugliest example. > > ----------------------------------------------- > > >I want to help those less well off in this world, > but I want it done > ethically, without coersion, and in the way that I > deem proper. > > -------------------------------- > > I like that sentence a lot, but I'm not sure about > the last bit.... > > ---------------------------------- > > > > Maybe I'm just misunderstanding the term > "libertarian" is used within > > this list. There seems to be many definitions, > from libertarian > > socialism to anarchic definitions to US > liberalism, depending on > > whether one has a US perspective or European. > > The idea that one can have freedom and > self-ownership without having > the right to own and reinvest the fruits of one's > labor, and the > profits from that investment, is laughable, > erroneous, and truly > irrational. > > ------------------------------------- > > I agree. But I am not an "absolutist". At what cost? > What is the > responsibility towards the inevitable losers? Should > economic and political > power be attached to wealth? > Should unfeeling, cynical exploitation of the > ignorant or weak be fair game? > Should exploitation of limited resources be fair > game? Is war "fair game"? > > ------------------------------------- > > > > > > I like the way this page hows the confusion (and > hence, my need to > > know more about the views of the libertarians > within this email list) > > > > > http://www.free-definition.com/Libertarianism.html > > > > I would have thought that a more egalitarian world > would be a > > desirable outcome post-singularity. Am I wrong or > misguided to hope > > for this? If this is a desirable outcome, what is > the hope or > > motivation to achieve such an outcome without > acceptance of a global > > "duty of care"? Surely, egalitarian outcomes > should apply to all, > > not just those in countries wealthy enough to > afford the benefits > > of new technologies? > > The definition of a Libertarian is a person who > believes that it is > wrong to initiate force against another individual > for any reason. That > is all. > > This includes initiating force against others in > order to steal their > property to pay for your 'egalitarianism'. Economic > equality and > Liberty do not mix. > > ---------------------------------- > Presumably, that is _your_ definition, as there are > many others. And when a > libertarian observes another entity "initiating > force" against a third > party, does the libertarian then take the > initiative, or stand by and allow > it to occur? When, if ever, is intervention > supported? How does this work on > a micro and macro level? (i.e. individual/society, > individual > property/town/city/state/country/global) > > I did not mention force against others to pay for > egalitarian outcomes, nor > do I advocate this. > Rather, my fervent hope is that technology makes it > _easier_ (and therefore > desirable) to obtain more egalitarian outcomes. > Your final sentence seems to imply such a hope is > futile. > Do you reject the notion that a more egalitarian > world would be a better > place to live in, if a way could be found to arrive > closer to a mix of > equality and liberty? > > Sean > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile phone. http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Fri Oct 29 04:03:40 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:03:40 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029033909.71497.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029040342.C6C8EC00B@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 Al Brooks Sent: Friday, 29 October 2004 11:39 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars Forget Bush for now, the monk was right. You don't seriously want to be a neo-Marxist at the age of 44, do you? It's all based on rope-a-dope, tricking men (or boys) into being troubadors. Sean, Marxism is a particularly bad religion, not good politics-- take it from someone who knows. ------------------------------ I understand and accept this. I dont even regard myself as neo-marxist. How about if I promise to never use the term "ruling class" on this list again? Will that free me from you guys seeing me as an agitprop ridden commie? As I have said before, my main issue is with finding a NEW system, hopefully catalysed by The Spike. I'm keen to discuss how that might occur, whether people here feel it might occur, what form it might take etc. Forget about "bad religion" or "not good politics" as you suggest - my case is that egalitarian outcomes ARE desirable and I'm yet to hear why they are not. Now, I don't mean this is the strict marxist sense. I mean it in the sense that the existing political, economic and scoial systems should (and can) change for the better through the advances in technology offered by The Spike, with the result being a reudction of the great and widening divide between the wealthy and the poor. Mike wants to help those less well off in this world. He wants it done ethically. I couldn't agree more. It is a different way of saying exactly the same thing I'm saying, except Mike would (presumably) strongly oppose anything which might be termed "re-distribution of wealth", as it would possibly involve the wealthy people not only making concessions, but relinquishing some of their wealth and power. My point is this - the new technologies should be able to do this without force, without any relinquishing. Therefore, there really is an opportunity for major political/economic/social progress to emerge during/post Spike. Marx is rendered irrelevant. But likewise, the role of the capitalists should also change. This is what I want to discuss. Sean From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 04:10:46 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:10:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029033909.71497.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029041046.88571.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> The future belongs to bourgeois liberal democracy, not to those that wish to replace one ruling class with another ruling class (if one ruling class were to be removed from power, another would rapidly assume the deposed ruling class' place). If you allow yourself to be tricked into an imaginary struggle for the 'masses' you are like the troubadours who journeyed around Europe singing songs & writing poems about romantic love; as silly as it was illusionary. In fact wanting a class revolution is worse, it is thinking no differently than the religious who believe they are going to be raptured to heaven. Sean, put simply, we are stuck with trickle-down economics for the next few generations. > > But yes, I am guilty in this respect of one thing > > when corporations and/or > > individuals amass HUGE fortunes, there are always > > sources for those > > fortunes. Winners, losers. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From spike66 at comcast.net Fri Oct 29 04:25:01 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:25:01 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028223146.01a148d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00a401c4bd6f$45812e90$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick > At 08:22 PM 10/28/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: > > > > > >If you set up a subset of the grid with only 7 resistors > >and calculate the hard way, the knight-move nodes Req is 7/5. > > Not 1.414, by any chance? > > Damien Broderick No, because it must be lower than 1.4 and higher than 2/pi. spike From sean at valuationpartners.com.au Fri Oct 29 04:25:19 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:25:19 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029041046.88571.qmail@web51606.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029042521.CA871C579@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 Al Brooks Sean, put simply, we are stuck with trickle-down economics for the next few generations. --------------------------------- How about a balance of "trickle up" brought about by technological change? In other words, rather than class struggle (which I agree is hopeless and almost pointless), why not _reduce_ the gap between the lower classes and the upper classes? Not by taking away from those at the top, but by lifting the quality of life for those at the bottom? Notions of "class" have less meaning if everyone enjoys a minimum standard of satisfied needs....and, ideally, it could be done without reliquishment by the upper classes... Sean From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 04:25:22 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:25:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029040342.C6C8EC00B@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041029042522.77334.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Well, I'm willing yet to use the term ruling class because it is a convenient way of expressing the hierarchical aspect of our nature. As I said before, the realistic goal is promoting, ever so gently, a multi-racial ruling class rather than the white ruling class, such is finding a new system, or perhaps refashioning the old 'system'. It will take a very long time (but being in our 40s we're already past our prime anyway). The 'agitprop ridden commies' --no, you are not one of them-- who get all worked up over the starving people in Africa don't help the starving people in Africa, not unless they desire to sacrifice their lives a la someone like Mother Theresa. >How about if I promise to never use the term "ruling > class" on this list again? > Will that free me from you guys seeing me as an > agitprop ridden commie? > As I have said before, my main issue is with finding > a NEW system, hopefully > catalysed by The Spike. > I'm keen to discuss how that might occur, whether > people here feel it might > occur, what form it might take etc. > > Forget about "bad religion" or "not good politics" > as you suggest - my case > is that egalitarian outcomes ARE desirable and I'm > yet to hear why they are > not. Now, I don't mean this is the strict marxist > sense. I mean it in the > sense that the existing political, economic and > scoial systems should (and > can) change for the better through the advances in > technology offered by The > Spike, with the result being a reudction of the > great and widening divide > between the wealthy and the poor. > > Mike wants to help those less well off in this > world. He wants it done > ethically. I couldn't agree more. It is a different > way of saying exactly > the same thing I'm saying, except Mike would > (presumably) strongly oppose > anything which might be termed "re-distribution of > wealth", as it would > possibly involve the wealthy people not only making > concessions, but > relinquishing some of their wealth and power. > > My point is this - the new technologies should be > able to do this without > force, without any relinquishing. Therefore, there > really is an opportunity > for major political/economic/social progress to > emerge during/post Spike. > Marx is rendered irrelevant. But likewise, the role > of the capitalists > should also change. This is what I want to discuss. > > Sean > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Fri Oct 29 04:33:24 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 21:33:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029042521.CA871C579@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041029043324.94623.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> Fine, no problem. Maybe we've been disagreeing about nothing. Anyhow, don't get impatient, let the Young Turks be impatient ;} We've done our six- eight posts for the day, now it's time to call it a night. > How about a balance of "trickle up" brought about by > technological change? > In other words, rather than class struggle (which I > agree is hopeless and > almost pointless), why not _reduce_ the gap between > the lower classes and > the upper classes? Not by taking away from those at > the top, but by lifting > the quality of life for those at the bottom? > Notions of "class" have less meaning if everyone > enjoys a minimum standard > of satisfied needs....and, ideally, it could be done > without reliquishment > by the upper classes... > > Sean > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 sean at valuationpartners.com.au Fri Oct 29 04:40:31 2004 From: sean at valuationpartners.com.au (Sean Diggins ) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:40:31 +0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029042522.77334.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029044036.B51B7C209@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 Al Brooks As I said before, the realistic goal is promoting, ever so gently, a multi-racial ruling class rather than the white ruling class, such is finding a new system, or perhaps refashioning the old 'system'. ---------------------------------- Definitely, I agree with the concept of a multi racial ruling class. I would even argue that such a thing already exists if you look at the human race globally. In part, this is why I fear the imperialist notions which seem to reside with the US/Israel generated PNAC neocon agenda. Specifically, it seems to be all about _the opposite_ of a multi racial ruling class. Yet, paradoxically, I do understand their motives and reasoning. I can see why they are heading down that path and why they feel it is necessary. But it really frightens me. This is much at stake and much can go wrong. One day, technology will render such things irrelvant. That is my hope. Sean From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Oct 29 05:03:50 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 07:03:50 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating a transhumanist consulting firm Message-ID: <470a3c5204102822037625b97b@mail.gmail.com> I have done some thinking on the possibility to create a transhumanist consulting firm. The rationale is that both large firms and governments will need information and advice on how things will change, how to make money with forthcoming changes, and what public policies to implement. There are plenty of futurist think tanks, but few willing to study radical medium/long term scenarios, still considered like SF by the mainstream, including radical life extension, conscious AIs, cryonics, brain implants, uploading, etc. We do a lot of thinking on these issues for fun, it would be good doing it also for money, and with the brainpower of some folks on transhumanist lists I am sure we can provide a very useful service. What I have in mind is a flexible partnership of indepedent consultants where the income minus expenses is redistributed to partners according to the previously agreed amount of work done. If things develop well I will be looking forward to doing this full time, and I hope to assemble a team with a few core staff and a larger network of people available to collaborate on a specific project basis. Now I plan to start looking for partners and brainstorm to elaborate a detailed plan. I am not sure of the name and it is better not to rush, so to fix ideas I have chosen the temporary name "Transwer ltd" and reserved the domain transwer.biz. We will switch to a better name if we find one. I have created the Yahoogroup transwerbiz: http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/transwerbiz/ as a planning workspace, please join if you are interested as the brainstorming will take place there. Things to discuss are: - Business model (what to sell to whom and how) - Partnerships e.g. Foresight, CRNano, SIAI, the transhumanist non-profit think tank under formation, etc. - Where to incorporate and in which form - Name and domain name - Organization - Business development While I am mainly interested in the European market, a possibility is incorporating branches in different places. I have many ideas, some I believe quite promising, but I prefer disclosing them on the Yahoogroup which is restricted and not visible to the world. Also, I assume that many people on the lists are not too interested, so the polite thing to do is continuing the discussion on a separate list. So again, please join if you are interested. G. From fauxever at sprynet.com Fri Oct 29 05:30:52 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Thu, 28 Oct 2004 22:30:52 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bush wants another $75 billion for wars] References: <20041029042522.77334.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <002d01c4bd78$7662ad00$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Al Brooks" > The 'agitprop > ridden commies' --no, you are not one of them-- who > get all worked up over the starving people in Africa > don't help the starving people in Africa, not unless > they desire to sacrifice their lives a la someone like > Mother Theresa. No, no, no ... not Mommie Dearest! nooooooooooo....: http://slate.msn.com/id/2090083/ "You are suffering, that means Jesus is kissing you!" The man got furious and screamed back: "Then tell your Jesus that he should stop kissing me!": http://www.rationalistinternational.net/article/20031020_en.htm Mother T had a lifelong obsession with abortion. It was her central issue. She was fundamentally opposed to it, regardless of circumstances. She was against abortion in all cases, even in the case of rape, incest, or risk to the woman's health. ... In 1993 she was asked about a case in Ireland about a 14-year-old rape victim. Mother T remarked: "Abortion can never be necessary because it is pure killing." Needless to say, M.T. was equally opposed to contraception in all forms.: http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/religion/mother-teresa/ And there's more rotten stuff. Ever since I can remember nuns have given me the heebie jeebies (of course, due to their costumes - nuns were more recognizable back then; nowadays, they are capable of impersonating regular human beings). Olga From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Fri Oct 29 05:53:28 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:53:28 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating a transhumanist consulting firm References: <470a3c5204102822037625b97b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <01c301c4bd7b$9cf2c740$b8232dcb@homepc> From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" >I have done some thinking on the possibility to create a transhumanist > consulting firm. Have you got a way of exchanging information/opinions for dollars b/n people in different countries over the net yet? ie. Do you know *how* to sell information services legally over the net given different information sellers (consultants) in different countries ? Brett Paatsch From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Oct 29 06:15:25 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 08:15:25 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating a transhumanist consulting firm In-Reply-To: <01c301c4bd7b$9cf2c740$b8232dcb@homepc> References: <470a3c5204102822037625b97b@mail.gmail.com> <01c301c4bd7b$9cf2c740$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <470a3c52041028231570d3b04b@mail.gmail.com> Hi Brett, yes, and no. For small projects (think of a scaled up version of Google Answers where the payment for info is a few thousands rather than a few hundred bucks) it is quite easy to receive payment with PayPal, and taxes depend on where who receives the payment (the company or the consultant directly) is based. But I think we should also focus on large projects for large firms and the public administration. Such clients are quite backward, and they really do need a company with corporate stationery, a street address and a bank account not located in a tax heaven. For such projects the company would receive the payment via normal channels, then pay the individual partners as appropriate. G. On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:53:28 +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote: > From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" > > >I have done some thinking on the possibility to create a transhumanist > > consulting firm. > > Have you got a way of exchanging information/opinions for dollars > b/n people in different countries over the net yet? > > ie. Do you know *how* to sell information services legally over the > net given different information sellers (consultants) in different > countries ? > > Brett Paatsch From pgptag at gmail.com Fri Oct 29 10:07:33 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:07:33 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sims 2 stretches boundaries of digital world Message-ID: <470a3c5204102903073b378715@mail.gmail.com> Welcome to the world of Sims 2, a game of simulated life in digital homes with digital people that allows you to play with the mundane, swirling it around until it becomes something distinctly unique and often kind of funny. What makes the game interesting and fuels its popularity is actually the lack of control players have over their Sims. The characters have a sort of rudimentary consciousness. So while you can decide their appearance, personality, dreams and fears, you don't have the ability to directly make them do anything. In a way the Sims have artificial intelligence. "This game is, in some sense, self-aware. But artificial intelligence is such a slippery term." The game uses markers, bits of data that tell a Sim what has happened to them in their digital lives. So when your Sim has his or her first kiss, gets married or has a child, those are all things they "remember." http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/entertainment_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_84_3288085,00.html From neptune at superlink.net Fri Oct 29 10:39:27 2004 From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 06:39:27 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] JARS Rand Centenary Celebration, Part I Message-ID: <000b01c4bda3$91a8e360$fd893cd1@pavilion> Volume 6, Number 1 of THE JOURNAL OF AYN RAND STUDIES has just been published. This Fall 2004 issue is the first of two symposia celebrating the Ayn Rand Centenary (which is marked, officially, on 2 February 2005). It is entitled "Ayn Rand: Literary and Cultural Impact," and it features the articles and contributors listed below. Our second Rand Centenary issue is entitled "Ayn Rand Among the Austrians," and it includes contributions from Walter Block, Peter J. Boettke, Steven Horwitz, Roderick T. Long, George Reisman, Larry J. Sechrest, Leland Yeager, Ed Younkins, and others. Information on that issue will be available in the Spring of 2005. Fall 2004 Table of Contents ==================== Centenary Symposium, Part I --- Ayn Rand: Literary and Cultural Impact The Illustrated Rand By Chris Matthew Sciabarra Passing the Torch By Erika Holzer Completing Rand's Literary Theory By Stephen Cox Ayn Rand's Influence on American Popular Fiction By Jeff Riggenbach Integrating Mind and Body By Matthew Stoloff The Poetics of Admiration: Ayn Rand and the Art of Heroic Fiction By Kirsti Minsaas The Russian Cultural Connection: Alexander Etkind on Ayn Rand By Cathy Young The Russian Subtext of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead By Bernice Rosenthal Reply to Kirsti Minsaas: Toward an American Renaissance By Alexandra York For article abstracts, click here: http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/v6_n1/6_1toc.asp For contributor biographies, click here: http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/v6_n1/6_1bio.asp For information on subscriptions, click here: http://www.aynrandstudies.com/jars/subscribForm.asp ================================================= Chris Matthew Sciabarra Visiting Scholar, NYU Department of Politics 726 Broadway, 7th floor New York, New York 10003 Dialectics & Liberty Website: http://www.chrismatthewsciabarra.com The Sciabarra "Not a Blog" (regularly updated): http://www.notablog.net The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies: http://www.aynrandstudies.com ================================================= From scerir at libero.it Fri Oct 29 14:26:40 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:26:40 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] [extropy-chat ] HEALTH: ApoA-I Milano References: <470a3c5204102903073b378715@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <000401c4bdc3$4f37dcf0$8fbf1b97@administxl09yj> [old news, good news] Limone, a small town on the Garda Lake, is known (also) because in the blood of some inhabitants there is a protein which eliminates the cholesterol. The history of the discovery began in 1979 when an employee of the state railroads, born in Limone, but who had been living in Milan for over 20 years, was hospitalised for a check-up. The clinical results were astonishing. The levels of patient's cholesterol and triglycerides were very high. The patient, however, presented neither clinical signs nor damages, so the doctors decided for a thorough examination. http://health.yahoo.com/search/healthnews?lb=s&p=id%3A49242 http://www.time.com/time/2004/cholesterol/drano.html http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2003-11-23-plaque-usat_x.htm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3243323.stm From artillo at comcast.net Fri Oct 29 17:24:52 2004 From: artillo at comcast.net (artillo at comcast.net) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 17:24:52 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] Sims 2 stretches boundaries of digital world Message-ID: <102920041724.16324.41827CE4000B0E2D00003FC42200748184010404079B9D0E@comcast.net> BAH go get into Second Life... I'd rather deal with REAL people and see them build with their imaginations, than a silly sim game hahaaa!!! Arti -------------- Original message -------------- > Welcome to the world of Sims 2, a game of simulated life in digital > homes with digital people that allows you to play with the mundane, > swirling it around until it becomes something distinctly unique and > often kind of funny. > What makes the game interesting and fuels its popularity is actually > the lack of control players have over their Sims. The characters have > a sort of rudimentary consciousness. So while you can decide their > appearance, personality, dreams and fears, you don't have the ability > to directly make them do anything. > In a way the Sims have artificial intelligence. > "This game is, in some sense, self-aware. But artificial intelligence > is such a slippery term." > The game uses markers, bits of data that tell a Sim what has happened > to them in their digital lives. So when your Sim has his or her first > kiss, gets married or has a child, those are all things they > "remember." > http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/entertainment_columnists/article/0,1299,DR > MN_84_3288085,00.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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 17:33:38 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:33:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041029173338.22183.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Amara Graps wrote: > mlorrey at yahoo.com forwards: > > >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. > > Do you believe it? > > And explosives at Al Qaqaa seem to have been stolen > *after* US occupation.. Actually, not. NBC reporters embedded with the 101st Airborne have reported that they were the first unit into Al Qaqaa and they went through the complex and saw absolutely NO IAEA seals on any bunkers in the whole place. The amount of trucks needed to move 296 tons of explosives would have been several large convoys which could not have been missed by military units with checkpoints on the highways. ===== 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 Fri Oct 29 17:46:48 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:46:48 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.0.20041028085145.035ae280@mail.earthlink.net> References: <217757.1098627339712.JavaMail.root@dedicated169-bos> <5.2.0.9.0.20041028085145.035ae280@mail.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041029104450.02955298@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Agreed. Please reread the section on netiquette at extropy.org. Remember that flaming TrendOlogist is easy - just do it directly to his email, not this list. At 08:52 AM 10/28/2004, you wrote: >Thank you for this post. Trendologist is having fun, but I think that it >has gone too far. Time to bring in the list moderators. > >Best, >Natasha ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From harara at sbcglobal.net Fri Oct 29 17:41:58 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:41:58 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] morons in office In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041029103135.02927ff8@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Ok, my 2 bits: Nearly all IQ tests have a large chunk devoted to words, word derivations, and the like, based on the assumption that the parents have a library of books and that the books have a selection of classical lit titles. Not in my family. I was a geek, only read science and SF. no library of books other that a few college texts on stuff like geology and mining engineering, and a really really boring encyclopedia. So in college in a psych class the prof gave us an IQ test based on Stanford research which was intended for high IQ types. It was at least 1/2 word stuff. I ended up with 136. A classmate whom I knew for sure did't match me got 145. I asked why - her response was revealing: "I took Latin in High School". On these things I end up mostly into the number sequence problems and my time gets eaten up there. There is another killer type of IQ problem, those little diagrams of two shapes and a third, with selection of 4 or 5 others to match. I am way too inventive, so I am confronted with that most of the offered selections have a way of matching for me. Result is poof! In the 70s Omni magazine had a quickie IQ test, I did it, got score of 157. I missed one question or it would have come out 175. The net has an IQ test I did last year, but it was LOADED with those visual analogy things and I ended up at 135. IMHO, IQ is too general a term for intelligence. Too many biases per ones background and culture. And the kind of thinking I seem to excel at I have yet to meet a test which is even in the ballpark. Conclusion: IQ tests are for morons. ptui. At 08:19 AM 10/28/2004, you wrote: >On 28 Oct 2004, at 16:22, Brian Lee wrote: > >>You're right that IQ tests just test what psychologists think is >>intelligence. But the difference between 130 and 170 is extremely >>statistically significant (especially with standard deviation of 10). > >It all depends on your measurement devices. Standard IQ tests give >meaningless results past about 150. > >> It measures your percentile so lets say 130 is in the 99% and 170 is in >> the 99.999%. > >Usually SD is of the population IQ is 15 so 130 is 2 SDs or in the top >95%, and 145 is in the top 99% (which is about as high standard IQ test >measure). Keep in mind that one of the big problems with designing test >for v. high IQs is finding a large enough population (min. 200-300 >people??) to standardize them properly. > >>That's a big difference (and there's no real "margin of error" in IQ >>tests like there are in polls as IQ tests simply compare you to the mean >>and the sample). > >I am not sure I understand what you mean. All IQ are estimates, the >question is what is the standard error of the estimate. I stated in a >previous email that this was about 15 for IQ test (I was thinking of the >WAIS(-R?) in particular). However, this was something I remember being >taught years ago and I haven't been able to confirm it doing a quick >Google search. I do remember being surprised by how large the range of a >typically estimated IQ was, but of course my memory might be conflating >the SD of IQ of the population with the SE of an individual test. > >>Of course you can probably give someone 10 tests and get 10 different >>scores out of them, so IQ tests aren't perfect but they're the best test >>we can perform to get an idea of a person's intelligence. > >Well let's say that someone has an IQ of 150 on the WAIS. They obviously >are pretty smart at the things the test measures: verbal skills and >spatial reasoning, but they might be very dumb on other things we consider >smart. For instance, a musical prodigy like Bach might have had an IQ <100 >since IQ tests don't measure musical intelligence (I am also not sure how >well a mathematical prodigy would necessarily do on the WAIS - and >certainly your physical smarts in bed are not measured by standardized IQ >tests). Even someone with a high general IQ might have a relatively low >verbal IQ but high spatial IQ or visa versa. > >Surely in the end IQ doesn't matter. Its what you do that counts. I >sometimes wonder if the people who care most about their IQ scores are >those who haven't actually got so much to show for their lives. > >>Also, the younger the test is administered the more accurate. Since an IQ >>is supposed to test intelligence and not knowledge. A knowledgable 10 >>year old can really clean up on an IQ test but at 30 could get a much >>lower score. > >IQ tests are age normalized. So even though you do more poorly as you age >(at least for non-crystalline factors) your estimated IQ is adjusted for >this decline. So in absolute terms an 50 years old with an IQ of 150 is >not as smart as a 25 year old with an IQ of 150. > >best, patrick > >------------------- >Measured Intelligence and Education > >WAIS Mean IQ > >Educational Equivalent > >125 >Mean of persons receiving Ph.D. and M.D. degrees > >115 >Mean of college graduates > >105 >Mean of high school graduates > >100 >Average for total population > >75 >About 50-50 chance of reaching ninth grade > >Matarazzo, Joseph D. Wechsler's Measure and Appraisal of Adult >Intelligence, 5th Edition. >Oxford University Press, 1972. > >-------------------- >Best Estimate of IQ Differences for Adults in Different Occupations > >WAIS-R Mean IQ Range > >Occupational Category > >110-112 >Professional and technical > >103-104 >Managers, clerical, sales > >100-102 >Skilled workers > >92-94 >Semiskilled workers > >87-89 >Unskilled workers > >Kaufman, Alan S. Assessing Adolescent and Adult Intelligence. Allyn and >Bacon, 1990. > > >_______________________________________________ >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 Fri Oct 29 18:08:37 2004 From: harara at sbcglobal.net (Hara Ra) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:08:37 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <00a401c4bd6f$45812e90$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028223146.01a148d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <00a401c4bd6f$45812e90$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.0.3.0.1.20041029105729.0294c968@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Well, I don't care to try solving this thing, but had some musings to share: 1. Solving the general problem of R(x0,y0;x1,y1) might be simpler or same difficulty as solving the knights move instance. 2. Such a solution requires enumerating all of the current carrying paths and constraints thereto, looks nasty, like a infinite series of summations of infinite series, and how to count these in a 1 for 1 way is tricky. 3. What is the test actually looking for. If there is a nice closed mathematical expression that's one thing, but will "good enough" do? If "good enough" does, then it is simple enough, though tedious, to write a simulator, say a grid of 100 x 100 resistors and run till it converges. If I did that I would email the solution, how I found it and why I did it this way. 4. Of course there's the story about Von Neumann when asked to sum the numbers 1 - 1000 and he did't see the obvious pairings of 1,999; 2,998 and so on, and when asked how he did the problem he said he just added them all up. Wonder if something similar lurks here. 5. Knights move is a co-ordinate transformation. Think of it as a diagonal on a matrix of resistors whose diagonal is the knights move. Probably a PITA, just a thought. > At 08:22 PM 10/28/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: > > > > > > > > >If you set up a subset of the grid with only 7 resistors > > >and calculate the hard way, the knight-move nodes Req is 7/5. ================================== = Hara Ra (aka Gregory Yob) = = harara at sbcglobal.net = = Alcor North Cryomanagement = = Alcor Advisor to Board = = 831 429 8637 = ================================== From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 18:42:20 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:42:20 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041029184220.54810.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> --- Sean Diggins wrote: > ----------------------------------------- > > No No NO! I do not advocate communism. But speaking of "the barrel of > a gun", I fear such things as the NRA... Aside from its tendency to support Republicans, it is more of a civil rights organization than the ACLU. It is not just communist, Sean. ANY government program that takes your money as 'taxes' to redistribute it to someone else is theft at the barrel of a gun. > > As an aside, I recently listened to a monk who one considered > explored communism/socialism. He attended one of those meetings > decades ago in England during Vanessa Redgrave's prime activist > period. After she spoke, he stood up and said "presumably, to > achieve your goals, you must change the mindset of everyone who > does not agree with you. But you cannot ever do this. Therefore, > the only other answer is to kill them. And who is going to do > that? You, Vanessa? Everyone here in this building?" - silence..... > > As another aside, Bush says "you are either with us, or against us" > - seems to me that was about bringing the entire world to heel. It depends on what Bush is 'with'. I see this from Democrats here in NH who are opposed to the Free State Project, where they say asinine things like "Nobody is going to come here and shove freedom down my throat!" Sounds like something one would expect from a 'house slave'. You can't "shove freedom down someone's throat", the best you can do is get the government monkey off their back. When a force for liberation says 'you are with us or against us', that means you either believe in freedom or tyranny. "For evil to succeed only requires that good men do nothing", as they say. Complacency, disinterest, apathy, are just as conducive to tyranny as outright assistance to it. > > I think you really were triggered by my use of marxist terminologies > to describe the huge and widening gap between the mega rich and > everyone else. Whether a gap is widening is irrelevant. What is important is whether the least well off are getting ahead in objective terms, not relative terms. When people below the threshold for 'poverty' commonly own items that were considered luxury items not even a decade ago, the definition of that word is seriously cock-eyed. Extropians look forward to the day when a homeless person can afford their own intelligence augmentation and life extension. Delivered by the free market. > > The compassion I speak of is not individual, either. I'm talking > about collective compassion built into the philosophical/political > /economic construct. Not possible. Philosophical/political/economic constructs are not persons. > Currently, this doesn't exist in any meaningful way as far as I can > tell, in ANY system except some of the remaining tribal communities, > as all have been usurped in one way or another. > When I speak of compassion, I see it as a "verb" in the sense that > true compassion requires an activity reflecting the empathy/sympathy. How does a Philosophical/political/economic construct have empathy when it isn't even a person? > > But yes, I am guilty in this respect of one thing - when corporations > and/or > individuals amass HUGE fortunes, there are always sources for those > fortunes. Winners, losers. It is not an endless, infinite bucket of > money/resources. I ask "how much is enough?" Should there be > requirements to return such wealth beyond a certain point? Return wealth to who? Upon what basis is a claim made? You seem to suffer from a false belief in the idea that the world is a zero sum game. > Should the current checks and balances be restructured from the top > down, philosophically, economically, politically? > Will emerging technologies make it easier to implement such > restructuring, particularly with respect to renewal of resources? Of course. Nanotech will eliminate resource scarcity almost entirely. The only remaining scarce resources will be IP and energy. > > One of the reasons I posted the Naomi Klein article was that it > described the carve up of another country's resources "at the > barrel of a gun" by corporate entities who seem to be very good > examples of my terminology "rampant, unchecked capitalism" of > which war profiteering is surely the ugliest example. "Profiteering" is one of those fake words that statists like to use. Profit is an expression of the disparity between supply and demand. Saying 'excessive profit' has any meaning is like saying that people can be 'excessively free', 'too pregnant', among other oxymoronically adjectivized phrases. > > ----------------------------------------------- > > >I want to help those less well off in this world, but I want it done > ethically, without coersion, and in the way that I deem proper. > > -------------------------------- > > I like that sentence a lot, but I'm not sure about the last bit.... If you don't have control over how you help they world, then you aren't really the one helping the world, you are just someone else's agent. Statists of all sorts have real trouble understanding this concept: that an act is only virtuous if it is committed freely by the person committing the act. If your money is being taken to help someone else, against your will, then you gain no karma from the act. Crime done to help others creates no net positive benefit to society. The concept of the "Robin Hood" is possibly the most corrosive idea in western history. > > "The idea that one can have freedom and self-ownership without having > the right to own and reinvest the fruits of one's labor, and the > profits from that investment, is laughable, erroneous, and truly > irrational." > > ------------------------------------- > > I agree. But I am not an "absolutist". At what cost? What is the > responsibility towards the inevitable losers? Should economic and > political power be attached to wealth? You have no responsibility to losers, they are responsible for themselves. Nor does there necessarily have to be a loser for you to win, as that is the mindset of a zero-sum-game player. Most wealth is created, not stolen. > Should unfeeling, cynical exploitation of the ignorant or weak be > fair game? If you steal from someone but feel bad about doing it, or feel that it was 'only fair', does that make it okay? > Should exploitation of limited resources be fair game? Is war "fair > game"? War against tyrants and other opressors anywhere, anytime, is always justified. The libertarian prohibition against initiating force against other individuals does not have a limited jurisdiction (some libertarians think otherwise, but I don't think they are 'complete' libertarians.) If a libertarian believes that national boundaries are fictitious creations of unjust governments, then they have no restraint upon a libertarian. What makes you think that resources are limited? There are very few such resources. Beyond limited species of wildlife, inanimate material resources become unlimited for practical purposes if technology is allowed free reign to develop more efficient resource utilization. Life is not a zero sum game. > > "The definition of a Libertarian is a person who believes that it is > wrong to initiate force against another individual for any reason. > That is all." > Presumably, that is _your_ definition, as there are many others. No, there are 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!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 18:44:22 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 11:44:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Peace in Palestine and Israel In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028222510.01ad1ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041029184422.35328.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > >A MODEST PROPOSAL > > > >Jim Giglio > >1) We start with Jerusalem. Both sides want it all and cannot > >compromise, so neither should get any of it. Jerusalem becomes an > >International Religious Reservation; nobody comes to Jerusalem > >from anywhere for any purpose other than religious observance. > >The city is run by an administrator appointed by the U.N. > >Secretary General and ratified by both the Security Council and > >General Assembly. Policing is carried out by a multinational > >force from nations that have no (or only tiny minorities of) > >Christians, Muslims, or Jews, and adherents of these faiths > >cannot be members of the force. > > This part alone is worth its weight in gold, frankincense and myrrh. > It's > much gentler and more sensible than another scheme, volatilizing the > city > with a directed meteor after giving everyone ample warning to get > out. And far too sensible and reasonable for either side in a land one british diplomat said was "Full of unreasonable 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 Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From namacdon at ole.augie.edu Fri Oct 29 19:36:50 2004 From: namacdon at ole.augie.edu (Nicholas Anthony MacDonald) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:36:50 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Robin Hood (was: Bush wants another $75 billion for wars) Message-ID: <1099078610.72455f80namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Mike Lorrey wrote: "The concept of the "Robin Hood" is possibly the most corrosive idea in western history." Ah, I remember reading that in Atlas Shrugged, and thinking- "wait a second, Ayn. 'Robin Hood' was stealing wealth that belonged to the 'statists' of the time, the feudal lords who held their subjects in a condition of slavery or near-slavery, with few, if any real freedoms and no chance for upward mobility. The lords did little to deserve their income other than possess horses, armor, and weaponry that the commoners lacked- they were just like the dictators of today. So, by that reckoning, who is to say that Robin Hood was doing anything wrong at all? In fact, Robin Hood seems remarkably similiar to the rest of the heroes of your dreary novel..." -Nicq MacDonald From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 29 19:40:22 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:40:22 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029184220.54810.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <20041029184220.54810.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029142300.01a61ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 11:42 AM 10/29/2004 -0700, Mike L. wrote: >ANY government program that takes your >money as 'taxes' to redistribute it to someone else is theft at the >barrel of a gun. > >...Sounds like something one would >expect from a 'house slave'. Many of us have been raised to think of it, and accept it, as an implicit social contract where we pay forward the debt we share with everyone else, our portion of the debt assessed according to how much spare resources we already own. Rather in the way most children learn to share food at the table rather than wolfing down the lot after shoving everyone else aside. For a small test case where this kind of commity has failed, look at http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/opinion/29birkett.html?th People often default on this shared enterprise; some are locked up as scoundrels, others run corporations like Enron. Some justify their default by reference to philosophies such as libertarianism, which finds the basis of the implicit contract, and its implementation in a given society, to be unfair, absurd or simply onerous. It's an arguable position, but its case is not won by fiat or redefinition of `theft' or accusations of servility against those who accept a pay-forward and proportional solution to the inevitable interstitial and even structural damage done by markets, crime, race hatreds, etc. > >Winners, losers. It is not an endless, infinite bucket of > > money/resources. I ask "how much is enough?" Should there be > > requirements to return such wealth beyond a certain point? > >Return wealth to who? Upon what basis is a claim made? Upon this basis: "The steel tortoise gave MacKinnon a feeling of Crusoe-like independence. It did not occur to him his chattel was the end product of the cumulative effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds of thousands of men, living and dead." --Robert A. Heinlein, `Coventry' Heinlein's utopian judge condemns MacKinnon, a reckless rugged individualist: `From a social standpoint, your delusion makes you as mad as a March Hare.' Damien Broderick From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 29 19:54:17 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:54:17 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029145037.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:43 AM 10/29/2004 +0200, Amara wrote: >And explosives at Al Qaqaa seem to have been stolen >*after* US occupation.. > >http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S3723.html?cat=1 > >(Isn't this fun?) http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/29/1099028208191.html?oneclick=true < a report by the US ABC network raised fresh allegations about the missing explosives that had been secured by the International Atomic Energy Agency in Iraq before the war. The network ran videotape taken by a reporter embedded with the US Army 101st Airborne Division nine days after the fall of Baghdad. The footage shows US troops examining barrels of what appeared to be explosives inside bunkers that had been sealed by UN inspectors. Weapons experts familiar with the work of IAEA inspectors who were in Iraq say that the video appears identical to photographs that the inspectors took of the explosives that the agency put under seal before the war. One frame of the pictures shows what the experts say is an IAEA seal itself, with fine wires that would have to be broken if anyone entered through the main door of the bunker. The agency said that when it left Iraq in mid-March, only days before the war began, the only bunkers bearing its seals at the huge complex contained the explosive HMX, which the agency had monitored because it could be used in a nuclear weapons program. The network said the troops had not been ordered to secure the site or its contents and left it unguarded when they moved. Reportedly it was later looted.> Meanwhile, authoritative estimates say 100,000 Iraqis have been killed, more than half women and kids, mostly by coalition forces. Never mind, though. There'll be a contrary report along any minute now. Damien Broderick From brian_a_lee at hotmail.com Fri Oct 29 20:01:03 2004 From: brian_a_lee at hotmail.com (Brian Lee) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:01:03 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Robin Hood (was: Bush wants another $75 billion forwars) Message-ID: I think the concern is that the extension of the "Robin Hood" mantra is that there will always be some group who perceives another group as having wrongfully acheieved wealth. Stealing it and redistributing is not the solution. But it sounds good so people like Robin Hood. "Steal from the rich, give to the poor." The rich consist of anyone who has more wealth than you and the poor are anyone with less wealth. So then it should be ok for me to steal from you to give to me since you have more money than I (for the sake of this argument). It's a slipperly slope. Who the rich bastards are varies based on cultural influences, etc. So taking money from the rich bastards today could be tomorrow's saints. BAL >From: "Nicholas Anthony MacDonald" >To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >Subject: [extropy-chat] Robin Hood (was: Bush wants another $75 billion >forwars) >Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:36:50 -0500 > >Mike Lorrey wrote: > >"The concept of the "Robin Hood" is possibly the most corrosive idea in >western history." > > >Ah, I remember reading that in Atlas Shrugged, and thinking- "wait a >second, Ayn. 'Robin Hood' was stealing wealth that belonged to the >'statists' of the time, the feudal lords who held their subjects in a >condition of slavery or near-slavery, with few, if any real freedoms and no >chance for upward mobility. The lords did little to deserve their income >other than possess horses, armor, and weaponry that the commoners lacked- >they were just like the dictators of today. So, by that reckoning, who is >to say that Robin Hood was doing anything wrong at all? In fact, Robin >Hood seems remarkably similiar to the rest of the heroes of your dreary >novel..." > >-Nicq MacDonald > >_______________________________________________ >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 Oct 29 20:02:23 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:02:23 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029044036.B51B7C209@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041029200223.36581.qmail@web51605.mail.yahoo.com> I don't see a multi-racial ruling class in America, the only nation I'm familiar with. No, it appears caucasians dominate the world, and it will take a very long time to 'even things out'. >Sean Diggins concept of a multi racial ruling class. >I would even argue that such a thing already exists if you look at the human >race globally. __________________________________________________ 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 pharos at gmail.com Fri Oct 29 20:06:47 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:06:47 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029142300.01a61ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> References: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> <20041029184220.54810.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041029142300.01a61ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:40:22 -0500, Damien Broderick wrote: > > "The steel tortoise gave MacKinnon a feeling of Crusoe-like independence. > It did not occur to him his chattel was the end product of the cumulative > effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds of thousands of men, living > and dead." --Robert A. Heinlein, `Coventry' > > Heinlein's utopian judge condemns MacKinnon, a reckless rugged > individualist: `From a social standpoint, your delusion makes you as mad as > a March Hare.' > The best sum-up of Libertarianism I've ever seen :- ... you Libertarians are amazing. You've managed to construct an entire political ideology based on the phrase 'FUCK OFF.' Richard James Winters III BillK From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 20:12:19 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:12:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bush wants another $75 billion for wars] In-Reply-To: <002d01c4bd78$7662ad00$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041029201219.20938.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> You don't know for a hard fact that abortion was Theresa's central issue. Even if abortion was her #1 issue, she grew up in the first half of the 20th century, if she were young (& alive in the first place) today her core values might be evolving. >Olga Bourlin wrote: >Mother T had a lifelong obsession with abortion. It was her central issue. >She was fundamentally opposed to it, regardless of circumstances. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 20:18:21 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:18:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029184220.54810.qmail@web12907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029201821.88931.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> The below is the important point. It demonstates how long trickle-down economics will continue-- as no one has worked out what to replace trickle-down with. >Mike Lorrey wrote: >Whether a gap is widening is irrelevant. What is important is whether >the least well off are getting ahead in objective terms, not relative >terms. When people below the threshold for 'poverty' commonly own items >that were considered luxury items not even a decade ago, the definition >of that word is seriously cock-eyed. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natashavita at earthlink.net Fri Oct 29 20:21:42 2004 From: natashavita at earthlink.net (natashavita at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:21:42 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win Message-ID: <282500-2200410529202142383@M2W095.mail2web.com> I do not think he was flamming Tend. Natasha Original Message: ----------------- From: Hara Ra harara at sbcglobal.net Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:46:48 -0700 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win Agreed. Please reread the section on netiquette at extropy.org. Remember that flaming TrendOlogist is easy - just do it directly to his email, not this list. At 08:52 AM 10/28/2004, you wrote: >Thank you for this post. Trendologist is having fun, but I think that it >has gone too far. Time to bring in the list moderators. > >Best, >Natasha ================================== = 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . From sjvans at ameritech.net Fri Oct 29 20:25:30 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:25:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029145037.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041029202530.70392.qmail@web81202.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > Meanwhile, authoritative estimates say 100,000 > Iraqis have been killed, > more than half women and kids, mostly by coalition > forces. Never mind, > though. There'll be a contrary report along any > minute now. Just who are these "authorities"? The web site Iraq Body Count: http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/ by no means a pro-war site, lists their maximum as 16,312. An appalling number, yes, but nowhere near "100,000". It is possilbe that there are unreported deaths, but unless you think that US forces are secretly staging mass executions and secretly burying them, I doubt it is anywhere near 6 times as many. And these web site guys are good...they track down all reports, including from volunteers on site. They have facts to back them up, not guesses or estimates. If anything, they are probably on the high side, since I'm sure some "civilian" deaths are actually combatants, since they are illegally fighting without uniform or insignia. An easy mistake to make, even if you are trying not to. But between unreported and misreported deaths, I suspect it is probably a wash. It could be you or someone else is mistaking the word "casualty" to mean death. It actually means dead *and* injured, and a 6 to 1 ratio of injured to dead is in the right area, so I would not be surprised at 100,000 "casualties", that is dead *and* injured. From thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 29 20:43:57 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:43:57 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041029202530.70392.qmail@web81202.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029145037.01c02ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041029202530.70392.qmail@web81202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029154002.01aa30c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> > > > Meanwhile, authoritative estimates say 100,000 > > Iraqis have been killed, > > more than half women and kids, mostly by coalition > > forces. > >Just who are these "authorities"? It's from those communist Islamists, THE LANCET, reporting findings by the bin Laden-funded Center for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore and New York's Columbia University's School of Nursing: http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/29/1099028208196.html?oneclick=true 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, study finds By Marian Wilkinson United States Correspondent Washington October 30, 2004 About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of air strikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts. The estimated death toll was extrapolated from a survey of nearly 1000 households in randomly selected locations throughout the country. The study, published in the British medical journal, the Lancet, concludes that: "Violence accounted for most of the excess deaths and air strikes from coalition forces accounted for most of the violent deaths." The research, led by Dr Les Roberts, was carried out by the Centre for International Emergency Disaster and Refugee Studies, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore and New York's Columbia University's School of Nursing. It will be highly controversial as it dramatically increases the estimated number of civilian deaths attributed to US-led coalition. The findings are bound to be disputed by US military commanders as the figures would mean 150 civilians have died each day since the conflict began. Even non-government estimates by the widely used website www.iraqbodycount.com, has put the figures of reported deaths at about 16,000 since the invasion. US and British military commanders have repeatedly refused to put a number on Iraqi civilian casualties, but this study may force a change in that official policy. The study's authors say the death toll would be even higher if households in the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah were included. Two-thirds of all violent deaths were reported in just one cluster of households in Fallujah, but it was difficult for the researchers to establish whether some of the victims were insurgents. The study compared the death rates in Iraq for 14 months before the invasion with an 18-month period after it. The information was based on interviews with members of selected Iraqi households. Interviewers did ask to see death certificates, but it is unclear whether the perpetrators of the deaths were able to be cross-checked. The study concluded that the risk of death for Iraqis was two-and-a-half times higher after coalition forces entered the country. In a comment accompanying the study, Lancet editor Richard Horton called for an immediate change in US and British military strategy. While acknowledging the sample of households was relatively small and researchers were hampered by security problems, Mr Horton said the central finding was that civilian deaths had risen sharply since the war. "Democratic imperialism has led to more deaths not fewer," Mr Horton said in the editorial. "For the occupiers, winning the peace now demands a thorough reappraisal of strategy and tactics to prevent further unnecessary human casualties. For the sake of a country in crisis and for a people under daily threat of violence, the evidence that we publish today must change heads as well as pierce hearts." The research will raise concerns in Washington and in the interim Iraqi Government of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. Both are preparing for a major military assault on insurgents in Fallujah, which is planned to be unleashed soon after the US presidential election. The assault is expected to result in widespread civilian casualties. Sunni political leaders have threatened to boycott all political dialogue with Mr Allawi's Government if the attacks go ahead. From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 20:52:29 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 13:52:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Robin Hood (was: Bush wants another $75 billion for wars) In-Reply-To: <1099078610.72455f80namacdon@ole.augie.edu> Message-ID: <20041029205229.55447.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Nicholas Anthony MacDonald wrote: > Mike Lorrey wrote: > > "The concept of the "Robin Hood" is possibly the most corrosive idea > in > western history." > > > Ah, I remember reading that in Atlas Shrugged, and thinking- "wait a > second, Ayn. 'Robin Hood' was stealing wealth that belonged to the > 'statists' of the time, the feudal lords who held their subjects in a > condition of slavery or near-slavery, with few, if any real freedoms > and no chance for upward mobility. The lords did little to deserve > their income other than possess horses, armor, and weaponry that the > commoners lacked- they were just like the dictators of today. So, by > that reckoning, who is to say that Robin Hood was doing anything > wrong at all? In fact, Robin Hood seems remarkably similiar to the > rest of the heroes of your dreary novel..." This illustrates the cognitive dissonance. That what Robin Hood might have been doing in the setting of a feudal society might have been considered heroic by those benefitting from his theft is immaterial as to whether his approach to the opression of the aristocracy was a properly libertarian approach. What he did is tantamount to 'doing good by doing bad.' The Prince John who was the bad guy in the story, you might note, is also the same guy who became King John who the aristocrats rebelled against and forced him to sign the Magna Charta, which really began the end of feudalism because it granted, among other things, what has become our common law right to travel, to the serfs, so they were no longer tied to their lords land. The Magna Charta is a libertarian outcome. Committing theft is not. Learn to distinguish the difference. ===== 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 Fri Oct 29 21:17:09 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:17:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] So-called "implied contracts" and their implied worth In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029142300.01a61ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041029211709.60346.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 11:42 AM 10/29/2004 -0700, Mike L. wrote: > > >ANY government program that takes your > >money as 'taxes' to redistribute it to someone else is theft at the > >barrel of a gun. > > > >...Sounds like something one would > >expect from a 'house slave'. > > Many of us have been raised to think of it, and accept it, as an > implicit social contract where we pay forward the debt we share with > everyone else, our portion of the debt assessed according to how > much spare resources we already own. Rather in the way most > children learn to share food at the table rather than wolfing down > the lot after shoving everyone else aside. > For a small test case where this kind of commity has failed, look at > > http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/opinion/29birkett.html?th > > People often default on this shared enterprise; some are locked up as > scoundrels, others run corporations like Enron. Some justify their > default by reference to philosophies such as libertarianism, which > finds the basis of the implicit contract, and its implementation in > a given society, to be unfair, absurd or simply onerous. It's an > arguable position, but its case is not won by fiat or redefinition > of `theft' or accusations of servility against those who accept a > pay-forward and proportional solution to the inevitable > interstitial and even structural damage done by markets, crime, > race hatreds, etc. Libertarianism doesn't deny the fact of implicit contracts outright, it merely denies all the socialist baggage that collectivist statist are always trying to hang on that contract. But the accusation is common for statists to make, as one commonly sees today the liberal "if you don't do it for the children/women/minorities/etc you are mean and greedy," presented as some sort of rational argument. Your claim is a bait and switch tactic. That is the problem with implicit contracts: the fine print is invisible, so the majoritarian mob can always be conned into believing that there is fine print in there that benefits them (at least until they are no longer in the majority). Implied contracts are not worth the implied paper they are implied to be not written on. I always find it amusing to see societies which tend to deny the validity of verbal contracts between individuals always seem to have a religious reverence for the idea of an implied social(ist) contract. I understand the concept of paying forward, as do many libertarians. We prefer to pay forward on an individual basis. Virtuous acts of men committed under the coersion of force are neither virtuous, nor committed by men. They are the fruits of extortion carried out by automatons. > > >Winners, losers. It is not an endless, infinite bucket of > > > money/resources. I ask "how much is enough?" Should there be > > > requirements to return such wealth beyond a certain point? > > > >Return wealth to who? Upon what basis is a claim made? > > Upon this basis: > > "The steel tortoise gave MacKinnon a feeling of Crusoe-like > independence. It did not occur to him his chattel was the end product > of the cumulative effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds > of thousands of men, living and dead." > --Robert A. Heinlein, `Coventry' > > Heinlein's utopian judge condemns MacKinnon, a reckless rugged > individualist: `From a social standpoint, your delusion makes you as > mad as a March Hare.' Heinlein wrote Coventry when he was coming down off of his Georgist/Socialist kick of the 1930's when he flirted with Upton Sinclair's party. By the time he wrote Methuselah's Children, he had realized the errors of his ways, which is why he never permitted his 30's novel "For Us, The Living" to be published (it is recently published, now that his wife is dead, which speaks volumes about honor among publishers). ===== 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 extropians at perception.co.nz Fri Oct 29 21:21:14 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:21:14 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <6.0.3.0.1.20041029105729.0294c968@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041028223146.01a148d8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <00a401c4bd6f$45812e90$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <6.0.3.0.1.20041029105729.0294c968@pop.sbcglobal.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041030101943.0579ee88@127.0.0.1> you know, the thought occurs to me. Often these kinds of tests are the "aha" kind. ie, there's a trick. in this problem, resistance across a knight's move, perhaps the clue is really "the grid of resistors" a grid implies square pattern, right? which means you'd have to go UP two resistors, and ACROSS one, to get the knight's move. this would mean the sum of 3 resistances. Just a thought. Si At 07:08 30/10/2004, you wrote: >Well, I don't care to try solving this thing, but had some musings to share: > >1. Solving the general problem of R(x0,y0;x1,y1) might be simpler or same difficulty as solving the knights move instance. > >2. Such a solution requires enumerating all of the current carrying paths and constraints thereto, looks nasty, like a infinite series of summations of infinite series, and how to count these in a 1 for 1 way is tricky. > >3. What is the test actually looking for. If there is a nice closed mathematical expression that's one thing, but will "good enough" do? If "good enough" does, then it is simple enough, though tedious, to write a simulator, say a grid of 100 x 100 resistors and run till it converges. If I did that I would email the solution, how I found it and why I did it this way. > >4. Of course there's the story about Von Neumann when asked to sum the numbers 1 - 1000 and he did't see the obvious pairings of 1,999; 2,998 and so on, and when asked how he did the problem he said he just added them all up. Wonder if something similar lurks here. > >5. Knights move is a co-ordinate transformation. Think of it as a diagonal on a matrix of resistors whose diagonal is the knights move. Probably a PITA, just a thought. > >> At 08:22 PM 10/28/2004 -0700, Spike wrote: >>> > >>> > >>> >If you set up a subset of the grid with only 7 resistors >>> >and calculate the hard way, the knight-move nodes Req is 7/5. > >================================== >= 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 21:31:28 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 14:31:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029154002.01aa30c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041029213128.61019.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > > > > > Meanwhile, authoritative estimates say 100,000 > > > Iraqis have been killed, > > > more than half women and kids, mostly by coalition > > > forces. > > > >Just who are these "authorities"? > > It's from those communist Islamists, THE LANCET, reporting findings > by the bin Laden-funded Center for International Emergency Disaster > and Refugee > Studies, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore and New > York's Columbia University's School of Nursing I will merely note that these organizations, particularly Lancet and Johns Hopkins, have a record of inventing facts about such political issues as gun ownership, crime, and gun accidents and have had the temerity to claim that firearms ownership is a health epidemic. Decoding the rest of their political agenda is an exercise left for the reader. ===== 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Fri Oct 29 21:37:36 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:37:36 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041029211709.60346.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029142300.01a61ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041029211709.60346.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029162333.01a46ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 02:17 PM 10/29/2004 -0700, Mike L. wrote: > > "The steel tortoise gave MacKinnon a feeling of Crusoe-like > > independence. It did not occur to him his chattel was the end product > > of the cumulative effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds > > of thousands of men, living and dead." > > --Robert A. Heinlein, `Coventry' > > > > Heinlein's utopian judge condemns MacKinnon, a reckless rugged > > individualist: `From a social standpoint, your delusion makes you as > > mad as a March Hare.' > >Heinlein wrote Coventry when he was coming down off of his >Georgist/Socialist kick of the 1930's when he flirted with Upton >Sinclair's party. `Coventry' was published in the middle of 1940, when Heinlein was 33. He was a mature adult with military, (failed) commercial, and political experience behind him. Far from `flirting' with EPIC, he was a staff writer for Upton Sinclair's EPIC News, the organ of the EPIC (End Poverty In California) campaign, and ran in 1938 (unsuccessfully) for office as a Democrat. >By the time he wrote Methuselah's Children, he had >realized the errors of his ways Well, he had changed his opinions, which slowly shifted and then schlerosed for another 40-odd years. While it is customary (especially in those over 40) to suppose that an older person's views are wiser and better based on experience than those of youth, it is notable that Einstein's later years were spent fruitlessly on the wrong track, as were Newton's. But the point is not to decide whether Heinlein's brain started soft and grew tougher, or started sharp and grew duller. The point is to look at what the damned quote *says* and evaluate it: "The steel tortoise gave MacKinnon a feeling of Crusoe-like independence. It did not occur to him his chattel was the end product of the cumulative effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds of thousands of men, living and dead." Damien Broderick From amara.graps at gmail.com Fri Oct 29 21:48:38 2004 From: amara.graps at gmail.com (Amara Graps) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:48:38 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] The Living to 100 HealthSpan Calculator Message-ID: This is useful calculator for ordinary people... common sense questions and answers, but nothing extraordinary discussed in the way of life extension The Living to 100 HealthSpan Calculator http://www.livingto100.com/quiz.cfm From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 22:01:40 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029162333.01a46ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041029220140.62177.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > "The steel tortoise gave MacKinnon a feeling of Crusoe-like > independence. > It did not occur to him his chattel was the end product of the > cumulative effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds of > thousands of men, living and dead." Yes, it is the common Proudhonian supposition that we have a debt to the past generations which built the civilization we currently live in. Like Proudhon, though, Heinlein was not yet economically educated enough to realize that a free market properly accounts for the value of that debt to the past in the prices of the present, far more accurately than any government can do so with it's price-signal-deafness and arrogant supposition that a bunch of lawyers and social scientist bureau-rats have a better idea of what the market wants than the population of consumers and producers. Your only possible true debt to the past for the civilization you enjoy is to avoid doing anything which would cause or contribute to its decay (like socialist looting would), or prevent its continued growth and development, as well as to actively defend it from barbarians. Of course, the very idea that you owe anything to the past is absurd. Contracts entered into via force or ignorance are not binding. You were dragged kicking and screaming into this life (don't believe me, just watch any baby being born), so its obvious you didn't come here willingly. You don't owe the bastards anything. If you have the arrogance to have kids, you owe them a debt for the offense of giving birth to them. Their job is to make you pay your full penance for your impudence. ===== 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 andrew at ceruleansystems.com Fri Oct 29 22:14:04 2004 From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:14:04 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria Message-ID: <1099088044.13157@whirlwind.he.net> Damien Broderick quoted: > The network ran videotape taken by a reporter embedded with the US Army > 101st Airborne Division nine days after the fall of Baghdad. The footage > shows US troops examining barrels of what appeared to be explosives inside > bunkers that had been sealed by UN inspectors. There are some interesting threads out there on the 'net regarding this particular video footage. The footage clearly shows all the marking details on the containers, including all the hazard tags and classification codes attached to or painted on them. This has given interested topical experts on the Internet plenty of opportunity to do their own verification and discuss the matter. What has been noted is that not only are some of the tags not applicable to HMX or RDX (the explosives of debate), but that the combination of tags and markings is really only applicable to TNP explosives. These are demolition explosives, commonly used as a cheap substitute for TNT and with similar power (but nastier chemical properties). And in this specific case they appear to be booster charges, usually used to improve the performance of low-power bulk industrial explosives like ammonium nitrate. In short, to topical experts the explosives shown in the video footage are only consistent with demolition boosters, and inconsistent with RDX and HMX. To the extent that I've double-checked the analysis (go Google!), it seems to be correct. The really important point here is the power of the Internet as a counter-force to the de facto truth-making of the mainstream media outlets. There was a time when the media could make nearly any assertion it wished without defending the accuracy of its claim. Now that people have realized that they have the power to question the media (see CBS and Dan Rather), it has become a new hobby for many people and changes the dynamics and quality of information in the public sphere. This is a great thing, but it is clear that the popular media is not comfortable with this shift. cheers, j. andrew rogers From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 22:36:43 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:36:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Good Morning Silicon Valley says GOP more pro-tech Message-ID: <20041029223643.70518.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/siliconvalley/business/columnists/gmsv/10049995.htm Published: Friday, Oct. 29, 2004 Don't look for a technical knockout in this bout By John Murrell No matter where you've settled on this presidential election thing, chances are your decision didn't come down to the candidates' respective technology policies. Neither George Bush nor John Kerry has given tech a prominent place in the campaign, and when it comes to encouraging innovation, maintaining competitiveness, improving education, providing broadband access and researching fuel cells, both are pro, pro, pro, pro and pro. The differences, as you might expect, are in the means to those ends: Both men's policies put much of the responsibility on the private sector, but Kerry sees a greater role for government than Bush. In a party vs. party comparison, Declan McCullagh over at News.com has put together an admittedly arbitrary but interesting scorecard showing that the friends of tech on Capitol Hill are primarily Republican, based on a selection of key votes over the years. ===== 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 sjvans at ameritech.net Fri Oct 29 22:57:26 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:57:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029154002.01aa30c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041029225726.95237.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> Fair enough. Certainly a well credentialed bunch. Forgive me, though, if I am a little skeptical of a study based on surveys and statistical extrapolation. They may well be right, but I'm going to need a little more before I believe it whole-heartedly. I'm not sure the sarcasm was called for. *I* never called anyone commie Islamists, and certainly not the Lancet. Though perhaps it is the habit of people using "scare quotes" to minimize or ridicule. I just was trying to make clear that I was using your own word. If I caused a misunderstanding I apologize. steve --- Damien Broderick wrote: > > > > > > Meanwhile, authoritative estimates say 100,000 > > > Iraqis have been killed, > > > more than half women and kids, mostly by > coalition > > > forces. > > > >Just who are these "authorities"? > > It's from those communist Islamists, THE LANCET, > reporting findings by the > bin Laden-funded Center for International Emergency > Disaster and Refugee > Studies, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in > Baltimore and New York's > Columbia University's School of Nursing: > > http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/29/1099028208196.html?oneclick=true > > > 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, study finds > > By Marian Wilkinson > United States Correspondent > Washington > October 30, 2004 > > About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women > and children - have died > in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of > air strikes by coalition > forces, according to the first reliable study of the > death toll from Iraqi > and US public health experts. > > The estimated death toll was extrapolated from a > survey of nearly 1000 > households in randomly selected locations throughout > the country. > > The study, published in the British medical journal, > the Lancet, concludes > that: "Violence accounted for most of the excess > deaths and air strikes > from coalition forces accounted for most of the > violent deaths." > > The research, led by Dr Les Roberts, was carried out > by the Centre for > International Emergency Disaster and Refugee > Studies, Johns Hopkins School > of Public Health in Baltimore and New York's > Columbia University's School > of Nursing. It will be highly controversial as it > dramatically increases > the estimated number of civilian deaths attributed > to US-led coalition. > > The findings are bound to be disputed by US military > commanders as the > figures would mean 150 civilians have died each day > since the conflict > began. Even non-government estimates by the widely > used website > www.iraqbodycount.com, has put the figures of > reported deaths at about > 16,000 since the invasion. > > US and British military commanders have repeatedly > refused to put a number > on Iraqi civilian casualties, but this study may > force a change in that > official policy. The study's authors say the death > toll would be even > higher if households in the insurgent stronghold of > Fallujah were included. > > Two-thirds of all violent deaths were reported in > just one cluster of > households in Fallujah, but it was difficult for the > researchers to > establish whether some of the victims were > insurgents. > > The study compared the death rates in Iraq for 14 > months before the > invasion with an 18-month period after it. > > The information was based on interviews with members > of selected Iraqi > households. Interviewers did ask to see death > certificates, but it is > unclear whether the perpetrators of the deaths were > able to be cross-checked. > > The study concluded that the risk of death for > Iraqis was two-and-a-half > times higher after coalition forces entered the > country. > > In a comment accompanying the study, Lancet editor > Richard Horton called > for an immediate change in US and British military > strategy. > > While acknowledging the sample of households was > relatively small and > researchers were hampered by security problems, Mr > Horton said the central > finding was that civilian deaths had risen sharply > since the war. > > "Democratic imperialism has led to more deaths not > fewer," Mr Horton said > in the editorial. "For the occupiers, winning the > peace now demands a > thorough reappraisal of strategy and tactics to > prevent further unnecessary > human casualties. For the sake of a country in > crisis and for a people > under daily threat of violence, the evidence that we > publish today must > change heads as well as pierce hearts." > > The research will raise concerns in Washington and > in the interim Iraqi > Government of Prime Minister Ayad Allawi. > > Both are preparing for a major military assault on > insurgents in Fallujah, > which is planned to be unleashed soon after the US > presidential election. > > The assault is expected to result in widespread > civilian casualties. Sunni > political leaders have threatened to boycott all > political dialogue with Mr > Allawi's Government if the attacks go ahead. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Oct 29 23:15:44 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 18:15:44 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041029225726.95237.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029154002.01aa30c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041029225726.95237.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029181258.01cbea00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 03:57 PM 10/29/2004 -0700, steve wrote: > >Just who are these "authorities"? >I'm not sure the sarcasm was called for. *I* never >called anyone commie Islamists, and certainly not the >Lancet. Though perhaps it is the habit of people >using "scare quotes" to minimize or ridicule. Yes, just so. But I was anticipating the boots of Mike Lorrey crashing down immediately, as they did. Apologies in turn, Steve. Damien Broderick From sjvans at ameritech.net Fri Oct 29 23:17:26 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:17:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041029220140.62177.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029231726.59909.qmail@web81201.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > Yes, it is the common Proudhonian supposition that > we have a debt to > the past generations which built the civilization we > currently live in. I don't get that at all. I had interpreted it as meaning that MacKinnon didn't realize that he was deliberately removing himself from the economic systems that made it possible for him to buy and pay for such things as the turtle. Not that he owed a debt...quite the opposite. How could he owe a debt to past generations for something he would never be able to get again? Those end products "of the cumulative effort and intelligent co-operation of hundreds of thousands of men, living and dead" were now denied him, and he didn't realized the implications of that. If he had, he would have bought a burro and use the money he saved on trade goods, steve From mlorrey at yahoo.com Fri Oct 29 23:36:22 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:36:22 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041029231726.59909.qmail@web81201.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041029233622.80059.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > > --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > > > Yes, it is the common Proudhonian supposition that > > we have a debt to > > the past generations which built the civilization we > > currently live in. > > I don't get that at all. I had interpreted it as > meaning that MacKinnon didn't realize that he was > deliberately removing himself from the economic > systems that made it possible for him to buy and pay > for such things as the turtle. The problem with the story is, however, that the 'economic system' that made it possible to buy and pay for such things is in any way to be credited to the state. Markets happen despite government, not because of it. The presence of black markets is proof enough of that. The faulty socialist idea that Heinlein was suffering from (likely contributed to significantly by such early SF as the socialist Bellamy's "Looking Backward" as well as his education at the hands of the US Navy) was that we have government to thank for everything, that government is in some way synonymous with 'the public good', 'the commons' etc. and that therefore our taxes are legitimate confiscations. The problem, of course, is that the redistributionist tendencies of government work at cross purposes to this claim. It is the productive members of society who are responsible for the civilization we now enjoy, yet it is those same productive members who pay the most for their 'debt to the past', while their payments are redistributed as entitlements to the unproductive classes who are not responsible for the height of our civilization, but who instead are responsible for it being held back from greater heights. So, instead, the productive members pay the most to those who hold back the advancement of civilization, ergo taxes are inherently luddite in nature. ===== 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 trichrom at optusnet.com.au Fri Oct 29 23:51:03 2004 From: trichrom at optusnet.com.au (RobKPO) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 09:51:03 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029154002.01aa30c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><20041029225726.95237.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041029181258.01cbea00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <004701c4be12$7d80d360$355a1fd3@turtle> Yikes, can't wait for the US election to be over... In an environment of an pre-existing violently oppressive/criminal government being confronted and then engaged in open and urban conflict, how do you determine the circumstance of who was killed an by whom. Both sides were shooting and the US/Coalition forces have much more C2I then the Iraqis - not to mention an actual effort of adherance to the Geneva convention. These day's the insurgency style conflict clearly has Iraqi's killing Iraqi's. If Iraq were a peaceful people invaded by a giant army then you could count the deaths and blame the invader's but that is purely fantasy. Deliberatly supporting information that effectively is enemy propaganda (whether correct or not) will always get most people upset during a war, moreso if it is wrong, even more so if it is blatantly wrong. What is accurate? I don't know but that figure seems awfully high for how the invasion/liberation was prosecuted, and very open to inaccuracies based on reports I've read from Iraq tactics regarding their style of fighting and use of civilian's.... Blaming your leader because their is a war might make you feel good but it is hardly a positive effort for personal growth. How about accuracy, empathy, and awareness that the public will not be told everything regarding strategic decision making. The office of President is probably something that is quite effective in the long run despite the personal cost many decision's might cause but it is not a public decision forum - the public only get's to vote who is in that position. So is enemy propoganda during a war considered part of free speech in the US, and I wonder what the US government should do to limit misinformation that incite's internal anti-US influence's during time of war and subsequant insecurity of benefit to enemy intent? Rob KPO From hal at finney.org Fri Oct 29 23:58:48 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 16:58:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD: ACTION ALERT: Nanofactory Animation Challenge Grant ? Please Respond by November 15 Message-ID: <20041029235848.4E9B457E2A@finney.org> I'm forwarding the letter below from Foresight. Apologies if you get it more than once. I'm not sure how good a cause it is, though, to give money for making a movie vs helping out ExI or some other transhumanist group. I took a look at the animation and it was pretty nice, at least the first part. It clearly illustrates Drexler's emphasis on mill based assembly rather than the robot arm based model which is practically synonymous with molecular manufacturing in the popular press. Here is some commentary and criticism. As we zoom into the mill, we first see a rather incomprehensible picture of several molecular "conveyor belts" moving in a complex pattern. This subsequently gets illustrated in more detail. We zoom in and see a gas composed of acetylene molecules, C2H2 (actually H-C-C-H) passing through two sorting rotors. This is Drexler's concept for purification. Each rotor uses a different type of active region to move just the correct molecules from one compartment to the other. This way, after several purification stages the gas should be free of contamination. The reactions here are apparently based somewhat on Ralph Merkle's paper, http://www.zyvex.com/nanotech/hydroCarbonMetabolism.html, although that used diacetylene, C4H2. The goal is ultimately to deposit a pair of carbon atoms into a growing diamondoid structure. The acetylene molecules are captured by another rotor which carries them around and deposits them on top of a pyramidal structure mounted on a conveyor belt. These conveyor belts will be used both to carry molecules around and to bring them together so they can react. It's not clear what makes the acetylene "stick" to the conveyor belt tool. The acetylene is held sideways at this point. The bound molecule is now carried down and interacts with another conveyor belt that has a large, purplish atom on it. This manages to "abstract" or remove a hydrogen atom from the acetylene. You can see the purple atom leaving now with the white hydrogen. Meanwhile the acetylene has become a CCH and rotates so the hydrogen is pointing outward. The belt swings around and now an interesting 3-atom reaction takes place. A large, ominous looking yellow atom comes up and sits next to the remaining hydrogen atom from the original acetylene. This is presumably designed to weaken the otherwise strong bond holding the hydrogen in place. Now a third belt swings up from the bottom and performs another hydrogen abstraction. This leaves just the C2 sitting on the original conveyor belt. Finally the belt swings around and the C2 is deposited on a growing cube of diamond. This is the purpose of all of the action we have seen so far. These diamond cubes are carried on a red upward-moving conveyor belt. As we pull back we see further mills located off into the unimaginable distance, each one adding a pair of carbon atoms to the growing diamond structure. At this point the movie cuts to a much later stage of assembly. Probably this is where some of the unfinished portion will go. I don't really see what is happening here, but it appears that a miniature molecular siege gun is being constructed, perhaps to fight off any attacking micro-organisms. Well, probably not, but it's hard to tell. Basically we see one unit being picked up and set on another unit. There's no hint of what is holding the pieces together when they are set on one another. Things then become even more incomprehensible, with a strange ferris wheel looking thing that doesn't seem to be doing anything (maybe it's checking the previous steps for errors), and then some arms which set a cube shape into an array, where it promptly vanishes as if by magic. I guess this is another unfinished sequence. Finally the lid of the nanofactory pops open and out comes an inanimate carbon rod. No, it unfolds and turns into a laptop computer. Of course, it's a really, really good laptop computer. Anyway, the most interesting part of this was, for me, the mill. I feel that this illustrates some of the problems and limitations with this concept as it makes it more concrete. One problem is the need to restore the tool tips to their original state as they complete a cycle around the conveyor belt. The central paradox is that, for example, the hydrogen abstraction tool must pull and hold the hydrogen pretty hard, to get it away from the other side. But now we need to undo that and get it to let go of the hydrogen so that it's ready to steal another when it comes around again. So do we use another reaction that's going to pull even harder on the hydrogen? That won't work. Merkle's paper above shows an answer, which is to use 3-finger or 4-finger reactions, as is done in the 2nd hydrogen abstraction in this example. Bringing in some metal atoms and other large atoms can produce electric fields that change bonding strength of nearby atoms. So it can work in theory, for some cases, but every reaction has to be worked out in detail. In this particular case, we have the puzzle of what is holding the acetylene to the first mill. It has to be holding it tightly enough that the first hydrogen tool doesn't pull the entire acetylene off. Yet it's loose enough that once the two hydrogens are gone, it will transfer spontaneously to the diamond workpiece. That whole sequence of reactions needs to be detailed, to make sure that the process will work. (This is basically Smalley's "sticky fingers" problem.) Another issue is that this enormous structure, the sorting rotors and the reactor mills, is designed for specifically adding two carbon atoms to a specific place on a specific workpiece. This isn't a programmable structure. It can't be used to build anything else. It can only add atoms number 1,347 and 1,348 to a growing cube. Every piece is designed like an enormous (actually microscopic of course!) clockwork so that each piece fits together perfectly. When we see the additional mill structures off in the distance, each adding a C2 dimer, those are just like this one, except they are positioned a few tenths of a nanometer differently, so that their atoms go into the next two slots, 1,349 and 1,350, and so on. Molecular mill systems like this are not programmable. They build fixed structures. Then at a higher level, a programmable system is supposed to put them together to make whatever is desired. This is presumably what the later part of the video will show. One final point which these mills illustrate is that there really are "fingers" involved, despite the fervent denials by nanotech advocates. Particularly with the 3-atom interaction shown with the 2nd hydrogen abstraction, and presumably with other reactions as well, several pieces have to be brought together in precisely the right qarrangement. It's actually worse than this, because based on Drexler's descriptions, these mill reactions are not being depicted quite right. In some cases Drexler suggested that rather than the reactions occuring in empty space as we see here, they would occur within a structure which had cavities and grooves for the tool tips to move through as the belts came together. These structures could adjust the electrical and chemical environment to facilitate the reaction. Any time you have a reaction where several pieces have to come together (Merkle's paper has 3- and 4-finger reactions) you do have a potential problem of having room for everything. This is the point Smalley was making, that in practice some of the reactions will require so much control over the local environment that the "fat fingers" will get in each other's way. While we don't see that here, we also don't necessarily see a convincing reaction sequence, as I have explained above. I hope that this video will be helpful in explaining Drexler's ideas to a wider audience. I don't think many other people have been aware that this concept is the basis for his proposed manufacturing system. However I would rather see more work on the specific reactions being proposed, with some analysis of whether they can actually happen. There doesn't seem to have been much additional work done since Merkle's 1997 paper. I don't think this video in itself will answer Smalley's objections or silence the critics. It will at least give people a concrete model to criticize, though, which will be a step forward. Hal > Dear Foresight Institute Member, > > Visualizing nanotechnology and nanosystems, in particular, > is a major challenge in communicating the > power of this technology. > > A highlight at the 1st Conference on Advanced Nanotechnology held in > Washington DC was the premier of "Productive Nanosystems: from > Molecules to Superproducts," a computer-generated animated short film. > > This four-minute film is a collaborative project of animator and > engineer, John Burch, and pioneer nanotechnologist, Dr. K. Eric > Drexler. The film depicts an animated view of a nanofactory and > demonstrates key steps in a process that converts simple > molecules into a billion-CPU laptop computer. > > These steps include the sorting of molecules, precise atomic construction > through the use of placement tools, and the assembly of smaller parts > into larger parts. Scenes depicting initial tool preparation show molecular > reactions based on computational quantum chemistry, and later stage > manufacturing processes are based on industrial processes found in > large-scale factories. > > The premiered version, v0.8, of "Productive Nanosystems: from Molecules > to Superproducts" received great applause and was screened, by popular > request, two additional times during the conference. This film will make > tremendous strides in the education of students, researchers, policy > makers and members of the media in the understanding of nanosystems. > > ====================== > ANIMATION CHALLENGE GRANT > > Thanks to Mark Sims, President of the nano-CAD software company, > Nanorex. Foresight Institute has a $10,000 challenge grant running > through November 15, 2004. This means that every dollar donated by > others up to this total will be doubled. > > This grant will ensure completion of the project and will enable broad > distribution of the final version over the Internet. All proceeds from the > grant will go toward the completion and upgrade of the film. > > A sample of the animation can be seen below, and the estimated > completion date is early 2005. > > Slide show: > http://www.foresight.org/lizardfire/nanofactorySS.html > > Animated clip: > http://www.foresight.org/animation_challenge/nanofactory_360x240copyright_sor3.mov > > Attendees of the conference have matched approximately half of the > grant, and we're asking you to help with the other half. Please go to > http://www.foresight.org/animation_challenge/ > to see the progress of the challenge grant, > > ====================== > DONATE NOW: > > Contribute online at this secure form: > https://snow.he.net/%7Eforesite/DonationForm.html > Click on "not a membership, but another donation button" > Enter: "Animation Completion" in the purpose of this donation field > > Or if you want to send in your donation by US post or fax > Go to this form, print out and send > http://www.foresight.org/FI/Donation.html (print and fax) > > Donations are tax deductible in the United States. Large donors may have > the opportunity to have their name or logo place on the final credit scroll > of the completed film. > > ====================== > ABOUT NANOREX > > Nanorex, Inc, is based in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan and was incorporated > in April 2004. The mission of Nanorex is to develop the world's best 3-D > molecular engineering software needed to realize the full potential of > molecular nanotechnology. Nanorex has seven employees and is led by > Mark Sims, President and J. Storrs Hall, PhD., Chief Scientist. > > The tentative release of Nanorex's first product, nanoENGINEER-1 is > targeted for Summer 2005. For more information about Nanorex send an > email to info at nanorex.com. > > > ====================== > CONFERENCE CONTRIBUTORS > > The premier of "Productive Nanosystems: from Molecules to > Superproducts" was so well received several attendees at the 1st > Conference on Advanced Nanotechnology immediately donated toward > the film's completion. > > Here is a partial list of donors: > > Doug Arends > Jennifer Ash > Brett Belmore > David DeGroote > Jason Force > Ed Hippo > Paras Kaul > Andrew Keane > Charles Kellogg > John Lobell > Sergio Martinez de Lahildago > Tom McKendree > David Moore > James Moore > Michael Stollmeyer > Philip Thorn > Gregory Trochina > Will Ware > Linda Wolin > Robert Zeches > > > ====================== > > Thank you for your continued support, if you have any questions about > this challenge grant, please contact foresight at foresight.org > > Sincerely, > > Foresight Institute > > ====================== > > Foresight Institute > PO Box 61058 > Palo Alto, CA 94306 USA > tel +1 650 917 1122 > fax +1 650 917 1123 > foresight at foresight.org > http://www.foresight.org > > ****************************************** > > Foresight Institute is the leading think tank and > public interest organization focused on > nanotechnology. Formed in 1986 by K. Eric Drexler > and Christine Peterson, Foresight dedicates itself > to providing education, policy development, and > networking to maximize benefits and minimize > downsides of molecular manufacturing. From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 30 02:16:27 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:16:27 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bush wantsanother $75 billion for wars] References: <20041029201219.20938.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005f01c4be26$76cb34c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: Al Brooks Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 1:12 PM >Olga Bourlin wrote: >>Mother T had a lifelong obsession with abortion. It was her central issue. >> She was fundamentally opposed to it, regardless of circumstances. >You don't know for a hard fact that abortion was Theresa's central issue. Even if abortion was her #1 issue, she grew up in the first half of the 20th century, if she were young (& alive in the first place) today her core values might be evolving. For the record, the quote was from one of the links I provided, not mine. Although, as Mother Teresa was a fundamentalist Catholic ... and as Catholics are not exactly encouraged to think about such issues for themselves, one can assume growing up in the first half of the 20th century, or the second half, or even if she were alive today - that Agnes Gonxha Bojaxhiu may still have become a fundamentalist Catholic automaton. After all, even though it is 2004 - there are still a lot of Catholics around. My grandmother *also* grew up in the first half of the 20th century, and she too was essentially a Catholic (having been reared in large Eastern Orthodox Russian family), but my grandmother was *much* more practical and a much kinder person than Mother Teresa. Babushka - married, but finding herself pregnant at 39 (and already being the mother of two almost-grown children), with instability raging prior to WWII in the country where she sought shelter from the Bolsheviks - decided to go the abortion route. It is almost impossible for today's women to realize how reproductive life was like without the almost impeccable birth control we now have (and have had for about the last 40 years, which BTW gave Mother Teresa plenty of time to "evolve" from her core values in the last half of her lifetime). But, of course, it is not just *abortion* that Mother Teresa was against ... but *birth control* itself. And yet it was Mother T who won the Nobel Prize. What a travesty. If it were up to me - prostitutes and exotic dancers - who provide a service, who are not moralistic about pleasure, who often teach the inexperienced and succor the unwanted - they are much more deserving of the Nobel Prize than a creep like Mother Teresa. Olga -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 02:56:18 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 19:56:18 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041030101943.0579ee88@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <004701c4be2c$07d0cf20$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Simon Dawson > > you know, the thought occurs to me. Often these kinds of > tests are the "aha" kind. > > ie, there's a trick. > > in this problem, resistance across a knight's move, perhaps > the clue is really "the grid of resistors" > > a grid implies square pattern, right? > > which means you'd have to go UP two resistors, and ACROSS > one, to get the knight's move. > > this would mean the sum of 3 resistances. > > Just a thought. > > Si Well sure. The way I interpreted the problem is a grid of squares. If node A is at (0,0) and node B is at (1,2) and there is a one-ohm resistor between each node, what is Req between A and B? I have solved the case for two adjacent nodes and two nodes diagonally separated, but I cannot add the two resistances to get Req A-B. If I did, I would be remarkably close to 1 ohm, so I am tempted to say that is the answer, but I want to prove it. Its turned out to be wildly difficult. HEY OUT THERE have any of you whiz kids gotten a copy of the GLAT? Isn't that a cool IQ test? Im tempted to apply to work there. spike From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 03:26:12 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:26:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will win In-Reply-To: <282500-2200410529202142383@M2W095.mail2web.com> Message-ID: <20041030032612.73151.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> I spoke with Trend, and he told me he is so embarrassed he has left this list & will not be back. > I do not think he was flaming Trend. > > Natasha > > > > Original Message: > ----------------- > From: Hara Ra harara at sbcglobal.net > Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 10:46:48 -0700 > To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] re: looks like Bush will > win > > > Agreed. Please reread the section on netiquette at > extropy.org. Remember > that flaming TrendOlogist is easy - just do it > directly to his email, not > this list. > > At 08:52 AM 10/28/2004, you wrote: > >Thank you for this post. Trendologist is having > fun, but I think that it > >has gone too far. Time to bring in the list > moderators. > > > >Best, > >Natasha > > ================================== > = 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 > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 03:31:27 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:31:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bush wantsanother $75 billion for wars] In-Reply-To: <005f01c4be26$76cb34c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <20041030033127.70972.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Hey, not a bad idea giving prostitutes & exotic dancers Nobel awards. Wouldn't it be interesting to have an exotic dancer as U.S. President or head of the UN? > If it were up to me - prostitutes > and exotic dancers - who provide a service, who are > not moralistic about pleasure, who often teach the > inexperienced and succor the unwanted - they are > much more deserving of the Nobel Prize than a creep > like Mother Teresa. > > Olga __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Oct 30 03:34:21 2004 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:34:21 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bush wantsanother $75 billion for wars] In-Reply-To: <005f01c4be26$76cb34c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> References: <20041029201219.20938.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com> <005f01c4be26$76cb34c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: Very interesting that I should agree with you, Olga - for usually I do not. But this time, I'm with you. :) Regards, MB 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 (and have had for about the last 40 years, which BTW gave Mother Teresa plenty of time to "evolve" from her core values in the last half of her lifetime). But, of course, it is not just *abortion* that Mother Teresa was against ... but *birth control* itself. > > And yet it was Mother T who won the Nobel Prize. What a travesty. > If it were up to me - prostitutes and exotic dancers - who provide a > service, who are not moralistic about pleasure, who often teach the > inexperienced and succor the unwanted - they are much more deserving > of the Nobel Prize than a creep like Mother Teresa. From extropians at perception.co.nz Sat Oct 30 03:35:30 2004 From: extropians at perception.co.nz (Simon Dawson) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:35:30 +1300 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <004701c4be2c$07d0cf20$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <6.1.2.0.2.20041030101943.0579ee88@127.0.0.1> <004701c4be2c$07d0cf20$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20041030163444.05258bb0@127.0.0.1> At 15:56 30/10/2004, you wrote: >> Simon Dawson > >> >> you know, the thought occurs to me. Often these kinds of >> tests are the "aha" kind. >> >> ie, there's a trick. >> >> in this problem, resistance across a knight's move, perhaps >> the clue is really "the grid of resistors" >> >> a grid implies square pattern, right? >> >> which means you'd have to go UP two resistors, and ACROSS >> one, to get the knight's move. >> >> this would mean the sum of 3 resistances. >> >> Just a thought. >> >> Si > > >Well sure. The way I interpreted the problem is a grid of >squares. If node A is at (0,0) and node B is at (1,2) >and there is a one-ohm resistor between each node, what >is Req between A and B? I have solved the case for two >adjacent nodes and two nodes diagonally separated, but >I cannot add the two resistances to get Req A-B. If I >did, I would be remarkably close to 1 ohm, so I am tempted >to say that is the answer, but I want to prove it. Its >turned out to be wildly difficult. hmm yes. don't remember enough electronics to solve it. however, I suggest you -don't- look at this http://www.geocities.com/frooha/grid/node2.html :) Si From sjvans at ameritech.net Sat Oct 30 04:32:30 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 21:32:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041029233622.80059.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041030043230.75279.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > The problem with the story is, however, that the > 'economic system' that > made it possible to buy and pay for such things is > in any way to be > credited to the state. Markets happen despite > government, not because > of it. The presence of black markets is proof enough > of that. Huh? I admit it has been a while since I read the story, but I don't remember anything about the economic system being credited to the state. Now, the *lack* of economic interaction between Coventry and the rest of the country is due to the state, and that big fence and the heavily armed guards surrounding it. Maybe governments don't *make* markets, but they can sure muck them up. From sjvans at ameritech.net Sat Oct 30 05:16:16 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:16:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029181258.01cbea00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041030051616.68562.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > Yes, just so. But I was anticipating the boots of > Mike Lorrey crashing down > immediately, as they did. > > Apologies in turn, Steve. No apologies needed. For everyone's information, the study Damien refers to is available free at: http://www.thelancet.com/journal/vol364/iss9445/full/llan.364.9445.early_online_publication.31137.1 There is a short and painless registration. 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. From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 30 05:23:59 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:23:59 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bushwantsanother $75 billion for wars] References: <20041030033127.70972.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <008401c4be40$a95d60b0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Al Brooks" > Wouldn't it be interesting to > have an exotic dancer as U.S. President or head of the > UN? Naaaahhhhhhhhh ... the prostitutes have politics cinched. Olga From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 30 05:34:24 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:34:24 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] Mother Teresa and Other Nunzillas [was Bushwantsanother $75 billion for wars] References: <20041029201219.20938.qmail@web51609.mail.yahoo.com><005f01c4be26$76cb34c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <009601c4be42$1ee24200$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "MB" > > Very interesting that I should agree with you, Olga - for usually I do > not. But this time, I'm with you. :) Yes ... and remember you never know what may come flying out at you from "left" field. Olga From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 05:55:36 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:55:36 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004a01c4be45$172f4050$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > 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 From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Oct 30 06:10:41 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:10:41 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] National Academy of Sciences against cloning ban Message-ID: <470a3c520410292310303c8af6@mail.gmail.com> >From the Washington Post - BRUCE ALBERTS, President, National Academy of Sciences: "Robert May, my counterpart at the Royal Society in London, has expressed not only the consensus of British scientists on the perils of a proposed U.N. convention to ban all human cloning research ["A Cloning Compromise That Works," op-ed, Oct. 20] but the consensus of the U.S. National Academies and more than 60 other science academies worldwide. Under the auspices of the InterAcademy Panel -- a global network of science academies -- we have expressed our support for an international ban on human reproductive cloning. But the Costa Rican proposal being considered at the United Nations goes too far by also calling for a ban on "therapeutic cloning," a technique more accurately termed "nuclear transfer to produce stem cell lines." This promising research has important potential both for scientific research and future medical therapies, and it has nothing to do with attempts to clone a person." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10810-2004Oct29.html From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 06:15:48 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:15:48 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <004a01c4be45$172f4050$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <004d01c4be47$e64985b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > 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 Actually in a sense we already do this, but do let us look at the bright side. (I have a well-known habit of looking at the bright side, even if totally unreasonable.) When we try to deal with all the problems that face humanity today, the armed conflict, impending multinational civil wars looming in the middle east and so forth, let us try to view life from the point of view of the genome. If we view life from the point of view of the human gene, then birth control *really is* a terrible thing. Drunken teenagers in the back seat becomes a good thing, the dumber the better. Hungry overpopulated Africa is good: they do bear lots of children, even if many die. Most technology is bad, since it gives people distractions from copulation, which for so long was the only really good form of entertainment (was it not?) and television is one of the most tragic technologies ever invented. Now we have a number of activities that people claim are as good as or perhaps better than sex. If I were a selfish gene, I would be so alarmed. Things do look different from that point of view. spike From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au Sat Oct 30 08:18:22 2004 From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:18:22 +1000 Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD: ACTION ALERT: Nanofactory Animation ChallengeGrant ? Please Respond by November 15 References: <20041029235848.4E9B457E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <027001c4be59$05ad8080$b8232dcb@homepc> Hal Finney wrote: > I'm forwarding the letter below from Foresight. Apologies if > you get it more than once. I'm not sure how good a cause it is, > though, to give money for making a movie vs helping out ExI > or some other transhumanist group. > > I took a look at the animation and it was pretty nice, at least the > first part. It clearly illustrates Drexler's emphasis on mill based > assembly rather than the robot arm based model which is > practically synonymous with molecular manufacturing in the > popular press. Here is some commentary and criticism. Thanks for the work in this post Hal. I watched the movie frame by frame while going through your commentary and criticism. I agree with your comments. I think Foresight would be well served to take them onboard. Another thing that stuck out to me was that although the molecules were collected by Brownian motion there was never a case of a mill slot failing to be filled. The success rate was 100% which seemed highly improbably to me. Given the precision of the system I wondered if a blank slot in one of the mills might result in there not being a double carbon atom to place in some corresponding carbon cubes being built downstream. Regards, Brett Paatsch PS: Personally, I think Drexler is wrong and Smalley is right, but the arguments are so hard to get at that I can well understand how intelligent people could be on both sides of the debate. Full credit to Foresight for making it easier for more people to make up their own mind though. It will be a lot easier for people to engage with and play "spot the error in" a movie than it will be to effectively criticise a book like Nanosystems. From pgptag at gmail.com Sat Oct 30 09:31:07 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:31:07 +0200 Subject: [extropy-chat] Buzzing the Web on a Meme Machine In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <470a3c5204103002315aef998c@mail.gmail.com> NYT - The Web is obsessed with anything that spreads, whether it's a virus, a blog or a rumor. And so the Internet loves memes. Richard Dawkins coined the term meme in his 1976 book, "The Selfish Gene." Memes (the word rhymes with dreams and is short for mimemes, from the word mimetic) are infectious ideas or any other things that spread by imitation from person to person - a jingle, a joke, a fashion, the smiley face or the concept of hell. Memes propagate from brain to brain much as genes spread from body to body. Thus, Mr. Dawkins wrote, they really "should be regarded as living structures, not just metaphorically but technically." The World Wide Web is the perfect Petri dish for memes. Wikipedia, the free collaborative online encyclopedia, calls the Internet "the ultimate meme vector." http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/26/arts/26meme.html From pharos at gmail.com Sat Oct 30 10:21:22 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:21:22 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030051616.68562.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029181258.01cbea00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <20041030051616.68562.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:16:16 -0700 (PDT), 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. > See the complete pdf report file at: (Registration not required) They tried to interview 30 clusters of 30 households (assuming an average of 7 people in each household) (n-6300), but they encountered various implementation problems. (Hardly surprising!) But it was still quite a large survey. They do make the point that the increases in violent deaths are not from US soldiers, but mainly from US bombing. If Iraqi fighters are living and fighting from their homes then unless they move their families away, then their families will get bombed along with the fighters. This appears to be what has happened. BillK From pharos at gmail.com Sat Oct 30 10:38:33 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:38:33 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <004d01c4be47$e64985b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> References: <004a01c4be45$172f4050$6401a8c0@SHELLY> <004d01c4be47$e64985b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:15:48 -0700, Spike wrote: > Most technology > is bad, since it gives people distractions from copulation, > which for so long was the only really good form of > entertainment (was it not?) and television is one of the > most tragic technologies ever invented. Now we have a > number of activities that people claim are as good as > or perhaps better than sex. If I were a selfish gene, > I would be so alarmed. > *Now we have a number of activities that people claim are as good as or perhaps better than sex.* Hmmm. Might another factor be the Independence and education of western women? They now expect a lot more from sex and a relationship than previous generations. Perhaps men look at the long list of hoops they are now expected to jump through (and pay for the privilege) and just say that they can't be bothered with all that hassle. Put the game on TV and get a cold one from the fridge sounds much better. BillK From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 10:44:16 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:44:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041030104416.97365.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> It depends on a guy's age. When he's 19 he wants it. When he's 55 he can probably do without it. > Put the game on TV and get a cold one from the > fridge sounds much better. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From natasha at natasha.cc Sat Oct 30 17:01:54 2004 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:01:54 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] re: Howling at the Moon (Eclipse tonight) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.2.0.9.0.20041030100130.022c6390@mail.earthlink.net> >I am so lazy... I could see the eclipse perfectly through the >windowed doors of my terrace from my bed... :-) Que bella ... Natasha Vita-More http://www.natasha.cc ---------- President, Extropy Institute http://www.extropy.org Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture http://www.transhumanist.biz http://www.transhuman.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 30 15:40:48 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:40:48 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control References: <004a01c4be45$172f4050$6401a8c0@SHELLY><004d01c4be47$e64985b0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <011301c4be96$d47b51c0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "BillK" > Hmmm. Might another factor be the Independence and education of > western women? They now expect a lot more from sex and a relationship > than previous generations. Perhaps men look at the long list of hoops > they are now expected to jump through (and pay for the privilege) ... Hmmm. Independent women don't expect men to "pay." If women you know *still* expect these old "privileges" from the past when many women didn't have as many rights, but were financially supported in exchange (like children), they're not independent women. One can't have it both ways (I know, I know ... but a lot of women do want it both ways and a lot of you guys let them get away with it). Olga From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 15:47:03 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:47:03 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <005901c4be97$b3740200$6401a8c0@SHELLY> BillK > > > > *Now we have a number of activities that people claim are as good as > or perhaps better than sex.* > > Hmmm...Perhaps men look at the long list of hoops > they are now expected to jump through (and pay for the privilege) and > just say that they can't be bothered with all that hassle. > Put the game on TV and get a cold one from the fridge sounds > much better. BillK Bill, from the point of view of the gene, your scenario is an alarming example of a possibly lethal malfunction of the enormous meaty shell I wear and use to continue expressing myself. spike From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 15:51:46 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 08:51:46 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <20041030104416.97365.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <005c01c4be98$60fc7240$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control > > Put the game on TV and get a cold one from the > > fridge sounds much better. > > It depends on a guy's age. When he's 19 he wants it. > When he's 55 he can probably do without it. Do without which? The game? Sure. The cold one? Ok. The TV? Only with great difficulty. I'll tell you one a lot of us would give up sex for: the internet. (I'm ignoring those for whom the internet *is* sex.) Many of us use the net every day, or many times during the day. It would leave a *serious* hole in our lives to suddenly lose that. spike From pharos at gmail.com Sat Oct 30 17:26:36 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:26:36 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Youthful characteristics Message-ID: On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 03:44:16 -0700 (PDT), Al Brooks wrote: > It depends on a guy's age. When he's 19 he wants it. > When he's 55 he can probably do without it. > I probably agree with this (Mick Jagger excepted). ;) Then I got to thinking that there are a lot of youthful activities that much of our civilization pretty well depends on. And a lot of disruptive activities as well, of course. Producing children is only one item, and that seems to be dying out in first world society. Fighting, in wars and privately, seems to be mostly a young male activity. Breakthrough research, again, mostly a younger activity. Working through the night on projects, on new startups, etc. is mostly for younger people with few outside commitments. All kinds of reckless behaviour are usually associated with younger people. You can probably think of more for yourself. As people grow older, they get more experienced. Stuff outside work becomes more important. They calm down, become less irresponsible. All night disco dancing becomes less attractive (Spike excepted). ;) So, I strongly suspect that a population of long-lived people, virtually immortal, whether in human-like bodies or uploaded to a molecular computer, will be very different to our present day civilization. Think about losing all the above attributes that young people bring. I know some people claim that they will redesign themselves to remain young in body and outlook, but you can't design out the many years of experience which stop you doing the 'daft' things that young folk do. An immortal civilization will be much quieter, much more careful, very cautious about changing anything. Sounds like a civilization of committee meetings where everyone talks, but nobody does anything. BillK From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 30 17:34:04 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:34:04 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Youthful characteristics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041030123204.01a6f370@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 06:26 PM 10/30/2004 +0100, BillK wrote: >Sounds like a civilization of committee meetings where everyone talks, >but nobody does anything. `"Talk?" We have our machines to do that!' Damien Broderick From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 17:59:50 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:59:50 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] anticipointed? In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041030123204.01a6f370@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <008101c4beaa$40a85d30$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Damien Broderick ... > > `"Talk?" We have our machines to do that!' > > Damien Broderick We should coin a term which means the nearly universal experience of anticipating some really great future technology, but then finding when it arrives that it isn't nearly as wicked cool as we thought it would be. Anticipointment? You can probably think of several examples, but Damien's comment reminded me of seeing Lost In Space as a child, where young Will Robinson had a robot which could carry on a conversation (of sorts). I thought that would be soooooo coool to talk to a machine. Well, I can do that now. And it isn't nearly as cool as I thought it would be. I did so just yesterday. My television reception suddenly went out, the missus called my attention to it, I didn't care, but then I noticed... DEAR EVOLUTION! MY INTERNET CONNECTION IS DEAD! Quick, emergency, get on the phone to the cable company. A machine-generated voice gave me a list of choices, asked me to enter or say a number, then another list of choices, and so on. I had a conversation (limited of course) with a machine. Eventually a human came on the line, who already knew all the details of the predicament by seeing my answers. Fortunately he was a young human, who fully understood the nature of the emergency of being without an information pipe. So, the future is here, and in some ways I have anticipointment. On the other hand, I did not anticipate the internet, or anything very analogous to it. It just showed up one day about 11 years ago. I was cheerfully blown away, not at all anticipointed, but rather the pleasant opposite, like an unexpected genuine orgasm. Surprimaxed? spike From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 30 18:03:51 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:03:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Youthful characteristics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041030180351.6144.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > I know some people claim that they will redesign > themselves to remain > young in body and outlook, but you can't design out > the many years of > experience which stop you doing the 'daft' things > that young folk do. Ah, but you can design back in the outlook that can lead you to try "daft" things even with said years of experience. I can offer some RL examples from my own life: A certain research project I'm working on is far outside the bounds of what's been tried before, and has certain similarities to widely discredited experiments. The stereotypical inventor in my case might be one who disregards or is ignorant of the many reasons why something like this couldn't work. However, I am well aware of the reasons - so I looked them up and make sure I'm not in conflict with them. Indeed, my original idea would not have worked, but by seeing what's failed, I managed to make some changes such that the current model stands a chance even when judged by those with experience in the field. (And I've asked quite a few of them.) Of course, no one - not even myself - is willing to say for sure that it will work until I can produce a prototype and see if it does work, so that's what I'm working on now. If it works, great; if not, figuring out why and explaining it should provide a bit more illumination into the relevant scientific field (quantum physics). On another, less theoretical project (Web e-commerce), there was a certain job to be done, and the one who could do it fastest and best would get the significant prize. All-nighters were one possible tactic to speed up work, though at the cost of quality if it really went *all* night. I certainly put in late hours in moderation. In the end, I pulled it off, beating all the competition - and although I'll never know for sure (having never met my competitors or otherwise had a reason to discover their approximate ages), I would not be surprised to find that some of my competitors were half my age or less. (Maybe I don't do "daft" things, but I do make use of tactics that work, even ones that stereotypical adults leave behind as they grow older.) > An immortal civilization will be much quieter, much > more careful, very > cautious about changing anything. Perhaps. But being immortal, we'll have more time. Just so long as caution about change doesn't get confused (as it often does) with refusal to change. Even when it does, pressure for change will build over long periods until the confusion is torn away: a certain change is understood as well as it can be without doing it, so is one for allowing people to try it if they want, or against allowing anyone to try it? (Requiring everyone to try it before a few people test and the results become known is almost never acceptable, even for changes that everyone wants eventually.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 30 18:10:42 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:10:42 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] anticipointed? In-Reply-To: <008101c4beaa$40a85d30$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041030181042.43712.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > We should coin a term which means the nearly > universal > experience of anticipating some really great future > technology, but then finding when it arrives that it > isn't nearly as wicked cool as we thought it would > be. > > Anticipointment? "Confusing the anticipated form of a technology with the typically crude early actualizations of the same, and the resulting disappointment." E.g., talking to a machine capable of voice recognition today, as opposed to having a true conversation with a machine that could pass the Turing Test. Hold your horses. Just because Robbie The Robot isn't available today doesn't mean this will always be the case, even if machines can "converse" in a very limited sense today. (There's been a recent series of commercials spoofing that, where human customers are having a face to face conversation with human sales representatives, but the sales reps talk like a phone menu and the customers just say "boop" or "beep" in emulation of phone tones.) From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 30 18:14:04 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <005901c4be97$b3740200$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041030181404.8045.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Spike wrote: > BillK > > > > *Now we have a number of activities that people > claim are as good as > > or perhaps better than sex.* > > > > Hmmm...Perhaps men look at the long list of hoops > > they are now expected to jump through (and pay for > the privilege) and > > just say that they can't be bothered with all that > hassle. > > Put the game on TV and get a cold one from the > fridge sounds > > much better. BillK > > Bill, from the point of view of the gene, your > scenario is > an alarming example of a possibly lethal malfunction > of the enormous meaty shell I wear and use to > continue > expressing myself. Put some spin on it: give up sex for long nights in the lab perfecting reproductive cloning. Who needs sex to spread your genes? From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 18:18:47 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:18:47 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <004a01c4be45$172f4050$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <008201c4beac$e63b8810$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > > 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... As a young newlywed twenty years ago, we were trying to adjust and create habits, as newlyweds do. My bride was a strict Seventh Day Adventist in those days. Strict SDAs have a gentle euphamism for copulation: "thine own pleasure." (Im not kidding). The reasoning follows that a couple should not engage in marital relations on Sabbath, because Isaiah 58:13 saith "If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing *thy pleasure* on my holy day...not doing thine own ways nor finding *thine own pleasure*...then shalt thou delight thyself in the lord; ...I will cause thee to ride upon high places of the earth..." Well, I was a sport, so I suggested a fantasy game for Friday evening (Sabbath begins sundown Friday). We would play 1844. (The Seventh Day Adventist church began in the year 1844) We would imagine ourselves as a young couple in 1844 who had no access to birth control or any technology not available to a young couple in 1844, which meant we could have a fire in the fireplace and candles for light, but no magazines, computer, TV, radio, newspapers, none of that. We were to imagine we needed to postpone offspring, for the usual reasons young couples might wish to do so: establish the farm or business etc. We were to imagine the young bride is at the peak of fertility in her monthly cycle, and so for that reason they were to struggle to avoid the newlywed thang. OK, so the sun is down, candles are lit, the fireplace burning cheerfully. The pioneer couple gazes at each other, making pleasant converstion. A minute passed. Then another. They look at the clock. It is a minute past. Then suddenly... another minute went by. Someone bumped into someone else in the dim candlelight, a playful rassling match took place, and well, let your imagination fill in the rest for the young pioneers. How different our lives would have been without impeccable birth control. spike From fauxever at sprynet.com Sat Oct 30 18:24:15 2004 From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:24:15 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control References: <008201c4beac$e63b8810$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <020301c4bead$a9de3bf0$6600a8c0@brainiac> From: "Spike" > As a young newlywed twenty years ago, we were trying to > adjust and create habits, as newlyweds do. My bride was > a strict Seventh Day Adventist in those days.... Whoa, whoa, whoa ... an SDA! And what *were you*? Olga From sjvans at ameritech.net Sat Oct 30 18:33:19 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:33:19 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041030183319.9684.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > See the complete pdf report file at: > > (Registration not required) > > They tried to interview 30 clusters of 30 households > (assuming an > average of 7 people in each household) (n-6300), but > they encountered > various implementation problems. (Hardly > surprising!) But it was still > quite a large survey. Yes, I got that much. Why clusters, though? It seems to be a common technique, but I am not familiar with it. It also seems to me that the clusters were chosen in urban areas, which would seem to skew things higher. But the real clincher was right there in the abstract, which I did not read carefully enough until this morning. It seems that the calculation they used for the 100,000 estimate had a 95% confidence level range of from 8000-194000. Now, this seems to me a bit like saying Bush will will with 51% of the vote, plus or minus 40%. This is enough for me to conclude, in the absence of a better explaination, that the whole study is meaningless. If anyone can explain to me why it is not, I'd love to hear it. I'd hate to think the Lancet would be this blatantly, well, dishonest. steve From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 30 19:04:31 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:04:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <004701c4be12$7d80d360$355a1fd3@turtle> Message-ID: <20041030190431.55844.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> --- RobKPO wrote: > So is enemy propoganda during a war considered part > of free speech in the > US, and I wonder what the US government should do to > limit misinformation > that incite's internal anti-US influence's during > time of war and subsequant > insecurity of benefit to enemy intent? We are no longer at war. The organization which we were at war with has been disbanded and replaced. There are organizations (in the loosest sense of the term) fighting for control of Iraq, but their war is with the government of Iraq - which we are aiding, perhaps even far moreso than their minimal internal forces. It may seem like mere semantics to argue whether we are "at war" or "helping another government suppress a rebellion", except that the former grants the US government all kinds of legal (and, in many peoples' minds, moral) power that the latter does not. From spike66 at comcast.net Sat Oct 30 19:08:26 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:08:26 -0700 Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <020301c4bead$a9de3bf0$6600a8c0@brainiac> Message-ID: <008501c4beb3$d5d13ea0$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Olga Bourlin > From: "Spike" > > > As a young newlywed twenty years ago, we were trying to > > adjust and create habits, as newlyweds do. My bride was > > a strict Seventh Day Adventist in those days.... > > Whoa, whoa, whoa ... an SDA! And what *were you*? > > Olga I was a heretic SDA, one who had serious issues with creationism after having been reluctantly convinced that there is a mooooountain of evidence for the prevailing scientific view of evolution. My bride was raised in an ultra-orthodox SDA home and tended to not question. It made for difficulties. After the 1844 experiment, she abandoned the prohibition of doing thine own pleasure on Sabbath. {8-] spike From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 30 19:17:03 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:17:03 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041029233622.80059.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041030191703.16474.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Mike Lorrey wrote: > The faulty socialist idea that Heinlein was > suffering from (likely > contributed to significantly by such early SF as the > socialist > Bellamy's "Looking Backward" as well as his > education at the hands of > the US Navy) was that we have government to thank > for everything, that > government is in some way synonymous with 'the > public good', 'the > commons' etc. and that therefore our taxes are > legitimate > confiscations. > > The problem, of course, is that the > redistributionist tendencies of > government work at cross purposes to this claim. It > is the productive > members of society who are responsible for the > civilization we now > enjoy, yet it is those same productive members who > pay the most for > their 'debt to the past', while their payments are > redistributed as > entitlements to the unproductive classes who are not > responsible for > the height of our civilization, but who instead are > responsible for it > being held back from greater heights. Two problems with that: 1. If not paid, the unproductive classes might engage in violence which would cause even more lack of progress. There are many examples of this throughout history, so one would likely have to show how those historical examples no longer apply in order to refute this point. Yes, this is essentially bribing - but if you can make so much more during peace than war that you can afford to part with the bribe, it's still worth it. It is usually coupled with efforts (usually labelled "education") to move individuals from the unproductive classes to the productive classes, but those do not suppress things in the near term like the bribes do. 2. There are a number of goods and services that help all, or at least most, members of society to be relatively more productive. Roads, police (who help protect against certain classes of predators that drag down society's output, although the proper versus actual nature of their protection is debatable), firefighters, water and sewer systems, and so forth. Some of these have proven to be of insufficient benefit to members of the productive classes that they would fund these on their own, thus a central government must operate (and collect funding for) these improvements if their benefits are to be reaped. Others can, for various (including technical) reasons, be funded and operated a lot more efficiently if done so by one or a few agencies on behalf of everyone, rather than each obtaining their own, so again more progress per unit time is enabled by having government do this than by leaving it to individuals. (Also known as the "tragedy of the commons".) From thespike at satx.rr.com Sat Oct 30 19:27:58 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:27:58 -0500 Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041030191703.16474.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041029233622.80059.qmail@web12904.mail.yahoo.com> <20041030191703.16474.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041030142614.01b17ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> At 12:17 PM 10/30/2004 -0700, Adrian wrote: >thus a central >government must operate (and collect funding for) >these improvements if their benefits are to be reaped. >Others can, for various (including technical) reasons, >be funded and operated a lot more efficiently if done >so by one or a few agencies on behalf of everyone, >rather than each obtaining their own, so again more >progress per unit time is enabled by having government >do this than by leaving it to individuals. (Also >known as the "tragedy of the commons".) More exactly: also known as *avoiding* or *circumventing* the tragedy of the commons. Damien Broderick From sentience at pobox.com Sat Oct 30 19:33:29 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:33:29 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030183319.9684.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030183319.9684.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4183EC89.5090403@pobox.com> http://image.thelancet.com/extras/04art10342web.pdf Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > > But the real clincher was right there in the abstract, > which I did not read carefully enough until this > morning. It seems that the calculation they used for > the 100,000 estimate had a 95% confidence level range > of from 8000-194000. Now, this seems to me a bit like > saying Bush will will with 51% of the vote, plus or > minus 40%. This is enough for me to conclude, in the > absence of a better explaination, that the whole study > is meaningless. The survey methods of Roberts et al. are better than any previous estimates provided, which is itself startling. They had a grand total of seven, count 'em, seven investigators with which to interview 33 clusters of 30 houses apiece. Why haven't US occupying forces done similar and more systematic estimates? You report the best scientific data you have. If the confidence interval is too wide, you do more surveys. Meanwhile, it's the only data you have, so you grind through your statistical methods (hopefully Bayesian ones, though I didn't see any sign of that) and produce the maximum likelihood estimate of 100,000. You can't just throw away that estimate because you don't like it, unless you come up with better data. If the study was conducted correctly (and if we assume a uniform prior that gives us MLE=MAP) then that figure of 100,000 is the most likely to be correct compared to any other figure you care to name. That's what the statistical method does. *However*, that figure of 100,000 is *after* excluding the statistical outlier of Falluja, which might be taken as representative of other extremely devastated cities not visited by the investigators, and which would have implied a figure in the range of 300,000 civilian casualties if included into the study. I'd have included it. You canna' change your experimental design after the fact. If you want to exclude outlying clusters you should write down that procedure in advance. But then I'm a Bayesian and an unusual stickler about such matters. The Lancet authors, concerned with their scientific reputations and media reporting of the result and other such irrelevancies, seem to have picked a lower bound that couldn't be challenged as the product of an outlying cluster, rather than producing the number that was most likely to be actually correct. As they say in the abstract, it's a "conservative" estimate. Indeed I rate such estimates as worthless, if what you need above all is the correct answer to the question of simple fact. So, probably more than 100,000, but with an even wider confidence interval, since the exact increase is based on extremely war-torn areas not adequately treated in the sample. > If anyone can explain to me why it is not, I'd love to > hear it. I'd hate to think the Lancet would be this > blatantly, well, dishonest. The Roberts study overrides any "estimates" based on wishful thinking, politics, etc., unless and until someone demonstrates a flaw in the study's methods or a deliberate bias / misreporting by the authors, or until someone collects better data. If the US did not wish to be accused by independent investigators, they should have collected their own data on civilian casualties instead of waiting to be surprised - using active methods reliable in cases of this kind, rather than passive reporting as in iraqbodycount.net. I do not find it the least bit implausible that civilian casualties reported in two or more independent media stories (IBC.net's criterion) are a seventh or less of civilian casualties estimated by active surveying, especially given the result that most civilian casualties result from air strikes. The Roberts study did note that the iraqbodycount.net data seemed to track trends in their own data fairly well, indicating that reported deaths may be a good *sample* of total deaths. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From wingcat at pacbell.net Sat Oct 30 19:37:58 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:37:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041030101943.0579ee88@127.0.0.1> Message-ID: <20041030193758.7395.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> --- Simon Dawson wrote: > you know, the thought occurs to me. Often these > kinds of tests are the "aha" kind. > > ie, there's a trick. True. Those tests in practice check more for foreknowledge of the trick than anything else, despite what is claimed about them. (In fact, it'd usually be a fairer test to make sure everyone knows, or has had ample opportunity and notice to learn, about the trick then apply it. This version often finds good use in school, although some students fail to understand why the particular information being communicated to them is of use - or, sometimes, even that information of potential value is being communicated to them in the first place. But I digress...) > in this problem, resistance across a knight's move, > perhaps the clue is really "the grid of resistors" > > a grid implies square pattern, right? > > which means you'd have to go UP two resistors, and > ACROSS one, to get the knight's move. > > this would mean the sum of 3 resistances. Electricity doesn't quite work like that. If there are two paths along a circuit, electricity will flow along both paths, not exclusively the one with the least resistance (barring superconductors with exactly zero resistance). If all of it went along one path, it'd encounter a higher total resistance than if a little bit of it went along a nominally higher resistance path. It may help to think of it like cars moving from point A to point B along a freeway system. Put in a wide freeway directly linking those two, designed to handle lots of traffic, and many people will use it...and cause traffic jams. A few commuters will take side streets that, while narrower and not as direct, still get them to their destination faster than if they'd taken the freeway (and added to that mess, slowing everyone on the freeway down). For example, in the infinite grid, connecting two nodes diagonally adjacent: the most direct paths (one up then one across, or one across then one up) both have a resistance of two. But the total effective resistance, after calculating in all paths, is (according to another post) the square root of two. From sjvans at ameritech.net Sat Oct 30 19:59:29 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 12:59:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030190431.55844.qmail@web81604.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041030195929.2798.qmail@web81204.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > We are no longer at war. The organization which we > were at war with has been disbanded and replaced. It has? Well, if it has been replaced, then I would argue we are at war with the replacement, or it really wouldn't be a replacement, would it? Or is that just arguing semantics? US troops are killing and being killed. If that is not war, I don't know what is. It seems to me whether or not it is recognized as legitimate by others is irrelevant to the question. In answer to the original poster, it seems to me that there are no circumstances where the government is justified in suppressing enemy propaganda, at least within this country. There are no war exceptions to the First Amendment in the Constitution, and not even a little wiggle room. Now, that does not mean that enemy propaganda cannot be met with propaganda of our own. Also, just because it cannot be prosecuted, does not mean that sedition cannot be called sedition. It should be, and loudly. And clear treason should be prosecuted (I know of no such cases of treason in this war, but there were I believe clear cases in the Vietnam War). Also, enemy broadcasting stations and newspapers seem to me to be legitimate targets, given that they can be (and have been) used to coordinate enemy action. This is a bit of a grey area, though. steve From sjvans at ameritech.net Sat Oct 30 20:19:39 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:19:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <4183EC89.5090403@pobox.com> Message-ID: <20041030201939.39156.qmail@web81208.mail.yahoo.com> --- Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote: > The survey methods of Roberts et al. are better than > any previous estimates > provided, which is itself startling. Yes they are. Better does not mean adequate, though. Given the conditions on the ground, I don't find it improbable at all that it is impossible to do a good study. > You > can't just throw away that > estimate because you don't like it, unless you come > up with better data. No, it's not a matter of not liking the result, but not liking the confidence interval. If I presented data like that to my advisor, she would laugh and tell me to go back and keep trying. No, you don't throw it out, but do you *publish* it? And issue press releases? > *However*, that figure of 100,000 is *after* > excluding the statistical > outlier of Falluja, which might be taken as > representative of other > extremely devastated cities not visited by the > investigators, and which > would have implied a figure in the range of 300,000 > civilian casualties if > included into the study. I'd have included it. So would I. This was another reason I don't have much confidence in this study. This *is* a clear example of throwing out the data because you don't like it. I suspect, as you say, it was done to make the study more believable. Again, my advisor would throw me out of her office if I suggested doing this. steve From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 20:19:44 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 13:19:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control In-Reply-To: <005c01c4be98$60fc7240$6401a8c0@SHELLY> Message-ID: <20041030201944.20984.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com> I meant when a guy is 19 he usually wants sex, when he's much older he may want to forget about sex so he doesn't 'drain his vital juices'. Spike wrote:> It depends on a guy's age. When he's 19 he wants it. > When he's 55 he can probably do without it. Do without which? The game? Sure. The cold one? Ok. The TV? Only with great difficulty. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From benboc at lineone.net Sat Oct 30 20:44:31 2004 From: benboc at lineone.net (ben) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 21:44:31 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Youthful characteristics In-Reply-To: <200410301800.i9UI0J007992@tick.javien.com> References: <200410301800.i9UI0J007992@tick.javien.com> Message-ID: <4183FD2F.8050808@lineone.net> BillK wrote: "I strongly suspect that a population of long-lived people, virtually immortal, whether in human-like bodies or uploaded to a molecular computer, will be very different to our present day civilization. " Of course they will. And i expect they will be capable of looking at the youthful activities and attitudes you describe, analyse what's beneficial and what's harmful about them, and work out how to keep the former while disposing of the latter. 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 From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 21:04:37 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 14:04:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030051616.68562.qmail@web81207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041030210437.95809.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> --- 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. ===== 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 kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 23:06:14 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Youthful characteristics In-Reply-To: <4183FD2F.8050808@lineone.net> Message-ID: <20041030230614.10355.qmail@web51604.mail.yahoo.com> 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 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sat Oct 30 23:14:50 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 16:14:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] impeccable birth control Message-ID: <20041030231450.32150.qmail@web51601.mail.yahoo.com> I enjoyed sex when I was young, but recently the fluoride in the water started to affect my potency. Now I only drink rainwater with grain alcohol. Do you know when fluoride was first placed in municipal water? 1946. How's that for a postwar Communist conspiracy? >Ja I know Al, I was just having some fun. > spike --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mlorrey at yahoo.com Sun Oct 31 01:03:50 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:03:50 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041030191703.16474.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041031010350.77407.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Two problems with that: > > 1. If not paid, the unproductive classes might engage > in violence which would cause even more lack of > progress. There are many examples of this throughout > history, so one would likely have to show how those > historical examples no longer apply in order to refute > this point. Yes, this is essentially bribing - but if > you can make so much more during peace than war that > you can afford to part with the bribe, it's still > worth it. It is usually coupled with efforts (usually > labelled "education") to move individuals from the > unproductive classes to the productive classes, but > those do not suppress things in the near term like the > bribes do. 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. ===== 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 Sun Oct 31 01:14:54 2004 From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <6.1.1.1.0.20041030142614.01b17ec0@pop-server.satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20041031011454.76451.qmail@web12906.mail.yahoo.com> --- Damien Broderick wrote: > At 12:17 PM 10/30/2004 -0700, Adrian wrote: > > > >thus a central > >government must operate (and collect funding for) > >these improvements if their benefits are to be reaped. > >Others can, for various (including technical) reasons, > >be funded and operated a lot more efficiently if done > >so by one or a few agencies on behalf of everyone, > >rather than each obtaining their own, so again more > >progress per unit time is enabled by having government > >do this than by leaving it to individuals. (Also > >known as the "tragedy of the commons".) > > More exactly: also known as *avoiding* or *circumventing* the tragedy > of the commons. The tragedy of the commons occurs when those that consume a public good are not responsible for paying for maintaining that public good. Government controlled commons fall into this conundrum all too often, which is why rational government tries to minimize as much as possible those goods which are commons, preferring only to create and maintain commons when such goods cannot be fenced off. It is easy to fence off land, but hard to fence off migratory wildlife. It is easy to fence off mineral deposits, but hard to fence off EM spectrum or air. ===== 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 sjvans at ameritech.net Sun Oct 31 01:59:49 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 18:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041031010350.77407.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041031015949.2155.qmail@web81203.mail.yahoo.com> --- 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. Of course, that doesn't work in the long run, but it is a long enough run that the people who start down this road are usually all long dead when it all falls apart. From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Sun Oct 31 13:51:55 2004 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:51:55 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <20041030193758.7395.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030193758.7395.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4184EDFB.7090404@optusnet.com.au> Adrian Tymes wrote: snip > > For example, in the infinite grid, connecting two > nodes diagonally adjacent: the most direct paths (one > up then one across, or one across then one up) both > have a resistance of two. But the total effective > resistance, after calculating in all paths, is > (according to another post) the square root of two. > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat > That can't be correct. Ignoring all but the two most direct paths you have 2 x 2ohms in parallel, giving a resistance of one. The rest of the grid can only lower that. Perhaps it was half the square root of two - a quick calculation including the next two paths indicates it would be in that neighbourhood. (ie = 1/(1/2+1/2+1/5+1/5 ....)) David. From sentience at pobox.com Sun Oct 31 04:58:46 2004 From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer Yudkowsky) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 00:58:46 -0400 Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041031010350.77407.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041031010350.77407.qmail@web12902.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <41847106.3090700@pobox.com> 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. Dunno what all this "owe" stuff is about, but I'll volunteer to handle the job if no other productive people want it. -- Eliezer S. Yudkowsky http://singinst.org/ Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Oct 31 05:40:16 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 06:40:16 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Youthful characteristics In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <470a3c520410302240749df0f4@mail.gmail.com> Well even now you can deliberately ignore what your experience tells you. Half of the time it is fun, and sometimes even successful. I suspect it does not depend so much on experience and committments, rather it depends on physical energy and fast-learning brain. Get that back, and much of the youthful hunger for more life will come back. > So, I strongly suspect that a population of long-lived people, > virtually immortal, whether in human-like bodies or uploaded to a > molecular computer, will be very different to our present day > civilization. Think about losing all the above attributes that young > people bring. > I know some people claim that they will redesign themselves to remain > young in body and outlook, but you can't design out the many years of > experience which stop you doing the 'daft' things that young folk do. > An immortal civilization will be much quieter, much more careful, very > cautious about changing anything. From kerry_prez at yahoo.com Sun Oct 31 05:53:28 2004 From: kerry_prez at yahoo.com (Al Brooks) Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 22:53:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Purity Of Essence [POE] Message-ID: <20041031055328.98728.qmail@web51602.mail.yahoo.com> Exactly, Spike, the key word is NATURAL; the Bolsheviks want to leech out our natural-pure vital manliness by fluoridating the heart & soul of our precious bodily fluids. Thus we must marshal our virility by vigilantly testing the water we drink into our bodies so as to maintain the Purity Of Essence that is so important in the day to day nourishment of our masculinity. > Spike wrote: > You can never trust those sneaky commies. > I dont think I can blame them for my own decline > however. It appears to have occurred by natural > causes. spike __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From pgptag at gmail.com Sun Oct 31 07:21:19 2004 From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:21:19 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Creating a transhumanist consulting firm In-Reply-To: <470a3c5204102822037625b97b@mail.gmail.com> References: <470a3c5204102822037625b97b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <470a3c5204103100215b58dd5d@mail.gmail.com> There are now 23 members in the group http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/transwerbiz/ I am posting this for those who missed the initial call for interest. I plan to start brainstorming in the group tomorrow, so please join if you wish to participate from the beginning. G. On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 07:03:50 +0200, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote: > I have done some thinking on the possibility to create a transhumanist > consulting firm. The rationale is that both large firms and > governments will need information and advice on how things will > change, how to make money with forthcoming changes, and what public > policies to implement. There are plenty of futurist think tanks, but > few willing to study radical medium/long term scenarios, still > considered like SF by the mainstream, including radical life > extension, conscious AIs, cryonics, brain implants, uploading, etc. We > do a lot of thinking on these issues for fun, it would be good doing > it also for money, and with the brainpower of some folks on > transhumanist lists I am sure we can provide a very useful service. > What I have in mind is a flexible partnership of indepedent > consultants where the income minus expenses is redistributed to > partners according to the > previously agreed amount of work done. If things develop well I will > be looking forward to doing this full time, and I hope to assemble a > team with a few core staff and a larger network of people available to > collaborate on a specific project basis. > Now I plan to start looking for partners and brainstorm to elaborate a > detailed plan. > I am not sure of the name and it is better not to rush, so to fix > ideas I have chosen the temporary name "Transwer ltd" and reserved the > domain transwer.biz. > We will switch to a better name if we find one. > > I have created the Yahoogroup transwerbiz: > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/transwerbiz/ > > as a planning workspace, please join if you are interested as the > brainstorming will take place there. > Things to discuss are: > - Business model (what to sell to whom and how) > - Partnerships e.g. Foresight, CRNano, SIAI, the transhumanist > non-profit think tank under formation, etc. > - Where to incorporate and in which form > - Name and domain name > - Organization > - Business development > While I am mainly interested in the European market, a possibility is > incorporating branches in different places. > I have many ideas, some I believe quite promising, but I prefer > disclosing them on the Yahoogroup which is restricted and not visible > to the world. Also, I assume that many people on the lists are not too > interested, so the polite thing to do is continuing the discussion on > a separate list. So again, please join if you are interested. > G. From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Sun Oct 31 11:40:05 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:40:05 +0100 (MET) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030210437.95809.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041030210437.95809.qmail@web12901.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: 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. To solve the contradiction, one has to recognize that one hypotesis is wrong, i.e. that they are trying to follow a political agenda. Alfio From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it Sun Oct 31 13:31:01 2004 From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:31:01 +0100 (MET) Subject: [extropy-chat] Newsflash: a single vote counts! Message-ID: I've seen many people saying that they don't bother to vote since they have some 20,000,000 to 1 chance of deciding the election. Leaving aside the issue of voting only if one is certain to win, it appears that in elections where the numbers are so close (like in many states of the USA) a single vote can do wonders: Students from Yale university run a simulated 2000 election and changed just one vote for each voting machine. They managed to change the election results in four states. ftp://ftp.cs.yale.edu/pub/TR/tr1285.pdf Alfio From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 31 15:58:35 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 07:58:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <4184EDFB.7090404@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: <20041031155835.35670.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- David wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: > snip > > For example, in the infinite grid, connecting two > > nodes diagonally adjacent: the most direct paths > (one > > up then one across, or one across then one up) > both > > have a resistance of two. But the total effective > > resistance, after calculating in all paths, is > > (according to another post) the square root of > two. > > That can't be correct. Ignoring all but the two most > direct paths you have 2 x 2ohms in parallel, giving > a resistance of one. The rest of the grid can > only lower that. > Perhaps it was half the square root of two - a quick > calculation including the next two paths indicates > it would be in that neighbourhood. > > (ie = 1/(1/2+1/2+1/5+1/5 ....)) Like I said, it was according to another post. I didn't check said other post's math. The point is that the result is less than two, and both square root of two and any value less than 1 make that assertion correct. From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 31 16:04:13 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:04:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Heinlein and thinking for yourself In-Reply-To: <20041031015949.2155.qmail@web81203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041031160413.36522.qmail@web81603.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. That is what I meant to convey, yes. (The unproductive might agree with Mike's take on it, though. Same action, different perceived causes.) > Of course, that doesn't work in the long run, but it > is a long enough run that the people who start down > this road are usually all long dead when it all > falls > apart. Even these days, that's not neccessarily true any longer. But it was true enough in days past, and the most popular alternative (moving people into the productive classes) is both less than successful enough and takes long enough, that the short term strategy is still widely followed today. From riel at surriel.com Sun Oct 31 16:20:39 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 11:20:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <004701c4be12$7d80d360$355a1fd3@turtle> References: <6.1.1.1.0.20041029154002.01aa30c0@pop-server.satx.rr.com><20041029225726.95237.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> <6.1.1.1.0.20041029181258.01cbea00@pop-server.satx.rr.com> <004701c4be12$7d80d360$355a1fd3@turtle> Message-ID: 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. 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 wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 31 16:35:15 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:35:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041030195929.2798.qmail@web81204.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20041031163515.40663.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> --- Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > --- Adrian Tymes wrote: > > We are no longer at war. The organization which > we > > were at war with has been disbanded and replaced. > > It has? Well, if it has been replaced, then I would > argue we are at war with the replacement, or it > really > wouldn't be a replacement, would it? Or is that > just > arguing semantics? Actually, we're supporting the replacement: the current organization that most people outside (and, I daresay, even inside) Iraq view as having the (relatively) most legitimate claim to being Iraq's government. > US troops are killing and being killed. If that is > not war, I don't know what is. It seems to me > whether > or not it is recognized as legitimate by others is > irrelevant to the question. War, in the sense that I meant it, happens between one nation and another - between the US and Iraq, for example. Those who wish to overthrow Iraq's new government are not themselves an organized nation. The majority of Iraq's citizens no longer support the enemy (even unwillingly, at the point of a gun). More to the point, the US is not currently under active threat by the terrorists who wish to topple Iraq's government (despite what the Bush administration would prefer people believe). (Some might say that the price of oil is a national interest, and some terrorists have been targeting the oil infrastructure to lower the supply, but the rising price in US dollars has more to do with other nations removing their investments from the US in response to Bush's actions in Iraq than with issues of supply.) Again, this may seem like semantics - except that "war" gives a lot of legal (and, in some eyes, moral) powers that lesser military actions do not. There is a distinction between law enforcement, even violent law enforcement, and war. Consider the case of Columbia, and its drug lords with their private armies. The drug lords are organized enough that one could almost say the Columbian government has been at war for the past several years, yet they do not see the need to slap down wartime anti-propaganda efforts. This organization is lacking among the insurgents in Iraq. (Then again, so is the regard for innocent life: the drug lords do not take the position that all who do not actively oppose the government are their enemy. Businessmen do not, for the most part, wantonly kill their potential customers or employees: such activities tend to be unprofitable in the long run.) From spike66 at comcast.net Sun Oct 31 16:41:20 2004 From: spike66 at comcast.net (Spike) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:41:20 -0800 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test In-Reply-To: <20041031155835.35670.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000d01c4bf68$7677c040$6401a8c0@SHELLY> > Adrian Tymes ... > > > > (ie = 1/(1/2+1/2+1/5+1/5 ....)) > > Like I said, it was according to another post. I > didn't check said other post's math. The point is > that the result is less than two, and both square root > of two and any value less than 1 make that assertion > correct. Adrian is right. I set up the simplified case with seven resistors making a kind of figure 8, then generated five linearly independent equations the old fashioned way, two node equations and three loop equations, solved them with no computers or anything. I was such a primitive savage. The Req came out to 1.4. I figure if I do the same with another row outside of that, generate twelve loop equations and six node equations, Ill solve it using Matlab. The answer has to be lower than 1.4 and greater than 1 (I think). spike From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 31 16:55:03 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 08:55:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Creating a transhumanist consulting firm In-Reply-To: <01c301c4bd7b$9cf2c740$b8232dcb@homepc> Message-ID: <20041031165503.90348.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- Brett Paatsch wrote: > From: "Giu1i0 Pri5c0" > >I have done some thinking on the possibility to > create a transhumanist > > consulting firm. > > Have you got a way of exchanging > information/opinions for dollars > b/n people in different countries over the net yet? > > ie. Do you know *how* to sell information services > legally over the > net given different information sellers > (consultants) in different > countries ? First, restrict activities to countries which have a legal basis for this and tend to enforce it. I.e., possibly not China (where IP can and will be ripped off without proper compensation if it's arguably in the interests of the state). Second, make sure to get payment and proof of receipt of information services. Using the existing multinational credit networks helps - they've got rules and enforcement mechanisms already set up for handling purchases by citizens of one country from citizens of another, and they would prefer that businesses succeed. (Their own first and foremost, of course, but they know they'll die if they get so abusive that most businesses or most consumers stop using them. And, indeed, those that forget this over long periods are no longer around, no matter how powerful they were.) One could even set it up as a pure e-commerce play. (Been there, done that...) It can be done, honest. But you are right to believe that how to do it right is not the most simplest and obvious thing in the world. From riel at surriel.com Sun Oct 31 17:29:45 2004 From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:29:45 -0500 (EST) Subject: [extropy-chat] Bush wants another $75 billion for wars In-Reply-To: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> References: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: On Fri, 29 Oct 2004, Sean Diggins wrote: > But yes, I am guilty in this respect of one thing - when corporations > and/or individuals amass HUGE fortunes, there are always sources for > those fortunes. Winners, losers. It is not an endless, infinite bucket > of money/resources. I ask "how much is enough?" Wealth is not a zero sum game, there is some room for upward growth of the total amount of wealth on this planet. The sky's the limit; and Richard Branson seems determined to break this limit. ;) 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. 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 thespike at satx.rr.com Sun Oct 31 18:10:33 2004 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 12:10:33 -0600 Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators In-Reply-To: References: <20041029021653.37969CFC8@vscan02.westnet.com.au> Message-ID: <6.1.1.1.0.20041031120633.01ad87c8@pop-server.satx.rr.com> 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. Damien Broderick From scerir at libero.it Sun Oct 31 18:53:15 2004 From: scerir at libero.it (scerir) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 19:53:15 +0100 Subject: [extropy-chat] glat test References: <20041030193758.7395.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000e01c4bf7a$e16da0b0$d0c51b97@administxl09yj> http://www-th.phys.rug.nl/~atkinson/dapubl.html see paper # 122 (pdf) D. Atkinson and F.J. van Steenwijk, 'Infinite Resistive Lattices', Am. Jour. Phys. vol. 67, (1999), p. 486-492 From sjvans at ameritech.net Sun Oct 31 21:19:56 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:19:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041031211956.53241.qmail@web81210.mail.yahoo.com> --- Alfio Puglisi wrote: > To solve the contradiction, one has to recognize > that one hypotesis is > wrong, i.e. that they are trying to follow a > political agenda. Not necessarily. First, they could have dropped the outlier to make the result more believeable for political purposes. Second, the outlier is only the cherrypicking they admitted to. Third, any cheerypicking reduces the credibility, and raises in my mind at any rate the question of what else they did that I am missing (see #2). While I am loathe to agree with Mike Lorrey on this, who reached his conclusion apparently without data or reading the paper, the study is crap. steve From hal at finney.org Sun Oct 31 21:20:34 2004 From: hal at finney.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:20:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators Message-ID: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> One of the principles that I find useful in considering issues like inequality and wealth sharing is to focus on the personal aspect. Instead of deciding the issue of how other people should be forced to behave, I first tackle the harder problem of how I ought to behave. The reason I say this is harder is because it is often difficult to assess my own life honestly, applying the same principles which I may use rather freely to criticize others. And yet, if I can't come up with convincing answers to questions of my own personal morality, what right do I have to prescribe morality for others, and in fact to force it on them? In the case of inequality, all of us reading this today are in a somewhat uncomfortable position. It is easy to look at those above us on the economic ladder and say that their wealth is unfair, and that it would cost them little to share some of that wealth and make many poor people's lives easier. In many cases, we ourselves would be beneficiaries of such a plan, and even though we convince ourselves that that is not part of our motivation, it is hard to know that we are being honest. But the truth is that all of us live lives of tremendous wealth and comfort by the standards of the poor people of the world. If we focus our attention on them, on the poor villagers of Africa, India, China and other regions, suddenly we are the ones who are wealthy by comparsion. What is the right thing to do, given this reality? How much wealth do we deserve? 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? How can we allow people to suffer when we each have it in our power to ease their suffering? The cost of an internet account can provide many meals to hungry people in poor countries. Does our loss of access to entertainment and an addictive flow of information count, compared to their physical pain and suffering? I don't have answers to these questions. I don't find them at all easy to face in an honest manner. Until I am able to do so, I am reluctant to force other people, whether richer or poorer than I am, to follow particular policies in this matter. Hal From wingcat at pacbell.net Sun Oct 31 22:11:01 2004 From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 14:11:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] extreme inequality *and* wealth-sharing as downregulators In-Reply-To: <20041031212034.2D32157E2A@finney.org> Message-ID: <20041031221101.47856.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com> --- 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. > Instead of deciding the issue of how other people > should be forced to > behave, I first tackle the harder problem of how I > ought to behave. I sincerely applaud you for that insight, and the reasoning behind it. I've done the same myself. > 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? I have an answer that works for myself, although when I suggest versions of it, I am often told it is impractical for various reasons that are far from unfixable. Basically, take the wealth that one has - physical, intellectual, and all other forms - and use it to come up with ways that help everyone. In my case, I try to build systems and invent technologies of use to a great many not-necessarily-rich people. (E.g., I built a self-service e-commerce engine back in the days when e-commerce was hard and expensive to set up, on the theory that this could let people take care of the accounts receivable and some of the sales sides of a small business for a few hundred bucks a year. And now I'm working on trying to tap a new, clean, and hopefully long-term cheap source of power.) To have any serious chance of doing this requires a far higher standard of living than most people in the world currently possess. (E.g., to do my nanotech research, I can either live in Silicon Valley - one of the most expensive real estate markets around - and have physical access to the lab, or hire someone to do my work for me - which would cost even more, in the long run, and would have less chance of good results.) Ultimately, one could try to start one's own multi-million dollar research effort towards building these things, but only the richest people in the world can afford that...so aim to become one of them, just like any capitalist, but do not neglect personal efforts that can directly help your end goal in the mean time. Especially, one can share intellectual property - ideas, knowledge, and so forth - in ways that do not diminish one's own net worth. (Many people are willing to share their opinions for free. This is that, but also make sure your opinions reflect the truth, or disclaim that you don't know if they do - which also protects you in case you are mistaken. Try to avoid stating as fact that which you are not fairly certain of.) A good example here is a recent post on this list which reflected confusion about the nature of electrcity: I explained, and I am none the worse off for it, but the formerly confused one is now slightly better prepared to solve any related problems he may encounter. And then there are the few charities I support, where I know the money gets put to good use (one must beware of "charities" whose administration eats up most of the donation without benefit to those they claim to serve - ironically, this has been the main funding source for certain recently infamous violent enemies of industrialized society). Now, compare all this - which, in theory, a single person could accomplish - to what would happen if one gave most of one's wealth to the poor as requested. Quite a few of the poor would have one more meal, but then...that's it. Their status would not be collectively improved much by a single person's contribution. To achieve meaningful results this way, one would need to obtain much wealth from others, and some might question whether the necessary amounts could possibly be obtained through non-coercive means. In short, make sure that you put the accumulation of wealth that you happen to possess to good use, as an investment in yourself and your efforts that yields a greater return to humanity than giving your money to the poor. (Or, if you truly believe in someone else's vision more than yourself, support that - but make sure to keep enough for yourself to support yourself while generating more wealth to support said other vision. And, of course, make sure to learn enough about the other vision to ensure you're not falling for a trap...but by the time you do this, if you do not find reason to no longer support it, the other person's vision will probably have become your own as well, so refer to the beginning of this paragraph.) From pharos at gmail.com Sun Oct 31 22:47:52 2004 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:47:52 +0000 Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: <20041031211956.53241.qmail@web81210.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20041031211956.53241.qmail@web81210.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:19:56 -0800 (PST), Stephen Van_Sickle wrote: > > First, they could have dropped the outlier to make the > result more believeable for political purposes. > Probably correct. They reckoned that nobody would really believe 300,000 civilian dead. > > While I am loathe to agree with Mike Lorrey on this, > who reached his conclusion apparently without data or > reading the paper, the study is crap. > OK, so how many civilian dead do you reckon there are? Is 30,000 fine by you? Small enough to forget about, just collateral damage? When they decided not to include the areas in Fallujah it was because there was nobody left to interview. The houses were empty, bombed-out shells. People from neighbouring areas told them that many had died there, but they were unable to verify this, so they decided not to include these areas. The deaths that the other clusters told them about were verified as much as possible. They found an increase in infant mortality from 29 to 57 deaths per 1,000 live births, which is consistent with the pattern in wars, where women are unable or unwilling to get to hospital to deliver babies. The other increase was in violent death, which was reported in 15 of the 33 clusters studied and which was mostly attributed to airstrikes. "This survey shows that with modest funds, four weeks and seven Iraqi team members willing to risk their lives, a useful measure of civilian deaths could be obtained." Iraq Body Count researcher Hamit Dardagan said the new research was very different from his group which keeps a running total of deaths reported by media or other sources. But he added that beyond debates on figures, what it showed was how little is really known about the full impact of the war on Iraqis. "The people who should really be doing this and providing the figures are the occupying forces," he said. "Why is it being left up to under-funded, small groups of individuals to get accurate counts? It is within their (the occupying forces') power to do so, but they refuse to because it is politically embarrassing." BillK From sjvans at ameritech.net Sun Oct 31 23:50:27 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:50:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041031235027.63014.qmail@web81205.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > Probably correct. They reckoned that nobody would > really believe > 300,000 civilian dead. So you agree that they dropped the outlier to make it more believable? Do you find this exceptable in a published scientific paper? > 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. > Is 30,000 fine by you? Small enough to forget about, > just collateral damage? Not even one is fine by me. I am not naive enough to believe that a war can be fought without civilians being killed, though. One of the many, many, many reasons war really sucks. > When they decided not to include the areas in > Fallujah it was because > there was nobody left to interview. The houses were > empty, bombed-out > shells. People from neighbouring areas told them > that many had died > there, but they were unable to verify this, so they > decided not to > include these areas. You contradict yourself. I thought you agreed that it was because no one would believe 300,000. Problems with the city being abandoned would be a legitimate reason. I don't remember it from reading the paper, but I will take your word for it. Still leaves that C.I. > "Why is it being left up to under-funded, small > groups of individuals > to get accurate counts? It is within their (the > occupying forces') > power to do so, but they refuse to because it is > politically > embarrassing." Could be because it is politically embarrassing. Could also be because they know it is impossible to get a good count while the shooting still goes on. I'm sure there are other reasons, good and bad. *I* sure don't know which are the deciding reasons. steve vs From sjvans at ameritech.net Sun Oct 31 23:53:05 2004 From: sjvans at ameritech.net (Stephen Van_Sickle) Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2004 15:53:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [extropy-chat] IRAQ: Weapons pipeline to Syria In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20041031235305.90221.qmail@web81201.mail.yahoo.com> --- BillK wrote: > Probably correct. They reckoned that nobody would > really believe > 300,000 civilian dead. So you agree that they dropped the outlier to make it more believable? Do you find this exceptable in a published scientific paper? > 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. > Is 30,000 fine by you? Small enough to forget about, > just collateral damage? Not even one is fine by me. I am not naive enough to believe that a war can be fought without civilians being killed, though. One of the many, many, many reasons war really sucks. > When they decided not to include the areas in > Fallujah it was because > there was nobody left to interview. The houses were > empty, bombed-out > shells. People from neighbouring areas told them > that many had died > there, but they were unable to verify this, so they > decided not to > include these areas. You contradict yourself. I thought you agreed that it was because no one would believe 300,000. Problems with the city being abandoned would be a legitimate reason. I don't remember it from reading the paper, but I will take your word for it. Still leaves that C.I. > "Why is it being left up to under-funded, small > groups of individuals > to get accurate counts? It is within their (the > occupying forces') > power to do so, but they refuse to because it is > politically > embarrassing." Could be because it is politically embarrassing. Could also be because they know it is impossible to get a good count while the shooting still goes on. I'm sure there are other reasons, good and bad. *I* sure don't know which are the deciding reasons. steve vs