From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Jul  1 00:05:46 2005
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:35:46 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Can a single brain cell recognize Bill Clinton?
In-Reply-To: <20050630235053.65171.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <42C47C82.4050809@mindspring.com>
	<20050630235053.65171.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc05063017056607142b@mail.gmail.com>

(3) Has the data stream from the subject's optical system been preprocessed
by the optical system itself, leaving little for the neurons to do?


Nope, but it's probably been preprocessed by lots of other neurons.

Imagine that I were to write a face recognition computer program.
You'd show it pictures of faces, and it would decide (through some
horribly complex code) who the face belonged to, from a set database
of known persons. Say Bill Clinton is one of them.

If you were to then get into this program with a debugger, it is
highly likely that there would be at least one word of memory
somewhere which would take one value (or range of values) when the
program was processing a picture of Bill Clinton, and another (range)
when it was processing anything else. Straightforwardly, this memory
location would be involved in the processing at the output end of
things, holding a result.

-- 
Emlyn

http://emlynoregan.com   * blogs * music * software *
http://RadioCandela.blogspot.com   * talk & music podcast *


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Jul  1 00:23:39 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:23:39 +1000
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
References: <20050630234106.41912.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <06f301c57dd3$21095b80$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

The Avantguardian wrote:

> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
>> But how can *you* guarantee it Stuart? What does 
>> your *guarantee* mean in this context?
>> 
>> Is it a legal term? Are you promising Samantha or
>> others
>> that if the military fires at, or bombs  people that
>> you 
>> personally will make good on any loss?
> 
> Sheesh. Too many attorneys on the list. ;)

Nah, I'm not an attorney. Australian's have lawyers and 
solicitors, and I'm not either of those either. 

> Actually I
> may have overstated myself. To rephrase more
> accurately, I am certain, to my own satisfaction mind
> you, that the U.S. military mandates and takes great
> pains these days to make sure that innocent civilians
> are not harmed by their soldiers during armed
> conflict. The civillian casualties that do occur are
> almost all accidents.

Sounds right to me. 

> Those very few soldiers that
> purposefully disregard this are brought to justice by
> their peers and their chain of command. And to a
> certain extent, yes, I do personally feel remorse at
> the death of civillians even when I am not the one
> pulling the trigger.  

Sounds right to me too, based on what I've seen of
you. 
 
>> > In any conflict involving U.S. troops, rules of
>> > engagement are very clearly spelled out, flash
>> cards
>> > summarizing them are issued, and violations are
>> taken
>> > very seriously.
>> 
>> In any? ;-)  That is truly a magnificent
>> accomplishment.
>> Perhaps the military should be running all aspects
>> of 
>> government and management then, if they have reached
>> such sophistication in anticipation and education.
> 
> ummmm.... NO. Although there does seem to be a rise in
> armed conflicts in American schools these days, using
> the military to solve this would be like using a
> sledge hammer to fix a toothache.
 
I'm just gently stirring you, Stuart. But I did have a bit of a
point in mind.  That is that rules of engagement for conduct
in military situations can hardly be less likely to produce
human error than "rules of engagement" under non military
situations as the people involved in both are essentially
the same. 

We (people) stuff up plenty, even when we don't have to
make decisions under fire and under conditions of extreme
stress, and getting more to the point now, when we have
'rules of engagement' that are the laws of our land, or oaths
taken, or promises made, or contracts agreed too, we still
clearly do managed to achieve quite a lot of non lethal 
conflict.  
 
> 
>> Perhaps the US Constitition and the UN Charter
>> should
>> be relabelled and called the US Rules of Engagement
>> and the UN Rules of Engagement.  ;-)
> 
> heh. I personally don't think that there will be a one
> world goverment unless or until it can be demonstrated
> that potentially hostile intelligent life exists
> elsewhere in the universe.

Wow, I didn't see the digression coming. 

> There just isn't enough evolutionary pressure to select for
> it. But if it should ever, for whatever reason, come about,
> I hope whatever charter or constitution the United Nations of
> Earth adopts would be based in large part upon the
> U.S. Constitution.

I like the US Constitution too. And the UN Charter. And as
Mike has pretty much convinced me of, whether he meant to
or not, they are part of an overarching conceptual structure. 

After all, what is or was the United States but a union of states
brought together largely to face off a threat to their mutual 
interests from outside. 

The states that came together did not come together to abandon
their independence as states completely, rather than came together
it seems to me, in a sort of contract. 

And even today there are tensions in the US about how much 
government should be centralised for whatever reason vs how
much it should be localised in the respective states, so that the
people can have the most amount of say possible in what effects
them directly.

Any United Nations of Bioshere 1 worth a damn in my book 
would leave as much as possible to the local "nations".  

So, if one could look at it with an engineering mindset, as if 
one had a blank sheet of paper, (which of course we don't because
the world is changing and we are in it), then perhaps only those
very few absolute necessities that must be of a global nature should
be of a global nature. 

But I digress. 

Back to rules of engagement.

What does a combat soldier do, when his or her fellow soldiers
or much harder superiors break the rules of engagement? It would
seem that to follow rules of engagement would be extremely
difficult if you were a private and your nco or commanding officer
was not following them. (It seems we have on this list quite a rich
base of practical experience in this area.) What do the lower ranks
do in such situations as superiors not following the rules of 
engagement?

Brett Paatsch



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Jul  1 00:32:10 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:32:10 +1000
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
References: <20050630234106.41912.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42C48685.9060208@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <06f801c57dd4$51779f60$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Joseph Bloch wrote:

> When conversations have risen to such a level of absurdity (and I speak 
> here of Brett's questions, not Stuart's answers) then perhaps the time has 
> come to move on to more productive conversations.

Well of course a con-versation can only reach a level of absurdity if
more than one person wants to pursue it, otherwise its a soliloquy isn't
it?

I am interested in the rules of engagement concept. I think its relevant
to what is going on in the world now.

Sometimes it seems we, here, have quite a bit of trouble even holding
ourselves to the rules of engagement on a mailing list ;-)

But by all means others can post threads on other topics as they like
and if those topics are of interest then other less "absurd" conversations
might develop. I don't want to badger anyone into talking about stuff
that doesn't interest them, I just have to assume that if it doesn't 
interest
them then they won't talk about it.

Brett Paatsch 




From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Fri Jul  1 00:47:23 2005
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:47:23 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Seven phenomena that define "Psycho-Medicine"
Message-ID: <42C4929B.3040002@mindspring.com>

Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss

< http://www.science-frontiers.com >

SCIENCE FRONTIERS, No. 160, Jul-Aug 2005, p. 4


PSYCHOLOGY

Seven phenomena that define "Psycho-Medicine"

"Psycho-Medicine" is the term used in an recent article in the French
journal *Science & Vie* are not all-inclusive.  They do, however, provide
in one place accounts of on-going research on seven phenomena, most of
which are anomalous in that they demonstrate the influence of the mind
over the body.

(1) Hypnosis reduces the need for general  anesthetics.

(2) Mental stimulation of muscles can greatly increase their strength.
Example: focussing one's thoughts on one's biceps.  [This is probably
related to the phenomenon that provides us with extra strength in
dire situations.]

(3) Transcendental meditation reduces hypertension.  Saying mantras,
for example.

(4) Psychological therapy stimulates the immune system.  Examples:
relaxation techniques, learning how to confront problems, etc.

(5) Placebo surgery improves patients with Parkinson's disease.   This
includes full operating-room procedures plus some superficial incisions
on the scalp!

(6) The use of biorhythms helps people with asthma.  Example: focussing
on one's cardiac rhythm.

(7) The use of virtual reality to reduce the pain of severe burns.  The
patient is exposed to a program called "SnowWorld"!  This program
envelops the patient visually with icy scenes.

(Bensaid, F., et al; "Psycho-Medicine," *Science & Vie*, #1046:52,
November 2004.  Cr. C. Mauge)


SCIENCE FRONTIERS is a bimonthly collection of scientific anomalies in
the current literature.  Published by the Sourcebook Project, P.O. Box 107,
Glen Arm, MD 21057 USA.  Annual subscription: $8.00.


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


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



From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Fri Jul  1 00:47:44 2005
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 17:47:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Let us speak of universes and intelligent designers
Message-ID: <42C492B0.8030709@mindspring.com>

Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss

< http://www.science-frontiers.com >

SCIENCE FRONTIERS, No. 160, Jul-Aug 2005, p. 4


UNCLASSIFIED

Let us speak of universes and intelligent designers

The latest number of the *Journal of Irreproducible Results*, a
science-humor magazine, had fun with an article on the Intelligent
Designer (ID) hypothesis.  We have the temerity to reproduce one
paragraph from said article because it harks back to SF#81, where
there was speculation about multiple universes.  In said universes, it
was proposed, the values of physical constants might change or be
changed so as to make them fitter in terms of longevity,
reproducibility, or some other criterion.  Pretty weird stuff, but
what do we mere humans know about the teleology of universes?

Universes seeming to us to be merely vast assemblages of luminous and
dark matter may be much more---something akin to the entity in F. Hoyle's
classic sci-fi novel *The Black Cloud*.

Anyway, here is the promised paragraph from the *Journal of
Irreproducible Results*.  Remember this is a humor magazine where
anything goes!

   With our increasing ability to manipulate genes, based on our
   ever-enlarging knowledge of the genetic code, eventually
   humanity will gain the ability to be virtually immortal, if
   bare-handed solo mountain climbing and hang-gliding are
   avoided in favor of selecting sedentary continuing
   accredited courses.  It's easy to envision a future where
   our descendants will explore the universe; perhaps to
   find other intelligent species.  It's possible that we might
   even meet the hypothetical species we call "The Intelligent
   Designers", assuming they want to be bothered with us.  As
   our progeny explore other solar systems, should they find
   a sterile planet, they may want to "seed" it with species
   bioengineered to thrive there; thus, future humanity may
   well become "intelligent designers".  The inhabitants of
   such a world may eventually speculate and contemplate
   about their origins as they turn their multifaceted eyes
   upward.

We hasten to add here that the proponents of Intelligent Design do
*not* insist that an Intelligent Designer be supernatural or even
singular.  Indeed, the quoted paragraph leaves room for such
possibilities.

In this light, the populations of competing universes mentioned in SF#81
could be the works of *different* Intelligent Designers in competition
with each other.  Their criterion for success might be life-containing
universes that include intelligent but *not* self-destructing lifeforms.
Or, there may be criteria that are beyond our comprehension and
toward which the Intelligent Designer of *our* universe is presently
striving and we are but partial steps along the way!

(Kirschbaum, Joel; *Journal of Irreproducible Results*, 49:27,
March 2005.)


SCIENCE FRONTIERS is a bimonthly collection of scientific anomalies in
the current literature.  Published by the Sourcebook Project, P.O. Box 107,
Glen Arm, MD 21057 USA.  Annual subscription: $8.00.


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


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



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 01:08:46 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 18:08:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <43267A1E-F5C0-41FD-9F4C-851AE36905AD@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050701010846.53729.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>



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

> You are a fool. 

    Maybe but only because so many people are trying
so hard to fool me about this Iraq thing. More so than
many on this list, when it comes right down to it, I
consider myself to be a liberal and have been called a
"watermelon" for it. I have either voted green or
democrat except in the case of Schwarzeneggar. I am
what you could call a big-stick pacifist. I believe in
having in having the biggest stick on the block so
that I CAN love my neighbors. I had protested the war
constantly up until the point that judged it to be too
late to do any good. Now that I see elections
happening and infra-structure starting to be rebuilt
there and land mines being cleared so that children
don't step on them, I understand what we are doing
there CURRENTLY to be more humanitarian aid than
empire building. Not so much because I believe that
the war was justified, but because that is what is
happening. Even if the end doesn't justify the means,
the means have come and gone and all we have left are
lemons. To stay, break the will of the bloodthirsty
Baathists and Jihadists, rebuild Iraq, and prevent an
insane four-way civil war, is the best way to make
lemonade with the lemons we have been given. Sometimes
the bullet in a gunshot wound is the only thing that
keeps it from bleeding and you best leave it in until
you get to a hospital.
 
> I have no such hatred.  I am no longer sorry I
> called you a fool.   
> You have now earned it if you take my legitimate
> concerns to be  
> irrational hatred.

Recognize this?

"If I was Iraqi I would almost certainly be in the
resistance and  
consider those cops turncoats to their own people."

You sound like you are saying that if you had to
choose sides, you would choose the side of muderous
Baathists over Americans. That means that you would be
willing to shoot Americans that at the very least
think they are risking their lives for YOU. Moreover
in the very same sentence you insinuate that you would
shoot your own Iraqi people, including cops, that
tried keep you from doing it. Why would you be so
willing to make war on America, if you don't hate it? 


> 
> Welcome to my kill file fool.

To be fair, I wrote my reply BEFORE I read your
apology.  I have never resorted to calling you names
or even labelling you. Considering you are supposed to
be a list moderator, it is somewhat strange that you
would resort so quickly to ad hominem not only against
me but against others. My self-esteem is built on
things other than your opinion so I don't really care,
but to be honest if it will spare me your verbal abuse
for daring to disagree with you, I think I will like
your kill file.


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Fri Jul  1 00:53:45 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 20:53:45 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Can a single brain cell recognize Bill
  Clinton?
In-Reply-To: <20050630235053.65171.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <42C47C82.4050809@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050630203820.0475aec0@unreasonable.com>

Adrian Tymes wrote:

>It is arguable whether evolution "accounts" for vestigial things like a 
>human's appendix, even if it can explain how such things came to be.

The appendix IS NOT vestigial. It has been known for several decades to be 
part of the immune system.

See, for instance,

http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/mole00/mole00225.htm
http://www.uchospitals.edu/online-library/content=P00630

or many of the other 122,000 matches for appendix "immune system" on google.

Medicine has a long hubristic tradition of declaring that

(a) we don't know what body part X does
(b) therefore it has no purpose
(c) therefore we may/should/will excise it

and then we have to deal with the aftermath, as when they decided that the 
thyroid was vestigial and removed it.


-- David Lubkin.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 04:09:42 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 21:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <06f301c57dd3$21095b80$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050701040942.64995.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote: 
> > ummmm.... NO. Although there does seem to be a rise in
> > armed conflicts in American schools these days, using
> > the military to solve this would be like using a
> > sledge hammer to fix a toothache.
>  
> I'm just gently stirring you, Stuart. But I did have a bit of a
> point in mind.  That is that rules of engagement for conduct
> in military situations can hardly be less likely to produce
> human error than "rules of engagement" under non military
> situations as the people involved in both are essentially
> the same. 

Not really. Humans trained in modern military units are distinctively
NOT like run of the mill persons on the street. No civilian
organization I know of uses negative reinforcement so extensively or
effectively. The military knows that war is very very messy and it has
used the decades since WWII to scientifically figure out how to make it
less so, make soldiers more reliable and more productive. The
regimentation, conformity, gung ho sloganeering and extensive
repetetive rote instruction of subordinates, along with very effective
leadership training for unit leadership. It all functions to make
soldiers want to obey orders when they otherwise wouldnt, or even
shouldn't.

Soldiers are trained to do their jobs no matter how they feel about it.
If that means shooting bad guys, they learn to do it without being
repulsed. That also means learning to distinguish innocents from
combatants, although IMHO the military doesn't do as much as it should.


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Fri Jul  1 04:54:06 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:54:06 +1000
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
References: <20050701040942.64995.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

> --- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
>> > ummmm.... NO. Although there does seem to be a rise in
>> > armed conflicts in American schools these days, using
>> > the military to solve this would be like using a
>> > sledge hammer to fix a toothache.
>>
>> I'm just gently stirring you, Stuart. But I did have a bit of a
>> point in mind.  That is that rules of engagement for conduct
>> in military situations can hardly be less likely to produce
>> human error than "rules of engagement" under non military
>> situations as the people involved in both are essentially
>> the same.
>
> Not really. Humans trained in modern military units are distinctively
> NOT like run of the mill persons on the street. No civilian
> organization I know of uses negative reinforcement so extensively or
> effectively. The military knows that war is very very messy and it has
> used the decades since WWII to scientifically figure out how to make it
> less so, make soldiers more reliable and more productive. The
> regimentation, conformity, gung ho sloganeering and extensive
> repetetive rote instruction of subordinates, along with very effective
> leadership training for unit leadership.

>                                                            It all 
> functions to make
> soldiers want to obey orders when they otherwise wouldnt, or even
> shouldn't.

So when they want to obey orders they shouldn't, what then, they
consider the rules of engagement?

> Soldiers are trained to do their jobs no matter how they feel about it.
> If that means shooting bad guys, they learn to do it without being
> repulsed. That also means learning to distinguish innocents from
> combatants, although IMHO the military doesn't do as much as it
> should.

I wonder what happens for instance if a low ranking soldier thinks that
they have been given an order to do something that breaks with the
rules of engagement, or the Geneva Conventions. What does a soldier
do when his/her superior is the one that is doing the encouraging or
is ordering to break from the rules of engagement?

Which is supposed to have precedence in a conflict, a direct order
from a superior, or the rules of engagement? I'd have though the
second.

Brett Paatsch 




From john.h.calvin at gmail.com  Fri Jul  1 05:37:20 2005
From: john.h.calvin at gmail.com (John Calvin)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:37:20 -0700
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
References: <20050701040942.64995.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <5d74f9c7050630223712928414@mail.gmail.com>

Hello,

I used to post to this list a few years ago, but stopped when life got
too busy.  I have enjoyed lurking again, and thought that I would
reply to this thread.

I spent last year serving in Afghanistan as a Psychological Operations
SGT, and can speak to the whole ROE thing.

We had several opportunities for training on the Rules of Engagement,
which at the time seemed odd since they were actually pretty simple. 
Goes to show that the military loves repetition, because it works.

> I wonder what happens for instance if a low ranking soldier thinks that
> they have been given an order to do something that breaks with the
> rules of engagement, or the Geneva Conventions. What does a soldier
> do when his/her superior is the one that is doing the encouraging or
> is ordering to break from the rules of engagement?
> 
> Which is supposed to have precedence in a conflict, a direct order
> from a superior, or the rules of engagement? I'd have though the
> second.


Bare bones, the Rules of Engagement boiled down to shoot only at
threats.  So if someone shoots at you, other US Personnel, or
civilians, you are authorized to shoot back and to terminate the
aggressor if required.  The ROE also set guidlelines for entering
buildings, conducting searches, and interacting with the local
populace.  The guidlines were very sensible and errored on the side of
caution.  It was made clear to us that the ROE was there to protect
both soldiers and civilians, and that they were broad enough to allow
us to conduct our missions.  There was also very clear instruction
that the ROE was the overiding order, and that if we were given
conflicting orders we were to follow the ROE to the best of our
ability.

Hope that answers your question

I also would like to point out that nearly my entire tour in
Afghanistan was engaged in various humanitarian efforts.  The infantry
unit that I supported was heavily engaged in providing medical care in
the villages, building schools, promoting better agriculture
techniques, and generally  working to improve the lives of the people
of Afghanistan.  I for one and proud to have served there, and will
gladly do so again.

John Calvin


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 05:47:34 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050701054734.70741.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Which is supposed to have precedence in a conflict,
> a direct order
> from a superior, or the rules of engagement? I'd
> have though the
> second.

Well that depends on who that superior is and the
situation at hand. ROE are usually written at the
theater or strategic levels. Really high ranking
officers make them up. So if a captain at the tactical
level orders a soldier to break them, the soldier
usually realizes that the ROE would take precedence
because they come from a brigadier general at least.
Moreover if the captain was a lunatic ordering the
slaughter of innocents for no good reason, there are
provisions in the UCMJ that the unit medic no matter
how low of a rank, could judge the captain to be
medically unfit for command and relieve him of duty.
But of course it depends on the situation. If for
example, the ROE would hamstring a unit such that they
could not follow them and survive, the typical soldier
would follow his captain's orders to break them,
knowing that the captain would take responsibility for
it himself after it was all over with. In a war almost
nothing is clear cut and certain and one does one's
best to accomplish objectives and if possible survive. 

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 05:51:32 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 22:51:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <5d74f9c7050630223712928414@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050701055132.71140.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>



--- John Calvin <john.h.calvin at gmail.com> wrote:

> I for one and proud to have served
> there, and will
> gladly do so again.

HUAW, John! May the Force be with you. :)



The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jul  1 06:13:54 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 23:13:54 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <20050701010846.53729.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507010613.j616DnR22562@tick.javien.com>

> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of The Avantguardian
> > Welcome to my kill file fool.
> 
> To be fair, I wrote my reply BEFORE I read your
> apology.  I have never resorted to calling you names
> or even labelling you. Considering you are supposed to
> be a list moderator, it is somewhat strange that you
> would resort so quickly to ad hominem not only against
> me but against others...
> 
> 
> The Avantguardian

Samantha is not acting as a moderator currently.  I am
supposed to be, so I shall explain what is going on.  I
have quietly watched this whole caustic dialog, or rather polylog
since several are involved.  I decided to allow the participants
to have their say, even if some crossed the line on several
occasions regarding ad hominem attacks.  In every case, I
felt the receiving end of the attacks to be fully capable
of verbal self defense: if I thought otherwise, I would
have stepped in before now.  My policy is to assume it is
better to be too lenient in moderating than to be too 
strict.  

War is a difficult topic, so we should expect passions
to be high on all sides.  So go ahead, say your piece, but do 
keep in mind the list principles.  We want to create an atmosphere
of open dialog and if at all possible maintain civility.  

Over the years our extro-list has sometimes suffered from acute 
Amiability Deficit Disorder (ADD).  This is understandable
since we do not generally share a particular hobby or interest, 
and we take on difficult topics that are usually disallowed on 
other chat-lists.

All this being said, I shall soon be taking a trip to Oregon
on an antique motorcycle, so the list will be temporarily
without a moderator.  (Weeee're off to see the cattle,
the wonderful cattle of Ore...)  Do let us keep the ADD to 
a minimum if possible and adhere to the 8 posts a 
day maximum.

spike







From sjatkins at mac.com  Fri Jul  1 07:00:15 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 00:00:15 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <20050701010846.53729.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050701010846.53729.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C039A1C2-2F14-4E14-9C1B-7CA473186004@mac.com>


On Jun 30, 2005, at 6:08 PM, The Avantguardian wrote:

>
>
> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>> You are a fool.
>>
>
>     Maybe but only because so many people are trying
> so hard to fool me about this Iraq thing. More so than
> many on this list, when it comes right down to it, I
> consider myself to be a liberal and have been called a
> "watermelon" for it.

I tend to eschew most political labels.  I am libertarian but I don't  
believe that party or set of ideas has all the answers either.


> I have either voted green or
> democrat except in the case of Schwarzeneggar. I am
> what you could call a big-stick pacifist. I believe in
> having in having the biggest stick on the block so
> that I CAN love my neighbors.

Hmm.  I am not sure that is the way to loving your neighbors although  
it does deal with the fear that is in the way.

> I had protested the war
> constantly up until the point that judged it to be too
> late to do any good.

But that still leaves you in opposition to the war just less actively  
or vocally so, no?

> Now that I see elections
> happening and infra-structure starting to be rebuilt
> there and land mines being cleared so that children
> don't step on them, I understand what we are doing
> there CURRENTLY to be more humanitarian aid than
> empire building.

Well I seem to recall that before we went in we said that we would  
not target infrastructure this time.  Yet we did.  So I see that as  
long overdue cleaning u a mess we had no need to make.   In the  
process we will probably pay Halliburton billions more than the job  
need really take.

> Not so much because I believe that
> the war was justified, but because that is what is
> happening.

I don't see how beginning to clean up our mess and attempting to  
force democracy in a country it is not clear is ready for it are  
sufficient to justify our continuing presence and all the ill  
thereof.   Neither of those actually require that continuation.   A  
true temporary international peace keeping force and reparations to  
the Iraqis to rebuild the infrastructure using contractors of their  
choice seems to me more just and to have far fewer negative  
consequences.

> Even if the end doesn't justify the means,
> the means have come and gone and all we have left are
> lemons. To stay, break the will of the bloodthirsty
> Baathists and Jihadists, rebuild Iraq, and prevent an
> insane four-way civil war, is the best way to make
> lemonade with the lemons we have been given.

People get rather irrational when their country is invaded, mauled,  
and occupied.  I honestly don't see how to calm the tensions  down by  
our continued presence.

>

>> I have no such hatred.  I am no longer sorry I
>> called you a fool.
>> You have now earned it if you take my legitimate
>> concerns to be
>> irrational hatred.
>>
>
> Recognize this?
>
> "If I was Iraqi I would almost certainly be in the
> resistance and
> consider those cops turncoats to their own people."
>

On the grounds of defense of my home against those I would most  
likely see as aggressors and destroyers of my life and well being, I  
would not be surprised to feel this way.   I said it also to attempt  
to jar readers into a different perspective.  I see too much that  
looks like an insufficiently examined assumption that American  
culture is so clearly *the answer* that all reasonable Iraqis would  
see the invasion and occupation as truly a good and wonderful thing  
and that all others, especially those who oppose by force, simply  
deserve to die.    I was also reacting against the implication that  
those who do not support what we are doing in Iraq are not patriotic  
or hate America.  I love America - the America of the ideals of  
freedom and equal treatment under the law, rational law not the  
monstrosity of today.  I love the heart of America.  I do not love  
and I oppose the great rot at the heart of the country today.   I  
could not love the former without opposing the latter and its  
manifestations.

> You sound like you are saying that if you had to
> choose sides, you would choose the side of muderous
> Baathists over Americans.

If I was Iraqi I am pretty sure I would choose defending my home over  
invasion and occupation on completely bogus grounds.  Is that so  
surprising?


Many people in Iraq see us as murderous barbarian invaders.  That was  
the lesson of the lack of endless adulation and continuing  
opposition.  Claiming the other side in a conflict is effectively  
pure evil is a commonplace bit of psychological self-justification.


> That means that you would be
> willing to shoot Americans that at the very least
> think they are risking their lives for YOU.

Do they?  I don't think most of the soldiers think any such thing.   
And whether they do or do not they are still invaders.  I would want  
them to simply go away rather than to kill them.  But if I was Iraqi  
I would likely do what was in my power to get the Americans to leave.

> Moreover
> in the very same sentence you insinuate that you would
> shoot your own Iraqi people, including cops, that
> tried keep you from doing it. Why would you be so
> willing to make war on America, if you don't hate it?

I would be fighting for self-determination and freedom from  
occupation.  I might find other less violent ways to work to the same  
end but I certainly would not see the Americans as god hearted  
liberators who only were there for my welfare.  I would likely see  
those of my countrymen who helped them and fostered the notion that  
continued occupation was OK as treasonous collaborators.

>
>>
>> Welcome to my kill file fool.
>>
>
> To be fair, I wrote my reply BEFORE I read your
> apology.  I have never resorted to calling you names
> or even labelling you. Considering you are supposed to
> be a list moderator,

I haven't been a list moderator for some time now.   I still am sorry  
that I called you a fool.  But I am deeply offended when someone says  
I hate America just because I am strongly opposed to the action of  
the current creatures in power.

> it is somewhat strange that you
> would resort so quickly to ad hominem not only against
> me but against others.

I do apologize for that.  My temper sometimes gets the best of me.   
Of late it gets away from me more easily.  I am told that that  
happens as part of the grieving process.  But that is no excuse for  
simply slamming into people.  That is not how I want to be.  I am sorry.

- samantha




From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Fri Jul  1 08:01:35 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:01:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Can a single brain cell recognize Bill Clinton?
In-Reply-To: <42C47C82.4050809@mindspring.com>
References: <42C47C82.4050809@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070101015748bde0@mail.gmail.com>

(digs up post to ai-philosophy)

For more technical details...

Nature paper: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v435/n7045/full/nature03687.html
PDF: http://www.klab.caltech.edu/refweb/paper/519.pdf (not sure if PDF
is downloadable from off-campus)

R. Quian Quiroga, L. Reddy, G. Kreiman, C. Koch & I. Fried. Invariant
visual representation by single neurons in the human brain. Nature
(2005) 435, 0-0

Abstract: It takes a fraction of a second to recognize a person or an
object even when seen under strikingly different conditions. How such
a robust, high-level representation is achieved by neurons in the
human brain is still unclear. In monkeys, neurons in the upper stages
of the ventral visual pathway respond to complex images such as faces
and objects and show some degree of invariance to metric properties
such as the stimulus size, position and viewing angle. We have
previously shown that neurons in the human medial temporal lobe (MTL)
fire selectively to images of faces, animals, objects or scenes. Here
we report on a remarkable subset of MTL neurons that are selectively
activated by strikingly different pictures of given individuals,
landmarks or objects and in some cases even by letter strings with
their names. These results suggest an invariant, sparse and explicit
code, which might be important in the transformation of complex visual
percepts into long-term and more abstract memories.

On 6/30/05, Terry W. Colvin <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> Forwarding permission was given by William R. Corliss
> 
> Can a single brain cell recognize Bill Clinton?


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 08:10:48 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:10:48 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <200507010613.j616DnR22562@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <20050701081048.54393.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com>



--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

My policy is to assume
> it is
> better to be too lenient in moderating than to be
> too 
> strict.  
> 
> War is a difficult topic, so we should expect
> passions
> to be high on all sides.

Ja, Spike. With a topic header like "Too far" one
would expect the kid gloves to come off. :)


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Fri Jul  1 08:12:33 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:12:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Can a single brain cell recognize Bill Clinton?
In-Reply-To: <42C47C82.4050809@mindspring.com>
References: <42C47C82.4050809@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070101123b6a2618@mail.gmail.com>

On 6/30/05, Terry W. Colvin <fortean1 at mindspring.com> wrote:
> (1) How can single, ostensibly rather simple, neurons process the flood
> of bits
> arriving from subject's optical system?

These neurons are at or near the top of the visual hierarchy. If I
recall correctly, it's something like retina -> LGN -> V1 -> V2 -> IT
-> stuff -> MTL (where these neurons were found). As you go up the
hierarchy, neuron responses get more invariant to things like pose and
illumination changes, while becoming more specific to particular
objects.

> (2) Can Darwinian evolution account for single-cell pattern recognition?  Of
> course it can; it *must*!

Sure. Highly sparse and invariant representations are easier to use as
inputs to other learning systems.

> (3) Has the data stream from the subject's optical system been preprocessed
> by the optical system itself, leaving little for the neurons to do?

I wouldn't necessarily say that it leaves "little" for the neurons to
do, but yes, the information has been preprocessed by earlier visual
layers.

> (4) Are the Bill Clinton cells only the output terminals of holographic
> (whole-brain) image processing.

I'm fairly certain they serve as inputs to other areas, particularly
memory-related regions.


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Fri Jul  1 08:20:03 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:20:03 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Accelerando Technical Companion
Message-ID: <e88b73ce0507010120e4a2562@mail.gmail.com>

As mentioned previously on this list, Charlie Stross just released his
new novel, Accelerando, which follows three generations of a family
through the Singularity. The novel is available as a free download
here:

http://www.accelerando.org/

I'm only partly through the novel myself, and noticed that it can be
technically quite dense. To help others get a better understanding of
the concepts involved and perhaps even provide more information on the
current state-of-the-art, I've started a Technical Companion for
Accelerando over on Wikibooks:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Accelerando_Technical_Companion

It's of course still incredibly preliminary, and contributions are
welcome. Just click "edit."

-- Neil Halelamien
neilh at caltech.edu


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 08:27:50 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 01:27:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
Message-ID: <20050701082750.23957.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>

I understand that the Constitution gives the President
the power to make treaties with senate approval. But
what I want to know is that if there is any explicit
law in the Constitution or elsewhere that prohibits
the governors of individual states from signing/making
treaties with foreign powers? As a completely
hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it? What
would be the consequences? Would the federal
government step in? Would it spark a civil war?    

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Fri Jul  1 11:37:16 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 07:37:16 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <20050701082750.23957.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050701082750.23957.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42C52AEC.4020401@humanenhancement.com>

Art. I, Sec. 10:

"No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of 
Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any 
Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or 
engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as 
will not admit of delay."

Joseph

The Avantguardian wrote:

>I understand that the Constitution gives the President
>the power to make treaties with senate approval. But
>what I want to know is that if there is any explicit
>law in the Constitution or elsewhere that prohibits
>the governors of individual states from signing/making
>treaties with foreign powers? As a completely
>hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
>Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it? What
>would be the consequences? Would the federal
>government step in? Would it spark a civil war?    
>
>The Avantguardian 
>is 
>Stuart LaForge
>alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu
>
>"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
>-Bill Watterson
>
>
>		
>____________________________________________________ 
>Yahoo! Sports 
>Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
>http://football.fantasysports.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  Fri Jul  1 12:26:29 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 22:26:29 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
References: <20050701082750.23957.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <076601c57e38$1bd01fe0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

The Avantguardian wrote:

>I understand that the Constitution gives the President
> the power to make treaties with senate approval.

> But what I want to know is that if there is any explicit
> law in the Constitution or elsewhere that prohibits
> the governors of individual states from signing/making
> treaties with foreign powers? 

Yes.

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html
[Mike sent this link recently. Actually I'm hoping he and
I can continue our discussion on impeachment in the 
other thread. ]

Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 says:

" No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation;
 grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of 
Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in 
Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law,
or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title 
of Nobility. "

> As a completely
> hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
> Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it? 

No. That would be the state of California breaching the above
clause in the constitution relating to treaties. 

> What  would be the consequences?

I'm still coming up to spead on the Constitution but I think
because of the above Schwazenagger wouldn't try to do
it. Its too obviously unconstitutional and not worth the 
political trouble. 

The Supreme Court has jurisdiction on Constitution matters
so it would not allow it. 

> Would the federal
> government step in? Would it spark a civil war?    

It wouldn't get to that. California cannot raise a separate
army. I think that's the point Joseph is making with the
clause he cites. 

Brett Paatsch



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jul  1 15:16:39 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 08:16:39 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <20050701081048.54393.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507011516.j61FGkR06059@tick.javien.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of The Avantguardian
> Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 1:11 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
> 
> 
> 
> --- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> My policy is to assume
> > it is
> > better to be too lenient in moderating than to be
> > too
> > strict.
> >
> > War is a difficult topic, so we should expect
> > passions
> > to be high on all sides.
> 
> Ja, Spike. With a topic header like "Too far" one
> would expect the kid gloves to come off. :)
> 
> 
> The Avantguardian


Avant, it's another one of those lessons we learned in 
kindergarten.  When the little kid is getting picked on, 
the teacher has to step in and put a stop to it.  But if 
the big kid is being provoked, it is best to hold back and 
let him or her get mad enough to take the appropriate 
action.  (It still works that way today I assume.)

Main participants this time, lets see, Avantguardian, Mike Lorrey, 
Joseph Bloch, Humania, Bret, Brett, j. andrew rogers, Samantha, 
John Clark, Dirk, and my apologies to any I have missed, but 
every one of you have demonstrated yourselves capable of
competent self defense on the playground.

One upbeat note: over the years our extro-flame wars have
actually improved in the sense that there is more actual
information and less personal attack than 8 yrs ago.

{8-]

spike






From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jul  1 15:23:30 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 08:23:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <200507011516.j61FGkR06059@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <200507011523.j61FNcR06730@tick.javien.com>

> > --- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> Main participants this time, lets see, Avantguardian, Mike Lorrey,
> Joseph Bloch, Humania, Bret, Brett, j. andrew rogers, Samantha,
> John Clark, Dirk, and my apologies to any I have missed...


Just to make it clear, the previous was a list of those
on either the sending or receiving end of harsh words,
and is not to be taken as criticism.  The list has done
a pretty good job of keeping it civil, thanks.  

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jul  1 15:26:29 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 08:26:29 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <20050701082750.23957.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507011526.j61FQnR07160@tick.javien.com>

> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of The Avantguardian
> Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
> 
> ... As a completely
> hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
> Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it...
> 
> The Avantguardian

As soon as the Taxifornia government paid out the first
dollar in that scenario, Aaahhhnold would be sooooo
recalled.  It wouldn't pay up, just as I predict *none*
of the nations that signed up to the Kyoto protocol
will pay up, not one.

spike







From spike66 at comcast.net  Fri Jul  1 15:38:36 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 08:38:36 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <200507011526.j61FQnR07160@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <200507011538.j61FckR08367@tick.javien.com>

> > ... As a completely
> > hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
> > Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it...
> >
> > The Avantguardian
> 
> As soon as the Taxifornia government paid out the first
> dollar in that scenario, Aaahhhnold would be sooooo
> recalled.  It wouldn't pay up, just as I predict *none*
> of the nations that signed up to the Kyoto protocol
> will pay up, not one.
> 
> spike

Avant note that several Taxifornia mayors have made a
symbolic signing of the Kyoto agreement.  It doesn't
actually mean anything, of course, as mayors have not
the authority to raid the treasury for this kind of
stuff, nor do they have the authority to make laws
regarding CO2 emissions, nor does Aaahhhnold.  I
suspect in the final scene, most of the nations that
did sign up to the Kyoto agreement will find that
they too lack the authority to make it so.  

This is the heart and soul of libertarianism:
governments do not own the treasury, the taxpayers
do.  We merely hire governments to be temporary stewards
over it.  If they do so irresponsibly, then they are
George Jetson and the we are Mr. Spacely:

Jetsoooooon!  You're Firrrrrrred!

spike  



From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Jul  1 15:48:16 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 08:48:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <200507011538.j61FckR08367@tick.javien.com>
References: <200507011538.j61FckR08367@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <42C565C0.1000008@pobox.com>

spike wrote:
> 
> This is the heart and soul of libertarianism:
> governments do not own the treasury, the taxpayers
> do.  We merely hire governments to be temporary stewards
> over it.  If they do so irresponsibly, then they are
> George Jetson and the we are Mr. Spacely:
> 
> Jetsoooooon!  You're Firrrrrrred!

As long as we're dreaming, I'd like my own space shuttle.

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


From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Fri Jul  1 15:50:32 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 11:50:32 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too far
In-Reply-To: <200507011523.j61FNcR06730@tick.javien.com>
References: <200507011523.j61FNcR06730@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <42C56648.2040607@humanenhancement.com>

spike wrote:

>>>--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
>>>      
>>>
>>Main participants this time, lets see, Avantguardian, Mike Lorrey,
>>Joseph Bloch, Humania, Bret, Brett, j. andrew rogers, Samantha,
>>John Clark, Dirk, and my apologies to any I have missed...
>>    
>>
>
>
>Just to make it clear, the previous was a list of those
>on either the sending or receiving end of harsh words,
>and is not to be taken as criticism.  The list has done
>a pretty good job of keeping it civil, thanks.  
>

Criticism? I took it as a compliment. :-)

Joseph


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Fri Jul  1 16:32:45 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:32:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Can a single brain cell recognize Bill  Clinton?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050630203820.0475aec0@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <20050701163245.11970.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- David Lubkin <extropy at unreasonable.com> wrote:
> The appendix IS NOT vestigial. It has been known for several decades
> to be 
> part of the immune system.
> 
> See, for instance,
> 
> http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/mole00/mole00225.htm
> http://www.uchospitals.edu/online-library/content=P00630

Thank you for the correction.  (Although, this is the first time I've
heard of it having a function, and the information that it was
vestigial came from someone who would know.  So the info's not been
disseminated as widely as it should have been.)


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Fri Jul  1 16:46:28 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 12:46:28 -0400
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too
  far
In-Reply-To: <20050701054734.70741.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>

In Gordon R. Dickson's Childe Cycle -- which he, as I had feared, died 
before finishing -- the people of a resource-poor planet, Dorsai, hire 
themselves out to the rest of civilization as elite warriors.

In "Brothers," Gordy addresses some of the issues of this thread:

>As professional, free-lance soldiers, under the pattern of the Dorsai 
>contract -- which the Exotic employers honored for all their military 
>employees -- the mercenaries were entitled to know the aim and purpose of 
>any general orders for military action they were given. By a ninety-six 
>per cent vote among the enlisted men concerned, they could refuse to obey 
>the order. In fact, by a hundred per cent vote, they could force their 
>officers to use them in an action they themselves demanded.


-- David Lubkin.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 19:36:26 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:36:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <20050701082750.23957.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050701193626.91146.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I understand that the Constitution gives the President
> the power to make treaties with senate approval. But
> what I want to know is that if there is any explicit
> law in the Constitution or elsewhere that prohibits
> the governors of individual states from signing/making
> treaties with foreign powers? As a completely
> hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
> Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it? What
> would be the consequences? Would the federal
> government step in? Would it spark a civil war? 

Yes, the Constitution bans states from signing treaties with other
nations, although many states have records of relations with foreign
countries over trade issues, particularly border states with Canada and
Mexico. New Hampshire maintains a trade office in London, which I
believe other states do as well, and I believe west coast states engage
in similar activities with other asian/pacific nations. The states
therefore generally will craft a bill for their congressional
delegation to promote in congress that deals with whatever
international issue they are working with that other nation to resolve.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 19:44:57 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <076601c57e38$1bd01fe0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050701194457.68838.qmail@web30714.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> The Avantguardian wrote:
> 
> >I understand that the Constitution gives the President
> > the power to make treaties with senate approval.
> 
> > But what I want to know is that if there is any explicit
> > law in the Constitution or elsewhere that prohibits
> > the governors of individual states from signing/making
> > treaties with foreign powers? 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html
> [Mike sent this link recently. Actually I'm hoping he and
> I can continue our discussion on impeachment in the 
> other thread. ]
> 
> Article 1, Section 10, Clause 1 says:
> 
> " No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation;
>  grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of 
> Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in 
> Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law,
> or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title 
> of Nobility. "
> 
> > As a completely
> > hypothetical example could Schwazeneggar sign the
> > Kyoto Treaty and have California abide by it? 
> 
> No. That would be the state of California breaching the above
> clause in the constitution relating to treaties. 

Yes, HOWEVER, while California cannot sign the Kyoto Treaty, or any
other, they can resolve that the state government, and local
governments of the state, shall function in accordance with the treaty
as if it were law in the US, with the sole exception being that they
cannot participate in the pollution fine distribution system with other
nations. California could pass a law that mandates that all state
offices, commercial enterprises, and new construction reduce their
emissions to 1990 levels. So long as the law doesn't specifically
mention the Kyoto Treaty and acts as if its measures are specifically
Californian in nature, then it would be constitutional.

> 
> > What  would be the consequences?
> 
> I'm still coming up to spead on the Constitution but I think
> because of the above Schwazenagger wouldn't try to do
> it. Its too obviously unconstitutional and not worth the 
> political trouble. 
> 
> The Supreme Court has jurisdiction on Constitution matters
> so it would not allow it. 
> 
> > Would the federal
> > government step in? Would it spark a civil war?    
> 
> It wouldn't get to that. California cannot raise a separate
> army. I think that's the point Joseph is making with the
> clause he cites.

Actually, California can raise a separate army, so long as it is called
a State Guard or State Militia. Such units cannot operate outside the
boundaries of the state except in pursuit of criminals or
invaders/attackers, or with the agreement of the governors of the other
states they operate in.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From amara at amara.com  Fri Jul  1 20:32:14 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 22:32:14 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all
Message-ID: <p06210202beeb58014711@[23.237.66.13]>


http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/tetka.html

It's UP TO YOU, dear deities-in-training. Please help her (*)
fall safely through the spheres!

(*) by using your mouse/cursor

Amara

-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"I couldn't read it because my parents forgot to pay the gravity
bill." --Calvin


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 21:52:56 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 14:52:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all
In-Reply-To: <p06210202beeb58014711@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <20050701215256.28794.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com>

I think this is very cool interactive art. It doesn't
just look cool, it has meaning open to interpretation
of course. 

--- Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:

> 
> http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/tetka.html
> 
> It's UP TO YOU, dear deities-in-training. Please
> help her (*)
> fall safely through the spheres!
> 
> (*) by using your mouse/cursor
> 
> Amara
> 
> -- 
> 
>
********************************************************************
> Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
> Computational Physics     vita: 
> ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
> Multiplex Answers         URL:  
> http://www.amara.com/
>
********************************************************************
> "I couldn't read it because my parents forgot to pay
> the gravity
> bill." --Calvin
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 22:09:10 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:09:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all
In-Reply-To: <20050701215256.28794.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050701220910.16828.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

What is supposed to be judged 'safely'? It seems creepy to me, like
abusing a corpse.

--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I think this is very cool interactive art. It doesn't
> just look cool, it has meaning open to interpretation
> of course. 
> 
> --- Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/tetka.html
> > 
> > It's UP TO YOU, dear deities-in-training. Please
> > help her (*)
> > fall safely through the spheres!
> > 
> > (*) by using your mouse/cursor
> > 
> > Amara
> > 
> > -- 
> > 
> >
> ********************************************************************
> > Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
> > Computational Physics     vita: 
> > ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
> > Multiplex Answers         URL:  
> > http://www.amara.com/
> >
> ********************************************************************
> > "I couldn't read it because my parents forgot to pay
> > the gravity
> > bill." --Calvin
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> >
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > 
> 
> 
> The Avantguardian 
> is 
> Stuart LaForge
> alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu
> 
> "The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they
> haven't attempted to contact us." 
> -Bill Watterson
> 
> 
> 		
> ____________________________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Sports 
> Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
> http://football.fantasysports.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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jul  1 22:28:15 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 17:28:15 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all
In-Reply-To: <20050701220910.16828.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050701215256.28794.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20050701220910.16828.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701172707.01ec1600@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 03:09 PM 7/1/2005 -0700, Mike wrote:

>It seems creepy to me, like abusing a corpse.

Exactly! (And the body obviously *is* recently dead.)

Damien Broderick 



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Fri Jul  1 22:31:57 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:31:57 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Body Worlds [was Free fall for all]
References: <20050701220910.16828.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <001101c57e8c$b140eab0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

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

> What is supposed to be judged 'safely'? It seems creepy to me, like
> abusing a corpse.

Speaking of which ... have you all discussed "plastination" here?  A friend 
of mine went to one of these shows (in Los Angeles), and described them to 
me in gory detail.  He said he loved the show - and was entertained.  I was 
creeped out just listening.:

http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/pages/home.asp

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,679330,00.html

Olga 




From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 23:04:02 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all
In-Reply-To: <20050701220910.16828.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050701230402.89384.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> What is supposed to be judged 'safely'? It seems
> creepy to me, like
> abusing a corpse.

Albeit the figure is somewhat pale and haggard
looking, I don't think it is supposed to represent a
corpse. I agree with you that it is a little creepy. I
felt that it was a scantily clad woman who is very
submissive, supple, and compliant as if she had been
given hypnotol the date-rape drug. My guess would be
that it is a statement about the objectification of
women. I would conjecture that the artist was a woman
and it could very well be a self-portrait of the
artist. The short hair seems to signify a rejection of
her sexuality as many rape victims shave their heads
and some become lesbians.

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Fri Jul  1 23:15:59 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 19:15:59 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: Rules of Engagement was Re: [extropy-chat] Re: Meta: Too  far
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>
References: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507011914280.-207363@pentium.mb.willtown.net>


Ah, Dorsai! Love those stories, don't have them all, can't find them.
It's a problem, loving old SF.

Maybe I'll get out what I have and re-read it. :)

Regards,
MB

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, David Lubkin wrote:

> In Gordon R. Dickson's Childe Cycle -- which he, as I had feared, died
> before finishing -- the people of a resource-poor planet, Dorsai, hire
> themselves out to the rest of civilization as elite warriors.
>
> In "Brothers," Gordy addresses some of the issues of this thread:
>
> >As professional, free-lance soldiers, under the pattern of the Dorsai
> >contract -- which the Exotic employers honored for all their military
> >employees -- the mercenaries were entitled to know the aim and purpose of
> >any general orders for military action they were given. By a ninety-six
> >per cent vote among the enlisted men concerned, they could refuse to obey
> >the order. In fact, by a hundred per cent vote, they could force their
> >officers to use them in an action they themselves demanded.
>
>


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jul  1 23:32:38 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:32:38 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507011914280.-207363@pentium.mb.willtown.ne
 t>
References: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507011914280.-207363@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 07:15 PM 7/1/2005 -0400, MB wrote:

>Ah, Dorsai! Love those stories, don't have them all, can't find them.
>It's a problem, loving old SF.


Not really. Try www.abebooks.com

e.g. 
http://dogbert.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=dickson&y=14&kn=dorsai&x=25

(lots of these books for a buck + postage)

or ebay.

Damien Broderick



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  1 23:39:34 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:39:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050701233934.60801.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> Not really. Try www.abebooks.com
> 
> e.g. 
>
http://dogbert.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=dickson&y=14&kn=dorsai&x=25
> 
> (lots of these books for a buck + postage)
> 
> or ebay.

You know, I think they should have a Project Gutenberg
for old sci fi. Where you can just download the text
for free. No point in paying some publisher for an old
copy of "Blade Runner" (i.e. "DADOES") when Phillip K.
Dick is too dead to enjoy the royalties.

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jul  1 23:46:09 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 18:46:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <20050701233934.60801.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050701233934.60801.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


>No point in paying some publisher for an old
>copy of "Blade Runner" (i.e. "DADOES") when [Philip] K.
>Dick is too dead to enjoy the royalties.

His kids aren't dead.

Damien Broderick 



From amara at amara.com  Fri Jul  1 23:46:30 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 01:46:30 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all part two
Message-ID: <p06210202beeb864eeaa6@[23.237.66.13]>

What you didn't try to save her ?! But why not ? OK, maybe she is a
bit like a rag doll and a bit *too* flexible., but just because
she's a mannequin, doesn't mean you can't try.

Here she is falling bigger and longer.. See if you can guide
her gently through the spheres:

"The Neverending Fall"

http://www.thechump.com/neverendingfall.swf

The physics embedded is incredibly good. I guess you didn't follow
my humor, so maybe only computational physics people can appreciate
excellent  "software gravity"... :-)

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 play's the thing."  --Shakespeare


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Fri Jul  1 23:53:56 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 16:53:56 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Body Worlds [was Free fall for all]
In-Reply-To: <001101c57e8c$b140eab0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
References: <20050701220910.16828.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<001101c57e8c$b140eab0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce0507011653433fae4d@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/1/05, Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> 
> > What is supposed to be judged 'safely'? It seems creepy to me, like
> > abusing a corpse.
> 
> Speaking of which ... have you all discussed "plastination" here?  A friend
> of mine went to one of these shows (in Los Angeles), and described them to
> me in gory detail.  He said he loved the show - and was entertained.  I was
> creeped out just listening.:
> 
> http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/pages/home.asp
> 
> http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,679330,00.html

I saw the exhibit a few month ago -- fascinating stuff. I thought I'd
be creeped out when I was there, but I ended up just being overwhelmed
by fascination and forgot completely about the creepiness.

-- Neil


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 00:10:46 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 17:10:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Body Worlds [was Free fall for all]
In-Reply-To: <001101c57e8c$b140eab0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20050702001047.87112.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:

> From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> 
> > What is supposed to be judged 'safely'? It seems creepy to me, like
> > abusing a corpse.
> 
> Speaking of which ... have you all discussed "plastination" here?  A
> friend of mine went to one of these shows (in Los Angeles), and
> described them to me in gory detail.  He said he loved the show -
> and was entertained. I was creeped out just listening.:
> 
> http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/pages/home.asp
> 
> http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,679330,00.html

These at least have some educational value. That free fall 'game' isn't
even as funny as "Weekend at Bernie's". It's like "lets toss this
cadaver off a skyscraper and kick it around the yard".

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 00:12:47 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 17:12:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> 
> >No point in paying some publisher for an old
> >copy of "Blade Runner" (i.e. "DADOES") when [Philip] K.
> >Dick is too dead to enjoy the royalties.
> 
> His kids aren't dead.

What do they have to do with anything? Let them get honest jobs.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jul  2 00:17:33 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 19:17:33 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all part two
In-Reply-To: <p06210202beeb864eeaa6@[23.237.66.13]>
References: <p06210202beeb864eeaa6@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701191621.01d99a30@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 01:46 AM 7/2/2005 +0200, Amara wrote:

>The physics embedded is incredibly good. I guess you didn't follow
>my humor, so maybe only computational physics people can appreciate
>excellent  "software gravity"... :-)

?? With no acceleration? (As far as I can tell.)

Damien Broderick 



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sat Jul  2 00:21:19 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 17:21:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Body Worlds [was Free fall for all]
References: <20050702001047.87112.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <003401c57e9b$f8ab3e50$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Mike Lorrey" <mlorrey at yahoo.com>
> These at least have some educational value. That free fall 'game' isn't
> even as funny as "Weekend at Bernie's". It's like "lets toss this
> cadaver off a skyscraper and kick it around the yard".

Awwwwww, Mike.  In spite of all your braggadocio, you're just an old softie 
...

;>) 




From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Jul  2 00:47:05 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 20:47:05 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507011914280.-207363@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507012038520.-300651@pentium.mb.willtown.net>



On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Damien Broderick wrote:

> At 07:15 PM 7/1/2005 -0400, MB wrote:
>
> >Ah, Dorsai! Love those stories, don't have them all, can't find them.
> >It's a problem, loving old SF.
>
>
> Not really. Try www.abebooks.com
>
> e.g.
> http://dogbert.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=dickson&y=14&kn=dorsai&x=25
>
> (lots of these books for a buck + postage)
>
> or ebay.
>


True, I wrote before I thought...

I purchased a few years ago an Ace Double, recommended/found for me
through abebooks by Jim Fehlinger (formerly of this list, IIRC):
Second Ending by James White - AI/robots saving the last man - and
re-doing creation from the dust and seeds caught in his trouser cuffs.
:)

... a book full of "suspended animation" and friendly AI.

And also the very first SF I ever read.

Really what I need is more shelf space! :)))

Regards,
MB


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jul  2 00:36:30 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 19:36:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 05:12 PM 7/1/2005 -0700, ML wrote:

> > >No point in paying some publisher for an old
> > >copy of "Blade Runner" (i.e. "DADOES") when [Philip] K.
> > >Dick is too dead to enjoy the royalties.
> >
> > His kids aren't dead.
>
>What do they have to do with anything? Let them get honest jobs.

Good grief! Mike Lorrey the rabid socialist?

The initial comment by Stuart rather confused the central issue, it seems 
to me, by referring to second-hand copies. After all, even if Phil were 
still alive, he still wouldn't be making any royalties from second-hand 
copies.

It's true that any book published in large numbers is likely to be 
available for years to come in second-hand stores, which reduces the 
likelihood that new copies will be published (by reducing the size of the 
market). On the other hand, readers having access to second-hand copies 
also keeps a writer's name alive. However, if free download of scanned 
texts by both dead and living writers were generally available, it would 
certainly obliterate the writers' or their estates' capacity to earn money 
from e-books, and very probably significantly reduce the interest of paper 
publishers to reprint such work. (Experiments in making available some work 
through Creative Commons licences are interesting, but are of course optional.)

My sense of it is this (by analogy): when my father died and left his house 
to his children, Mike appears to be suggesting that we had no right at all 
to use it or sell it and keep the money ourselves. This is rather unexpected.
.................................

But to shift ground slightly: I'm still seriously considering releasing to 
the net a thriller that Barbara Lamar and I wrote based on the idea of 
synthetic chromosomes as a means of defeating ageing and death, increasing 
intelligence, and doing away with bad hair days. We've had astonishing 
resistance to this book from mainstream publishers, generally on the 
grounds that we're endorsing rather than abominating scientific advances of 
this kind.

When someone like Charlie Stross or Cory Doctorow releases a book under CC, 
it is ancillary to paper publication, and their hope is that readers who 
get enthralled by the e-text will get tired of reading on the screen and 
pick up a copy at the bookstore, or via Amazon. CC release is thus a form 
of advertising; the revenue still comes from the paper books. What I'm 
still toying with is the possibility of making this novel available for 
download at no charge, while inviting readers who enjoy it to send us, say, 
a dollar or two via PayPal.

Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new singularity 
novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people would feel an 
impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude for having the 
book might available in this way? Would anyone here be likely to do so?

Damien Broderick 



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Jul  2 00:50:24 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 10:50:24 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all part two
References: <p06210202beeb864eeaa6@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <07d301c57ea0$085b1060$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Amara Graps wrote:

> What you didn't try to save her ?! But why not ? OK, maybe she is a
> bit like a rag doll and a bit *too* flexible., but just because
> she's a mannequin, doesn't mean you can't try.
> 
> Here she is falling bigger and longer.. See if you can guide
> her gently through the spheres:
> 
> "The Neverending Fall"
> 
> http://www.thechump.com/neverendingfall.swf
> 
> The physics embedded is incredibly good. I guess you didn't follow
> my humor, so maybe only computational physics people can appreciate
> excellent  "software gravity"... :-)

She seems to have double-jointed elbows and leg that are stuck
together :-)

Also, the friction on the spheres seems to be zero, and her body
must be totally non stick as she simply refuses to balance on one. 

She's too high maintenance for me. 

Brett Paatsch



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Jul  2 00:48:45 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 20:48:45 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507012038520.-300651@pentium.mb.willtown.ne
 t>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507011914280.-207363@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701203831.05e68da0@unreasonable.com>

MB wrote:

>Really what I need is more shelf space! :)))

When Glen Cook is dealing used books at sf conventions, he has a 
calligraphed epigram on his table to the effect that if you aren't out of 
book shelves, you probably aren't worth knowing.


-- David Lubkin.



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sat Jul  2 01:05:18 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 11:05:18 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com><20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <07f401c57ea2$1cde0040$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Damien Broderick wrote:

> What I'm  still toying with is the possibility of making this novel
> available for download at no charge, while inviting readers who
> enjoy it to send us, say, a dollar or two via PayPal.
> 
> Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his
> new singularity novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My 
> question: how many people would feel an impulse to pay the
> author a couple of bucks in gratitude for having the book might
> available in this way? Would anyone here be likely to do so?

I probably wouldn't read a sci fi novel in eform, I still prefer to read
paper, perhaps because the PC I use still sits on top of a desk and
has wires coming out of it all over the place, but if I did, I'd be happy
to pay a couple of bucks for it.

I don't even know what the state of the art in easy e-reading is at
present.

Brett Paatsch



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 01:14:26 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 18:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050702011426.67920.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> At 05:12 PM 7/1/2005 -0700, ML wrote:
> 
> > > >No point in paying some publisher for an old
> > > >copy of "Blade Runner" (i.e. "DADOES") when [Philip] K.
> > > >Dick is too dead to enjoy the royalties.
> > >
> > > His kids aren't dead.
> >
> >What do they have to do with anything? Let them get honest jobs.
> 
> Good grief! Mike Lorrey the rabid socialist?

I have been previously on record stating that one reason, IMHO, for the
plague of attacks on IP is that congress has extended IP protections
for too long. WRT patents, the extension of patent protections from 17
to 20 years in GATT is in the wrong direction, given the accelerating
advancement of technology, the protection period should be shortening
if it is to fulfill its goal of encouraging innovation. 

WRT copyrights, yes, publishers copyright protections should only be
extended if the publisher issues new editions of the work, otherwise
they should be adjuged to have 'abandoned' the claim to the work, like
a railroad company abandoning its tracks, with title reverting to the
original landowners. IMHO a publisher should issue a new edition each
decade or so, of some significant production quantity, else the
copyright reverts to the author. If the author cannot either find a new
publisher, or themselves publish and sell the required quantities,
their work should be regarded as abandoned and become public domain.


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Jul  2 01:48:08 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 21:48:08 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>

Damien wrote:

>When someone like Charlie Stross or Cory Doctorow releases a book under 
>CC, it is ancillary to paper publication, and their hope is that readers 
>who get enthralled by the e-text will get tired of reading on the screen 
>and pick up a copy at the bookstore, or via Amazon. CC release is thus a 
>form of advertising; the revenue still comes from the paper books.

Indeed, a free download is best structured to be inconvenient to read, even 
if it is ostensibly in a print format.

I encountered something similar in a consulting job. We were generating 
printed quarterly reports for company A to give to their customers. I had 
ideas on making it much more convenient, such as real-time reports the 
customer could view over the web. Turns out a major reason they wanted the 
printed reports is to have a regular excuse for their sales force to call.

The moral for me, and perhaps others on-list, is that people almost always 
behave rationally and if one doesn't think so, one may not be looking at a 
wide enough range of considerations.

>  What I'm still toying with is the possibility of making this novel 
> available for download at no charge, while inviting readers who enjoy it 
> to send us, say, a dollar or two via PayPal.
>
>Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new 
>singularity novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people 
>would feel an impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude for 
>having the book might available in this way? Would anyone here be likely 
>to do so?

I wouldn't, although I have paid for pdf documents. Because the content was 
not available on paper, because it was substantially cheaper, or because I 
needed it *now*.

Commerce is more dependable than charity. (Quoth the libertarian, 
paraphrasing David Friedman.)


-- David.



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jul  2 02:26:22 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 21:26:22 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
References: <20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701211858.01da2068@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 09:48 PM 7/1/2005 -0400, David Lubkin wrote:

>>Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new 
>>singularity novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people 
>>would feel an impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude 
>>for having the book [made] available in this way? Would anyone here be 
>>likely to do so?
>
>I wouldn't...
>Commerce is more dependable than charity.

?? I wouldn't be asking for charity, because I'd be the one providing the 
service.

Nor would I be offering charity, since I'd be seeking payment.

However, your maxim seems to suggest that the better method would be to 
charge a nominal fee, before downloading is done. That, though, presumably 
slashes the number of people interested in trying a book out. Maybe some 
combination is worth testing: permit downloading of one third or one half 
of the novel free of charge, with the remainder available upon request for 
a fee of two dollars, say. This would have to be made absolutely clear up 
front, of course, or readers would feel royally pissed off.

Damien Broderick



From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Jul  2 03:10:30 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 23:10:30 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507012245010.-300651@pentium.mb.willtown.net>





On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Damien Broderick wrote:

> When someone like Charlie Stross or Cory Doctorow releases a book under CC,
> it is ancillary to paper publication, and their hope is that readers who
> get enthralled by the e-text will get tired of reading on the screen and
> pick up a copy at the bookstore, or via Amazon. CC release is thus a form
> of advertising; the revenue still comes from the paper books. What I'm
> still toying with is the possibility of making this novel available for
> download at no charge, while inviting readers who enjoy it to send us, say,
> a dollar or two via PayPal.
>
> Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new singularity
> novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people would feel an
> impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude for having the
> book might available in this way? Would anyone here be likely to do so?

I might well be interested in purchasing such, but would not want to
use PayPal, preferring to send a Money Order. That would be a problem
for non-US purchases.

For sure I wouldn't want to pay much, as the reading would not be very
comfortable. My old 'puter sitting here on this desk, me perched on
this drafting stool... however I'm most unlikely to print a *book*
out! :)))

Regards,
MB


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Jul  2 03:13:47 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 23:13:47 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old sf
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701203831.05e68da0@unreasonable.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<073501c57df8$e93b34a0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701122730.04c52ff8@unreasonable.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507011914280.-207363@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701183015.01ce5cc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701203831.05e68da0@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507012248330.-300651@pentium.mb.willtown.net>



On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, David Lubkin wrote:

> MB wrote:
>
> >Really what I need is more shelf space! :)))
>
> When Glen Cook is dealing used books at sf conventions, he has a
> calligraphed epigram on his table to the effect that if you aren't out of
> book shelves, you probably aren't worth knowing.
>

:))) In the herp arena, empty cages seem to fill themselves from herp
shows only to be followed by more cage purchases for the additional
herps one couldn't resist but hadn't housing for. I don't go to herp
shows, the danger is too great. A show where old SF was being sold
would be a terrible temptation!

The book shelf business is a challenge. Any time I've weeded through
my books I've almost immediately wanted/needed some I've discarded.
Maybe if I lined every room with shelves all 'round, I'd manage
better. My cousin has done that with two rooms in her house. It's
quite a wonderful thing, very attractive and endlessly interesting!

Regards,
MB




From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Sat Jul  2 04:03:32 2005
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 14:03:32 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <42C61214.6050500@optusnet.com.au>

> 
> Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new 
> singularity novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people 
> would feel an impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude 
> for having the book might available in this way? Would anyone here be 
> likely to do so?
> 
> Damien Broderick


Yes.


From amara at amara.com  Sat Jul  2 06:48:40 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 08:48:40 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Body Worlds
Message-ID: <p06210201beebe894d5b9@[23.237.66.13]>

Olga:
>Speaking of which ... have you all discussed "plastination" here?  A
>friend of mine went to one of these shows (in Los Angeles), and
>described them to me in gory detail.  He said he loved the show - and
>was entertained.  I was creeped out just listening.:

>http://www.bodyworlds.com/en/pages/home.asp

>http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,679330,00.html


Anders Sandberg wrote an excellent piece on it in 2001 (I think, or
2002?) when the exhibit was just getting known in Europe. The archives
are not up from that time, and I think I was offline enough that I
wasn't saving all of the posts because now I can't find it. Someone,
who has the extropians list archived more completely, can check?

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/
********************************************************************
"CALIFORNIA magazine, in an article on "The Man Who Invented Time Travel",
even  ran a photograph of me doing physics in the nude on Palomar Mountain.
I was mortified---not by the photo, but by the totally outrageous claims
that I had  invented time machines and time travel."  -- Kip Thorne


From pharos at gmail.com  Sat Jul  2 07:35:54 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 08:35:54 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why smart people defend bad ideas
Message-ID: <ee50357e050702003535da8364@mail.gmail.com>

<http://www.scottberkun.com/essays/essay40.htm>

Nice essay, with lots of home truths.

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

The problem with smart people is that they like to be right and
sometimes will defend ideas to the death rather than admit they're
wrong. This is bad. Worse, if they got away with it when they were
young (say, because they were smarter than their parents, their
friends, and their parent's friends) they've probably built an ego
around being right, and will therefore defend their perfect record of
invented righteousness to the death. Smart people often fall into the
trap of preferring to be right even if it's based in delusion, or
results in them, or their loved ones, becoming miserable. (Somewhere
in your town there is a row of graves at the cemetery, called
smartypants lane, filled with people who were buried at poorly
attended funerals, whose headstones say "Well, at least I was right.")

----

Short of obtaining a degree in logic, or studying the nuances of
debate, remember this one simple rule for defusing those who are
skilled at defending bad ideas: Simply because they cannot be proven
wrong, does not make them right. Most of the tricks of logic and
debate refute questions and attacks, but fail to establish any true
justification for a given idea.

----

The primary point is that no amount of intelligence can help an
individual who is diligently working at the wrong level of the
problem. Someone with wisdom has to tap them on the shoulder and say,
"Um, hey. The hole you're digging is very nice, and it is the right
size. But you're in the wrong yard."

----

Smart people, or at least those whose brains have good first gears,
use their speed in thought to overpower others. They'll jump between
assumptions quickly, throwing out jargon, bits of logic, or rules of
thumb at a rate of fire fast enough to cause most people to become
rattled, and give in. When that doesn't work, the arrogant or the
pompous will throw in some belittlement and use whatever snide or
manipulative tactics they have at their disposal to further discourage
you from dissecting their ideas.

----

BillK


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 09:48:16 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 02:48:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701211858.01da2068@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050702094816.83273.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> However, your maxim seems to suggest that the better
> method would be to 
> charge a nominal fee, before downloading is done.
> That, though, presumably 
> slashes the number of people interested in trying a
> book out. Maybe some 
> combination is worth testing: permit downloading of
> one third or one half 
> of the novel free of charge, with the remainder
> available upon request for 
> a fee of two dollars, say. This would have to be
> made absolutely clear up 
> front, of course, or readers would feel royally
> pissed off.

How about selling by chapters with the first one free
and incrementing the price of each chapter
progressively? Just set the increments so that by the
time they buy the chapter containing the "climax" they
get the rest of the novel for free but they have
actually paid what they would have normally paid for
the book in paperback. Or whatever you feel it's
worth. It would work great for mystery novels where
everything is revealed in the last chapter.
 

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Jul  2 10:29:41 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 03:29:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507012245010.-300651@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507012245010.-300651@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
Message-ID: <50411CE4-6ABC-4A6F-A4C0-2270F90AFFAC@mac.com>


On Jul 1, 2005, at 8:10 PM, MB wrote:

>
>
>
>
> On Fri, 1 Jul 2005, Damien Broderick wrote:
>
>
>> When someone like Charlie Stross or Cory Doctorow releases a book  
>> under CC,
>> it is ancillary to paper publication, and their hope is that  
>> readers who
>> get enthralled by the e-text will get tired of reading on the  
>> screen and
>> pick up a copy at the bookstore, or via Amazon. CC release is thus  
>> a form
>> of advertising; the revenue still comes from the paper books. What  
>> I'm
>> still toying with is the possibility of making this novel  
>> available for
>> download at no charge, while inviting readers who enjoy it to send  
>> us, say,
>> a dollar or two via PayPal.


It is an interim form on the way to hopefully more ways to release  
work AND get reasonable remuneration.  I don't see it as primarily  
advertising though.    Personally I have a very nice monitor  
optimized for reading.   It is just too hard so far to drag a  
suitable monitor with me everywhere I would read  I haven't mounted  
an LCD panel on the bathroom wall for instance.

I would certainly send a couple of bucks myself.

>>
>> Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new  
>> singularity
>> novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people would  
>> feel an
>> impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude for  
>> having the
>> book might available in this way? Would anyone here be likely to  
>> do so?
>>

Actually as soon as it came out I ordered a hardback from Amazon.  I  
have read half of it online. and will likely read the other half  
there but I still wanted the paper copy.  Especially of this book.  I  
am really very impressed with Accelerando.  I haven't enjoyed any SF  
book as much in some time.

- samantha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050702/30e6cebe/attachment.html>

From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 10:42:37 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 03:42:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why smart people defend bad ideas
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e050702003535da8364@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050702104237.4716.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>



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

> <http://www.scottberkun.com/essays/essay40.htm>
> 
> Nice essay, with lots of home truths.
> 
Yup. And some pretty funny not so truths-

--------------------------------
For example, if you are skidding out of control at
95mph in your broken down Winnebago on an ice covered
interstate, when a semi-truck filled with both poorly
packaged fireworks and loosely bundled spark plugs
slams on its brakes, it?s not the right time to
discuss with your passengers where y?all would like to
stop for dinner. But as ridiculous as this scenario
sounds, it happens all the time.
--------------------------------------

It does? To who? Whoever that guy is I have to hand it
to him. When I feel my tires lose traction about the
only thing I can say is "oh shit!"

------------------------------------
?Well, it's gotten us this far, and it?s the best
system we have?. Well, maybe. But if you were in that
broken down Winnebago up to your ankles in gasoline
from a leaking tank, smoking a cigarette in each hand,
you could say the same thing. 
----------------------------------------------

Maybe- if you're the poster child for natural
selection. 

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

As social animals we are heavily influenced by how the
people around us behave, and the quality of our own
internal decision making varies widely depending on
the environment we currently are in. (e.g. Try to
write a haiku poem while standing in an elevator with
15 opera singers screaming 15 different operas, in 15
different languages, in falsetto, directly at you vs.
sitting on a bench in a quiet stretch of open woods). 
----------------------------------------
My spring day ruined--
Fifteen fat ladies singing,
Fourteen floors to go.
:)




The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From theo at gmx.co.uk  Sat Jul  2 13:29:19 2005
From: theo at gmx.co.uk (T.Theodorus Ibrahim)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 14:29:19 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Military
In-Reply-To: <200506300224.j5U2OaR13948@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <OIEBKIIHPEBCNNHOAENBEEKICDAA.theo@gmx.co.uk>


Just saw this post by J. Andrew Rodgers. This is very interesting. There
does seem to be this rather strange (or maybe not so strange) military -
transhuman axis. Historically, here in the UK in the early part of the 20th
century  there was a guy named JFC Fuller, one of the pioneers of armoured
warfare, mechanisation and proponent of the drive towards the greater
efficiency this would bring. He & his cadre placed great emphasis on the
technology of improving human performance in the military arena, in a way
somewhat reminiscent of what we might recognise
as transhumanism today - except with that specific military focus. If there
are a lot of proto extropians now or in the recent past in the military the
roots of that may lie quite a long time in the past. Something to think
about.

cheers
t. theodorus ibrahim


>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 28
> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 19:24:00 -0700
> From: "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>


> Well I'll be damned.  Who would have thought there was more than one
> former Lightfighter on this list (yeah, me too many moons ago).  I
> remember an unofficial survey on the extropians list many years ago of
> how many on the list were ex-military and they came out of the woodwork.
>  There were a lot of geeks and proto-extropians in the military when I
> was in -- it is not a cadre of ill-educated hicks as is a popular notion.

>
> cheers,
>
> j. andrew rogers
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
> End of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 21, Issue 48
> ********************************************
>



From sentience at pobox.com  Sat Jul  2 14:20:02 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 07:20:02 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why smart people defend bad ideas
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e050702003535da8364@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ee50357e050702003535da8364@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42C6A292.9040409@pobox.com>

BillK wrote:
> <http://www.scottberkun.com/essays/essay40.htm>
> 
> Nice essay, with lots of home truths.

If you liked this essay you may also be interested in reading:

"Why Smart People Can Be So Stupid"
a collection of semitechnical papers edited by Robert J. Sternberg

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


From jef at jefallbright.net  Sat Jul  2 18:20:02 2005
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 11:20:02 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
References: <20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <42C6DAD2.1020507@jefallbright.net>

David Lubkin wrote:

> Damien wrote:
>
>> When someone like Charlie Stross or Cory Doctorow releases a book 
>> under CC, it is ancillary to paper publication, and their hope is 
>> that readers who get enthralled by the e-text will get tired of 
>> reading on the screen and pick up a copy at the bookstore, or via 
>> Amazon. CC release is thus a form of advertising; the revenue still 
>> comes from the paper books.
>
>
> Indeed, a free download is best structured to be inconvenient to read, 
> even if it is ostensibly in a print format.
>
> I encountered something similar in a consulting job. We were 
> generating printed quarterly reports for company A to give to their 
> customers. I had ideas on making it much more convenient, such as 
> real-time reports the customer could view over the web. Turns out a 
> major reason they wanted the printed reports is to have a regular 
> excuse for their sales force to call.
>
> The moral for me, and perhaps others on-list, is that people almost 
> always behave rationally and if one doesn't think so, one may not be 
> looking at a wide enough range of considerations.
>

People don't rationally pay for that which they can get for free, and 
this is true at all scales of time, actors and types of interactions.  
However, people and organizations are increasingly coming to understand 
that identification with short term, limited context goals is 
detrimental to self in the longer term bigger picture.

So the current problem is one of balance:  How to contribute to 
sustaining the current systems, predominately based on immediate or very 
near-term payback, while also promoting and contributing to longer-term 
investments in the future that we (and increasingly, others) would like 
to enjoy.

I enjoyed Acclerando, downloading it for free and reading it on my 
handheld during free moments and in bed before sleep.  Because I enjoyed 
it and want to promote similar creative offerings, I've asked Charlie 
how I can send him a few bucks.  At the same time, I have little 
interest in promoting the dead tree version so I will not buy the paper 
book.  (I've already converted several hundred books in my paper library 
to PDF and have discretely disposed of the corpses.)

- Jef


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Sat Jul  2 18:21:07 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 11:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Military
In-Reply-To: <OIEBKIIHPEBCNNHOAENBEEKICDAA.theo@gmx.co.uk>
Message-ID: <20050702182107.6102.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

--- "T.Theodorus Ibrahim" <theo at gmx.co.uk> wrote:
> There
> does seem to be this rather strange (or maybe not so strange)
> military -
> transhuman axis.

Not so strange.  Military is one of the most obvious and easy
applications of transhuman tech.  Put another way: >H tech is, in a
sense, about increasing one's personal power - and military is all
about power.

From: "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
>  There were a lot of geeks and proto-extropians in the military
> when I
> was in -- it is not a cadre of ill-educated hicks as is a popular
> notion.

This misperception again comes because the military is all about power.
Raw, barbaric, physical power is what most people have experience with
- think schoolyard bullies.  It actually takes a bit of training to see
the force multiplier that intellectual power gives; fighting smartly,
rather than just harder, is the true advantage that military, martial
artists, and other trained fighters have, but it can be difficult to
see it (as opposed to the relatively minor effects of increased
physical hardiness, muscles, et cetera) if one does not know what to
look for.  (Kind of like judging any advanced art, when one does not
know the basics of the art.)


From starman2100 at cableone.net  Sat Jul  2 21:09:07 2005
From: starman2100 at cableone.net (starman2100 at cableone.net)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 14:09:07 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Sci Am & Transhumanism
Message-ID: <1120338547_132278@S1.cableone.net>

An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050702/ebc5f212/attachment.ksh>

From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Sat Jul  2 21:15:56 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 17:15:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Military
In-Reply-To: <20050702182107.6102.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050702182107.6102.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42C7040C.5020103@humanenhancement.com>

Not only that, but on a practical level, many of the technologies we 
describe as >H in nature will, on a practical level, be developed by the 
military. One has only to look at DARPA to see that; 
http://www.darpa.mil/ipto/programs/augcog/ is only one example among 
very many.

Much like space travel, there's little incentive for private industry to 
blaze a trail whose outcome is entirely uncertain. Government, whatever 
else one may think of it, has not only the concentrated resources but 
also the incentive to develop these technologies to the point of proof 
of viability, at which time industry should (in a perfect model) take 
over the reigns of development, production, and ultimately distribution 
to society.

Joseph

Enhance your body "beyond well" and your mind "beyond normal": 
http://www.humanenhancement.com
New Jersey Transhumanist Association: http://www.goldenfuture.net/njta
PostHumanity Rising: http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ (updated 6/14/05)

Adrian Tymes wrote:

>--- "T.Theodorus Ibrahim" <theo at gmx.co.uk> wrote:
>  
>
>>There
>>does seem to be this rather strange (or maybe not so strange)
>>military -
>>transhuman axis.
>>    
>>
>
>Not so strange.  Military is one of the most obvious and easy
>applications of transhuman tech.  Put another way: >H tech is, in a
>sense, about increasing one's personal power - and military is all
>about power.
>
>From: "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
>  
>
>> There were a lot of geeks and proto-extropians in the military
>>when I
>>was in -- it is not a cadre of ill-educated hicks as is a popular
>>notion.
>>    
>>
>
>This misperception again comes because the military is all about power.
>Raw, barbaric, physical power is what most people have experience with
>- think schoolyard bullies.  It actually takes a bit of training to see
>the force multiplier that intellectual power gives; fighting smartly,
>rather than just harder, is the true advantage that military, martial
>artists, and other trained fighters have, but it can be difficult to
>see it (as opposed to the relatively minor effects of increased
>physical hardiness, muscles, et cetera) if one does not know what to
>look for.  (Kind of like judging any advanced art, when one does not
>know the basics of the art.)
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
>  
>


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 21:56:26 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 14:56:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhuman Military
In-Reply-To: <42C7040C.5020103@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <20050702215626.17453.qmail@web30706.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

--- Joseph Bloch <jbloch at humanenhancement.com> wrote:

> Not only that, but on a practical level, many of the technologies we 
> describe as >H in nature will, on a practical level, be developed by
> the military. One has only to look at DARPA to see that; 
> http://www.darpa.mil/ipto/programs/augcog/ is only one example among 
> very many.
> 
> Much like space travel, there's little incentive for private industry
> to blaze a trail whose outcome is entirely uncertain. Government,
> whatever 
> else one may think of it, has not only the concentrated resources but
> also the incentive to develop these technologies to the point of
> proof of viability, at which time industry should (in a perfect
> model) take over the reigns of development, production, and
ultimately
> distribution to society.

Business is about risk. People who want certainty buy government bonds,
not private stocks. To date, the military has already developed and
used all technologies needed to get to orbit, and many technologies for
getting from there to the rest of the solar system. It is government
that has been lacking the will to risk developing advanced
technologies.

SpaceShipOne's flight envelope may not have been much different from
the X-15 (they actually beat the X-15 by 13,000 feet), but they did it
with an innovative hybrid rocket motor that has never been used in a
government space program. Tier Two will pick up the next stage that the
USAF abandoned in the 60's, it will essentially replicate the Dyna-Soar
program would have followed if it hadn't been cancelled by the Johnson
administration to fund the Vietnam war and the Great Society welfare
state.

XCOR's Xerus program is similar to the USAF's Black Horse program of
the 1980's, while a european company is developing ion thruster powered
OTVs that NASA and the USAF have been talking about and experimenting
about for decades. The Planetary Society's unfortunate loss of it's
solar sail vehicle was lost at the hands of faulty government owned
rockets (russian ICBMs).

The US military does recognise the need to move technology forward to
maintain tactical superiority, but it unfortunately sees transhumans as
a threat rather than potential allies (as specified in its 2025
program). Its ideas, though, are still generally mundane compared to
what will be possible, and I found that Charlie Stross' depiction of
the military of the New Republic and its inability to rationally deal
with truly posthuman technologies and entities, which eat them
literally for lunch before any of them have any clue what is going on,
as being entirely reasonable. 

While I found many individuals in the military to have transhumanist
tendencies, the problem is that most of those were not in any position
to do anything about them and were prisoners of bureaucratic inertia.
Even those who were in positions to do something about them generally
didn't because the more hide-bound individuals (who paradoxically saw
themselves as cutting edge) would have seen them as too fanciful for a
responsible officer to advocate if he or she expected to be promoted.
Flights of fancy do not reflect responsibility, maturity, and introspection.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 22:21:58 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 15:21:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] it takes a conservative village
In-Reply-To: <20050702221102.89922.qmail@web51603.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050702222158.52284.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

If smaller government is better then why don't fiscal conservatives save more for their childrens' education? Why do conservative parents so often say, "I don't like big government telling me what to do with my family, but I want the government to subsidize my kids' education"? If education is so important, then why don't conservative parents make it their first priority? If so many conservative parents want to send their children to better schools then why don't they save much more so they can pay for the schooling entirely by themselves? Instead parents essentially say "I pay taxes thus I want back for my childrens' education what I put into the system". However in terms of quality they are often not getting back what they put in, they would have greater odds getting more bang for their buck by paying all the educational costs themselves or homeschooling the children; and of course some can hire tutors as well. But no, of course not-- this would be the sensible thing to do. Instead
 they infuse funds via property and other taxes into the school system, but often resent public schools because the quality is merely poor - good or the children are not being educated in the way conservative parents want them to be educated. 
What it amounts to is fiscal conservatives say they think their children are their own responsibility when deep down they actually think the responsibility ought to be shared. "It takes a conservative village" is their secret thinking. Jessica Peck Corry of The Independence Institute wants parents to take responsibility for their own families, yet she will expect the government to take some financial responsibility for her child when that child goes to school. When you multiply that times all the conservatives in Colorado who want government to take at least part of the responsibility for their childrens' education, then you can see right away that fiscal responsibility in education wont go anywhere in the confused state that is Colorado. So much for independence.















































		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Sports
 Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050702/a0c8a557/attachment.html>

From reason at longevitymeme.org  Sat Jul  2 22:23:45 2005
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 15:23:45 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Sci Am & Transhumanism
In-Reply-To: <1120338547_132278@S1.cableone.net>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNAEPMGCAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]On Behalf Of
> starman2100 at cableone.net

> The latest issue of Scientific American grabbed my attention due
> to the writings
> of both Michael Shermer and Dr. Nick Bostrom.  Shermer, who is
> known at times to
> be a critic of cryonics and transhumanism, mocked the idea that
> immortalists like
> Ray Kurzweil could really see a big life-extension payoff within
> their lifetimes.
>  I do agree with Shermer that mega-dosing on vitamins is not
> going to necessarily
> be that beneficial but he is really making things up as he goes
> along when he
> says "immortality is at least a millennium away, if not
> unattainable altogether!"
>  And I have to wonder if he meant true immortality or simply
> indefinite lifespan...

The beginnings of a discussion as to whether developing radical life
extension is easier than developing GAI - using the Shermer column as a
starting point - is here:

http://www.fightaging.org/archives/000528.php

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 22:40:58 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 15:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] it takes a conservative village
In-Reply-To: <20050702222158.52284.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050702224058.25196.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

This is a statement with a lot of assertions but few facts backing
them.

However, conservatives, who do not homeschool or private school their
kids, generally send their kids to public school because the local
community levies property taxes against them that the parents would
otherwise use to privately school their kids. People are taxed many
years before they send kids to school, and many years afterwards, in
total far more than it would cost them to privately school their kids.

How do you know conservative parents don't make education their first
priority? You certainly are jumping to a lot of conclusions here. Many
parents are unable to save for education for their kids because they
are overly taxed by the state for liberals welfare state programs that
are incredibly wasteful and only deliver a small fraction of the funds
and services to the intended end recipient.



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> If smaller government is better then why don't fiscal conservatives
> save more for their childrens' education? Why do conservative parents
> so often say, "I don't like big government telling me what to do with
> my family, but I want the government to subsidize my kids'
> education"? If education is so important, then why don't conservative
> parents make it their first priority? If so many conservative parents
> want to send their children to better schools then why don't they
> save much more so they can pay for the schooling entirely by
> themselves? Instead parents essentially say "I pay taxes thus I want
> back for my childrens' education what I put into the system". However
> in terms of quality they are often not getting back what they put in,
> they would have greater odds getting more bang for their buck by
> paying all the educational costs themselves or homeschooling the
> children; and of course some can hire tutors as well. But no, of
> course not-- this would be the sensible thing to do!
> . Instead
>  they infuse funds via property and other taxes into the school
> system, but often resent public schools because the quality is merely
> poor - good or the children are not being educated in the way
> conservative parents want them to be educated. 
> What it amounts to is fiscal conservatives say they think their
> children are their own responsibility when deep down they actually
> think the responsibility ought to be shared. "It takes a conservative
> village" is their secret thinking. Jessica Peck Corry of The
> Independence Institute wants parents to take responsibility for their
> own families, yet she will expect the government to take some
> financial responsibility for her child when that child goes to
> school. When you multiply that times all the conservatives in
> Colorado who want government to take at least part of the
> responsibility for their childrens' education, then you can see right
> away that fiscal responsibility in education wont go anywhere in the
> confused state that is Colorado. So much for independence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Sports
>  Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football>
_______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sat Jul  2 22:30:54 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 18:30:54 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <42C6DAD2.1020507@jefallbright.net>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>

Jef Allbright wrote:

>(I've already converted several hundred books in my paper library to PDF 
>and have discretely disposed of the corpses.)

I've recently begun the process of massively ridding myself of paper, and 
having a digital backup for paper I want to retain.

I heartily recommend the Fujitsu ScanSnap fi-5110EOX2 (about $400, 
including shipping, from newegg.com). It's about the size of a shoe box. It 
will scan a stack of documents from business card to A4. Both sides are 
scanned simultaneously, optionally skipping blank pages. Color to 600 dpi, 
B&W to 1200 dpi. Automatically deskews crooked pages. Saves to pdf or jpg. 
Comes with Acrobat (which includes OCR software) and CardMinder (global 
business card recognition). Lots of other bells-and-whistles. A few 
limitations.

I'm easily able to feed it a couple thousand sheets a day while I'm doing 
other work. Its small footprint and fast idle-to-scanned time also makes it 
trivial to integrate one-off scans into your workflow. I.e., I can scan in 
my electric bill in roughly the time it takes to open the next envelope in 
a stack of mail.


-- David Lubkin.



From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Sat Jul  2 22:50:09 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 18:50:09 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <42C71A21.5060404@humanenhancement.com>

Oooh... that sounds nice. How's it work on paperback books?

I'm imagining you dismember the books into single pages and feed it in.

Joseph

David Lubkin wrote:

> Jef Allbright wrote:
>
>> (I've already converted several hundred books in my paper library to 
>> PDF and have discretely disposed of the corpses.)
>
>
> I've recently begun the process of massively ridding myself of paper, 
> and having a digital backup for paper I want to retain.
>
> I heartily recommend the Fujitsu ScanSnap fi-5110EOX2 (about $400, 
> including shipping, from newegg.com). It's about the size of a shoe 
> box. It will scan a stack of documents from business card to A4. Both 
> sides are scanned simultaneously, optionally skipping blank pages. 
> Color to 600 dpi, B&W to 1200 dpi. Automatically deskews crooked 
> pages. Saves to pdf or jpg. Comes with Acrobat (which includes OCR 
> software) and CardMinder (global business card recognition). Lots of 
> other bells-and-whistles. A few limitations.
>
> I'm easily able to feed it a couple thousand sheets a day while I'm 
> doing other work. Its small footprint and fast idle-to-scanned time 
> also makes it trivial to integrate one-off scans into your workflow. 
> I.e., I can scan in my electric bill in roughly the time it takes to 
> open the next envelope in a stack of mail.
>
>
> -- David Lubkin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Sat Jul  2 22:58:14 2005
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 15:58:14 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Nanogirl news~
Message-ID: <016d01c57f59$89f74df0$0200a8c0@Nano>

The Nanogirl News
July 2, 2005

The Nanogirl News

Foresight Nanotech Institute Launches Nanotechnology Roadmap. Foresight Nanotech Institute, the leading nanotechnology think tank and public interest organization, and Battelle, a leading global research and development organization, have launched a Technology Roadmap for Productive Nanosystems through an initial grant of $250,000 from The Waitt Family Foundation. The group is assembling a world-class steering committee to guide this groundbreaking project, and has garnered the support of several important industry organizations as roadmap partners. Productive Nanosystems are molecular-scale systems that make other useful materials and devices that are nanostructured. The Technology Roadmap for Productive Nanosystems will provide a common framework for understanding the pathways for developing such systems, the challenges that must be overcome in their development and the applications that they can address. (Foresight 6/21/05) http://www.foresight.org/cms/press_center/128

Organizers of the second annual International and North Coast Nanotechnology Business Idea Competitions today announced they are accepting submissions for the 2005 event, which will award winners $150,000 in prize money at the conclusion of NANO Week in October. The competition seeks to encourage the development of business ideas that will commercialize nanotechnology research being done around the world. The International and North Coast Nanotechnology Business Idea Competitions is the culminating event of NANO Week, October 17-21, which this year will focus attention on the next generation of nanotechnology-based products and applications from the aerospace, automotive and consumer products industries. (6/16/05) http://www.tiime.case.edu/nano/index.html
Also see: http://www.nano-network.org./

Nano-levers point to futuristic gadgets. Billions of tiny mechanical levers could be used to store songs on future MP3 players and pictures on digital cameras. As bizarre as the idea might sound, researchers at a Dutch company have already demonstrated that miniscule mechanical switches can be used to store data using less power than existing technologies and with greater reliability.
Nanomech memory, developed by Cavendish Kinetics in the Netherlands, stores data using thousands of electro-mechanical switches that are toggled up or down to represent either a one or zero as a binary bit. Each switch is a few microns long and less than a micron wide - roughly a hundred times smaller than the width of a human hair. (NewScientist 6/24/05)
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7577&feedId=online-news_rss20

Research offers clues about C60 behavior in natural environments. In some of the first research to probe how buckyballs will interact with natural ecosystems, Rice University's Center for Biological and Environmental Nanotechnology finds that the molecules spontaneously clump together upon contact with water, forming nanoparticles that are both soluble and toxic to bacteria. The research challenges conventional wisdom: since buckyballs are notoriously insoluble by themselves, most scientists had assumed they would remain insoluble in nature. The findings also raise questions about how the buckyball aggregates - dubbed nano-C60 - will interact with other particles and living things in natural ecosystems. The findings appear in the June 1 issue of the journal Environmental Science & Technology. (PhysOrg 6/22/05) http://www.physorg.com/news4684.html
 
New Material Could Improve Fabrication of Nanoscale Components. A team of chemists at Penn State has developed a new type of ultrathin film, which has unusual properties that could improve the fabrication of increasingly smaller and more intricate electronic and sensing devices. The material, a single layer made from spherical cages of carbon atoms, could enable more precise patterning of such devices with a wider range of molecular components than now is possible with conventional self-assembled monolayers. The research is published in the current issue of the Journal of the American Chemical Society. The molecules that make up the material have larger spaces and weaker connections between them than do components of conventional self-assembled monolayers. "The bonding and structural characteristics of this monolayer give us the opportunity to replace its molecules with different molecules very easily, which opens up lots of possibilities for both directed patterning and self-assembled patterning," says Paul S. Weiss, professor of chemistry and physics. (Penn State 6/22/05) http://www.science.psu.edu/alert/Weiss6-2005.htm

Solar to Fuel: Catalyzing the Science. In the past 150 years, burgeoning industrialization has increased carbon in the atmosphere by 40 percent and driven a continuing rise in global temperatures. The trend won't stop soon. Among the consequences: rising sea levels, increased air pollution, and more hurricanes, floods, and droughts. Meanwhile, the age of cheap oil and gas has come to an end. In the short term humans urgently need to use energy more efficiently, and we need to stop putting carbon straight into the air. More important for the long term, we need to find or create ways to use energy that don't release any carbon at all. 
(Berkeley Lab 5/13/05) http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/sabl/2005/May/01-solar-to-fuel.html

New Chem-bio Sensors Offer Simultaneous Monitoring. Researchers at the Georgia Institute of Technology and the Vienna University of Technology have developed a modular system that combines chemical and biological sensing tools capable of providing simultaneous, nano-level resolution information on cell topography and biological activity. The tools integrate micro and nanoscale electrodes into the tips of an atomic force microscope (AFM). A veritable Swiss army knife of sensors, the patented technique is currently being tested to combine other sensing methods to give scientists a more holistic view of cellular activities. The research is published in Vol 44, 2005 of the chemistry journal Angewandte Chemie. (ScienceDaily 6/30/05)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/06/050630063042.htm

Nano World: Wiring up single molecules. A new method to carve infinitesimal gaps into nanowires soon could help scientists connect electronics to single molecules. This in turn could lead to computers based on molecular transistors with vastly greater computing power than conventional machines. Researchers at Northwestern University in Chicago who are developing the technique already have created notches only 2.5 nanometers wide -- or 2.5 billionths of a meter, the breadth of a DNA molecule -- in gold nanowires, into which a variety of compounds, such as genes, could be plugged.  "I believe we'll hit 1 nanometer within the year," senior researcher Chad Mirkin told UPI's Nano World. (WorldPeaceHerald 6/30/05) 
http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20050630-032056-1446r

(Past tense) Industry meets academia to discuss nanofoods. Nanotechnology researchers and food industry representatives are meeting in the Netherlands next week to discuss how to the technology may apply to processing operations, reports Ahmed ElAmin. Along with the technical talk a major item on the agenda will be how to prepare the public for its actual introduction into what they eat. Food processors and researchers are studying ways of making nanomachines on a microscopic scale that can help companies ensure the safety and quality of their products. More controversially they are also working on ways to make everyday foods carry medicines and supplements by creating tiny edible capsules, or nanoparticles, that release their contents on demand at targeted spots in the body. (Foodproductiondaily.com 6/17/05) http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/news/ng.asp?id=60733

A Sharper Focus for Soft x-rays. Zone Plate Lenses Capable of Better than 15-Nanometer Resolution. Progress in nanoscience and nanotechnology depends not only on examining the surfaces of things but on seeing deep inside biological organisms and material structures to identify what they're made of - and what electronic, magnetic, optical, and chemical processes may be in play. For measuring internal variations in shape, organization, magnetism, polarization, or chemical make-up over distances of a few nanometers (billionths of a meter), x-ray microscopy not only complements electron microscopy but also offers important advantages. (BerkeleyLab 6/29/05) http://www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/ALS-soft-x-rays.html

Motorola calls on Congress for increased funding of nanotechnology. Jim O'Connor, vice president of Technological Commercialization at Motorola, Inc., testified today before the U.S. House of Representatives Science Subcommittee on Research to share Motorola's thoughts on where the United States stands competitively and innovatively when it comes to nanoscience and nanotechnologies. (nanotechwire 7/2/05) http://nanotechwire.com/news.asp?nid=2091

Nanotube bike enters Tour de France. This year's Tour de France will see cyclists from the Phonak Team use a bike with a frame containing carbon nanotubes. Swiss manufacturer BMC claims that the frame of its "Pro Machine" weighs less than 1 kg and has excellent stiffness and strength. To create the frame, BMC used a composite technology developed by US sports equipment specialist Easton. The company's "enhanced resin system" embeds carbon fibre in a resin matrix that's reinforced with carbon nanotubes. Easton says that this improves strength and toughness in the spaces between the carbon fibres. (nanotechweb 7/1/05)
http://nanotechweb.org/articles/news/4/7/1/1

Nanotech As Disease Detector. Startup Nanosphere may have a technology that can sniff out telltale markers early enough to advance treatment. The challenge: translating potential to real-life results. There's tremendous hype about the promise of nanotechnology in medicine. Now, the companies pioneering the field have to prove the promise can become a reality. Among the players making the rounds at the Biotechnology Industry Organization convention in Philadelphia is William Moffitt, president and chief executive officer of Nanosphere, a startup looking to use nanotechnology to revolutionize the medical-testing industry. "Nanotech is going to create the next major advance in diagnostics," Moffitt says. (Businessweek 6/21/05)
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/jun2005/tc20050621_8895_tc048.htm

Microsoft woos world's scientists. Microsoft's British research arm is looking into what kind of software scientists will require in the future. The company has brought together 40 leading scientists to a meeting in Venice to discuss their needs... The challenges facing scientists have been outlined by the man behind the initiative, Stephen Emmott of Microsoft Research. "By 2020, science will, I claim, be in the process of a profound transformation as a consequence of the emergence of 'new kinds' of science'," he wrote in a paper entitled Towards 2020 Science. "For example, advances in areas such as computational systems biology could re-shape the health and pharmaceutical sectors as a result of a fundamentally greater understanding of biological processes, and therefore of disease. "Advances in artificial chemistry and nanoscience could create entirely new technology. (BBC 7/1/05) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4638583.stm

Lehigh University's new mission: space, the final frontier. In high-tech team-up, school will get a hand in James Webb scope. Lehigh University researchers will work with NASA on what some scientists hail as the most important astronomy project of the decade - the successor to the Hubble Space Telescope... Under an agreement announced Tuesday, Lehigh will give researchers from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration free access to the school's nanotechnology and electron microscopy facilities. In return, Lehigh professors get to work on developing technologies for future Mars rovers and spacecraft, as well as the James Webb Space Telescope - Hubble's successor and the most expensive space science mission under development at NASA. ''It looks like nanotechnology will play a big role in space exploration, and we get to be a part of that,'' said Martin Harmer, director of Lehigh's Center for Advanced Materials and Nanotechnology. (OrlandoSentinel 6/30/05) 
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/custom/space/all-a1_5nasajun30,0,5840960.story?coll=orl-news-headlines-space

China to create nanotechnology standards. China this week created a body that will draw up standards for nanotechnology, an emerging field of research that seeks to create materials and devices on the scale of atoms and molecules. Bai Chunli, vice president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and China's National Centre for Nanoscience and Nanotechnology will head the National Nanotechnology Standardisation Committee. "The country which completes the standardisation work first might greatly influence the future international standards in nanotechnology," said Bai in an interview with the Xinhua news agency. (SciDev 6/21/05) 
http://www.scidev.net/gateways/index.cfm?fuseaction=readitem&rgwid=5&item=News&itemid=2179&language=1

Brookhaven Scientists Create a New Nanostructure. Scientists from the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory have devised a method to create a new, intriguing nanostructure: ultra-thin, ribbon-like "nanobelts" bound to nanotubes. Their research achieves several "firsts" in the field of nanoscience, the study of materials on the scale of a billionth of a meter. Additionally, the new structure, described in the June 4, 2005, online version of Nano Letters, is likely to have unique electrical and mechanical properties, and may be useful in many developing nanotechnologies.   (Physorg 6/26/05) http://www.physorg.com/news4797.html



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
3D/Animation http://www.nanogirl.com/museumfuture/index.htm
Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050702/2903cbc6/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  2 23:18:29 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 16:18:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] it takes a conservative village
In-Reply-To: <20050702224058.25196.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050702231829.81365.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Mike, it's based on where I live and everything I've seen here. 
But tell me, how many decades have parents been complaining about public schools, and how little has been done about it? It has been 3-4 decades. So you can't blame statist sentiment alone. Many parents are playing a double game, they are saying they put money into the system in the past, and will do so in the future, so that supposedly justifies sending their kids to public schools which they don't like much? Now, I'm no philosopher, but that sounds like very bad thinking, no matter what the circumstances. No matter how much good money they are forced to throw after bad, their children are much more important than the monetary aggregate. Parents can homeschool their children if they really want to. But it's not convenient. Though I have no children I've paid thousands in property taxes, and think all those funds are less valuable than one second of a child's (or adult's) time, as you can get money back, but time is gone forever-- you never get a second back. The issue isn't money to
 me, it is the overall waste. And don't say you dislike the fact that only a tiny fraction of welfare-state funding gets to the recipient, you don't want the recipient to get anything in the first place. You think think all liberals are chumps, don't you?

Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
This is a statement with a lot of assertions but few facts backing
them.

However, conservatives, who do not homeschool or private school their
kids, generally send their kids to public school because the local
community levies property taxes against them that the parents would
otherwise use to privately school their kids. People are taxed many
years before they send kids to school, and many years afterwards, in
total far more than it would cost them to privately school their kids.

How do you know conservative parents don't make education their first
priority? You certainly are jumping to a lot of conclusions here. Many
parents are unable to save for education for their kids because they
are overly taxed by the state for liberals welfare state programs that
are incredibly wasteful and only deliver a small fraction of the funds
and services to the intended end recipient.



--- c c wrote:

> If smaller government is better then why don't fiscal conservatives
> save more for their childrens' education? Why do conservative parents
> so often say, "I don't like big government telling me what to do with
> my family, but I want the government to subsidize my kids'
> education"? If education is so important, then why don't conservative
> parents make it their first priority? If so many conservative parents
> want to send their children to better schools then why don't they
> save much more so they can pay for the schooling entirely by
> themselves? Instead parents essentially say "I pay taxes thus I want
> back for my childrens' education what I put into the system". However
> in terms of quality they are often not getting back what they put in,
> they would have greater odds getting more bang for their buck by
> paying all the educational costs themselves or homeschooling the
> children; and of course some can hire tutors as well. But no, of
> course not-- this would be the sensible thing to do!
> . Instead
> they infuse funds via property and other taxes into the school
> system, but often resent public schools because the quality is merely
> poor - good or the children are not being educated in the way
> conservative parents want them to be educated. 
> What it amounts to is fiscal conservatives say they think their
> children are their own responsibility when deep down they actually
> think the responsibility ought to be shared. "It takes a conservative
> village" is their secret thinking. Jessica Peck Corry of The
> Independence Institute wants parents to take responsibility for their
> own families, yet she will expect the government to take some
> financial responsibility for her child when that child goes to
> school. When you multiply that times all the conservatives in
> Colorado who want government to take at least part of the
> responsibility for their childrens' education, then you can see right
> away that fiscal responsibility in education wont go anywhere in the
> confused state that is Colorado. So much for independence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> Yahoo! Sports
> Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football>
_______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com



____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Sports
 Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050702/cfae4a53/attachment.html>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Jul  2 23:57:13 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 19:57:13 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <20050702094816.83273.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050702094816.83273.qmail@web60521.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507020822320.-238529@pentium.mb.willtown.net>



On Sat, 2 Jul 2005, The Avantguardian wrote:


> How about selling by chapters with the first one free and
> incrementing the price of each chapter progressively? Just set the
> increments so that by the time they buy the chapter containing the
> "climax" they get the rest of the novel for free but they have
> actually paid what they would have normally paid for the book in
> paperback. Or whatever you feel it's worth. It would work great for
> mystery novels where everything is revealed in the last chapter.


Matter of fact, the cartoonist, Bill Holbrook, of Kevin&Kell did
something similar to that a year or so ago. For free you could get the
first chapter or two or three (don't now recall), and then to get the
rest I think it was $10. Not sure how well he did, don't remember
seeing a report.

He sent the subsequent chapters in email, plaintext, I think, one
every month. My only problem with it was that the chapters came in so
far apart that I misrembered the story line between readings.

For sure he didn't email out any 20,000 copies of a chapter every
month! Then again, IIUC, he's not an established writer, but a
cartoonist.

Looking at it now, it might have been better to put the first few
teaser chapters on the web, receive a minimal payment, and then either
post a zip file or send one.

Regards,
MB



From extropy at unreasonable.com  Sun Jul  3 00:49:05 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 20:49:05 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <42C71A21.5060404@humanenhancement.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>

Joseph Bloch wrote:

>Oooh... that sounds nice. How's it work on paperback books?
>
>I'm imagining you dismember the books into single pages and feed it in.

I haven't tried it on paperbacks yet, but I don't expect they'd present a 
problem.

Some considerations for this or any ADF scanner without a flatbed --

If the document feeder isn't going to be able to separate the pages because 
of their weight, or because they are slightly crumpled, or because they 
stick together (from humidity or staple holes), you have to feed the sheets 
one at a time. With a little practice, you can place each sheet at just the 
right time in the cycle to be included in the current pdf file. In Acrobat, 
you can trivially Create Document from Multiple Files to aggregate however 
many pdf files you ended up with.

I've found that for newspaper clippings to appear as black on white, one 
needs to adjust the brightness and contrast, because of the non-whiteness 
of the paper. My guess is that a paperback would require the same 
adjustment, for the same reason.

For any scanner, if you want the text recognized instead of just scanned as 
an image, you'll need to play with the settings to get the best results, 
allow a lot of time for the OCR phase, and be prepared to check and correct 
the text. (I don't bother with OCR for 95% of what I scan.)

I've also started scanning journals and magazines. Removing staples or 
perfect binding is annoying. I looked into a paper cutter that could handle 
a few hundred sheets at a time. They're rather expensive. But my local 
OfficeMax will cut a stack of 500 sheets for a dollar, and I can just drop 
off a box of journals for them to cut.

Before scanning periodicals, check if you can already get them on-line. 
Some magazines (like The Economist) and professional associations (like 
ACM) provide a free, complete, pdf archive on their web sites for subscribers.

For oversized scanning, like a full sheet from a newspaper, you'll want to 
use software that can stitch together the pieces into one image.


-- David Lubkin.



From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Sun Jul  3 01:18:25 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 21:18:25 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>

Outstanding. Come the fall, I might just get one and start converting my 
ginormous collection of paperbacks to digital.

One word of caution to those who might be interested in doing the same; 
with the recent SCOTUS rulings about copyright and such, it might be 
worthwhile to retain some sort of proof of right to own such digital 
copies.

I will probably be keeping the covers in a box, against the day the 
Copyright Enforcers come to my door.

Joseph

David Lubkin wrote:

> Joseph Bloch wrote:
>
>> Oooh... that sounds nice. How's it work on paperback books?
>>
>> I'm imagining you dismember the books into single pages and feed it in.
>
>
> I haven't tried it on paperbacks yet, but I don't expect they'd 
> present a problem.
>
> Some considerations for this or any ADF scanner without a flatbed --
>
> If the document feeder isn't going to be able to separate the pages 
> because of their weight, or because they are slightly crumpled, or 
> because they stick together (from humidity or staple holes), you have 
> to feed the sheets one at a time. With a little practice, you can 
> place each sheet at just the right time in the cycle to be included in 
> the current pdf file. In Acrobat, you can trivially Create Document 
> from Multiple Files to aggregate however many pdf files you ended up 
> with.
>
> I've found that for newspaper clippings to appear as black on white, 
> one needs to adjust the brightness and contrast, because of the 
> non-whiteness of the paper. My guess is that a paperback would require 
> the same adjustment, for the same reason.
>
> For any scanner, if you want the text recognized instead of just 
> scanned as an image, you'll need to play with the settings to get the 
> best results, allow a lot of time for the OCR phase, and be prepared 
> to check and correct the text. (I don't bother with OCR for 95% of 
> what I scan.)
>
> I've also started scanning journals and magazines. Removing staples or 
> perfect binding is annoying. I looked into a paper cutter that could 
> handle a few hundred sheets at a time. They're rather expensive. But 
> my local OfficeMax will cut a stack of 500 sheets for a dollar, and I 
> can just drop off a box of journals for them to cut.
>
> Before scanning periodicals, check if you can already get them 
> on-line. Some magazines (like The Economist) and professional 
> associations (like ACM) provide a free, complete, pdf archive on their 
> web sites for subscribers.
>
> For oversized scanning, like a full sheet from a newspaper, you'll 
> want to use software that can stitch together the pieces into one image.
>
>
> -- David Lubkin.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Jul  3 01:44:03 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 11:44:03 +1000
Subject: SCOTUS rulings and replacements Re: [extropy-chat] finding old (and
	new) sf
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Joseph Bloch wrote:

> One word of caution to those who might be interested in doing the same; 
> with the recent SCOTUS rulings about copyright and such, it might be 
> worthwhile to retain some sort of proof of right to own such digital 
> copies.
> 
> I will probably be keeping the covers in a box, against the day the 
> Copyright Enforcers come to my door.

What SCOTUS ruling is that Joseph ?

Brett Paatsch

I'm boning up my Australian-based understanding of the SCOTUS, now
that Sandra Day O Connor has retired and President G W B will get a 
shot at first her replacement and then likely, pretty soon given his health
and age, Rehquirst's) ?

Also, when reading about possible replacement justices I see that liberal
and conservative are talked about as if those categories are opposites.
Is that the case in the US?





From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Sun Jul  3 02:04:21 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2005 22:04:21 -0400
Subject: SCOTUS rulings and replacements Re: [extropy-chat] finding old
	(and	new) sf
In-Reply-To: <088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
	<088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <42C747A5.9090606@humanenhancement.com>

Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Joseph Bloch wrote:
>
>> One word of caution to those who might be interested in doing the 
>> same; with the recent SCOTUS rulings about copyright and such, it 
>> might be worthwhile to retain some sort of proof of right to own such 
>> digital copies.
>>
>> I will probably be keeping the covers in a box, against the day the 
>> Copyright Enforcers come to my door.
>
>
> What SCOTUS ruling is that Joseph ?
>

One media mention of many can be found at 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8375955/

Not that it is directly applicable, since it deals with file sharing and 
not digitalizing of written works, but it does demonstrate a growing 
hostility of the Court to copyright infringement in the digital realm. I 
just don't want to be caught with my pants down, so to speak.

> I'm boning up my Australian-based understanding of the SCOTUS, now
> that Sandra Day O Connor has retired and President G W B will get a 
> shot at first her replacement and then likely, pretty soon given his 
> health
> and age, Rehquirst's) ?


It's more than a "shot"; GWB will nominate a replacement, and the Senate 
judiciary committee will vote on him or her. If that nominee is voted 
down, GWB will name another, and so on. Ditto for a replacement for 
Rehnqist, although I personally think he won't retire until a 
replacement for O'Connor has been confirmed. Either way, President Bush 
nominates the successor; if his first choice isn't confirmed, he just 
keeps nominating someone until they are confirmed.

The REAL question is whether President Bush's candidate will be so 
conservative as to trigger a showdown with a Democrat filibuster, or 
moderate enough to avoid it and still not disaffect his conservative 
base. We won't know that until July 8th, when he gets back from the G8 
Summit and makes his nominee known.

>
> Also, when reading about possible replacement justices I see that liberal
> and conservative are talked about as if those categories are opposites.
> Is that the case in the US?


Indeed it is. In popular parlance (in the context of the Federal 
judiciary), liberal tends to mean willing to freely interpret the 
Constitution according to modern needs and mores (the "living 
Constitution"), while conservative means tending to a much stricter and 
more literal reading of the Constitution as written ("original intent").

Naturally, there is a lot of gray between those two poles, and a lot of 
specific implications in case-law dependent on both labels (to use as an 
example the hot-button issue that will certainly define the battle; 
conservatives generally don't recognize the "right to privacy" that Roe 
v. Wade established which made state prohibition of abortion 
unconstitutional, while liberals see it as a natural consequence of the 
10th Amendment).

With the political climate in Washington so polarized, so partisan, and 
so vicious (on both sides), the confirmation of O'Connor's replacement 
promises to be great political theater any way it goes.

Hope that helps.

Joseph

Enhance your body "beyond well" and your mind "beyond normal": 
http://www.humanenhancement.com
New Jersey Transhumanist Association: http://www.goldenfuture.net/njta
PostHumanity Rising: http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ (updated 6/14/05)


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul  3 03:49:30 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2005 20:49:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>


On Jul 2, 2005, at 6:18 PM, Joseph Bloch wrote:

> Outstanding. Come the fall, I might just get one and start  
> converting my ginormous collection of paperbacks to digital.
>
> One word of caution to those who might be interested in doing the  
> same; with the recent SCOTUS rulings about copyright and such, it  
> might be worthwhile to retain some sort of proof of right to own  
> such digital copies.
>

What is needed is a means to pay creators of information,  
entertainment and so on that can be digitally (or equivalent)  
rendered AND make all of that information available to everyone (with  
some security caveats).  By so doing will we attain maximum extropy  
increment derivable from maximizing these information flows.    Among  
the benefits are:

1) Information will be maximally used to the benefit of all;

2) Eventually the creators are more directly rewarded than today;

3) People are not made criminals by the agents of media companies and  
other middlemen for maximizing their lives and happiness using the  
technology.

4) Innovators and future creators  need not fear.;

5) Innovation will be maximized.

So how could such a thing be done?

If there was a sufficiently large pool of funds, say the size of the  
current amount spent for year on such information and entertainment,  
and a means simply to reliably count how often that information is  
used,  then the creator or rights holder would get a percentage of  
the total pool based no some function applied to the usage count and  
various measurements describing qualities of the information.    The  
pool might be maintained by a low subscription fee or through (ugh)  
taxes.    Thus you have a commons that rewards producers, is not only  
not being depleted but is growing richer and it supports maximal  
information flow.

Thoughts?

- samantha


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  3 07:55:09 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 00:55:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050703075509.1511.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>



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

> 
> What is needed is a means to pay creators of
> information,  
> entertainment and so on that can be digitally (or
> equivalent)  
> rendered AND make all of that information available
> to everyone (with  
> some security caveats).  By so doing will we attain
> maximum extropy  
> increment derivable from maximizing these
> information flows.    Among  
> the benefits are:
> 
> 1) Information will be maximally used to the benefit
> of all;
> 
> 2) Eventually the creators are more directly
> rewarded than today;
> 
> 3) People are not made criminals by the agents of
> media companies and  
> other middlemen for maximizing their lives and
> happiness using the  
> technology.
> 
> 4) Innovators and future creators  need not fear.;
> 
> 5) Innovation will be maximized.
> 
> So how could such a thing be done?
> 
> If there was a sufficiently large pool of funds, say
> the size of the  
> current amount spent for year on such information
> and entertainment,  
> and a means simply to reliably count how often that
> information is  
> used,  then the creator or rights holder would get a
> percentage of  
> the total pool based no some function applied to the
> usage count and  
> various measurements describing qualities of the
> information.    The  
> pool might be maintained by a low subscription fee
> or through (ugh)  
> taxes.    Thus you have a commons that rewards
> producers, is not only  
> not being depleted but is growing richer and it
> supports maximal  
> information flow.
> 
> Thoughts?

Well for one thing how do we evaluate information
content? Even in the current system there are times
when by viewing information (for example a movie)
where I feel that the maker of the movie should have
paid me for having wasted my time. In other times
people have said or shown or communicated things to me
for free and it is very valuable information. So
whatever creative commons type system you are
suggesting ought to somehow deal with that disconnect.
I mean I am willing to pay by the byte as long as the
information isn't SPAM or otherwise crap.



The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul  3 08:55:49 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 01:55:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <20050703075509.1511.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050703075509.1511.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6104F36E-A9D4-4546-B33B-20150198FD9B@mac.com>


On Jul 3, 2005, at 12:55 AM, The Avantguardian wrote:

>
>
> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> What is needed is a means to pay creators of
>> information,
>> entertainment and so on that can be digitally (or
>> equivalent)
>> rendered AND make all of that information available
>> to everyone (with
>> some security caveats).  By so doing will we attain
>> maximum extropy
>> increment derivable from maximizing these
>> information flows.    Among
>> the benefits are:
>>
>> 1) Information will be maximally used to the benefit
>> of all;
>>
>> 2) Eventually the creators are more directly
>> rewarded than today;
>>
>> 3) People are not made criminals by the agents of
>> media companies and
>> other middlemen for maximizing their lives and
>> happiness using the
>> technology.
>>
>> 4) Innovators and future creators  need not fear.;
>>
>> 5) Innovation will be maximized.
>>
>> So how could such a thing be done?
>>
>> If there was a sufficiently large pool of funds, say
>> the size of the
>> current amount spent for year on such information
>> and entertainment,
>> and a means simply to reliably count how often that
>> information is
>> used,  then the creator or rights holder would get a
>> percentage of
>> the total pool based no some function applied to the
>> usage count and
>> various measurements describing qualities of the
>> information.    The
>> pool might be maintained by a low subscription fee
>> or through (ugh)
>> taxes.    Thus you have a commons that rewards
>> producers, is not only
>> not being depleted but is growing richer and it
>> supports maximal
>> information flow.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>
> Well for one thing how do we evaluate information
> content? Even in the current system there are times
> when by viewing information (for example a movie)
> where I feel that the maker of the movie should have
> paid me for having wasted my time.

The exact dimensions measured and terms of the formula and criteria  
will have to be worked out over time and will likely have dynamic  
components.

> In other times
> people have said or shown or communicated things to me
> for free and it is very valuable information. So
> whatever creative commons type system you are
> suggesting ought to somehow deal with that disconnect.

What disconnect is that.  It is perfectly fine for the woner/creator  
to decide they aren't interested in this form of compensation.

> I mean I am willing to pay by the byte as long as the
> information isn't SPAM or otherwise crap.
>

Nothing I proposed is remotely about paying by the byte.  Just the  
opposite in fact. You have a fixed rate subscription (one model).   
You can access as much of the information you want as often as you  
want for that.  You don't pay more if you use more.  You simply  
increase the percentage of the pool of funds allocated to the  
creators of the information you use.

- samantha

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050703/ad3e8754/attachment.html>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Sun Jul  3 11:46:19 2005
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin Hanson)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 07:46:19 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
	<49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703071030.01eeefd8@mail.gmu.edu>

At 11:49 PM 7/2/2005, Samantha Atkins wrote:
>If there was a sufficiently large pool of funds, say the size of the
>current amount spent for year on such information and entertainment,
>and a means simply to reliably count how often that information is
>used,  then the creator or rights holder would get a percentage of
>the total pool based no some function applied to the usage count and
>various measurements describing qualities of the information.    The
>pool might be maintained by a low subscription fee or through (ugh)
>taxes.    Thus you have a commons that rewards producers, is not only
>not being depleted but is growing richer and it supports maximal
>information flow. Thoughts?

Everything depends on the quality of the "measurements describing
qualities of the information."  Or rather, what we really want are
indicators of the *value* of the information to the people who use it.
Whatever the problems with the current system, it does ensure that
info which users perceive to have a high value is produced and used.
An alternative could be worse if it failed often enough to induce
the production and use of this class of info.




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




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  3 12:21:40 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 05:21:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: SCOTUS rulings and replacements Re: [extropy-chat] finding old
	(and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050703122140.83895.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:

> Joseph Bloch wrote:
> 
> > One word of caution to those who might be interested in doing the
> same; 
> > with the recent SCOTUS rulings about copyright and such, it might
> be 
> > worthwhile to retain some sort of proof of right to own such
> digital 
> > copies.
> > 
> > I will probably be keeping the covers in a box, against the day the
> > Copyright Enforcers come to my door.
> 
> What SCOTUS ruling is that Joseph ?

I believe the case is MGM v Grokster or something along those lines. It
was issued in the last two weeks, and as I had predicted, it pretty
much puts the power in the copyright holder, all this new fangled
anti-IP propaganda notwithstanding.

> 
> Brett Paatsch
> 
> I'm boning up my Australian-based understanding of the SCOTUS, now
> that Sandra Day O Connor has retired and President G W B will get a 
> shot at first her replacement and then likely, pretty soon given his
> health and age, Rehquirst's) ?

Yes, and the big change will be O'Connor, who was a swing vote who
often wrote moderate, hair-splitting decisions that left issues for
another day. If Bush puts, say, a constructionist in her place (like
that recently promoted black lady judge) it will be a great day for
libertarians. If he puts in a fascist like his friend Alberto Gonzalez
it will be a bad day.

> 
> Also, when reading about possible replacement justices I see that
> liberal and conservative are talked about as if those categories are
> opposites. Is that the case in the US?

Yes, but liberals here are not libertarian, they are democratic
socialists, i.e. welfare state proponents, with a dash of anti-crime
fascism in order to get elected.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Jul  3 13:48:05 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 08:48:05 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703071030.01eeefd8@mail.gmu.edu>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
	<49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>
	<6.2.1.2.2.20050703071030.01eeefd8@mail.gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050703083526.01cd3da8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 07:46 AM 7/3/2005 -0400, Robin wrote:

>Everything depends on the quality of the "measurements describing
>qualities of the information."  Or rather, what we really want are
>indicators of the *value* of the information to the people who use it.
>Whatever the problems with the current system, it does ensure that
>info which users perceive to have a high value is produced and used.
>An alternative could be worse if it failed often enough to induce
>the production and use of this class of info.

This discussion has skidded weirdly away from my original suggestion, which 
was precisely to make available to potential users an experience (reading 
the text) that they could evaluate *after use*and then pay for, if they 
felt that its value was sufficient.

This is not altogether unprecedented. If you go to a restaurant (rather 
than a McEatery) and order a meal, they bring it to you, you eat and drink 
it, and only after that do you pay them. If the food and drink was 
repulsive, you might decide not to pay, although this would be regarded as 
bad form.

The difference with downloadable material is that competition in the form 
of unedited and free (or edited and textjacked) downloads is abundant. When 
your daily reading experience is largely comprised of blogs, 
advertisement-subsidised newspaper or journal downloads, etc, you start to 
feel resentful if somebody has the gall to ask you to pay for your 
entertainment.

In particular, you're likely to resist the urge to pay for something you 
have already used. To me, this is a sign of moral enfeeblement in our 
community, but hey -- if that's the way people are, there is no point 
trying to make a living by flying in the face of it.

In any event, the point of my proposal was that the reader gets to assess 
the value of what has just been consumed, and pay what the reader regards 
as a fair price for it. Weird, huh?

Damien Broderick 



From hkhenson at rogers.com  Sun Jul  3 13:46:18 2005
From: hkhenson at rogers.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 09:46:18 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
In-Reply-To: <20050625184520.79872.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050625133117.039e36a0@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050703093606.036cee00@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>

At 11:45 AM 25/06/05 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:


>--- Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:

snip

> > Why do humans periodically kill large numbers of other humans?
> >
> > If you consider the period length and the exception cases you will be
> > half way to the answer.

snip

>War, crime, and other mass maladies, are the result of population
>pressure

It isn't just population or densely populated Europe would be at war all 
the time.  Near as I can tell it is the ratio of resources to population, 
more or less income per capita.  Even more it is *anticipated change* in 
income per capita, with the worse situation being a downturn after a long 
run up.

>and lack of individual liberty. Having enough space for
>everyone to be truly free on their own land, free of force and
>manipulation by outside groups, is a key requirement for peace and
>justice.

Something that is just not going to happen if the population is rising 
faster than the resources to support that population.

>When enough people feel they are oppressed, either by their
>own government, or by a foreign government or population, they will
>rise up to make their demands heard.

I think the *mechanism* behind wars and related social disruptions is the 
circulation of xenophobic memes.

>In Zimbabwe, you have a problem

snip

This being something that evolved over millions of years, before our 
subspecies of hominid wiped out the rest of them, you would expect it to be 
common to all wars and related disruptions.  Such as Rwanda, the US civil 
war and Germany in the 20s.

Keith Henson



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  3 14:38:59 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 07:38:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050703093606.036cee00@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>
Message-ID: <20050703143900.33517.qmail@web30708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:

> At 11:45 AM 25/06/05 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> 
> >--- Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
> 
> snip
> 
> > > Why do humans periodically kill large numbers of other humans?
> > >
> > > If you consider the period length and the exception cases you
> will be
> > > half way to the answer.
> 
> snip
> 
> >War, crime, and other mass maladies, are the result of population
> >pressure
> 
> It isn't just population or densely populated Europe would be at war
> all the time.  Near as I can tell it is the ratio of resources to
> population, more or less income per capita.  Even more it is
> *anticipated change* in income per capita, with the worse situation
> being a downturn after a long run up.

Europe's history has been nearly constant war. The peace of the latter
half of the 20th was an externally imposed stalemate, an anomaly, which
quickly devolved into multiple revolutions all over eastern europe and
multiple civil wars in Yugoslavia as soon as that stalemate was ended
by one party. Before that stalemate, Europe was constitutionally unable
to avoid having a ware every 10-20 years as a matter of course. In the
20th, you had WWI (1914-1918), Russian Civil War (1918-1921), the
Polish-Soviet War (1919-1920), the Spanish Civil War (1936-1939), The
Winter War (1939-1940), WWII (1939-1945), the Greek Civil War
(1946-1949), plus you had four wars with non-european nations that
european nations were prime players in: The Russo-Japanese War
(1904-1905), The Abyssinian Conquest (Italy's invasion of
Ethiopia)(1935-1939), The French Indochinese War (1945-1954), the
French Algerian War (1954-1962).

Europe had no less than 24 wars in the 19th century, and european
nations were involved in at least 11 other wars with nations outside
europe in the same period. Europe had 43 wars in the 18th century, plus
another five with nations outside europe. In the 17th century, europe
had 72 wars, plus at least another 12 with nations overseas.

Now that the european constitution has been rejected, and Russia
continues to fight the Chechnyans, and muslims continue to invade from
Africa, I predict a major religious war in europe within 5-10 years as
fundamentalist muslims attempt to violently impose sharia on the
secular european populations.

> 
> >and lack of individual liberty. Having enough space for
> >everyone to be truly free on their own land, free of force and
> >manipulation by outside groups, is a key requirement for peace and
> >justice.
> 
> Something that is just not going to happen if the population is
> rising faster than the resources to support that population.

Which isn't happening except in places where there is artificially
created shortages (through sabotage, protectionism, or taxation).

> 
> >When enough people feel they are oppressed, either by their
> >own government, or by a foreign government or population, they will
> >rise up to make their demands heard.
> 
> I think the *mechanism* behind wars and related social disruptions is
> the circulation of xenophobic memes.

That is a symptom. Xenophobic memes become popular only when the
population is already under stress for other reasons.

China, for example, with its one-child policy, now has a generation
that is heavily dominated by a high percentage of males. The effect of
this on chinese society will create stresses that are similar to the
artificially created wife shortage in the muslim world that is created
by the tribal control of resources and the quranic allowance of four
wives for those who can afford them. In both cases, the 'cause' is
being blamed, by those who have the wives, on the United States as the
boogeyman, in order to deflect the rage of unmarried males upon us
rather than those with the wives, or their own governments.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From hkhenson at rogers.com  Sun Jul  3 14:38:56 2005
From: hkhenson at rogers.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 10:38:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Keith Henson's adventures in Canada
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.0.20050703093606.036cee00@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cab
	le.rogers.com>
References: <20050625184520.79872.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.0.20050625133117.039e36a0@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050703103748.030bfb30@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>


My efforts to expose the scientology cult have been totally eclipsed by Tom 
Cruise's insane public outbursts and his fight with Brooke Shields, but for 
those who are interested:

http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.religion.scientology/msg/82296f58d18c6132?hl=en

Keith Henson 



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sun Jul  3 15:02:39 2005
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 00:32:39 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Free fall for all part two
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701191621.01d99a30@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <p06210202beeb864eeaa6@23.237.66.13>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701191621.01d99a30@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc050703080221a83313@mail.gmail.com>

> At 01:46 AM 7/2/2005 +0200, Amara wrote:
> 
> >The physics embedded is incredibly good. I guess you didn't follow
> >my humor, so maybe only computational physics people can appreciate
> >excellent  "software gravity"... :-)
> 
> ?? With no acceleration? (As far as I can tell.)
> 
> Damien Broderick

As far as I can tell, there is acceleration (how does she even start
falling otherwise?), but terminal velocity might be pretty low.
Overall, kind of beautiful and kind of disturbing. I like it!

-- 
Emlyn

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


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Sun Jul  3 15:09:02 2005
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 00:39:02 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <42C61214.6050500@optusnet.com.au>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701192431.01cfffc0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<42C61214.6050500@optusnet.com.au>
Message-ID: <710b78fc05070308095c9e5f21@mail.gmail.com>

On 02/07/05, David <deimtee at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >
> > Charlie had 22,000 downloads fairly quickly when he put his new
> > singularity novel ACCELERANDO up for grabs. My question: how many people
> > would feel an impulse to pay the author a couple of bucks in gratitude
> > for having the book might available in this way? Would anyone here be
> > likely to do so?
> >
> > Damien Broderick
> 
> Yes.

I would almost definitely download and read it. I might get around to
paypal (more likely since I know you, but a decent (lower than 50%)
chance even if I'd never met you, if I liked the book).

However, if it were in print, there's an extremely low chance that I'd
read the book at all. I mostly read etexts only these days (although I
do every so often read an actual book for the retro thrill).

-- 
Emlyn

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


From hkhenson at rogers.com  Sun Jul  3 16:04:58 2005
From: hkhenson at rogers.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 12:04:58 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
In-Reply-To: <20050703143900.33517.qmail@web30708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050703093606.036cee00@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20050703114503.036922e0@pop.brntfd.phub.net.cable.rogers.com>

At 07:38 AM 03/07/05 -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:

 > keith wrote:
snip

>Europe had no less than 24 wars in the 19th century, and european
>nations were involved in at least 11 other wars with nations outside
>europe in the same period. Europe had 43 wars in the 18th century, plus
>another five with nations outside europe. In the 17th century, europe
>had 72 wars, plus at least another 12 with nations overseas.

And what has changed is the low population growth in the last 60 years.

>Now that the european constitution has been rejected, and Russia
>continues to fight the Chechnyans, and muslims continue to invade from
>Africa, I predict a major religious war in europe within 5-10 years as
>fundamentalist muslims attempt to violently impose sharia on the
>secular european populations.

I grant you that without some breakthrough like nanotech this is 
likely.  It is fueled by the high population growth in Africa and 
transportation that allows the excess population to travel.

> > >and lack of individual liberty. Having enough space for
> > >everyone to be truly free on their own land, free of force and
> > >manipulation by outside groups, is a key requirement for peace and
> > >justice.
> >
> > Something that is just not going to happen if the population is
> > rising faster than the resources to support that population.
>
>Which isn't happening except in places where there is artificially
>created shortages (through sabotage, protectionism, or taxation).

The problems are not entirely social.  There *are* physical problems like 
wrecking the farmland that have destroyed civilizations in the past.  Read 
Diamond's Collapse in this light.

> > >When enough people feel they are oppressed, either by their
> > >own government, or by a foreign government or population, they will
> > >rise up to make their demands heard.
> >
> > I think the *mechanism* behind wars and related social disruptions is
> > the circulation of xenophobic memes.
>
>That is a symptom. Xenophobic memes become popular only when the
>population is already under stress for other reasons.

I look at xenophobic memes as in the causal chain.  Stress -> build up of 
memes that support war -> war.  It makes sense as part of a behavioral 
switch that evolved in hunter gatherer stage humans who periodically over 
stressed their environment.  Wars periodically cut back the population.

>China, for example, with its one-child policy, now has a generation
>that is heavily dominated by a high percentage of males. The effect of
>this on chinese society will create stresses that are similar to the
>artificially created wife shortage in the muslim world that is created
>by the tribal control of resources and the quranic allowance of four
>wives for those who can afford them. In both cases, the 'cause' is
>being blamed, by those who have the wives, on the United States as the
>boogeyman, in order to deflect the rage of unmarried males upon us
>rather than those with the wives, or their own governments.

Time will test this idea.  My theory is that a good economic outlook is 
more important in holding down the buildup of war memes than the excess of 
young males.

So I would predict that as long as they have a reasonably rosy economic 
prospects, China will not start wars.

Where wars and related social disruptions such as terrorism will be a big 
problem in the Islamic world in direct relation to how bleak their economic 
prospects are.

Keith Henson



From brian at posthuman.com  Sun Jul  3 17:00:09 2005
From: brian at posthuman.com (Brian Atkins)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 12:00:09 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050703083526.01cd3da8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>	<49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>	<6.2.1.2.2.20050703071030.01eeefd8@mail.gmu.edu>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050703083526.01cd3da8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <42C81999.3090100@posthuman.com>

Damien, what do you think about a subscription model? I'm referring to something 
like the Yahoo Unlimited Music service, which costs $60 a year and allows one to 
download/access over 1 million songs, including copying them to a portable audio 
player. If you end your subscription, the music "expires" from your devices 
within a month.

I assume the artists make some money based on how popular their music is on this 
type of service, but I don't know the specifics of the contracts.

Personally I find that both my dvd and music intakes have both converted 
essentially 100% to subscription services, and I find this provides a superior 
overall experience. I look for large selection and total entertainment bang, 
balanced against lowest cost, and this seems to hit a nice sweet spot. And I 
find the current price to be pretty competitive vs. the option of "free" p2p 
alternatives. I think others agree since subscription service usage appears to 
be rapidly passing p2p usage in terms of number of users.

I'm not sure if this would work well for the written word though since most 
readers prefer books as their user interface currently. Maybe if a really good 
portable electronic reader device would be developed...
-- 
Brian Atkins
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
http://www.singinst.org/


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  3 18:30:46 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 11:30:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
Message-ID: <20050703183046.12681.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Mike,
I'm not just trying to break your balls, I want a glimpse into the military mind-- an alien mind to an old queer such as myself. In legal and moral terms you have earned the government benefits you have now and those you will have as you age. But how do you justify those benefits on libertarian grounds? Though the funds you and all the other veterans receive are merely a small fraction of the government pie, they are given to you for past services, in a similar way to how an unemployment check is given to someone who has been laid off; and in a similar fashion to how disability benefits are received by someone who no longer works.
No doubt most defense personnel risk their lives, nevertheless so do laborers who hold dangerous jobs in the private sector.
I ask this, among other reasons, because it is my understanding that virtue is its own reward, a soldier sailor or airman takes greater than average risks and is compensated with all sorts of benefits-- and I have looked into the benefits--  that most agree are deserved. However from a libertarian viewpoint couldn't it be said that when someone enlists in one of the branches of the Services he has signed a contract giving him certain rights however preeminently the right to serve? All the goodies a serviceman receives in the Service or afterwards are secondary or tertiary. Joining the Service is more than a career, or less than a career depending upon how you look at it. A man joins to serve or he joins for a reason or reasons not in line with the mission of the Service. A fellow may be enticed with benefits, but that's very obviously not at all what he is recruited for. Since in the service virtue is without question its own reward how, again, can you on libertarian terms justify
 getting government benefits until death? Now, I'm sure there is a good explanation, so I'd like to get it from the horse's 'mouth'.



		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Sports
 Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050703/590f72f7/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul  3 19:18:58 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 12:18:58 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050703083526.01cd3da8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>
	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>
	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com>
	<49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com>
	<6.2.1.2.2.20050703071030.01eeefd8@mail.gmu.edu>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050703083526.01cd3da8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <2FE8228C-2C8D-4D83-A1FD-7E3799699441@mac.com>


On Jul 3, 2005, at 6:48 AM, Damien Broderick wrote:

> At 07:46 AM 7/3/2005 -0400, Robin wrote:
>
>
>> Everything depends on the quality of the "measurements describing
>> qualities of the information."  Or rather, what we really want are
>> indicators of the *value* of the information to the people who use  
>> it.
>> Whatever the problems with the current system, it does ensure that
>> info which users perceive to have a high value is produced and used.
>> An alternative could be worse if it failed often enough to induce
>> the production and use of this class of info.
>>
>
> This discussion has skidded weirdly away from my original  
> suggestion, which was precisely to make available to potential  
> users an experience (reading the text) that they could evaluate  
> *after use*and then pay for, if they felt that its value was  
> sufficient.

I segued to something else in the solution space after responding to  
the original. Instead of discussions of when and if you pay for a  
particular bit of information I sought to go to the root of the  
problem of having the creators compensated while maximizing the use  
of information and the rate of innovation.  My proposed solution,  
incomplete as it is, removes the question of when and if one pays.

- samantha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050703/7534168b/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  3 20:04:03 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 13:04:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050703183046.12681.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050703200403.84755.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Mike,
> I'm not just trying to break your balls, I want a glimpse into the
> military mind-- an alien mind to an old queer such as myself. In
> legal and moral terms you have earned the government benefits you
> have now and those you will have as you age. But how do you justify
> those benefits on libertarian grounds? Though the funds you and all
> the other veterans receive are merely a small fraction of the
> government pie, they are given to you for past services, in a similar
> way to how an unemployment check is given to someone who has been
> laid off; and in a similar fashion to how disability benefits are
> received by someone who no longer works.

Veterans benefits are indeed for past services, which at the time were
very poorly paid for (without those benefits, the real hourly wage of
an E-1 through E-3 isn't much more than minimum wage). Earned benefits
don't need to be justified on libertarian grounds, any more than any
employee of any corporation needs to justify their benefits.

What needs to be justified on libertarian grounds is what services the
individual renders for the government. Is one a tax collector, or a
welfare administrator, or a bureaucrat who writes tax or welfare
regulations, or a BATF or DEA agent? 

I was an electrical/environmental/avionics tech on F-15 and F-111
aircraft. The closest I came to being even tangentially working in
support of government activities I thought questionable from a
libertarian standpoint was when Bush 41 modified posse comitatus to
have the military assist in the drug war. The F-15 unit I was in at the
time was already tasked as a fighter interceptor unit for NORAD and
intercepted every aircraft that didn't identify itself in the pacific
northwest, so there wasn't any real change in our operations and to my
knowledge we didn't splash any drug planes while I was there.

> No doubt most defense personnel risk their lives, nevertheless so do
> laborers who hold dangerous jobs in the private sector.

Private sector laborers generally don't risk getting arrested by
competitive companies and held in prisons and tortured for years. Nor
do most industrial or other workplace accidents maime the worker so
thoroughly that repair and rehabilitation is so difficult. Nor do they
get paid to intentionally put themselves in harms way (except for, say,
cops and firemen). Private employers generally want you to follow OSHA
rules at all times.

> I ask this, among other reasons, because it is my understanding that
> virtue is its own reward, a soldier sailor or airman takes greater
> than average risks and is compensated with all sorts of benefits--
> and I have looked into the benefits--  that most agree are deserved.
> However from a libertarian viewpoint couldn't it be said that when
> someone enlists in one of the branches of the Services he has signed
> a contract giving him certain rights however preeminently the right
> to serve? All the goodies a serviceman receives in the Service or
> afterwards are secondary or tertiary. Joining the Service is more
> than a career, or less than a career depending upon how you look at
> it. A man joins to serve or he joins for a reason or reasons not in
> line with the mission of the Service. A fellow may be enticed with
> benefits, but that's very obviously not at all what he is recruited
> for. Since in the service virtue is without question its own reward
> how, again, can you on libertarian terms justify
>  getting government benefits until death? Now, I'm sure there is a
> good explanation, so I'd like to get it from the horse's 'mouth'.

I have never heard that any service member 'gets' rights by enlisting.
If anything, the service member gives up rights, including agreeing to
be held to justice under the UCMJ rather than civilian law, and to
pretty much be told what to do with his or her life, which may include
being separated from spouse and kids for long periods of time.

About the only right we gain is the right to tell obnoxious
know-it-alls to go to hell when they start telling us we are baby
killers, mercenaries, or didn't earn our pay and/or benefits. In a
world where most civilians either don't own guns, don't believe in
guns, or the military, or the common militia, or in self-defense, the
risking and bleeding and dying that military members do enables such
self-deluded idiots to continue to live in their fantasy worlds of
poorly estimated risk. This includes a few individuals who claim to be
libertarians but interpret the zero agression principle as pacifism
with a shuck and jive, betting their bluff will never be called, rather
than responsible self-defense as it should be.

I know of few real libertarians (counting all libertarians and not just
absolutist anarchists living in their air castles in denial of reality)
who do not recognise that one of the few legitimate functions of the US
government under the US Constitution, or even the Articles of
Confederation, if you disbelieve in the validity of the Constitution,
is the military. While keeping a standing army is generally wrong in
libertarian eyes, a full time Navy and any other means of power
projection with large capital equipment (which IMHO includes air power,
space power, as well as ships), is legitimate.

If you still think otherwise, then fine, come and bitch at me once
you've gone and dismantled the 90% of the US government that ISN'T
constitutionally allowed. Until then, you've got a lot bigger fish to
fry than my veterans benefits. At the time I enlisted, I was a
republican. You could say the Air Force made me a libertarian, so in
that sense, the US military made the world a slightly better place by
one person (though some may dispute that).

I know of a number of other libertarians who went through similar
experiences, who enlisted. I believe the older ones who enlisted back
when there was a draft followed Heinlein's advice that the best place
to hide from a draft is in the military.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jul  3 21:45:04 2005
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 16:45:04 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Molecular Logic Gates
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703164318.02a53d10@pop-server.austin.rr.com>


Nice.

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/83/i25/8325notw4.html

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist, Designer
Studies of the Future, University of Houston
President, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture

Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler
Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050703/7e805ddc/attachment.html>

From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul  3 23:07:18 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 16:07:18 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Molecular Logic Gates
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703164318.02a53d10@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050703230719.50662.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>

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

> 
> Nice.
> 
> http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/83/i25/8325notw4.html

Very interesting post, Natasha. :)
It's got me wondering if there might not be naturally
occuring logic gates operating on the surface of
cells. Such would explain some aspects of the
phenotypic complexity of multicellular organisms.
And implications for Moore's Law are self-evident.

Vigeas,







The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Sun Jul  3 23:12:33 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 09:12:33 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] finding old (and new) sf
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com><20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com><6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com><20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com><42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com><49E76D07-D645-4254-A05F-60B4D77598E6@mac.com><6.2.1.2.2.20050703071030.01eeefd8@mail.gmu.edu>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050703083526.01cd3da8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <08f201c58024$b1c171f0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Damien Broderick wrote:

> This discussion has skidded weirdly away from my original suggestion, 
> which was precisely to make available to potential users an experience 
> (reading the text) that they could evaluate *after use*and then pay for, 
> if they felt that its value was sufficient.
>
> This is not altogether unprecedented. If you go to a restaurant (rather 
> than a McEatery) and order a meal, they bring it to you, you eat and drink 
> it, and only after that do you pay them. If the food and drink was 
> repulsive, you might decide not to pay, although this would be regarded as 
> bad form.
>
> The difference with downloadable material is that competition in the form 
> of unedited and free (or edited and textjacked) downloads is abundant. 
> When your daily reading experience is largely comprised of blogs, 
> advertisement-subsidised newspaper or journal downloads, etc, you start to 
> feel resentful if somebody has the gall to ask you to pay for your 
> entertainment.

Psychologically, though its a while since I did social psych, I think you 
are
right on here.

> In particular, you're likely to resist the urge to pay for something you 
> have already used. To me, this is a sign of moral enfeeblement in our 
> community, but hey -- if that's the way people are, there is no point 
> trying to make a living by flying in the face of it.

The technique, which both your restaurant example (bad form etc) and
psych theory suggests, is that you get some commitment to pay if they
like it before hand, ie have the prospective reader do something, take
some action, put some details into a database or something, and they
will far more likely treat the exercise as a transaction and honour their
side of it.

Of course some will not want to pre-register with you before
downloading, but those that do are much more the type that are likely
to pay you.

Perhaps if there were a bunch of authors like yourself and Charlie
you could find someone to put together a registration service of
readers for you. They 'promise' to pay if they like, they say what
book and what author, having selected from the online blurb.

I haven't screened this idea for commercial viability against the
existing offerings in the market but I've a sense its worth checking
out.    Its just not interesting enough for me personally to do.
Perhaps Adrian or Emlyn or the Futuretag folk (might put together
a shopfront for transhumanist authors or some such) or some of
your other web savy buds on this list could work out a way of
knocking up a model or prototype.

The market is clearly open to innovative solutions right now.
Perhaps.

> In any event, the point of my proposal was that the reader gets
> to assess the value of what has just been consumed, and pay
> what the reader regards as a fair price for it. Weird, huh?

Not weird, no.

Brett Paatsch 




From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Jul  4 02:04:53 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 12:04:53 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SCOTUS rulings and replacements 
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com><088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<42C747A5.9090606@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <096101c5803c$c49d8da0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Joseph Bloch wrote:

[I wrote]
>> I'm boning up my Australian-based understanding of the
>> SCOTUS, now that Sandra Day O Connor has retired and
>> President G W B will get a shot at first her replacement and
>> then likely, pretty soon given his health and age, Rehquirst's) ?
>
>
> It's more than a "shot"; GWB will nominate a replacement, and the Senate 
> judiciary committee will vote on him or her. If that nominee is voted 
> down, GWB will name another, and so on. Ditto for a replacement for 
> Rehnqist, although I personally think he won't retire until a replacement 
> for O'Connor has been confirmed. Either way, President Bush nominates the 
> successor; if his first choice isn't confirmed, he just keeps nominating 
> someone until they are confirmed.

Does the judiciary committee have to have grounds for voting a
nomination down, or it is simply that as both the nomination and the
voting down of it (potentially) will take place transparently with the
American public watching (so neither side wants to be seen to be
blatantly self serving)?

I don't really get what the judiciary committee does in relation to
what the Senate does. Does the judiciary committee perhaps conduct
inquiries for a time until say the President hurrumphs and says "dammit
stop delaying, put my nominee to the vote of the Senate and lets
see if we can smoke out some anti-voter filibusterers," or what?

> The REAL question is whether President Bush's candidate will be so 
> conservative as to trigger a showdown with a Democrat filibuster, or 
> moderate enough to avoid it and still not disaffect his conservative base. 
> We won't know that until July 8th, when he gets back from the G8 Summit 
> and makes his nominee known.

That is certainly interesting.  It is just the Senate that votes though 
isn't
it?

(I do realise that I could find this stuff out myself by Googling, and
probably will, but I thought if some US'ians saw how much this stuff
interests some of us that don't even live there, then they might discover
an interest in their own systems as well.  The Supreme Court is one
of the real hubs of civilizing, or otherwise, power not just in the US
but in the world.  It may be on a par with, or at more likely at present
given the might of the US, even more powerful than the UN Security
Council).

>> Also, when reading about possible replacement justices I see that
>> liberal and conservative are talked about as if those categories
>>  are opposites. Is that the case in the US?
>
>
> Indeed it is. In popular parlance (in the context of the Federal 
> judiciary), liberal tends to mean willing to freely interpret the 
> Constitution according to modern needs and mores (the "living 
> Constitution"), while conservative means tending to a much stricter and 
> more literal reading of the Constitution as written ("original intent").
>
> Naturally, there is a lot of gray between those two poles, and a lot of 
> specific implications in case-law dependent on both labels (to use as an 
> example the hot-button issue that will certainly define the battle; 
> conservatives generally don't recognize the "right to privacy" that Roe v. 
> Wade established which made state prohibition of abortion 
> unconstitutional, while liberals see it as a natural consequence of the 
> 10th Amendment).
>
> With the political climate in Washington so polarized, so partisan, and so 
> vicious (on both sides), the confirmation of O'Connor's replacement 
> promises to be great political theater any way it goes.
>
> Hope that helps.

Thanks

Brett Paatsch

PS: Mike, your post mentions the term "constructionist" what do you mean
by that term, is it a commonly used classification, and if so, what is its
opposite? Who on the current court for instance would you regard
as constructionists and the opposite to constructionists? 




From megao at sasktel.net  Mon Jul  4 01:10:14 2005
From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc.)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 20:10:14 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Molecular Logic Gates
In-Reply-To: <20050703230719.50662.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050703230719.50662.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42C88C76.9060504@sasktel.net>

Might it be possible to engineer a buckyball sized  to engulf a logic 
gate and act as a membrane , a spacer
and circuit isolator.   Then build a  nerve like connection./conduction 
system to create a  muticomponent
grid with communication network.  This would be a piece of molecular 
engineered artwork to be sure.



The Avantguardian wrote:

>--- Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Nice.
>>
>>http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/83/i25/8325notw4.html
>>    
>>
>
>Very interesting post, Natasha. :)
>It's got me wondering if there might not be naturally
>occuring logic gates operating on the surface of
>cells. Such would explain some aspects of the
>phenotypic complexity of multicellular organisms.
>And implications for Moore's Law are self-evident.
>
>Vigeas,
>  
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050703/4b5dafe8/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  4 02:43:27 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 19:43:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SCOTUS rulings and replacements 
In-Reply-To: <096101c5803c$c49d8da0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050704024327.28356.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Brett Paatsch <bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au> wrote:
> 
> I don't really get what the judiciary committee does in relation to
> what the Senate does. Does the judiciary committee perhaps conduct
> inquiries for a time until say the President hurrumphs and says
> "dammit
> stop delaying, put my nominee to the vote of the Senate and lets
> see if we can smoke out some anti-voter filibusterers," or what?

In order to ostensibly streamline the work of the Senate (the House
works similarly), members form into committees to  consider bills,
resolutions, etc. and members try to get on committees that they have
an interest in, or their constituents have a significant interest in
(like senators from agricultural states being on the Agriculture
Committee, etc). Senior senators vie for chairmanships because
committee chairs decide what bills before their committees get voted on
in what order, if at all, so they are positions of power.

The Judiciary Committee, among other things, examines in depth judge
candidates for federal judgships and ultimate for supreme court justice
seats. They also examine the presidents appointments for Attorney
General, FBI, and other law enforcement agency appointments, treaties,
etc. 

What is interesting in this case is that Arlen Specter is the chair of
the senate judiciary committee. He is a celebrated moderate RINO from
Pennsylvania who is famous outside his senate seat for being the
original attorney of infamous murderer and fugitive Ira Einhorn, who
killed his girlfriend Holly Maddux and kept her body in a chest in his
closet for several years before police found it. Ira fled the US to
Ireland, Sweden, and finally France, where he was found and apprehended
with his scandanavian wife and went through two extradition proceedings
in France because the French extorted the people of PA into waiving
Einhorn's death penalty and chance of getting it in a new trial, in
order to get their hands back on him. Whether Specter advised Einhorn
to flee the US is unknown to this day.

Specter raised the ire of conservatives in the past several months over
comments attributed to him where he warned the White House against
sending him non-moderate judges, a statement he denied making, however
he was part of the group of RINO senators that undercut Senate Majority
Leader Bill Frist's campaign to get all Bush judge appointees an up or
down vote before the full Senate.

> 
> > The REAL question is whether President Bush's candidate will be so 
> > conservative as to trigger a showdown with a Democrat filibuster,
> or 
> > moderate enough to avoid it and still not disaffect his
> conservative base. 
> > We won't know that until July 8th, when he gets back from the G8
> Summit 
> > and makes his nominee known.
> 
> That is certainly interesting.  It is just the Senate that votes
> though isn't it?

If the candidate can get out of committee, yes, he gets a full senate
vote. Getting out of Committee is the hard part.
> 
> PS: Mike, your post mentions the term "constructionist" what do you
> mean by that term, is it a commonly used classification, and if so,
> what is its opposite? Who on the current court for instance would you
> regard as constructionists and the opposite to constructionists? 

A constructionist is also described by Justice Scalia as an
"originalist", in that a constructionist or originalist interprets the
constitution according to the original intent or original meaning of
the clear language construction of the document.

In the founders view, "general welfare" was not a social safety net,
but the management of the performance of the economy, therefore Alan
Greenspan's job at the Federal Reserve Board of Governors is closer to
the original meaning of that term than whoever is running Health and
Human Services or the Social Security Administration. Similarly "the
militia" was specifically NOT the active duty military, but "the whole
of the people", in the words of George Mason and James Madison,
therefore the average Joe practicing his rifle shooting at the gun club
is the real militia and participating in neighborhood watch patrols and
the State Guard, not the Department of Defense.

The opposite of a constructionist or originalist is an "evolutionist",
who believes that the meaning of the Constitution changes, or can be
changed by judicial review, to meet the changing needs of an advancing
society. The problem with this is "legislating from the bench" in which
law is made by person who were not elected, but there is also a much
more insidious problem in this view, and that is that the definitions
of words are intentionally changed over time by judicial activists,
particularly those who edit legal dictionaries. 

By inventing new definitions of the words that describe our laws, you
change the meaning of the law without amending one word through
legislative or judicial processes, if you go by the evolutionist
approach. This is therefore an extremely subversive and legalistically
a form of insurgency or coup d'etat: if you can change how people think
the words that describe what the state stands for mean, you change the
government without an election or a shot being fired. This is the same
problem I described in my essay "Unsafe at any speed" that was
published as part of the "3 Laws Unsafe" campaign of SIAI: if you
change the meanings of the words of a programming language, you change
the function of the program, which can have many dangerous, unforseen
consequences that need to be extensively studied and modelled and
contemplated by a properly qualified deliberative body.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  4 03:02:22 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 20:02:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact fireworks and Bug Planet detected.
In-Reply-To: <096101c5803c$c49d8da0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050704030223.98955.qmail@web30701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2005/10/text/

The above link announces that Hubble has discovered a well defined dust
ring around the star Fomalhaut, which as you might know was the home of
the Bug civilization in Robert Heinlein's classic novel "Starship
Troopers". The ring, in fact, demonstrates that it is being shepherded
by a large planet approximately 4.5 billion miles from the star, with
an oribital center that is offset from the star, indicating the
gravitational influence of the planet. The shepherding planet itself
has not been observed, and it is most certainly a jovian sized body,
though it is likely to have moons, and there certainly appears to be
room for plenty of planets closer to the star. 

On the down side, the star is only 200 million years old according to
current estimates, so it is unlikely to have evolved intelligent life
at this point on any planets that might exist there, though there may
be room for settlement.... it is only 25 light years away.

http://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/nasatv/index.html
Watch Deep Impact's fireworks on NASA tv.

Expected impact will be 10:52 pacific time, July 3 (1:52 eastern time
on the 4th for east coasters), and while the impact is expected to be
magnitude 6 as seen from Hawaii or the southwestern US, it will be very
low in the sky from the east coast.

Complete coverage:
http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/deepimpact/main/index.html

CBS show "60 Minutes" covers Rutan and SpaceShipOne program, just shown
this evening, sorry if you missed it, Ed Bradley did a good job with 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Mon Jul  4 03:14:23 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 23:14:23 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SCOTUS rulings and replacements
In-Reply-To: <096101c5803c$c49d8da0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com><088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>	<42C747A5.9090606@humanenhancement.com>
	<096101c5803c$c49d8da0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <42C8A98F.3040809@humanenhancement.com>

Brett Paatsch wrote:

> Joseph Bloch wrote:
>
> [I wrote]
>
>>> I'm boning up my Australian-based understanding of the
>>> SCOTUS, now that Sandra Day O Connor has retired and
>>> President G W B will get a shot at first her replacement and
>>> then likely, pretty soon given his health and age, Rehquirst's) ?
>>
>>
>>
>> It's more than a "shot"; GWB will nominate a replacement, and the 
>> Senate judiciary committee will vote on him or her. If that nominee 
>> is voted down, GWB will name another, and so on. Ditto for a 
>> replacement for Rehnqist, although I personally think he won't retire 
>> until a replacement for O'Connor has been confirmed. Either way, 
>> President Bush nominates the successor; if his first choice isn't 
>> confirmed, he just keeps nominating someone until they are confirmed.
>
>
> Does the judiciary committee have to have grounds for voting a
> nomination down, or it is simply that as both the nomination and the
> voting down of it (potentially) will take place transparently with the
> American public watching (so neither side wants to be seen to be
> blatantly self serving)?


The committee votes according to the whims and wishes of its members. 
There's no standard of "grounds" that needs to be held.

>
> I don't really get what the judiciary committee does in relation to
> what the Senate does. Does the judiciary committee perhaps conduct
> inquiries for a time until say the President hurrumphs and says "dammit
> stop delaying, put my nominee to the vote of the Senate and lets
> see if we can smoke out some anti-voter filibusterers," or what?


As a rule, if any issue (such as the nomination for a Supreme Court 
Justice) does not get a positive vote by the appropriate committee 
(i.e., make a positive recommendation), the Senate as a whole does not 
conduct a vote. There have been very rare exceptions (and none involving 
the judiciary committee in particular that I'm aware of, but I'm hardly 
a scholar of Senate history), but that's not really relevant in this 
case; enough Republican Senators would vote in favor of tradition and 
form that if the Senate leadership brought a nominee to a vote sans the 
recommendation of the committee, the nomination would be defeated.

The vote does not happen simultaneously. The President has no official 
say in when the Senate brings anything to a vote (although informal 
political pressure can always be applied, as in any system).

>
>> The REAL question is whether President Bush's candidate will be so 
>> conservative as to trigger a showdown with a Democrat filibuster, or 
>> moderate enough to avoid it and still not disaffect his conservative 
>> base. We won't know that until July 8th, when he gets back from the 
>> G8 Summit and makes his nominee known.
>
>
> That is certainly interesting.  It is just the Senate that votes 
> though isn't
> it?


Correct; once the committee has given its recommendation.


>
> (I do realise that I could find this stuff out myself by Googling, and
> probably will, but I thought if some US'ians saw how much this stuff
> interests some of us that don't even live there, then they might discover
> an interest in their own systems as well.  The Supreme Court is one
> of the real hubs of civilizing, or otherwise, power not just in the US
> but in the world.  It may be on a par with, or at more likely at present
> given the might of the US, even more powerful than the UN Security
> Council).


I doubt you will maintain that view of the Supreme Court if they 
suddenly start handing down decisions that are contrary to your 
political views. Like, say, if another Justice Scalia is appointed to 
fill O'Connor's vacancy. Then it will doubtless replace George Bush as 
the seed of evil in the world.

Joseph


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Jul  4 03:55:11 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 13:55:11 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: SCOTUS rulings and replacements
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<6.2.1.2.0.20050701184511.01d58048@pop-server.satx.rr.com>	<20050702001247.47300.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050701205105.04de8cc0@unreasonable.com>	<5.1.0.14.2.20050702165733.04bcdc70@unreasonable.com><5.1.0.14.2.20050702201725.046b4400@unreasonable.com>	<42C73CE1.4090101@humanenhancement.com><088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>	<42C747A5.9090606@humanenhancement.com><096101c5803c$c49d8da0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
	<42C8A98F.3040809@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <099701c5804c$2d390ab0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>

Joseph wrote:

>> (I do realise that I could find this stuff out myself by Googling, and
>> probably will, but I thought if some US'ians saw how much this stuff
>> interests some of us that don't even live there, then they might discover
>> an interest in their own systems as well.  The Supreme Court is one
>> of the real hubs of civilizing, or otherwise, power not just in the US
>> but in the world.  It may be on a par with, or at more likely at present
>> given the might of the US, even more powerful than the UN Security
>> Council).
>
>
> I doubt you will maintain that view of the Supreme Court if they suddenly 
> start handing down decisions that are contrary to your political views. 
> Like, say, if another Justice Scalia is appointed to fill O'Connor's 
> vacancy. Then it will doubtless replace George Bush as the seed of evil in 
> the world.

I think you missed the "or otherwise" in what I wrote. I'm saying based
on a reading of the constitution and discussions with other list members
and other reading that its clear the Supreme Court has a lot of power
in the US. And because the US has a lot of power in the world it also
follows that the SCOTUS has power in the world.

I'm thinking of things like free trade agreements and such, being treaties.
If I want to enjoy the benefit of any treaties, including trade treaties,
made with the US then this stuff will matter to me personally.

See Article III, Section 2, clause 1, again.

"The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising
under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made,
or which shall be made under their Authority;  ...."

Please let me be clear, I am not a supporter of George Bush, but I don't
regard him as the seed of evil in the world. It is possible for me to see
that things that George Bush does could be good both in his aim and in
his effect.  I don't think in terms of "seed of evil" and I don't 
characterise
those who hold views different from mine as evil.  It doesn't help.

When I see people in politics talking about "evil" or "believing" my radar
goes way up though because I suspect they are appealing to the lowest
common denominator voters. I think that they are trying to encourage
others to take nuance and judgement out of their deliberations and to
just jump on their band wagon or be run over by it and by those that do.

Brett Paatsch 




From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Jul  4 04:25:37 2005
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2005 23:25:37 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Molecular Logic Gates
In-Reply-To: <42C88C76.9060504@sasktel.net>
References: <20050703230719.50662.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42C88C76.9060504@sasktel.net>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050703232348.02901cd8@pop-server.austin.rr.com>

At 08:10 PM 7/3/2005, Lifespan wrote:

>Might it be possible to engineer a buckyball sized  to engulf a logic gate 
>and act as a membrane , a spacer
>and circuit isolator.   Then build a  nerve like connection./conduction 
>system to create a  muticomponent
>grid with communication network.  This would be a piece of molecular 
>engineered artwork to be sure.

I was just writing about a concept for a transpolitics blogocracy in which 
nomothetic and diplomacy-based referendums for voting on issues would be 
developed through pervasive computing environments.  The ubiquitous 
environment would produce rapid multi-cultural communications. Open 
communications produces broader understanding and cooperation through 
online politics.

Completely new computing structures like molecular logic gates may lead to 
another quantum leap in computing power. These technologies could 
replace?at least in part?silicon-based computers, and help to give 
intelligence to everyday items. In addition, the human interface to 
computers could merge with the environment with the help of smart materials.

Cheers!
Natasha





>The Avantguardian wrote:
>>
>>--- Natasha Vita-More <mailto:natasha at natasha.cc><natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Nice.
>>>
>>><http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/83/i25/8325notw4.html>http://pubs.acs.org/cen/news/83/i25/8325notw4.html
>>>
>>
>>
>>Very interesting post, Natasha. :)
>>It's got me wondering if there might not be naturally
>>occuring logic gates operating on the surface of
>>cells. Such would explain some aspects of the
>>phenotypic complexity of multicellular organisms.
>>And implications for Moore's Law are self-evident.
>>
>>Vigeas,
>>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist, Designer
Studies of the Future, University of Houston
President, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture

Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler
Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050703/a804b407/attachment.html>

From fauxever at sprynet.com  Mon Jul  4 06:25:49 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2005 23:25:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Beefcake Babies
Message-ID: <000c01c58061$39aba360$6600a8c0@brainiac>

"... His staff wooed successful scientists and businessmen who were 
athletic, healthy and tall (Graham discovered American parents were wary of 
little eggheads). He lured customers by letting them select donors from an 
irresistible collection of what Plotz calls ''prime cuts of American man.'':

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/03/books/review/03MORRICE.html?

July 3, 2005
'The Genius Factory': Test-Tube Superbabies
By POLLY MORRICE
''All parents expect too much of their children,'' David Plotz writes in 
''The Genius Factory,'' his beguiling account of one man's struggle to 
ensure that everyone's children -- at least white ones -- would come up to 
the mark. In our era of rampant parental ambition, of ''aggro soccer dads 
and home schooling enthusiasts plotting their children's future one spelling 
bee at a time,'' the cockeyed vision of Robert K. Graham, a California 
millionaire who sought to create cadres of baby geniuses, seems less bizarre 
than it probably did in 1980, when Graham's Repository for Germinal Choice, 
better known as the Nobel Prize sperm bank, opened its doors.

Plotz, only 10 at the time, recalls his father's appalled reaction to the 
notion of using brainiac sperm to spawn wunderkinder: He tried to explain it 
was ''the sort of thing Hitler would have tried.'' Has Graham's project lost 
its sinister edge? This is one of two inquiries that Plotz, the deputy 
editor at Slate, explores in his first book.

The reader may conclude Hitler would have been more efficient than Graham. 
Although Graham's business talents allowed him to parlay his invention of 
plastic eyeglass lenses into a great fortune, he fumbled the first stage of 
his grand scheme -- cajoling Nobel winners in science to provide their 
superior seed to improve America's gene pool. The problem was his showpiece 
donor: William Shockley, a pioneer of the transistor who shared the 1956 
Nobel in physics. Shockley's sperm, ''a superb asset,'' in Graham's view, 
was the first contribution frozen, color-coded and offered to infertile 
couples eager to conceive. In this case Graham's natural marketing flair was 
done in by his knee-jerk adoration of brilliance. For years Shockley had 
preached that whites were genetically superior to blacks, and he was widely 
despised. Reporters who might have seen the genius sperm bank as ''well 
meaning and perhaps even visionary'' perceived it as inseparable from 
Shockley's racism. It was reviled as a horror and lampooned as a joke, and 
Nobel donors shunned it.

So the Nobel Prize sperm bank produced no Nobel offspring (even Shockley 
quit donating sperm, fearing his was too aged to beget healthy children). 
Yet Graham kept the bank in business nearly two decades, with slightly 
lowered standards for donors. His staff wooed successful scientists and 
businessmen who were athletic, healthy and tall (Graham discovered American 
parents were wary of little eggheads). He lured customers by letting them 
select donors from an irresistible collection of what Plotz calls ''prime 
cuts of American man.'' By the time the bank closed in 1999, its customers 
had produced 215 babies, a respectable addition to the national ''germ 
plasm,'' as Graham might have said.

Those children populate the second part of Plotz's story. In a 2001 article 
in Slate, Plotz sought information from anyone connected with the 
repository. He soon found himself cast as the ''Semen Detective,'' trying to 
hook up sperm-bank children and their mothers with the anonymous 
progenitors. This would be difficult territory for any writer, and Plotz has 
to reassure himself that none of his confidants wants him to ''go all 
Oprah.'' No wonder. We meet, for instance, a young man who desperately hopes 
his biological dad will be a better father than the one who raised him. 
Plotz's kindness shines through, but some readers may wonder if the book's 
halves -- explorations of the nature of parenthood and the morality of the 
Nobel sperm bank -- are coherent.

But in the end, the themes mesh. Plotz's meetings with employees, consumers 
and offspring of the repository, sympathetic people on the whole, may have 
led him to his understated conclusion that the enterprise wasn't so 
terrible. For one thing, Graham's inspired strategy of providing consumers a 
choice of the most desirable men possible freed women from the tyranny of 
early fertility doctors. And it has become standard industry practice; as 
Plotz says, ''All sperm banks have become eugenic sperm banks.''

Indeed, reproductive technologies all have eugenic possibilities now, 
especially preimplantation genetic diagnosis, a means of screening embryos 
that may one day let parents select the traits they wish for their children. 
Plotz labels this petri dish micromanagement an instance of ''private 
eugenics.'' But, he argues, even parents who ''will be lining up for P.G.D. 
and hoping for a prodigy'' have no use for traditional eugenics, which, in 
its brutal, negative form, culminated in the Nazis' ''mercy killings'' of 
those they judged unfit. ''Negative eugenics,'' Plotz says, ''was 
state-sponsored and brutal. But 'positive' eugenics took a milder 
approach.'' Graham's version ''sought to increase the number of outstanding 
people,'' in Plotz's phrase. Is personal eugenics -- producing a superkid 
for yourself instead of for the master race -- problematic? Plotz suggests 
the influence of genes is dicey enough and the role of nurture strong enough 
that we are delusional if we think we can make our children ''what we want 
them to be, rather than what they are.''

This conclusion, however comforting for parents of teenagers, won't quash 
everyone's objections. It doesn't address the recent swing toward nature in 
the old nature vs. nurture debate. Nor does it provide an answer for those 
who fear that prenatal screening may lead scientists to limit future 
research on genetic disorders. But Plotz's take on the role of genes now --  
in our imaginations and in fact, so far as we can determine that -- is 
humane and funny, which are fine traits for any argument, or any book.

Polly Morrice is writing a book about autism.




From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Jul  4 16:06:17 2005
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 11:06:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha 
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com>

The French glossy culture/style magazine, "Le Magazine De L'Optimum" covers 
my latest ideas and designs in its "Techno - Multimedias" section, page 56.

Natasha

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist, Designer
Studies of the Future, University of Houston
President, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture

Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler
Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050704/648c4630/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Jul  4 17:39:07 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 18:39:07 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e050704103920566d95@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/4/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote:
>  The French glossy culture/style magazine, "Le Magazine De L'Optimum" covers
> my latest ideas and designs in its "Techno - Multimedias" section, page 56.
> 

Apparently not available online.  :(

But during my searching I found you credited in a French interview
dated 23.06.2005 with Daniel Ichbiah, author of Robots: Genesis of
artificial people.

<http://www.vieartificielle.com/nouvelle/?id_nouvelle=929>

Translation of the appropriate paragraph (Google + me):

During the preparation of this book, which meeting, human or
robot-like, had the biggest effect on you?

Philippe Druillet, whom I had interviewed at the time of the release
of the video game The Ring 2 agreed to meet me for The Robots and he
gave me a brilliant analysis of the phenomenon. I also liked the
interview Brian Carlisle of Adept Technology gave me because it had
the straightforward direct approach of an engineer who knows his
business well. For a very different point of view, I found that
Natasha Vita-More, who supports the good foundation of bionics,
superbly defended her viewpoint, and I say this with all the more
intensity because my position was very skeptical in this area. Lastly,
on a purely personal basis, the meeting that I liked the most, that
fascinated me the most, is that with the New York artist Chico
Mcmutrie. He creates groups of robots which you interact with.


BillK


From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Jul  4 17:54:33 2005
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 12:54:33 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e050704103920566d95@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
	<ee50357e050704103920566d95@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704125235.029089c8@pop-server.austin.rr.com>

At 12:39 PM 7/4/2005, BillK wrote:
>On 7/4/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote:
> >  The French glossy culture/style magazine, "Le Magazine De L'Optimum" 
> covers
> > my latest ideas and designs in its "Techno - Multimedias" section, page 56.
> >
>
>Apparently not available online.  :(

Yes, I know.


>But during my searching I found you credited in a French interview
>dated 23.06.2005 with Daniel Ichbiah, author of Robots: Genesis of
>artificial people.
>
><http://www.vieartificielle.com/nouvelle/?id_nouvelle=929>
>
>Translation of the appropriate paragraph (Google + me):
>
>During the preparation of this book, which meeting, human or
>robot-like, had the biggest effect on you?
>
>Philippe Druillet, whom I had interviewed at the time of the release
>of the video game The Ring 2 agreed to meet me for The Robots and he
>gave me a brilliant analysis of the phenomenon. I also liked the
>interview Brian Carlisle of Adept Technology gave me because it had
>the straightforward direct approach of an engineer who knows his
>business well. For a very different point of view, I found that
>Natasha Vita-More, who supports the good foundation of bionics,
>superbly defended her viewpoint, and I say this with all the more
>intensity because my position was very skeptical in this area. ...

How lovely to read this. Thank you!

Natasha


<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist, Designer
Studies of the Future, University of Houston
President, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture

Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler
Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050704/c3a2cf42/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Jul  4 17:54:50 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 18:54:50 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e050704103920566d95@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
	<ee50357e050704103920566d95@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e050704105478a3f8d7@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/4/05, BillK wrote:
> Lastly,
> on a purely personal basis, the meeting that I liked the most, that
> fascinated me the most, is that with the New York artist Chico
> Mcmutrie. He creates groups of robots which you interact with.
> 

That last sentence is wrongly translated. While it is correct, i.e.
that is what Chico does, the french phrase should be translated as 'He
creates groups of robots which leave you stunned.'

Sorry. The translator had trouble with the word 'pantois'.

BillK


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Jul  4 19:58:32 2005
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 12:58:32 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha 
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
Message-ID: <001f01c580d2$c19c9880$0200a8c0@Nano>

Congratulations Natasha! Will there be somewhere online that we can see it? 
Kind regards, Gina`
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Natasha Vita-More 
  To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org ; ART-tac at yahoogroups.com ; futuretag at yahoogroups.com ; wta at transhumanism.org 
  Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 9:06 AM
  Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha 


  The French glossy culture/style magazine, "Le Magazine De L'Optimum" covers my latest ideas and designs in its "Techno - Multimedias" section, page 56.

  Natasha

    Natasha Vita-More 
    Cultural Strategist, Designer 
    Studies of the Future, University of Houston 
    President, Extropy Institute 
    Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture 


    Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler 
    Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet




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


  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050704/4db4e58c/attachment.html>

From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Mon Jul  4 20:02:25 2005
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 13:02:25 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050704105636.02912958@pop-server.austin.rr.com><ee50357e050704103920566d95@mail.gmail.com>
	<6.2.1.2.2.20050704125235.029089c8@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
Message-ID: <005a01c580d3$4f277d50$0200a8c0@Nano>


Oops, I should have read all of my email before I asked my question!
Gina

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Natasha Vita-More 
  To: BillK ; ExI chat list 
  Sent: Monday, July 04, 2005 10:54 AM
  Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] NEWS: Le Magazine De L'Optimum - Natasha


  At 12:39 PM 7/4/2005, BillK wrote:

    On 7/4/05, Natasha Vita-More wrote:
    >  The French glossy culture/style magazine, "Le Magazine De L'Optimum" covers
    > my latest ideas and designs in its "Techno - Multimedias" section, page 56.
    > 

    Apparently not available online.  :(

  Yes, I know.  



    But during my searching I found you credited in a French interview
    dated 23.06.2005 with Daniel Ichbiah, author of Robots: Genesis of
    artificial people.

    < http://www.vieartificielle.com/nouvelle/?id_nouvelle=929>

    Translation of the appropriate paragraph (Google + me):

    During the preparation of this book, which meeting, human or
    robot-like, had the biggest effect on you?

    Philippe Druillet, whom I had interviewed at the time of the release
    of the video game The Ring 2 agreed to meet me for The Robots and he
    gave me a brilliant analysis of the phenomenon. I also liked the
    interview Brian Carlisle of Adept Technology gave me because it had
    the straightforward direct approach of an engineer who knows his
    business well. For a very different point of view, I found that
    Natasha Vita-More, who supports the good foundation of bionics,
    superbly defended her viewpoint, and I say this with all the more
    intensity because my position was very skeptical in this area. ...

  How lovely to read this. Thank you!

  Natasha



    Natasha Vita-More 
    Cultural Strategist, Designer 
    Studies of the Future, University of Houston 
    President, Extropy Institute 
    Founder, Transhumanist Arts & Culture 


    Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler 
    Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet




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


  _______________________________________________
  extropy-chat mailing list
  extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050704/e81efcb9/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  4 20:09:52 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 13:09:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050703200403.84755.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050704200952.51375.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Mike, this is such a comprehensive answer it took
99.9% of the strut out of me. Almost nothing left to
say. I grew up in the early '70s, becoming interested
in libertarianism gradually throughout that decade, in
a remore philosophical sense, it was one of the many
fads floating around at that time. There was
periodically someone passing out flyers at a mall with
the headline, "do as thou will" or somesuch. After
reading this post the only wind in my sails concerning
libertarianism is that is a creation of intellectuals,
and we intellectuals are many things-- including
tricksters. So libertarianism itself is to be taken
seriously yet not too seriously. The actual practicing
of freedom is something else.

>Mike Lorrey wrote:
> Veterans benefits are indeed for past services,
> which at the time were
> very poorly paid for (without those benefits, the
> real hourly wage of
> an E-1 through E-3 isn't much more than minimum
> wage). Earned benefits
> don't need to be justified on libertarian grounds,
> any more than any
> employee of any corporation needs to justify their
> benefits.
>  What needs to be justified on libertarian grounds
is
> what services the
> individual renders for the government. Is one a tax
> collector, or a
> welfare administrator, or a bureaucrat who writes
> tax or welfare
> regulations, or a BATF or DEA agent? 
> I was an electrical/environmental/avionics tech on
> F-15 and F-111
> aircraft. The closest I came to being even
> tangentially working in
> support of government activities I thought
> questionable from a
> libertarian standpoint was when Bush 41 modified
> posse comitatus to
> have the military assist in the drug war. The F-15
> unit I was in at the
> time was already tasked as a fighter interceptor
> unit for NORAD and
> intercepted every aircraft that didn't identify
> itself in the pacific
> northwest, so there wasn't any real change in our
> operations and to my
> knowledge we didn't splash any drug planes while I
> was there.
 Private sector laborers generally don't risk getting
> arrested by
> competitive companies and held in prisons and
> tortured for years. Nor
> do most industrial or other workplace accidents
> maime the worker so
> thoroughly that repair and rehabilitation is so
> difficult. Nor do they
> get paid to intentionally put themselves in harms
> way (except for, say,
> cops and firemen). Private employers generally want
> you to follow OSHA
> rules at all times.
> I have never heard that any service member 'gets'
> rights by enlisting.
> If anything, the service member gives up rights,
> including agreeing to
> be held to justice under the UCMJ rather than
> civilian law, and to
> pretty much be told what to do with his or her life,
> which may include
> being separated from spouse and kids for long
> periods of time.
> 
> About the only right we gain is the right to tell
> obnoxious
> know-it-alls to go to hell when they start telling
> us we are baby
> killers, mercenaries, or didn't earn our pay and/or
> benefits. In a
> world where most civilians either don't own guns,
> don't believe in
> guns, or the military, or the common militia, or in
> self-defense, the
> risking and bleeding and dying that military members
> do enables such
> self-deluded idiots to continue to live in their
> fantasy worlds of
> poorly estimated risk. This includes a few
> individuals who claim to be
> libertarians but interpret the zero agression
> principle as pacifism
> with a shuck and jive, betting their bluff will
> never be called, rather
> than responsible self-defense as it should be.
> 
> I know of few real libertarians (counting all
> libertarians and not just
> absolutist anarchists living in their air castles in
> denial of reality)
> who do not recognise that one of the few legitimate
> functions of the US
> government under the US Constitution, or even the
> Articles of
> Confederation, if you disbelieve in the validity of
> the Constitution,
> is the military. While keeping a standing army is
> generally wrong in
> libertarian eyes, a full time Navy and any other
> means of power
> projection with large capital equipment (which IMHO
> includes air power,
> space power, as well as ships), is legitimate.
> 
> If you still think otherwise, then fine, come and
> bitch at me once
> you've gone and dismantled the 90% of the US
> government that ISN'T
> constitutionally allowed. Until then, you've got a
> lot bigger fish to
> fry than my veterans benefits. At the time I
> enlisted, I was a
> republican. You could say the Air Force made me a
> libertarian, so in
> that sense, the US military made the world a
> slightly better place by
> one person (though some may dispute that).
> 
> I know of a number of other libertarians who went
> through similar
> experiences, who enlisted. I believe the older ones
> who enlisted back
> when there was a draft followed Heinlein's advice
> that the best place
> to hide from a draft is in the military.
> 
> Mike Lorrey
> Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of
> human freedom.
> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of
> slaves."
>                                       -William Pitt
> (1759-1806) 
> Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Jul  4 20:25:58 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 13:25:58 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050703200403.84755.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050703200403.84755.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42C99B56.6040500@pobox.com>

Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> If you still think otherwise, then fine, come and bitch at me once
> you've gone and dismantled the 90% of the US government that ISN'T
> constitutionally allowed. Until then, you've got a lot bigger fish to
> fry than my veterans benefits. At the time I enlisted, I was a
> republican. You could say the Air Force made me a libertarian, so in
> that sense, the US military made the world a slightly better place by
> one person (though some may dispute that).

I would, on the strict grounds that convincing people of ideologies counts for 
nothing - is no triumph for the ideology.  Only what people do matters.  It 
benefits humanity nothing when one more human becomes convinced of, say, the 
Singularity Institute's reading material, unless that human should be 
motivated to do something differently thereby, and even then the belief still 
matters nothing of itself.  This is something that I emphasize in all causes I 
join, doing my helpful part to prevent those causes from becoming religions; 
belief counts for nothing.

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


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  4 21:24:31 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 14:24:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050704200952.51375.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050704212431.5308.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Glad I could be of service and I hope I wasn't too abrasive for you to
get the point. While I am well versed in the orthodox libertarian
gospel, as an individualist I generally don't accept even the word of
Rothbard or L Neil Smith as gospel. I think for myself, thanks. 

I try to live in "is" and work at baby steps toward getting the world
to 'ought'. I don't pout and stamp my footie and demand the world
accomodate me, like so many absolutists do. While I score 100%x100% on
the WSPQ, I don't demand the world become 100% libertarian
immmediately, nor do I insist the people I work with politically be the
same, so long as we are all making progress daily. While I'm on the
Freedom Train chugging down the tracks, those living in air castles are
still back in slaves-ville living in the hallucination that reality
will stop existing if you stop believing in it.

--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Mike, this is such a comprehensive answer it took
> 99.9% of the strut out of me. Almost nothing left to
> say. I grew up in the early '70s, becoming interested
> in libertarianism gradually throughout that decade, in
> a remore philosophical sense, it was one of the many
> fads floating around at that time. There was
> periodically someone passing out flyers at a mall with
> the headline, "do as thou will" or somesuch. After
> reading this post the only wind in my sails concerning
> libertarianism is that is a creation of intellectuals,
> and we intellectuals are many things-- including
> tricksters. So libertarianism itself is to be taken
> seriously yet not too seriously. The actual practicing
> of freedom is something else.
> 
> >Mike Lorrey wrote:
> > Veterans benefits are indeed for past services,
> > which at the time were
> > very poorly paid for (without those benefits, the
> > real hourly wage of
> > an E-1 through E-3 isn't much more than minimum
> > wage). Earned benefits
> > don't need to be justified on libertarian grounds,
> > any more than any
> > employee of any corporation needs to justify their
> > benefits.
> >  What needs to be justified on libertarian grounds
> is
> > what services the
> > individual renders for the government. Is one a tax
> > collector, or a
> > welfare administrator, or a bureaucrat who writes
> > tax or welfare
> > regulations, or a BATF or DEA agent? 
> > I was an electrical/environmental/avionics tech on
> > F-15 and F-111
> > aircraft. The closest I came to being even
> > tangentially working in
> > support of government activities I thought
> > questionable from a
> > libertarian standpoint was when Bush 41 modified
> > posse comitatus to
> > have the military assist in the drug war. The F-15
> > unit I was in at the
> > time was already tasked as a fighter interceptor
> > unit for NORAD and
> > intercepted every aircraft that didn't identify
> > itself in the pacific
> > northwest, so there wasn't any real change in our
> > operations and to my
> > knowledge we didn't splash any drug planes while I
> > was there.
>  Private sector laborers generally don't risk getting
> > arrested by
> > competitive companies and held in prisons and
> > tortured for years. Nor
> > do most industrial or other workplace accidents
> > maime the worker so
> > thoroughly that repair and rehabilitation is so
> > difficult. Nor do they
> > get paid to intentionally put themselves in harms
> > way (except for, say,
> > cops and firemen). Private employers generally want
> > you to follow OSHA
> > rules at all times.
> > I have never heard that any service member 'gets'
> > rights by enlisting.
> > If anything, the service member gives up rights,
> > including agreeing to
> > be held to justice under the UCMJ rather than
> > civilian law, and to
> > pretty much be told what to do with his or her life,
> > which may include
> > being separated from spouse and kids for long
> > periods of time.
> > 
> > About the only right we gain is the right to tell
> > obnoxious
> > know-it-alls to go to hell when they start telling
> > us we are baby
> > killers, mercenaries, or didn't earn our pay and/or
> > benefits. In a
> > world where most civilians either don't own guns,
> > don't believe in
> > guns, or the military, or the common militia, or in
> > self-defense, the
> > risking and bleeding and dying that military members
> > do enables such
> > self-deluded idiots to continue to live in their
> > fantasy worlds of
> > poorly estimated risk. This includes a few
> > individuals who claim to be
> > libertarians but interpret the zero agression
> > principle as pacifism
> > with a shuck and jive, betting their bluff will
> > never be called, rather
> > than responsible self-defense as it should be.
> > 
> > I know of few real libertarians (counting all
> > libertarians and not just
> > absolutist anarchists living in their air castles in
> > denial of reality)
> > who do not recognise that one of the few legitimate
> > functions of the US
> > government under the US Constitution, or even the
> > Articles of
> > Confederation, if you disbelieve in the validity of
> > the Constitution,
> > is the military. While keeping a standing army is
> > generally wrong in
> > libertarian eyes, a full time Navy and any other
> > means of power
> > projection with large capital equipment (which IMHO
> > includes air power,
> > space power, as well as ships), is legitimate.
> > 
> > If you still think otherwise, then fine, come and
> > bitch at me once
> > you've gone and dismantled the 90% of the US
> > government that ISN'T
> > constitutionally allowed. Until then, you've got a
> > lot bigger fish to
> > fry than my veterans benefits. At the time I
> > enlisted, I was a
> > republican. You could say the Air Force made me a
> > libertarian, so in
> > that sense, the US military made the world a
> > slightly better place by
> > one person (though some may dispute that).
> > 
> > I know of a number of other libertarians who went
> > through similar
> > experiences, who enlisted. I believe the older ones
> > who enlisted back
> > when there was a draft followed Heinlein's advice
> > that the best place
> > to hide from a draft is in the military.
> > 
> > Mike Lorrey
> > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of
> > human freedom.
> > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of
> > slaves."
> >                                       -William Pitt
> > (1759-1806) 
> > Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
> > 
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > 
> === message truncated ===
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> ____________________________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Sports 
> Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
> http://football.fantasysports.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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Jul  4 21:33:20 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 22:33:20 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <42C99B56.6040500@pobox.com>
References: <20050703200403.84755.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<42C99B56.6040500@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e050704143315958793@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/4/05, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
> I would, on the strict grounds that convincing people of ideologies counts for
> nothing - is no triumph for the ideology.  Only what people do matters.  It
> benefits humanity nothing when one more human becomes convinced of, say, the
> Singularity Institute's reading material, unless that human should be
> motivated to do something differently thereby, and even then the belief still
> matters nothing of itself.  This is something that I emphasize in all causes I
> join, doing my helpful part to prevent those causes from becoming religions;
> belief counts for nothing.
> 

Not quite nothing. You mean the intellectual belief that does not
result in any action counts for nothing.
You have to have the belief first as a driving force for your actions.
"machshavosav ni'karos mi'toch ma'asav..."

BillK


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jul  4 22:26:30 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 17:26:30 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] astrology suit against NASA
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Russian sues Nasa for comet upset
By Artyom Liss
BBC News, Moscow

Hours after a Nasa probe crashed into Comet Tempel 1, legal reverberations 
were felt in a Moscow court.

Judges in the tiny courtroom normally deal with matters much more mundane 
than space exploration.

But Judge Litvinenko opened hearings into a case which could see Nasa pay a 
local amateur astrologist millions of dollars in damages.

Writer Marina Bay claims that by slamming the probe into the comet, Nasa 
endangered the future of civilisation.

"Nobody has yet proven that this experiment was safe," says Ms Bay's lawyer 
Alexander Molokhov.

"This impact could have altered the orbit of the comet, so now there is a 
chance that the Tempel may well destroy the Earth some day!"

If your phone went down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then get in 
touch with us
Alexander Molokhov
Marina Bay's lawyer

This claim was brushed aside by Nasa mission engineer Shadan Ardalan.

"The analogy is a mosquito hitting the front of an airliner in flight. The 
effect is negligible," Mr Ardalan told BBC News.

However, even if the comet stays at a safe distance from Earth, Ms Bay's 
own life, she thinks, will never be the same again.

An amateur astrologist, she believes that any variation in the orbit or the 
composition of the Tempel comet will certainly affect her own fate.

So Ms Marina's claims to be experiencing "a moral trauma" - which only a 
payment of $300m (252m euros; ?170m) can put right.

This is roughly what Nasa has spent on the experiment so far.

Volunteers request

Moscow representatives of the American space agency have ignored Monday's 
court hearing.

But, by Russian law, this will not prevent the judge from continuing with 
the case.

Marina Bay's legal team remain confident, and they are even looking for 
volunteers to join in on the claim.

"The impact changed the magnetic properties of the comet, and this could 
have affected mobile telephony here on Earth. If your phone went down this 
morning, ask yourself Why? and then get in touch with us," says Mr Molokhov.

So now it is up to the Moscow Presnya court to find an answer to this, 
truly universal, question.

The final decision is not likely to be announced for at least another month.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4649987.stm

Published: 2005/07/04 17:54:10 GMT



From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Mon Jul  4 22:32:24 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 08:32:24 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
References: <20050703200403.84755.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com><42C99B56.6040500@pobox.com>
	<ee50357e050704143315958793@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005b01c580e8$4035c1c0$0d98e03c@homepc>

> On 7/4/05, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
>> I would, on the strict grounds that convincing people of ideologies 
>> counts for
>> nothing - is no triumph for the ideology.  Only what people do matters. 
>> It
>> benefits humanity nothing when one more human becomes convinced of, say, 
>> the
>> Singularity Institute's reading material, unless that human should be
>> motivated to do something differently thereby, and even then the belief 
>> still
>> matters nothing of itself.  This is something that I emphasize in all 
>> causes I
>> join, doing my helpful part to prevent those causes from becoming 
>> religions;
>> belief counts for nothing.
>>
>
> Not quite nothing. You mean the intellectual belief that does not
> result in any action counts for nothing.
> You have to have the belief first as a driving force for your actions.
> "machshavosav ni'karos mi'toch ma'asav..."

I guess that tee shirt "Don't believe. Think !" won't be arriving anytime
soon then :-)

Brett Paatsch 




From weg9mq at centralmail.zzn.com  Mon Jul  4 23:38:52 2005
From: weg9mq at centralmail.zzn.com (Edward Smith)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 15:38:52 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Catalog Of Correctable Omnipresent Human Flaws
Message-ID: <D1DE1D1F375024D4BBDC96AD7926E260@weg9mq.centralmail.zzn.com>

This reference may be copied and distributed freely.

PART 1: Corrections, Enhancements, And Species Names

All human bodies have numerous flaws which can be eliminated
by geneticly modifying the zygote. Those flaws exist because
their elimination was and is not necessary for the survival of the
human species. However, their elimination would greatly
increase the efficiency of our actions, and thus both our physical
prosperity and our quality of life.

A distinction must be made between corrections and
enhancements. Corrections are removals of negatives whereas
enhancements are additions of positives. The line between a
correction and an enhancement is not entirely defined, but most
modifications clearly fall on one side or the other.

A correction constitutes the replacement of an important trait
that had evolved away due to lack of necessity, or the
correction of a trait that had evolved wrongly due to
evolutionary expedience, except when the correction of such a
trait satisfies the criteria for being an enhancement. An
enhancement constitutes any augmentation of ones abilities that
are characterized as being competitive, other than the removal
of specific weaknesses, or any elaborate or unnatural addition.
Many examples of enhancements are: 1. enhancements, beyond
the removal of specific weaknesses, of muscle strength, muscle
disinhibition, muscle endurance, cardiovascular endurance, skill,
sensory breadth, sensory sensitivity, intelligence, mental skills,
appearance, speed of development, or ability to feel pleasure,
2. the ability to extract energy from sunlight, hydrocarbons, or
other sources that are unnatural for animals, 3. chameleon-like
color-changing ability or other camouflage, 4. echolocation
ability (which is mostly applicable in the dark), 5. built-in
phosphorescent light(s), 6. built-in fire lighter(s) (most likely
phosphoric and sulfuric), 7. wings, fins, claws, gills, serpentine
arms, cold-bloodedness, or any other complex animal-like
traits, 8. built-in weapons, 9. built-in armor beyond the removal
of any specific weaknesses, 10. any purely cosmetic alteration.
Obviously, some of such enhancements would not even be
practical, especially since artificial non-biological objects can
serve many of those functions, though such artificial
non-biological objects are often expensive and in any case they
depend upon a technological industrial infrastructure and access
to that infrastructure.

It is important to first focus on corrections rather than
enhancements, the reason being that corrections are limited
in their scope (there are most likely only 35-45 possible
corrections) and mostly benefit an individual by themself,
whereas enhancements are virtually unlimited in their scope, are
mostly beneficial to an individual in competition with others,
and/or are prone to abuse. Pursuing the latter traits may thus
touch off a rash of socially mutually-destructive genetic
competition if it is not clear that such enhancements must only
be made with the most rightful and socially responsible of
intentions, as characterized by the geneticly-determined
character of the enhanced beings, such that they have a fine,
clear, rightness-seeking abstract focus (caused by the H1, M1,
and M3 receptors in unmodified humans), which works in
opposition to both crude blind wrongness-seeking focus
(caused by the 5-HT2A, 5-HT2B, and 5-HT2C receptors in
unmodified humans) and ethically indifferent greed. Luckily
though, if a person is rational enough to support transhumanism,
then they are more likely to be rational enough to realize that
responsibility. The various possible human modifications fall on
a spectrum between being a correction and being an
enhancement (which may be called the correction-enhancement
spectrum), with most possible modifications clearly falling on
one side or the other. The further a trait falls toward the
[competitive] enhancement end of the spectrum, the more
dangerous it is, and thus the more rightful it's bearer's
temperament must be.

Being as highly modified humans that can reproduce certainly
constitute a new subspecies of homo sapien, there should be
specific species names to distinguish significantly-modified
humans from unmodified or minimally-modified humans, and to
distinguish humans that have only been modified by significant
corrections from those that have been modified by significant
enhancements (with or without significant corrections also).
Species names, by custom, are latin, meaning that latin terms
should be used to describe the 3 human types, following the
species name 'homo sapien'. The most appropriate latin
subspecies names for humans that are not significantly-modified,
significantly-corrected only, and significantly-enhanced,
respectively, are 'rudis', 'correctus', and 'altus', which mean in
latin, respectively: 'rough, raw, or crude', 'corrected', and
'grown or improved'.

There are also different categories of modifications for both
correction and enhancement modifications, which can serve to
classify the modifications when making lists. Those categories
are: 1. biochemical, 2. gross physical, and 3. neurological. A
modification can fall under multiple categories to some extent,
especially if it is complex, but such traits should be classified
into the categories that they best fall under. Those categories
may also have subcategories where appropriate, such as
'growth', 'autonomy', 'mobility', 'durability', etcetera, though not
all modifications may fall into one of the subcategories.


PART 2: Correctable Omnipresent Human Flaws

The reference below describes many of, and most likely the vast
majority of, geneticly-correctable omnipresent evolutionary
flaws of unmodified humans (descriptions begin with "In
unmodified humans,"), their corresponding corrected state
(descriptions begin with "In the corrected state," and use the
verb "will"), and any other relevant basic information. Closely
related flaws are described as a single flaw:

(Due to an email size limit of 30 kilobytes, this large section can
not fit into this email. The entire reference is at the URL:
http://www.cotse.net/users/t3nj/th.html )


PART 3: Application

As of now, mid 2005, transhumanist work has consisted of
nothing except discussions, news-sharing, political debating, and
some political work on behalf of issues that are related to
transhumanism. There have apparently been no attempts at
actually IMPLEMENTING transhumanism, that is, modifying
human zygotes (probably produced in test tubes), most likely
via a retroviral gene-delivery vector. The genome of an
unmodified human has approximately 22,000 genes (in contrast
to an early crude estimate of approximately 30,000 genes).

Before the genetic modification of human zygotes occurs, it is
first necessary to research the relevant genes and proteins of the
various traits that are to be modified. That constitutes identifying
what genes and proteins produce a specific trait; discovering
how they produce that trait; learning their sequences; using that
information to extrapolate the nature of the modified genes and
proteins and their sequences; and testing the modified genes in
animals (preferably fast-growing animals) that are sufficiently
geneticly similar to humans in the relevant genes, until the
modified genes function successfully. An other option is to
geneticly engineer laboratory animals to grow more rapidly (so
as to get faster test results) and/or to have more human-like
genes (so as to get more accurate test results).

It is therefore in the immediate interest of transhumanists to
share any of the aforementioned research information. To that
end, and to facilitate implementing transhumanism in general, I
recommend the creation of a new extropy institute mailing list,
probably best called 'extropy-research', which serves the
purpose of exchanging such information, and any other
necessary logistical information involved in actively implementing
transhumanism. To organize the information presented on that
list, an extropy institute reference should be created that is a
well-organized conglomeration of that information, and it should
incorporate this very reference as a guideline for research. The
new extropy institute reference is probably best called the
'extropy institute active transhumanism reference'. The active
transhumanism reference should be backed up on many users'
computers and on disks, in case theocratic terrorists manage to
hack into and destroy the online reference. I also advise that
transhumanists that intend to actively implement transhumanism
obtain a college degree in genetics, as that official recognition
will give you more clout when dealing with any
anti-transhumanists that will try to obstruct these goals. I have
already made an equivalent proposal to the WTA, but they have
not shown interest. I am hoping that the extropy institute is more
proactive.


Get your Free E-mail at http://centralmail.cjb.net
___________________________________________________________
Get your own Web-based E-mail Service at http://www.zzn.com


From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Mon Jul  4 22:45:42 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 18:45:42 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] astrology suit against NASA
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <42C9BC16.7060107@humanenhancement.com>

Even the folks on the pagan news websites I frequent are saying this 
person is a complete idiot.

Joseph

Enhance your body "beyond well" and your mind "beyond normal": 
http://www.humanenhancement.com
New Jersey Transhumanist Association: http://www.goldenfuture.net/njta
PostHumanity Rising: http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ (updated 6/14/05)

Damien Broderick wrote:

> Russian sues Nasa for comet upset
> By Artyom Liss
> BBC News, Moscow
>
> Hours after a Nasa probe crashed into Comet Tempel 1, legal 
> reverberations were felt in a Moscow court.
>
> Judges in the tiny courtroom normally deal with matters much more 
> mundane than space exploration.
>
> But Judge Litvinenko opened hearings into a case which could see Nasa 
> pay a local amateur astrologist millions of dollars in damages.
>
> Writer Marina Bay claims that by slamming the probe into the comet, 
> Nasa endangered the future of civilisation.
>
> "Nobody has yet proven that this experiment was safe," says Ms Bay's 
> lawyer Alexander Molokhov.
>
> "This impact could have altered the orbit of the comet, so now there 
> is a chance that the Tempel may well destroy the Earth some day!"
>
> If your phone went down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then get 
> in touch with us
> Alexander Molokhov
> Marina Bay's lawyer
>
> This claim was brushed aside by Nasa mission engineer Shadan Ardalan.
>
> "The analogy is a mosquito hitting the front of an airliner in flight. 
> The effect is negligible," Mr Ardalan told BBC News.
>
> However, even if the comet stays at a safe distance from Earth, Ms 
> Bay's own life, she thinks, will never be the same again.
>
> An amateur astrologist, she believes that any variation in the orbit 
> or the composition of the Tempel comet will certainly affect her own 
> fate.
>
> So Ms Marina's claims to be experiencing "a moral trauma" - which only 
> a payment of $300m (252m euros; ?170m) can put right.
>
> This is roughly what Nasa has spent on the experiment so far.
>
> Volunteers request
>
> Moscow representatives of the American space agency have ignored 
> Monday's court hearing.
>
> But, by Russian law, this will not prevent the judge from continuing 
> with the case.
>
> Marina Bay's legal team remain confident, and they are even looking 
> for volunteers to join in on the claim.
>
> "The impact changed the magnetic properties of the comet, and this 
> could have affected mobile telephony here on Earth. If your phone went 
> down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then get in touch with us," 
> says Mr Molokhov.
>
> So now it is up to the Moscow Presnya court to find an answer to this, 
> truly universal, question.
>
> The final decision is not likely to be announced for at least another 
> month.
> Story from BBC NEWS:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4649987.stm
>
> Published: 2005/07/04 17:54:10 GMT
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul  4 22:56:02 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 18:56:02 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] computer chess again
In-Reply-To: <200506281449.j5SEnZR03672@tick.javien.com>
References: <200506281449.j5SEnZR03672@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <42C9BE82.10905@cox.net>

spike wrote:

>>Alejandro Dubrovsky
>>    
>>
>...
>  
>
>>Note though that enhanced humans are not for finished yet.  The Hydras,
>>both 16 and 32 CPU versions, got hammered just a month ago in an
>>advanced chess comp.
>>alejandro
>>    
>>
>
>Ja I noticed that.  {8-]
>
>alejandro, we should point out for the chess-nongeeks that
>advanced chess is a competition that allows the humans to
>use computers and team up.  I see it as wonderful advertisement
>for computer enhancement of humans in athletic competitions.
>
>spike
>
>
>  
>
Wow!. I quit following chess some time ago in the belief that we had
already learned what we could from it: algorithms plus raw computing
power inevitably surpass human skills in this problem domain. Now you
tell me that while I was not looking, we have a whole new experiment
underway: human-computer collaboration can still beat algorithms and raw
computing capacity!

But why restrict this to sports? Chess is a "sport," but it is also an 
exercise
in problem solving. If we adapt the collaborative techniques used in
this competition to activities such as programming, chip design, and other
logic-based problem domains, we can possibly increase our intellectual
productivity. at the extreme we create a seed SI based on a human-computer
collaboration. There is a huge economic incentive to pursue as a way to
increase the productivity of software and hardware developers. There is no
need to treat that as a purely academic or theoretical exercise. Next step:
research the chess collaboration to see if it can be generalized.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Mon Jul  4 23:05:14 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 16:05:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] astrology suit against NASA
In-Reply-To: <42C9BC16.7060107@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <20050704230514.56569.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Well, the impactor imparted 372 trillion ft-lbs/sec, or
89875517873681764 m^2 s^-2 of specific energy. That this energy was
imparted against the direction of the comet's travel when the comet was
at perigee should result in a measurable change in apogee distance from
the sun, though no change in the perigee distance from the sun, or from
Earth's orbit around the Sun.

That the impactor struck the comet near the end closest to earth may
cause much of the energy to be translated into a change in angular
momentum (spin).

--- Joseph Bloch <jbloch at humanenhancement.com> wrote:

> Even the folks on the pagan news websites I frequent are saying this 
> person is a complete idiot.
> 
> Joseph
> 
> Enhance your body "beyond well" and your mind "beyond normal": 
> http://www.humanenhancement.com
> New Jersey Transhumanist Association:
> http://www.goldenfuture.net/njta
> PostHumanity Rising: http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ (updated
> 6/14/05)
> 
> Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> > Russian sues Nasa for comet upset
> > By Artyom Liss
> > BBC News, Moscow
> >
> > Hours after a Nasa probe crashed into Comet Tempel 1, legal 
> > reverberations were felt in a Moscow court.
> >
> > Judges in the tiny courtroom normally deal with matters much more 
> > mundane than space exploration.
> >
> > But Judge Litvinenko opened hearings into a case which could see
> Nasa 
> > pay a local amateur astrologist millions of dollars in damages.
> >
> > Writer Marina Bay claims that by slamming the probe into the comet,
> 
> > Nasa endangered the future of civilisation.
> >
> > "Nobody has yet proven that this experiment was safe," says Ms
> Bay's 
> > lawyer Alexander Molokhov.
> >
> > "This impact could have altered the orbit of the comet, so now
> there 
> > is a chance that the Tempel may well destroy the Earth some day!"
> >
> > If your phone went down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then
> get 
> > in touch with us
> > Alexander Molokhov
> > Marina Bay's lawyer
> >
> > This claim was brushed aside by Nasa mission engineer Shadan
> Ardalan.
> >
> > "The analogy is a mosquito hitting the front of an airliner in
> flight. 
> > The effect is negligible," Mr Ardalan told BBC News.
> >
> > However, even if the comet stays at a safe distance from Earth, Ms 
> > Bay's own life, she thinks, will never be the same again.
> >
> > An amateur astrologist, she believes that any variation in the
> orbit 
> > or the composition of the Tempel comet will certainly affect her
> own 
> > fate.
> >
> > So Ms Marina's claims to be experiencing "a moral trauma" - which
> only 
> > a payment of $300m (252m euros; ?170m) can put right.
> >
> > This is roughly what Nasa has spent on the experiment so far.
> >
> > Volunteers request
> >
> > Moscow representatives of the American space agency have ignored 
> > Monday's court hearing.
> >
> > But, by Russian law, this will not prevent the judge from
> continuing 
> > with the case.
> >
> > Marina Bay's legal team remain confident, and they are even looking
> 
> > for volunteers to join in on the claim.
> >
> > "The impact changed the magnetic properties of the comet, and this 
> > could have affected mobile telephony here on Earth. If your phone
> went 
> > down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then get in touch with
> us," 
> > says Mr Molokhov.
> >
> > So now it is up to the Moscow Presnya court to find an answer to
> this, 
> > truly universal, question.
> >
> > The final decision is not likely to be announced for at least
> another 
> > month.
> > Story from BBC NEWS:
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4649987.stm
> >
> > Published: 2005/07/04 17:54:10 GMT
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Mon Jul  4 23:10:59 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 16:10:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
Message-ID: <e88b73ce050704161031beffc6@mail.gmail.com>

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154788&threshold=0&cid=12979847

So how does one go about debating people like this? Is it even
possible? Are there any relevant points they make which we need to
keep in mind?


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Mon Jul  4 23:19:09 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 16:19:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] astrology suit against NASA
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070416196e9a90c6@mail.gmail.com>

Lawsuit aside, it was a darned impressive impact. (paste, paste...)
The Planetary Society's Emily Lakdawalla put together a fairly nice
animated GIF of the impact and posted it to the Society's official
blog:

http://planetary.org.nyud.net:8090/deepimpact/images/encounter/animation-small.gif
http://planetary.org/blog/

Her description: "OK, I've managed to get back on the raw image
website, and I grabbed a whole bunch of the images that we were
apparently looking at earlier. I just threw together this little
animation, showing mostly Impact Targeting Sensor images, but moving
at the end to some Medium Resolution Imager images. Now, I've probably
dropped some frames, and these images are smaller than the ones the
scientists get to use, but I have to say that this is pretty sweet as
it is. I can't wait to see what the scientists produce! "

On 7/4/05, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> Russian sues Nasa for comet upset
> By Artyom Liss
> BBC News, Moscow


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul  4 23:14:54 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 19:14:54 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] computer chess again
In-Reply-To: <42C9BE82.10905@cox.net>
References: <200506281449.j5SEnZR03672@tick.javien.com>
	<42C9BE82.10905@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42C9C2EE.30208@cox.net>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> Wow!. I quit following chess some time ago in the belief that we had
> already learned what we could from it: algorithms plus raw computing
> power inevitably surpass human skills in this problem domain. Now you
> tell me that while I was not looking, we have a whole new experiment
> underway: human-computer collaboration can still beat algorithms and raw
> computing capacity!
>
> But why restrict this to sports? Chess is a "sport," but it is also an 
> exercise
> in problem solving. If we adapt the collaborative techniques used in
> this competition to activities such as programming, chip design, and 
> other
> logic-based problem domains, we can possibly increase our intellectual
> productivity. at the extreme we create a seed SI based on a 
> human-computer
> collaboration. There is a huge economic incentive to pursue as a way to
> increase the productivity of software and hardware developers. There 
> is no
> need to treat that as a purely academic or theoretical exercise. Next 
> step:
> research the chess collaboration to see if it can be generalized.
> _______________________________________________

And responding to my own post:
Google is your friend.
My point is discussed at some length at:
http://ieet.org/writings/Dvorsky20050302.htm
and of course, clicking on the home page:
http://ieet.org/index.php
we find that Nick Bostrom is the Chair of IEET.

Yes, Google remains the best current exemplar of a computer-based
intelligence enhancer.




From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jul  4 23:21:21 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 16:21:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Catalog Of Correctable Omnipresent Human Flaws
In-Reply-To: <D1DE1D1F375024D4BBDC96AD7926E260@weg9mq.centralmail.zzn.com>
Message-ID: <20050704232121.59662.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Edward Smith <weg9mq at centralmail.zzn.com> wrote:
> As of now, mid 2005, transhumanist work has consisted of
> nothing except discussions, news-sharing, political debating, and
> some political work on behalf of issues that are related to
> transhumanism.

Ha ha ha wrong.  Although I can see how one would come to such an
erroneous conclusion.

> There have apparently been no attempts at
> actually IMPLEMENTING transhumanism, that is, modifying
> human zygotes (probably produced in test tubes), most likely
> via a retroviral gene-delivery vector.

One step at a time, yo.  The human genome ain't the easiest learning
tool out there.  There's been tons of ongoing work just trying to
understand what all the various bits are.  See any number of mainstream
biomedical research publications focussing on genetic anything.

In the mean time, there's been work on modifying the genomes of
plants (look up Genetically Modified Organisms - which work has been so
widespread as to have provoked debate in many nations, and
unfortunately legal restrictions in some) and some animals.  A few
people have tried basic gene therapy on humans; unfortunately, we know
so little that the attempts killed people.  The regulating bodies have
been discussing safeguards to make sure deaths don't happen again;
they've put a halt to actual gene therapy for now, but they definitely
do not want that halt to last forever - just until there's a good
chance they won't kill anyone else.  (Of course, they're ignoring all
the deaths their delay is causing in the mean time, but they tend to do
that a lot.)  See
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/medicine/genetherapy.shtml#status

I'll leave commenting on the proposal for a new list and archive to
others.  But the fact that it is so easy to believe transhumanism is
all talk and no action says something.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jul  4 23:26:33 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 16:26:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce050704161031beffc6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050704232633.30247.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:
> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154788&threshold=0&cid=12979847
> 
> So how does one go about debating people like this? Is it even
> possible? Are there any relevant points they make which we need to
> keep in mind?

Read the responses to that comment.  (By date/timestamp, some of them
apparently written after you posted the above.)  Yes, there will be
individuals who spread misinformation and negative opinions about us.
Get the facts out there enough, and the light of truth will start
blasting away these shadows almost on its own.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 00:14:36 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 17:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce050704161031beffc6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050705001436.63025.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:

> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154788&threshold=0&cid=12979847
> 
> So how does one go about debating people like this? Is it even
> possible? Are there any relevant points they make which we need to
> keep in mind?

The socialist left-wing slant of slashdot readers is notorious,
primarily because it is the paper of record for the open source
community. The anti-property anti-enterprise slant of Stallman is the
primary reason so many get into the movement. It isn't surprising there
is a heavy overlap with those in the left wing who hate or fear technology.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 00:17:58 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 17:17:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] astrology suit against NASA
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce05070416196e9a90c6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050705001758.45694.qmail@web30702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

the word is that the impact crater is still venting significant amounts
of gas and may do so for some time, so there may actually wind up being
a significant change in the orbit of the comet, as the vents act as
thrusters. I wonder if anybody simulated significant venting from the
impact changing the orbit...

--- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:

> Lawsuit aside, it was a darned impressive impact. (paste, paste...)
> The Planetary Society's Emily Lakdawalla put together a fairly nice
> animated GIF of the impact and posted it to the Society's official
> blog:
> 
>
http://planetary.org.nyud.net:8090/deepimpact/images/encounter/animation-small.gif
> http://planetary.org/blog/
> 
> Her description: "OK, I've managed to get back on the raw image
> website, and I grabbed a whole bunch of the images that we were
> apparently looking at earlier. I just threw together this little
> animation, showing mostly Impact Targeting Sensor images, but moving
> at the end to some Medium Resolution Imager images. Now, I've
> probably
> dropped some frames, and these images are smaller than the ones the
> scientists get to use, but I have to say that this is pretty sweet as
> it is. I can't wait to see what the scientists produce! "
> 
> On 7/4/05, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> > Russian sues Nasa for comet upset
> > By Artyom Liss
> > BBC News, Moscow
> _______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 00:21:37 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 17:21:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Catalog Of Correctable Omnipresent Human Flaws
In-Reply-To: <20050704232121.59662.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705002137.71305.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Yes, he obviously doesn't think of the x-prize, the methuselah mouse
prize, the free state project, the electronic freedom foundation, etc
etc as 'transhumanist' because they are things that have already
happened. This is the strawman: as soon as we accomplish something, it
is part of the past and therefore by definition not part of the
transhumanist future that we've been predicting and working on for
years.

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

> --- Edward Smith <weg9mq at centralmail.zzn.com> wrote:
> > As of now, mid 2005, transhumanist work has consisted of
> > nothing except discussions, news-sharing, political debating, and
> > some political work on behalf of issues that are related to
> > transhumanism.
> 
> Ha ha ha wrong.  Although I can see how one would come to such an
> erroneous conclusion.
> 
> > There have apparently been no attempts at
> > actually IMPLEMENTING transhumanism, that is, modifying
> > human zygotes (probably produced in test tubes), most likely
> > via a retroviral gene-delivery vector.
> 
> One step at a time, yo.  The human genome ain't the easiest learning
> tool out there.  There's been tons of ongoing work just trying to
> understand what all the various bits are.  See any number of
> mainstream
> biomedical research publications focussing on genetic anything.
> 
> In the mean time, there's been work on modifying the genomes of
> plants (look up Genetically Modified Organisms - which work has been
> so
> widespread as to have provoked debate in many nations, and
> unfortunately legal restrictions in some) and some animals.  A few
> people have tried basic gene therapy on humans; unfortunately, we
> know
> so little that the attempts killed people.  The regulating bodies
> have
> been discussing safeguards to make sure deaths don't happen again;
> they've put a halt to actual gene therapy for now, but they
> definitely
> do not want that halt to last forever - just until there's a good
> chance they won't kill anyone else.  (Of course, they're ignoring all
> the deaths their delay is causing in the mean time, but they tend to
> do
> that a lot.)  See
>
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/medicine/genetherapy.shtml#status
> 
> I'll leave commenting on the proposal for a new list and archive to
> others.  But the fact that it is so easy to believe transhumanism is
> all talk and no action says something.
> _______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From dgc at cox.net  Tue Jul  5 00:52:34 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 20:52:34 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <20050705001436.63025.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050705001436.63025.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42C9D9D2.80700@cox.net>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>--- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154788&threshold=0&cid=12979847
>>
>>So how does one go about debating people like this? Is it even
>>possible? Are there any relevant points they make which we need to
>>keep in mind?
>>    
>>
>
>The socialist left-wing slant of slashdot readers is notorious,
>primarily because it is the paper of record for the open source
>community. The anti-property anti-enterprise slant of Stallman is the
>primary reason so many get into the movement. It isn't surprising there
>is a heavy overlap with those in the left wing who hate or fear technology.
>
>  
>
Mike, this is a preposterous assertion.

Slashdot's editorial stance is "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."

The editors do not care about left-right, liberal-conservative, or
green-blue. They try to post stuff that Nerds care about. commentary is then
added by many random people with many random opinions. A great many of the
posts on Slashdot appear to be from teenagers. These kids do not in 
general have
a particular political position. Rather, they feel that they are being 
screwed by the
entertainment industry, and they are therefore morally justified in 
acquiring the music
they like. The RIAA is perceived as evil. The slightly older crowd 
treats the BSA as
equivalent to RIAA. In general the posters align themselves on the "nerd"
axis. Left-right and conservative-liberal are irrelevant. People who 
self-associate on these
older axes tend to look at the posts on Slashdot as being opposed to 
their own views.
A liberal sees Slashdot as conservative, You see Slashdot as Liberal. 
Slashdot sees
you as irrelevant.

Many posts on Slashdot refer to Stallman as a nut-case. Slashdot does 
does not
support Stallman. It supports Nerds. Many (Most?) Slashdot readers 
prefer the more
pragmatic "Open Source" approach to Stalmans's "free software" concept, and
Stallman's insistence on the "GNU/Linux" nomenclature is clearly very
irritating to a large portion of the Slashdot community.




From riel at surriel.com  Tue Jul  5 01:05:54 2005
From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 21:05:54 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Catalog Of Correctable Omnipresent Human Flaws
In-Reply-To: <D1DE1D1F375024D4BBDC96AD7926E260@weg9mq.centralmail.zzn.com>
References: <D1DE1D1F375024D4BBDC96AD7926E260@weg9mq.centralmail.zzn.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0507042104471.21251@imladris.surriel.com>

On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Edward Smith wrote:

>  There have apparently been no attempts at actually IMPLEMENTING 
> transhumanism,

I suspect we'll end up going the cyborg way, with cell phones
and/or computers growing into something very closely coupled
to our body.

I mean, they are already pretty closely coupled to our mind...

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan


From riel at surriel.com  Tue Jul  5 01:11:53 2005
From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 21:11:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <42C9D9D2.80700@cox.net>
References: <20050705001436.63025.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<42C9D9D2.80700@cox.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0507042106410.21251@imladris.surriel.com>

On Mon, 4 Jul 2005, Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> Mike, this is a preposterous assertion.

Yeah, just when you think Mike couldn't possibly make any
more of a fool out of himself, he manages to amaze us once
again.  

Impressive as it is, it makes me sad to think that Mike
might be putting others off transhumanist ideas with this
writing style ;(

> Many posts on Slashdot refer to Stallman as a nut-case. Slashdot does 
> does not support Stallman. It supports Nerds. Many (Most?) Slashdot 
> readers prefer the more pragmatic "Open Source" approach to Stalmans's 
> "free software" concept, and Stallman's insistence on the "GNU/Linux" 
> nomenclature is clearly very irritating to a large portion of the 
> Slashdot community.

The vast majority of open source developers are also not 
free software fanatics.  Yes, people care about others not
infringing on their copyright (eg. GPL), but that's about
it.

Pragmatism is the dominant factor in open source development,
which shows in the fact that many developers work on multiple
pieces of software, some GPL, some BSD, some Artistic and
sometimes other licenses too.

-- 
"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 spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jul  5 03:38:20 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 20:38:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <20050701193626.91146.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507050340.j653eQR05195@tick.javien.com>


> Yes, the Constitution bans states from signing treaties with other
> nations...
> 
> Mike Lorrey

Vermont was home to Col. Ethan Allan, who attempted to make
a separate treaty with Canada in the revolutionary war 
times.  My grandmother applied for membership into the Daughters
of the American Revolution on being descended from 
Col. Allan.  She was told that Col. Allan was considered 
an ally of George Washington but was not in Washington's command,
therefore the descendants of Allan and the rest of Vermont's
Green Mountain Boys were not eligible for DAR membership.

spike


...ding dong, the cows are gone,
the wicked cows are gooooone...

{8-]





From amara at amara.com  Tue Jul  5 05:57:37 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 07:57:37 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Deep Impact mission goals (was: astrology suit
	against NASA)
Message-ID: <p06210200beefcfae89d5@[23.237.66.13]>


The Deep Impact mission is not without its psychological baggage though.
I saw in the news yesterday an editorial by my friend David Grinspoon

"Collision with a Comet"
http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/07/04/opinion/edcomet.php

that defended the idea of hitting the comet. His points are good with
the exception of one [he talked as if it were a long-period comet, of
which there are many, but that this is a short-period comet, of which
there are only about 100], but I think that David doesn't spend enough
time outside of the US to understand how strongly that many people
perceive the Deep Impact mission as a sign of aggression, given the
perception in the world that the US is a military country. It 'looks'
like the Deep Impact space mission is something "military-related".

An Australian journalist at the Deep Impact press conference yesterday
asked the mission manager:

"You are shooting a comet on America's 4th-of-July holiday, can you say
something to that point?"

And the JPL manager did not address it. I think he missed an opportunity
to make better press and help people understand better about the mission
goals.

The mission, whatever its psychological baggage, was executed yesterday
flawlessly. I'm most interested in  the chemistry they find, and I hope
that their spectroscopy can answer that point. The comet astronomers I
know  (and me!) are keen to know if the isotopic deuterium ratio
difference between Standard Mean Ocean Water ('SMOW') and that of
Halley/Hyakatake/Hale-Bopp, which are long-period comets, is similar to
the deuterium ratio difference between SMOW and short period comets,
like Tempel 1. Nobody knows yet the deuterium isotopic ratio of
short-period comets. Did comets bring significant amounts of water to
the Earth or not? How can we know what life outside of the Earth might
be like, if we don't even know how Earth got its water?

This data is likely to be the best chemistry data on comets until
Rosetta arrives at its target comet. So then pretty exciting time for
planetary scientists.

Amara

-- 

***********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD             email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics        vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers            URL:   http://www.amara.com/
***********************************************************************
"I'm just moving clouds today - tomorrow I'll try mountains."
     --Ashleigh Brilliant


From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jul  5 05:58:40 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 22:58:40 -0700
Subject: SCOTUS rulings and replacements Re: [extropy-chat] finding old
	(andnew) sf
In-Reply-To: <088c01c57f70$b11909c0$6e2a2dcb@homepc>
Message-ID: <200507050600.j6560jR21200@tick.javien.com>

> Brett Paatsch
> 
> Also, when reading about possible replacement justices I see that liberal
> and conservative are talked about as if those categories are opposites.
> Is that the case in the US?


Well Brett, those two were opposite at one time, but 
we are having an ever-harder time telling them apart.

spike








From spike66 at comcast.net  Tue Jul  5 06:16:42 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 23:16:42 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
In-Reply-To: <20050703143900.33517.qmail@web30708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507050618.j656IiR26383@tick.javien.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey
> Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
> 
...
> 
> China, for example, with its one-child policy, now has a generation
> that is heavily dominated by a high percentage of males. The effect of
> this on chinese society will create stresses that are similar to the
> artificially created wife shortage in the muslim world that is created
> by the tribal control of resources and the quranic allowance of four
> wives for those who can afford them...
> 
> Mike Lorrey


This is something that has puzzled me.  Wars have decimated
male populations since forever, and some societies have
accepted men having multiple wives.  But in a few cases
there are societies with excess males, such as in the old
American west, the Alaskan frontier and China today.  But I 
know of no society that has accepted a woman having two or more 
husbands.  Has there ever been such a thing?  Should we count 
societies that have legal of prostitution as being a kind
of de-facto polyandrogamy?

spike





From amara at amara.com  Tue Jul  5 06:44:26 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 08:44:26 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
Message-ID: <p06210201beefdb0331d5@[23.237.66.13]>

>But I know of no society that has accepted a woman having two or more
>husbands.  Has there ever been such a thing?

Yes.
Spike: You might need to search for the information, however here
is something from me.

Amara

-------cutting and pasting from my extropians post on December 14, 2002,
titled: " Hawaii and the Canaries"

I am terribly curious why sea-faring is not part of every culture
that develops on an island. One would think that, if a human can see
another land mass on the horizon separated by a body of water, that
the human would be drawn to learn what was 'over there', and learn
how to build boats and sail. However this is not at all true in the
Canary Islands.

The Canary Islands are an archipelago of many volcanic islands/islets
(principal islands: Tenerife, Grand Canary, La Palma,
La Gomera, El Hierro, Lanzarote and Fuerteventura) that are similar
in size and separation from each other as are the Hawaiian Islands.
On Tenerife on a clear day you can see easily see Gomera -- it is as
close (10 nautical miles) as Molokai looks to someone standing on
windward side of Oahu.

Yet the original populations of the Canaries were ignorant of the
art of navigation, and developed in isolation of each other, and at
different rates of cultural (religious and technical too) evolution,
based on different population triggers that brought the different
peoples to the islands in the first place.

This leads to the question of how the people arrived in the Canary
Islands in the first place- in Hawaii, the migration looks pretty
clear to the historians, (from Tahiti, Samoa, etc.), but it's not at
all clear the case in the Canary Islands. The Guanches, that is, the
original people in the Canaries, arrived with their animals: goats,
sheep, dogs, with them as if colonizers, and these people dedicated
themselves totally to agriculture and pasture, and not to the sea.

Even though there is not alot of information available about the
Guanches, there is _something_ and the archeologists and historians
have pieced together some aspects of the life,and are still actively
trying to find answers. In the little book below that I found in a
archeological museum in Puerto de la Cruz, Tenerife, last year, I read
the following about the marriage customs on the different islands that
made me smile, so then a smile for your Saturday:

<begin quote, pg. 66, 67>

"In Grand Canary, men were monogamous. Wives were subjected one month
before matrimony, to a fattening diet, to strengthen them, so that
later they would have strong and robust children.

During the wedding night, the woman could, if she wished, sleep with
a noble of her liking, and if as a result of this union a child was
born, he would be named "Caballero" (gentleman).

The legitimate husband, meanwhile, waiting for the news of a
pregnancy brought about by this irregular union, was not permitted
any carnal contact with her.

In La Gomera, things were easier. There free love existed and so
there were few problems encountered in finding an ideal partner,
either for the man or the woman.

The sacredness of the conjugal condition was not felt here as it was
in the other islands, and in fact there existed a strange custom
called "hospitality of the bed" in which any husband could offer the
delights of his wife to house guests.

It seems that this usage, which it must be said is sometimes found
towns of other nations was also found Grand Canary.

In Lazarote polygamy was normal, and so women there had three
husbands, who alternated each month in their marital duties.

During the abstinence period, the other two husbands were obliged to
revere and serve the wife in all her necessities and desires.

In El Hierro, marriage was contracted by the delivery, as payment,
of a certain quantity of cattle to the parents of the wife.

It is a fact that in almost all the islands a quasi-matriarchy
existed, which made the condition of being a woman always most
favourable.

Respect for women was so high among these people that, on meeting
one in your path, you were obliged to wait until she had passed. You
had to avoid speaking, or look at them without permission. Insulting
a woman was considered a crime worthy of punishment of the utmost
severity."

<end quote>

Reference:

Tenerife: From its Origins to the Spanish Conquest, by Paolo Ludovisi
and Elizabeth Blue, Paolo Ludovisi Publications, Los Realejos,
Tenerife, 1998.


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/
********************************************************************
"Oh you damned observers, you always find extra things."
    -- Fred Hoyle [quoted by Richard Ellis at IAU Symposium 183]


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Tue Jul  5 06:56:35 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 23:56:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050704232633.30247.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <e88b73ce050704161031beffc6@mail.gmail.com>
	<20050704232633.30247.qmail@web81609.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce050704235671eec71a@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/4/05, Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net> wrote:
> --- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:
> > http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154788&threshold=0&cid=12979847
> >
> > So how does one go about debating people like this? Is it even
> > possible? Are there any relevant points they make which we need to
> > keep in mind?
> 
> Read the responses to that comment.  (By date/timestamp, some of them
> apparently written after you posted the above.)  Yes, there will be
> individuals who spread misinformation and negative opinions about us.
> Get the facts out there enough, and the light of truth will start
> blasting away these shadows almost on its own.

Indeed.

On a related note, I think most of the anti-transhumanist arguments
I've come across have tended to follow one of the following themes:

1. Religion: Certain advanced technologies violate the will of God.
2. Environmentalism: Advanced technologies will increase humanity's
capability to ruin the environment. (I suspect most environmentalists
would object to turning the solar system's mass into a Dyson sphere)
3. Social justice: The rich, western world, and/or corporations will
get access to advanced technologies first, leading to greater economic
and social disparities.

Perhaps it would be useful to put together a resource (maybe a wiki?)
of arguments we often encounter, along with useful counter-arguments?
We of course don't want to end up being like certain
anarcho-syndicalists, with their never-ending verbatim quotation of
Chomsky talking-points, but having such a resource could still be
useful.

-- Neil


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Tue Jul  5 06:58:49 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 23:58:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] destroying gardens?
In-Reply-To: <200507050618.j656IiR26383@tick.javien.com>
References: <20050703143900.33517.qmail@web30708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<200507050618.j656IiR26383@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070423585b0e818f@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/4/05, spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> This is something that has puzzled me.  Wars have decimated
> male populations since forever, and some societies have
> accepted men having multiple wives.  But in a few cases
> there are societies with excess males, such as in the old
> American west, the Alaskan frontier and China today.  But I
> know of no society that has accepted a woman having two or more
> husbands.  Has there ever been such a thing?  Should we count
> societies that have legal of prostitution as being a kind
> of de-facto polyandrogamy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry#Occurrence

"Polyandry has occured in Tibet (Polyandry in Tibet), Zanskar, Nepal,
and Sri Lanka. It is also encountered in some regions of China
(especially Yunnan- the Mosuo people), and in some Subsaharan African
and American indigenous communities (notably the Surui of northwestern
Brazil). It has been reported among the Nairs of Kerala, the Nymba of
North India, and the people of Ladakh (a region of northern India
adjacent to Tibet). In other societies, there are people who live in
de facto polyandrous arrangements that are not recognized by the law."


From reason at longevitymeme.org  Tue Jul  5 07:30:54 2005
From: reason at longevitymeme.org (Reason)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 00:30:54 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Kurzweil charity luncheon auction launched
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce05070423585b0e818f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEDKGDAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5592464719
http://www.mprize.org/auction/

You have 9 days and 23 hours left to gather together six like-minded folks
to bid for a lunch with Ray Kurzweil, the proceeds to go to the Mprize for
rejuvenation and longevity research, there to be used to encourage
scientists to develop the technologies of radical life extension:

http://www.mprize.org/

I and the other Mprize volunteers would greatly appreciate it if you
well-connected folks would get out there and tell your friends, submit to
Slashdot, BoingBoing, etc, and generally make a noise.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme



From xander25 at adelphia.net  Tue Jul  5 02:06:22 2005
From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 02:06:22 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
Message-ID: <42C9EB1E.9020907@adelphia.net>

In response to Mr. Halelamien,

Speaking as a former anti-technology guy (very short period of time in
my life), my fears of transhumanism came from two sources:

1) Destructive to the human spirit

The more technologically advanced a society becomes, the less interested
it is in matters that concern his well-being.  Likewise, he becomes
increasingly incapable of handling changing factors that endanger it. 
Examine for instance the phenomona of the internet.  How many computer
enthusiasts get out these days?  How many get out into, appreciate, and
learn about nature?  How many learn to socialize with others?  I would
think these are fundamental aspects of what it means to be human. 
Translated into transhumanism it becomes a matter of how will this new
technology affect humans?  It could make our lives easier yes, but in
doing so makes us slaves to the technology that was meant to help us. 
This is possibly where I think the slashdot poster was coming from, as
he wasn't clear.  However, who says that technology needs to be enslaving?

a. It opens doors to undiscovered potential we haven't been capable of
in the past.
b. The human spirit is about overcoming and adapting.  It's there where
our strength appears.  To figure out ways to preserve who we are, and
yet advance at the same time.  Take for example the automobile.  It
opened up a world of new possibilities.  The caveat now is that we no
longer have to toil in ways done in the past.  Humans developed
excercise (hence adapting) to reclaim to what was lost.

2) Damaging to organic tissue along with it's not natural!  This can be
solved with time, it's just a matter of study.  The problem is vastly
overstated.  The unnatural part is refuted by asking what is natural? 
If science and it's application is a product of the human mind, and if
the human mind is natural, then how is it unnatural?

I am utterly shocked that both arguments come from either side of the
political fence (though seems to come more from the left).  So, I don't
think it is a mainly political argument.

--Jacob Bennett


From xander25 at adelphia.net  Tue Jul  5 02:55:44 2005
From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 02:55:44 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] In defense of slashdotters (was transhumanism ==
	militant fascism)
Message-ID: <42C9F6B0.7030104@adelphia.net>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

Many posts on Slashdot refer to Stallman as a nut-case. Slashdot does 
does not
support Stallman. It supports Nerds. Many (Most?) Slashdot readers 
prefer the more
pragmatic "Open Source" approach to Stalmans's "free software" concept, and
Stallman's insistence on the "GNU/Linux" nomenclature is clearly very
irritating to a large portion of the Slashdot community.

As a slashdotter myself, I concur.  Men like Mr. Stallman and Mr. Perens
seem to be under the impression that all software should be open, going
as far as proposing legislation.  I personally believe it should be up
to the individual.

Slashdot itself tends to be a very diverse group.  It is geared more
towards the open source/Linux crowd, but it is far more diverse than
simply that.  I take everything I read on there with a grain of salt
anyways.  The posts range from the good and useful all the way to the
utterly useless.

--Jacob Bennett


From pgptag at gmail.com  Tue Jul  5 12:57:29 2005
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:57:29 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Gates: Get ready for chip implants
Message-ID: <470a3c5205070505571bbc2449@mail.gmail.com>

CNN <http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/07/04/gates.implants.ap/> reports that 
Bill Gates thinks computers will be implanted in the human brain someday. 
Though not volunteering for the process, he acknowledges this is the 
direction technology is moving toward.
Technological advances will one day allow computers to be implanted in the 
human body and could help the blind see and the deaf hear, according to Bill 
Gates.
Meshing people directly with computers has been a science fiction subject 
for years, from downloading memories onto computer chips to replacement 
robotic limbs controlled by brain waves. The fantasy is coming closer to 
reality as advances in technology mean computers are learning to interact 
with human characteristics such as voices, touch -- even smell.
[Gates] cited author Ray Kurzweil <http://www.kurzweilai.net/>, whom he 
called the best at predicting the future of artificial intelligence, as 
believing that such computer-human links would become mainstream.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050705/0455b5b3/attachment.html>

From davidmc at gmail.com  Tue Jul  5 14:15:50 2005
From: davidmc at gmail.com (David McFadzean)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 08:15:50 -0600
Subject: [extropy-chat] Keith Henson in the news
Message-ID: <c934387b05070507156866555d@mail.gmail.com>

The Expositor, July 2, 2005

Scientology foe seeks refugee status here

Keith Henson talks about his years-long battle with controversial
organization

By SUSAN GAMBLE EXPOSITOR STAFF / BRANTFORD

He's accused of being a convicted hate criminal, a child molester, an
Internet terrorist, a self-proclaimed bomb expert and a fugitive from
justice.

Well, that last part is true, says Keith Henson, a mild-mannered 63
year-old with a boisterous laugh and thinning hair.

The fugitive living in Brantford doesn't exactly fit the part written
for him on the Internet by the Church of Scientology as a hate filled
terrorist bomber, but he is somewhat peeved that his quiet life in
Brantford has been disturbed.

Once, Henson was in the forefront as a critic of Scientology, posting
the organization's secrets on the Internet, protesting outside the
group's film studio in California and fighting its lawyers in court. 

[full article at http://tinyurl.com/cy6k5 ]


From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Tue Jul  5 15:37:39 2005
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:37:39 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Kurzweil charity luncheon auction launched
In-Reply-To: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEDKGDAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
References: <FCEDLEKFOENAIDKOGMNNEEDKGDAA.reason@longevitymeme.org>
Message-ID: <61C7244E-AF6F-459D-A72A-DFEA75712D48@bonfireproductions.com>


This is great!

I'm the current high bidder!

For the next 15 minutes I guess...


Bret Kulakovich

On Jul 5, 2005, at 3:30 AM, Reason wrote:

> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=5592464719
> http://www.mprize.org/auction/
>
> You have 9 days and 23 hours left to gather together six like- 
> minded folks
> to bid for a lunch with Ray Kurzweil, the proceeds to go to the  
> Mprize for
> rejuvenation and longevity research, there to be used to encourage
> scientists to develop the technologies of radical life extension:
>
> http://www.mprize.org/
>
> I and the other Mprize volunteers would greatly appreciate it if you
> well-connected folks would get out there and tell your friends,  
> submit to
> Slashdot, BoingBoing, etc, and generally make a noise.
>
> Reason
> Founder, Longevity Meme
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 16:52:03 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 09:52:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Question of Constitutional Law
In-Reply-To: <200507050340.j653eQR05195@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <20050705165204.58809.qmail@web30702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> 
> > Yes, the Constitution bans states from signing treaties with other
> > nations...
> > 
> > Mike Lorrey
> 
> Vermont was home to Col. Ethan Allan, who attempted to make
> a separate treaty with Canada in the revolutionary war 
> times.  My grandmother applied for membership into the Daughters
> of the American Revolution on being descended from 
> Col. Allan.  She was told that Col. Allan was considered 
> an ally of George Washington but was not in Washington's command,
> therefore the descendants of Allan and the rest of Vermont's
> Green Mountain Boys were not eligible for DAR membership.

Vermont's Green Mountain Boys are an  interesting case. You see,
Vermont was originally part of NH, but in the early 1770's land
speculators in New York hatched a scheme by which they lied to King
George and made presentations that NY owned Vermont, which he concurred
in. The speculators then went to the various settlers in the green
mountains and attempted to make them repurchase their land from the New
Yorkers.

This was repugnant of course, so representatives of the towns gathered
in Windsor, VT and declared their independence of New York, recognising
in their first Constitution that they belonged to New Hampshire by
right, and formed the Republic of Vermont. Vermont was not a member of
the Continental Congress throughout the war and the Green Mountain Boys
were most noted for keeping the British out of Vermont, and assisting
Benedict Arnold (when he was on our side) with his naval battles on
Lake Champlain against the advances of General "Gentleman Johnny"
Burgoyne southward. They also assisted with the takeover of Fort
Ticonderoga and the transportation of some of its cannon to Breeds Hill
in Boston for the Battle of Bunker Hill.

All that being said, it is factually correct for the DAR to do what
they did, since Vermont was not a member of the Continental Congress,
but certainly not in the spirit. It is an interesting thing in these
parts, because Grafton County, NH, which I grew up in, seceded and
joined Vermont during the War because the merchants in Portsmouth who
controlled the government refused to direct any tax funds to maintain
roads in the county or provide soldiers pay that was owed to the
families they left behind. The DAR in these parts tends to make
allowances.

This being said, I have a friend who must be a relative of yours. John
Stark, a farmer I have shot sporting clays with on occasion, is a
direct descendant of both General John Stark of New Hampshire, and Ira
Allen, Ethan's brother who was the more cerebral of the pair.

The DAR are an exclusive snotty bunch 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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________ 
Yahoo! Sports 
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football 
http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jul  5 17:23:28 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 10:23:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce050704235671eec71a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050705172328.69608.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:
> On a related note, I think most of the anti-transhumanist arguments
> I've come across have tended to follow one of the following themes:
> 
> 1. Religion: Certain advanced technologies violate the will of God.

Common answer: whose God?  (See refutations of Pascal's Wager.)

Less common answer: point out that some interpretations of God would
actually see advanced technologies as not only okay, but part of God's
plan for us - specifically, allowing us to better understand God's
wisdom and to better accomplish God's work, just like we have for all
of human history.

> 2. Environmentalism: Advanced technologies will increase humanity's
> capability to ruin the environment. (I suspect most environmentalists
> would object to turning the solar system's mass into a Dyson sphere)

Common answer: it will also increase humanity's capability to save and
restore the environment - as, for example, it has measurably done ever
since the environmentalist movement started.  (Actually before, but
environmentalists are more likely to accept this counter if they are
allowed to take some credit for it.)  There is every reason to believe
this trend will continue.

Less common answer: if things really go to heck, advanced technologies
will allow us to completely evacuate humanity from the Earth, to let
the Earth recover while our lives go on.

> 3. Social justice: The rich, western world, and/or corporations will
> get access to advanced technologies first, leading to greater
> economic
> and social disparities.

Common answer: look at the current definition of "poverty", versus the
definition many decades ago.  Note that, for example, few people
actually starve in industrial countries, unlike in the 1800s.  Why
should we care if some people get super-rich and go play in their own
world, if in the bargain we can drastically improve living conditions
for the world's poor?

Less common answer: of course it will.  But the faster we develop the
technologies, the faster we can get them to the rest of the world and
correct not only those disparities but the ones we currently face.

> Perhaps it would be useful to put together a resource (maybe a wiki?)
> of arguments we often encounter, along with useful counter-arguments?
> We of course don't want to end up being like certain
> anarcho-syndicalists, with their never-ending verbatim quotation of
> Chomsky talking-points, but having such a resource could still be
> useful.

A Wiki specific to us might never be known to the vast majority of
people to whom the information would be of use.  I wonder if we could
put it on some entry in Wikipedia without violating their NPOV.  (If
we violate it, they'll remove our text, and our effort will have been
for naught or even counterproductive.)


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 18:01:24 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:01:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <42C9EB1E.9020907@adelphia.net>
Message-ID: <20050705180125.88220.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Here's another personal experience: I was very influenced by the 'back to nature' world view that attained wide popular currency around 1969 and continues to this day (reaching its period of maximum intensity, I would say, about 1971-' 73) 
At any rate, science at that time gave me the sensation of being one of a pair of dice on a darwinian roulette table; though I knew nature eventually became an enemy of an older person, I thought the aging process could be counteracted to a shall we say socially acceptable extent by gradually improved nutrition and of course exercise, physical therapy, etc. It was not so much at the time I thought lengthening lifespans was unnatural, but rather nebulous thoughts revolved around the idea that lengthening lifespans might lead to certain diminishing returns in a longer but more complicated and not necessarily more pleasant and/or happier life; the exasperations of a more complicated life might shorten or ruin that life. The latter has been proven to me as valid in many cases, but most people-- as you imply-- can rise to the challenges & opportunities of overcoming and adapting.
 
 

Jacob <xander25 at adelphia.net> wrote:
In response to Mr. Halelamien,

Speaking as a former anti-technology guy (very short period of time in
my life), my fears of transhumanism came from two sources:

1) Destructive to the human spirit

The more technologically advanced a society becomes, the less interested
it is in matters that concern his well-being. Likewise, he becomes
increasingly incapable of handling changing factors that endanger it. 
Examine for instance the phenomona of the internet. How many computer
enthusiasts get out these days? How many get out into, appreciate, and
learn about nature? How many learn to socialize with others? I would
think these are fundamental aspects of what it means to be human. 
Translated into transhumanism it becomes a matter of how will this new
technology affect humans? It could make our lives easier yes, but in
doing so makes us slaves to the technology that was meant to help us. 
This is possibly where I think the slashdot poster was coming from, as
he wasn't clear. However, who says that technology needs to be enslaving?

a. It opens doors to undiscovered potential we haven't been capable of
in the past.
b. The human spirit is about overcoming and adapting. It's there where
our strength appears. To figure out ways to preserve who we are, and
yet advance at the same time. Take for example the automobile. It
opened up a world of new possibilities. The caveat now is that we no
longer have to toil in ways done in the past. Humans developed
excercise (hence adapting) to reclaim to what was lost.

2) Damaging to organic tissue along with it's not natural! This can be
solved with time, it's just a matter of study. The problem is vastly
overstated. The unnatural part is refuted by asking what is natural? 
If science and it's application is a product of the human mind, and if
the human mind is natural, then how is it unnatural?

I am utterly shocked that both arguments come from either side of the
political fence (though seems to come more from the left). So, I don't
think it is a mainly political argument.

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


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050705/bc94d5fb/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 18:17:57 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:17:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050705172328.69608.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

> --- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On a related note, I think most of the anti-transhumanist arguments
> > I've come across have tended to follow one of the following themes:
> > 
> > 1. Religion: Certain advanced technologies violate the will of God.
> 
> Common answer: whose God?  (See refutations of Pascal's Wager.)
> 
> Less common answer: point out that some interpretations of God would
> actually see advanced technologies as not only okay, but part of
> God's
> plan for us - specifically, allowing us to better understand God's
> wisdom and to better accomplish God's work, just like we have for all
> of human history.

Or: Says who? The bible says nothing about nanotechnology, space
travel, or genetic engineering. In fact, it appears that Jesus cured
people of diseases that were genetic in origin, which could only be
done by genetic engineering, while the angels allegedly took Ezekiel
for a galactic joyride. Furthermore, humans, according to God's alleged
design, were capable of living as long as 999 years (Methuselah), which
was cut short by diseases put upon us by our own sinful and corrupt
living. Additionally, if Mary was impregnated and gave birth as a
virgin, such could only have been accomplished with nanotechnology, so
nanotech is apparently 'god's will'.

> 
> > 2. Environmentalism: Advanced technologies will increase humanity's
> > capability to ruin the environment. (I suspect most
> environmentalists
> > would object to turning the solar system's mass into a Dyson
> sphere)
> 
> Common answer: it will also increase humanity's capability to save
> and restore the environment - as, for example, it has measurably done
> ever since the environmentalist movement started. (Actually before,
> but environmentalists are more likely to accept this counter if they
> are allowed to take some credit for it.)  There is every reason to
> believe this trend will continue.
> 
> Less common answer: if things really go to heck, advanced
> technologies will allow us to completely evacuate humanity from
> the Earth, to let the Earth recover while our lives go on.

As demonstrated by Peter Huber, it is primitive farming and rural
populations that causes the most environmental damage. Dense living in
cities and high tech farming technologies (including genetic
engineering and cloning of more productive plants and animals) allows
us to feed more people on less acrage, allowing more land to return to
nature.

Advancing technology not only improves our ability to use resources
more efficiently, but improves the efficiency by which we are able to
recover them from nature with less damage.

> 
> > 3. Social justice: The rich, western world, and/or corporations
> will
> > get access to advanced technologies first, leading to greater
> > economic
> > and social disparities.
> 
> Common answer: look at the current definition of "poverty", versus
> the
> definition many decades ago.  Note that, for example, few people
> actually starve in industrial countries, unlike in the 1800s.  Why
> should we care if some people get super-rich and go play in their own
> world, if in the bargain we can drastically improve living conditions
> for the world's poor?
> 
> Less common answer: of course it will.  But the faster we develop the
> technologies, the faster we can get them to the rest of the world and
> correct not only those disparities but the ones we currently face.

The rich always pay the development costs of technology, and the more
they are allowed to do so, the less expensive those technologies become
over time (and sooner), which means that more people will eventually be
able to utilize them... Better the rich pay the development costs
directly rather than everyone pay for them indirectly through taxation,
which will waste half the money on government bureaucracy.

> 
> > Perhaps it would be useful to put together a resource (maybe a
> wiki?)
> > of arguments we often encounter, along with useful
> counter-arguments?
> > We of course don't want to end up being like certain
> > anarcho-syndicalists, with their never-ending verbatim quotation of
> > Chomsky talking-points, but having such a resource could still be
> > useful.
> 
> A Wiki specific to us might never be known to the vast majority of
> people to whom the information would be of use.  I wonder if we could
> put it on some entry in Wikipedia without violating their NPOV.  (If
> we violate it, they'll remove our text, and our effort will have been
> for naught or even counterproductive.)

Wikipedia's NPOV is a POV that is determined by the people who run
Wikipedia, much as MSM purport their editorial slant is 'moderate' and
'middle-of-the-road', or at their most honest "slightly left of
center", when in fact they are significantly left leaning and fascist
tending.

Establishing our own Extrowiki would allow us to establishour own NPOV
as specifically extropic in outlook. This exists to a degree in Neal
Stephenson's Metaweb (http://www.metaweb.com), which I write articles
for, but is focused on his writing specifically, although other authors
works have been covered and Neal does want it to become a general resource.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 18:42:14 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:42:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705184214.37373.qmail@web34411.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Or let us say that God doth not shoot blanks. :-}
The clincher for me is that the collective fear of dying outweighs the advantages of a pious, more 'nature'- oriented life. This and also that my weak stomach turns me off the thought of all bodily functions.
 To turn Tennyson's verse on its head: "I say hush this talk of nature 'til a thousand years have passed".


Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
if Mary was impregnated and gave birth as a
virgin, such could only have been accomplished with nanotechnology
__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050705/352e436c/attachment.html>

From megao at sasktel.net  Tue Jul  5 17:52:27 2005
From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc.)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:52:27 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Keith Henson in the news
In-Reply-To: <c934387b05070507156866555d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c934387b05070507156866555d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42CAC8DB.6090302@sasktel.net>

Keith is not the only list member pushing the hot buttons.
Our Ag-Pharm business is a tiny hole in the wall commercializing med-pot 
from hemp
and challenging quite a few  folks to accept this sort of thing  or
step forward to quash our existence.

And like Keith we are in Canada which is  quickly getting the
reputation of being the most european part of North America.

MFJ


David McFadzean wrote:

>The Expositor, July 2, 2005
>
>Scientology foe seeks refugee status here
>
>Keith Henson talks about his years-long battle with controversial
>organization
>
>By SUSAN GAMBLE EXPOSITOR STAFF / BRANTFORD
>
>He's accused of being a convicted hate criminal, a child molester, an
>Internet terrorist, a self-proclaimed bomb expert and a fugitive from
>justice.
>
>Well, that last part is true, says Keith Henson, a mild-mannered 63
>year-old with a boisterous laugh and thinning hair.
>
>The fugitive living in Brantford doesn't exactly fit the part written
>for him on the Internet by the Church of Scientology as a hate filled
>terrorist bomber, but he is somewhat peeved that his quiet life in
>Brantford has been disturbed.
>
>Once, Henson was in the forefront as a critic of Scientology, posting
>the organization's secrets on the Internet, protesting outside the
>group's film studio in California and fighting its lawyers in court. 
>
>[full article at http://tinyurl.com/cy6k5 ]
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>
>  
>



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jul  5 18:53:01 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 11:53:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Wikipedia's NPOV (was Re: themes in anti-transhumanist
	arguments)
In-Reply-To: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705185301.9050.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Wikipedia's NPOV is a POV that is determined by the people who run
> Wikipedia,

This is true.

> much as MSM purport their editorial slant is 'moderate'
> and
> 'middle-of-the-road', or at their most honest "slightly left of
> center", when in fact they are significantly left leaning and fascist
> tending.

This is not true, at least of Wikipedia.

> Establishing our own Extrowiki would allow us to establishour own
> NPOV
> as specifically extropic in outlook.

You're not getting the concept of a "Neutral" Point Of View.  It's not
extropic, it's not fascist, it's not anything like that.  It exists
completely outside of those axis.  It's trying to get at what really
happened - a simple statement of the facts, without any labelling
unless the labelled parties themselves would agree to it (or there is
general agreement by institutions set up to judge these things, like
the courts - at least, in matters where most people would trust the
courts).

Specifically, your issue with them is that you put up a rant about how
certain people and organizations are "Neo-Luddite", which label would
be in dispute.  You then refused to acknowledge that Wikipedians don't
want such politics in their entries - and that, rightly or wrongly,
they believe there is a way to state the facts that is completely free
of said politics.  The Wikipedians would like an article saying what
Neo-Luddism is, with relevant facts about the movement per se (which
can include common criticisms, which I'm sure we can easily provide),
without using it as a vehicle to denounce specific people and
organizations.

For example, see this bit I added: "Those who are called neo-luddites
tend to call themselves greens, conservatives, or other labels, but
with an anti-technology focus.  This causes friction with pro-tech
greens and others, who sometimes cite the negative environmental
consequences of neo-luddites' goals to challenge their right to call
themselves "green"."  This basic statement of facts, while roundly
denouncing neo-luddism, doesn't actually target anyone, and so has been
left in place - even defended by others.

If you want to denounce specific people and organizations, the first
step is to move *all* such discussion to pages specifically about said
people and organizations.  The second step is to argue the case against
them without any resort to loaded terms or anything else but the bare
facts, presented as unemotionally as possible.  Think like someone
reporting lists of crimes to a UN human rights commission.  Also see
their page on "moral panic" and related terms for tactics *not* to
employ: one aspect of their goals is to defuse, rather than to inflame,
moral panics by dousing hype and exaggerations with facts.

I believe you could learn from them if, instead of angrily rejecting
their position, you were to study their guides as to how to present
statements of fact.  Indeed, if you adopted elements of their style, I
suspect you would be able to persuade many more people, both inside ExI
and among the general public, of the rightness of your points of view.


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 20:56:39 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 13:56:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050705184214.37373.qmail@web34411.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705205639.77329.qmail@web34412.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

What I mean by a weak stomach turning me off that which is 'natural':
 
when you are young you want to get dressed up and go to a fancy restaurant; when you are old you want to get out of a restaurant so as to ingest some metamucil and lie down.
 
When one is young one wants to get someone in bed for sex; when one is old one wants to get someone out of bed so as to put the dentures in to soak for the night.

 

__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050705/de4aa267/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Jul  5 21:45:20 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 14:45:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] astrology suit against NASA
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050704172543.01c79298@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <16F4615B-BF3E-4351-AFD5-7F88F3E86586@mac.com>

Damn!  I could get rich if I could successfully sue people for being  
utterly stupid.  I guess (hope) the Russian courts simply have a  
wacky sense of humor.   Without that (or worse) the case should have  
been immediately thrown out.   I am sure the astrologist [sic] is  
traumatized.  She lives in a world of metaphors and sympathetic  
magic.  So to her the great enemy has attacked her very essence and  
reason for being.

with compassion for all crazed chimps everywhere,

     samantha


On Jul 4, 2005, at 3:26 PM, Damien Broderick wrote:

> Russian sues Nasa for comet upset
> By Artyom Liss
> BBC News, Moscow
>
> Hours after a Nasa probe crashed into Comet Tempel 1, legal  
> reverberations were felt in a Moscow court.
>
> Judges in the tiny courtroom normally deal with matters much more  
> mundane than space exploration.
>
> But Judge Litvinenko opened hearings into a case which could see  
> Nasa pay a local amateur astrologist millions of dollars in damages.
>
> Writer Marina Bay claims that by slamming the probe into the comet,  
> Nasa endangered the future of civilisation.
>
> "Nobody has yet proven that this experiment was safe," says Ms  
> Bay's lawyer Alexander Molokhov.
>
> "This impact could have altered the orbit of the comet, so now  
> there is a chance that the Tempel may well destroy the Earth some  
> day!"
>
> If your phone went down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then  
> get in touch with us
> Alexander Molokhov
> Marina Bay's lawyer
>
> This claim was brushed aside by Nasa mission engineer Shadan Ardalan.
>
> "The analogy is a mosquito hitting the front of an airliner in  
> flight. The effect is negligible," Mr Ardalan told BBC News.
>
> However, even if the comet stays at a safe distance from Earth, Ms  
> Bay's own life, she thinks, will never be the same again.
>
> An amateur astrologist, she believes that any variation in the  
> orbit or the composition of the Tempel comet will certainly affect  
> her own fate.
>
> So Ms Marina's claims to be experiencing "a moral trauma" - which  
> only a payment of $300m (252m euros; ?170m) can put right.
>
> This is roughly what Nasa has spent on the experiment so far.
>
> Volunteers request
>
> Moscow representatives of the American space agency have ignored  
> Monday's court hearing.
>
> But, by Russian law, this will not prevent the judge from  
> continuing with the case.
>
> Marina Bay's legal team remain confident, and they are even looking  
> for volunteers to join in on the claim.
>
> "The impact changed the magnetic properties of the comet, and this  
> could have affected mobile telephony here on Earth. If your phone  
> went down this morning, ask yourself Why? and then get in touch  
> with us," says Mr Molokhov.
>
> So now it is up to the Moscow Presnya court to find an answer to  
> this, truly universal, question.
>
> The final decision is not likely to be announced for at least  
> another month.
> Story from BBC NEWS:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/4649987.stm
>
> Published: 2005/07/04 17:54:10 GMT
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Jul  5 22:25:06 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:25:06 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce050704161031beffc6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <e88b73ce050704161031beffc6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <934BAFA2-9C44-4129-82E7-F9D611F63E99@mac.com>

There is no need for debate with such creatures but only antidotes to  
their venom.  Here is a brief response I posted.

"Do we want a future dominated by technophobes who would condemn all  
humans to hideous decrepitude and death after a mere 70ish years?  I  
don't think so.  Kurzweil's vision is highly benign and has no  
fascism or borg-like parts at all.  The poster's slur is beneath  
contempt.  What could be more fascist than the poster's implied wish  
to outlaw thoughts the poster finds uncomfortable? "

-s

On Jul 4, 2005, at 4:10 PM, Neil Halelamien wrote:

> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=154788&threshold=0&cid=12979847
>
> So how does one go about debating people like this? Is it even
> possible? Are there any relevant points they make which we need to
> keep in mind?
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Tue Jul  5 22:34:26 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:34:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Wikipedia's NPOV (was Re: themes in
	anti-transhumanist arguments)
In-Reply-To: <20050705185301.9050.qmail@web81602.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705223427.41535.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

> --- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Wikipedia's NPOV is a POV that is determined by the people who run
> > Wikipedia,
> 
> This is true.
> 
> > much as MSM purport their editorial slant is 'moderate'
> > and
> > 'middle-of-the-road', or at their most honest "slightly left of
> > center", when in fact they are significantly left leaning and
> fascist
> > tending.
> 
> This is not true, at least of Wikipedia.

I didn't say it was, I said it was of MSM, which is "main stream
media". Wikipedia's slant is somewhere in the area of left-liberal
anarchist with significant players who are rabid left-liberals who are
skilled at making articles appear ostensibly NPOV but careful semantic
analysis shows is still significantly left-leaning, particularly of the
verbs, adverbs and adjectives used to describe left versus right
arguments.

> 
> > Establishing our own Extrowiki would allow us to establishour own
> > NPOV
> > as specifically extropic in outlook.
> 
> You're not getting the concept of a "Neutral" Point Of View.  It's
> not
> extropic, it's not fascist, it's not anything like that.  It exists
> completely outside of those axis.  It's trying to get at what really
> happened - a simple statement of the facts, without any labelling
> unless the labelled parties themselves would agree to it (or there is
> general agreement by institutions set up to judge these things, like
> the courts - at least, in matters where most people would trust the
> courts).

This is a silly and improbable as believing in the easter bunny. It is
impossible to state 'facts' in a world when nobody agrees on what the
'facts' are. For example, the accepted dictionary definition of
'fascism' is a philosophy that advocates the state allowing private
property, but dictating who can own it and how they use it, yet the
biased people on wikipedia who claim to be more NPOV refuse to define
political policies that fit the above definition as 'fascist'.

> 
> Specifically, your issue with them is that you put up a rant about
> how
> certain people and organizations are "Neo-Luddite", which label would
> be in dispute.  You then refused to acknowledge that Wikipedians
> don't
> want such politics in their entries - and that, rightly or wrongly,
> they believe there is a way to state the facts that is completely
> free
> of said politics.  The Wikipedians would like an article saying what
> Neo-Luddism is, with relevant facts about the movement per se (which
> can include common criticisms, which I'm sure we can easily provide),
> without using it as a vehicle to denounce specific people and
> organizations.

If an act is a crime, stating it is a crime is not denouncing. If a
person's actions or statements are generally thought negatively of by
the general population, words like 'infamous' or 'notorious' are not
POV, they are purely descriptive. If something fits the dictionary
definition of a word, then you can call it or describe it with that
word.


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Jul  5 22:46:12 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 15:46:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] In defense of slashdotters (was transhumanism ==
	militant fascism)
In-Reply-To: <42C9F6B0.7030104@adelphia.net>
References: <42C9F6B0.7030104@adelphia.net>
Message-ID: <114F9869-8D2E-4121-9E3C-8A14AA701BB5@mac.com>


On Jul 4, 2005, at 7:55 PM, Jacob wrote:

> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
> Many posts on Slashdot refer to Stallman as a nut-case. Slashdot does
> does not
> support Stallman. It supports Nerds. Many (Most?) Slashdot readers
> prefer the more
> pragmatic "Open Source" approach to Stalmans's "free software"  
> concept, and
> Stallman's insistence on the "GNU/Linux" nomenclature is clearly very
> irritating to a large portion of the Slashdot community.
>
> As a slashdotter myself, I concur.  Men like Mr. Stallman and Mr.  
> Perens
> seem to be under the impression that all software should be open,  
> going
> as far as proposing legislation.  I personally believe it should be up
> to the individual.

I do not concur.  RS and Perens both believe strongly in the right of  
creators to decide how to offer their creation.  They believe that  
non-open software is more or less immoral but not that everyone  
should be forced to offer their software creations under licenses of  
their liking.  Besides, the issue from an extropian viewpoint is one  
of what forms of licensing of what kinds of software under what  
circumstances expand extropy.   That this or that original light or  
exponent of Free/Open Software has opinions distasteful to some of us  
is not terribly important.

>
> Slashdot itself tends to be a very diverse group.  It is geared more
> towards the open source/Linux crowd, but it is far more diverse than
> simply that.  I take everything I read on there with a grain of salt
> anyways.  The posts range from the good and useful all the way to the
> utterly useless.

I am often surprised by the gibbering monkey chatter level and the  
seeming serious level of ignorance.  I am also surprised to encounter  
a lot of young geeks who seem to have not a clue of how fast  
technology is changing the world and  possess no positive vision (to  
say the least).    It seems to be uncool to dream and seek to make  
the dream real.

- samantha

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050705/d7f9a157/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Jul  5 23:21:16 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:21:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Methuselah Foundation Offers Once-in-a-Lifetime
 Lunch with Luminary Ray Kurzweil
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050705161157.055bd530@mail.earthlink.net>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050705161157.055bd530@mail.earthlink.net>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050705181553.03ff7cb0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>


>>Dr. Ray Kurzweil, recipient of the U.S. National Medal of
>>Technology, and author of numerous books including "Fantastic Voyage: 
>>Live Long Enough To Live Forever"

Here's my rather over-simplified and non-critical pop sci review for the 
Weekend ustralian newspaper, published last weekend:

Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever
By Ray Kurzweil and Terry Grossman, M.D.
Rodale, 452pp, $US 24.95

Reviewed by Damien Broderick


In 1994, a beauty pageant entrant made a fool of herself by blurting out 
something that almost everyone believes. Miss America's host asked Miss 
Alabama: "If you could live forever, would you, and why?" Thinking aloud, 
she replied: "I would not live forever, because we should not live forever, 
because if we were supposed to live forever, then we would live forever, 
but we cannot live forever, which is why I would not live forever."

This apparently circular word salad makes her seem an airhead. But that's 
unkind. Her impromptu analysis, read charitably, makes perfect sense from 
either a Bible Belt or an evolutionary viewpoint. Here's her logic, 
de-garbled: "It'd only be right to want eternal life if that were part of 
God's or nature's plan. Actually, though, we're mortal beings, that's part 
of our very nature. So it would be wrong to wish to escape death, and I 
don't." This suddenly looks like a perfectly sensible appraisal. Haven't 
humans evolved to live, mature, grow old and die, leaving the world to our 
children, and they to theirs?

Luckily, as philosophers have known for several centuries, that really 
isn't a good argument after all, any more than the claim that if God or 
Darwin had wanted us to fly, we'd have propellers. Intelligence often finds 
ways to improve on nature, even if our limitations sometimes botch the job. 
It's no sin against deity or natural selection to swallow an aspirin, get a 
tooth filled, or watch television beside a cooling fan. The main problem 
with living forever is just that nobody has worked out yet how to do it. 
Snake oil salesmen once promised endless health, but they're buried 
alongside their gullible customers.

But science did enable a couple of Ohio bicycle builders to fly, an 
otherwise impossible dream, and within a single lifetime flung humans to 
the Moon. It now seems likely that powerful research programs will let us 
first slow and then halt the major causes of death--heart disease, cancer, 
stroke, infections--and then, perhaps, reverse ageing itself, that slow, 
terrible corrosion of our youthful flesh and lively minds. Or is this no 
more than wishful thinking? If it's not, is it at least wicked thinking, 
ruinous for individual and society alike? These are increasingly urgent 
questions. Kurzweil and Grossman explore them from many angles in their 
significant new book. As a bonus, they suggest ways to stave off the Grim 
Reaper until the longevity doctor arrives.

Ray Kurzweil is a highly awarded inventor and computer expert, not a 
medical researcher, but his insights into the pace of change are what drive 
this collaboration with medico Grossman. Knowledge is doubling and 
deepening at a prodigious rate, and even that rate is itself accelerating, 
something the book rather immodestly calls "his most profound observation". 
It's not a true scientific law, of course, and could suffer setbacks in its 
pace due to global terrorism, environmental collapse, or political 
opportunism directed against research (such as current US government 
hostility to stem cell work). If this "Law of Accelerating Returns" does 
hold up, though, Kurzweil projects a future where ageing will become an 
unthinkable horror of the past, as polio and smallpox are today. Some of 
those alive now might thrive indefinitely, kept youthful by the same 
recuperative processes that build brand-new babies from aging sperm and ova.

Are the rest of us doomed to be the last mortal generation? Perhaps not, if 
a kind of maintenance engineering can be applied to our ailing bodies. The 
remedy might be complicated: genomic profiling, pills, supplements, 
stringent diet, more exercise than we care for, and even intravenous shots 
of hormone top-ups and entirely new pharmaceuticals. But many of us already 
take daily doses of Lipitor, to lower bad cholesterol, and drugs to fight 
hypertension. In the slightly longer term, our bodies might be infused with 
swarms of machines not much larger than viruses, nanobots designed to 
scavenge wastes and repair tissue damage at the scale of cells. Unnatural? 
In a sense, as is wearing contact lenses. In another, not at all, since 
modifying our lives in the light of hard-won knowledge is precisely what 
makes us human.

The longevity program recommended by Kurzweil and Grossman is meant to get 
us over the hump, allow us to survive "long enough to live 
forever"--although this doesn't mean we might become literally immortal, 
unable to be killed. It does imply a future where every human will have the 
choice of staying healthily young indefinitely, or of stepping aside, if 
they choose, to make room for a new life--assuming, of course, that we 
linger on this planet, and that we remain strictly human. Some ethicists 
are dismayed at these choices, finding them inhuman and degrading. No doubt 
the arguments will continue for generations until all those opposed to 
endless life have died. Meanwhile, anyone wishing to try for the goal of 
extended life could do worse than study Kurzweil and Grossman's detailed 
prospectus. You might end up looking like a pin-cushion and gulping 250 
pills a day (Aggressive Supplementation, they call it--"Take them all, and 
let your body use what it needs"), but it's more fun than rotting in the 
ground.








From wingcat at pacbell.net  Tue Jul  5 23:43:26 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:43:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Wikipedia's NPOV (was Re: themes in
	anti-transhumanist arguments)
In-Reply-To: <20050705223427.41535.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050705234327.70509.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I didn't say it was, I said it was of MSM, which is "main stream
> media".

Ah, okay.  Just making sure.  Thanks for the correction.

> This is a silly and improbable as believing in the easter bunny. It
> is
> impossible to state 'facts' in a world when nobody agrees on what the
> 'facts' are.

Actually...it is.  ^_^

There are many tricks and techniques to it.  Finding a way to speak the
undisputed truth when many basic facts are in dispute is a skill in
itself, much like (for example) computer programming.  It usually
requires more than one mind, since even the best-trained single mind
will still often put in some bias - thus the push for and success of
collaborative efforts, like Wikipedia.  But it also requires tricks and
techniques on the individual level.  A couple of the basics are trying
to find what facts *are* generally agreed upon (for instance, most
people agree that "1+1=2", while there is less agreement on "the Earth
was created from nothing within the past 10,000 years"), and more
importantly, taking the attitude of searching for the truth (and
contributing your piece of the puzzle, as you see it) rather than
assuming you know the truth - because no one (not you, not me, not
anyone we know, not anyone we don't know, *no one*) ever knows the
compete truth.

> For example, the accepted dictionary definition of
> 'fascism' is a philosophy that advocates the state allowing private
> property, but dictating who can own it and how they use it,

Some dictionaries define it that way, but it definitely isn't how I
hear it used in public use.  This may come as a shock, but even
dictionaries aren't always the last word in saying what words mean - no
matter how good of an attempt they often make.  Especially since
different dictionaries give different definitions.  From
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fascism :

1. often Fascism
  1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under
     a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the
     opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy
     of belligerent nationalism and racism.
  2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a
     system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

As the focus is on oppression, not private property per se (private
property may be one tool for oppression, but not the only one), this
seems to be far different from your dictionary's definition.
Conclusion: just because you see it in one dictionary, doesn't always
mean it's so.

> yet the
> biased people on wikipedia who claim to be more NPOV refuse to define
> political policies that fit the above definition as 'fascist'.

Because they're using their own dictionaries.  As a guess, I think the
definition you gave would be closer to their definition of "communist"
than of "fascist".  A non-oppressive communist government can be
envisioned and dreamt of, and thus discussed, even if in practice
communism seems to inherently give rise to oppression (and thus be
"fascist" in both your and their senses of the term).

> If an act is a crime, stating it is a crime is not denouncing. If a
> person's actions or statements are generally thought negatively of by
> the general population, words like 'infamous' or 'notorious' are not
> POV, they are purely descriptive. If something fits the dictionary
> definition of a word, then you can call it or describe it with that
> word.

All three of these, while true, can be used to give the appearance of
justification to things they do not in fact justify, if one takes a
slightly blind eye to certain aspects.  For example (not saying you did
these, just that they are common mistakes):

\* Whether or not some act is in fact a crime may be in dispute, as is
  whether or not a certain person did indeed commit that act.  In this
  circumstance, it would not necessarily be correct that the person
  committed a crime.  It might be correct to say that the person is
  suspected or accused of a crime, though.

* If a small subset of the general population to which you happen to
  belong - for example, just Extropians or even just all transhumanists
  - considers a certain act negatively, that is a far cry from the
  general population seeing the same act negatively.  For instance, it
  is quite possible that a greater number of human beings see the
  Precautionary Principle in a positive light than in a negative light.
  We may attempt to change that, but in the mean time, it would not be
  purely descriptive to say that a certain person or organization is
  "infamous" for using the Precautionary Principle a lot, unless you
  are clearly speaking from or about the POV of a group (like
  transhumanists) which would have that perception - which is almost
  never the case in a Wikipedia article.  The solution here is to
  honestly see things from the uninvolved, and often un- or only
  slightly educated (with respect to this issue), person's POV.  This
  can be extremely difficult for most people, as it absolutely requires
  setting aside (and recognizing!) one's personal beliefs and
  prejudices.

* As pointed out above, just because something technically fits one
  dictionary definition, does not always mean that it fits the
  definition that most people use.  If you're getting pushback on the
  application of a particular word, the most likely cause is that the
  definition you were using conflicts with the definition those who
  take exception are using.  In this case, one of the early important
  steps to defusing and refining is to ask them what their definition
  is.  If there is a disagreement, *then* maybe cite your definition -
  in the unusual case that they could be persuaded to change
  definitions.  Usually, you have to use your audience's definitions,
  with no chance to make up your own (unless you're trying to confuse
  the issue - which some politicians and lawyers do for a living, but
  which would probably just get bad results for us).

You might want to spend some time reading and mulling over
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
in particular the sections "An example" (especially the bit about how
we don't need to say that "so-and-so is evil" when we can present
evidence that speaks for itself - which is one advantage transhumanists
often have over neo-luddites!), "There's no such thing as objectivity",
"Morally offensive views" (making sure to note what we find morally
offensive, like the Precautionary Principle), "Giving "equal
validity"", "Making necessary assumptions", and "Writing for the
"enemy" POV".


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Tue Jul  5 23:50:55 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 16:50:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050705172328.69608.qmail@web81605.mail.yahoo.com>
	<20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce0507051650ee5f86f@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/5/05, Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Establishing our own Extrowiki would allow us to establishour own NPOV
> as specifically extropic in outlook. This exists to a degree in Neal
> Stephenson's Metaweb (http://www.metaweb.com), which I write articles
> for, but is focused on his writing specifically, although other authors
> works have been covered and Neal does want it to become a general resource.

FYI, it also seems that the new-and-improved Betterhumans.com site has
its own Wiki:

http://betterhumans.com/Wiki/tabid/54/Default.aspx


From dgc at cox.net  Tue Jul  5 23:48:26 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 19:48:26 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] In defense of slashdotters (was transhumanism
	==	militant fascism)
In-Reply-To: <114F9869-8D2E-4121-9E3C-8A14AA701BB5@mac.com>
References: <42C9F6B0.7030104@adelphia.net>
	<114F9869-8D2E-4121-9E3C-8A14AA701BB5@mac.com>
Message-ID: <42CB1C4A.9010808@cox.net>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

>
> I am often surprised by the gibbering monkey chatter level and the 
> seeming serious level of ignorance.  I am also surprised to encounter 
> a lot of young geeks who seem to have not a clue of how fast 
> technology is changing the world and  possess no positive vision (to 
> say the least).    It seems to be uncool to dream and seek to make the 
> dream real.
>
> - samantha
>
The SNR in the comments at Slashdot is so low that I rarely read the 
comments any more except on stories that really interest me. For 
discussions of intellectual property philosophy, Groklaw is far superior.

I personally prefer to use and contribute to GPLed software,  As a 
practical matter, GPLed software is cheaper because the the costs (in 
time and hassle) of license compliance are so much lower than with 
proprietary software. As a philosophical matter, I see the GPL as an 
enabler for a powerful collaborative system that generates high-quality 
software very efficiently and quickly. The Open Source community and its 
various sub-constituencies comprise an evolving collaborative 
intelligence that has a computer component. The computer component 
(Internet, email, CVS,and many development tools) currently contributes 
critical infrastructure, but is not yet doing any of the "thinking." 
This will change. As a trivial example, a team has now implemented 
automated regression tests for Linux: each time a new release happens, 
it is completely tested by the regression suite on many hardware 
platforms in a very short period of time. The concept is not new: almost 
none of the individual concepts are new. However, the bug-finding time 
for a large class of bugs has dropped to mere hours and the humans 
become more efficient.


From xander25 at adelphia.net  Tue Jul  5 18:05:32 2005
From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 18:05:32 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] In defense of slashdotters (was transhumanism
	==	militant fascism)
In-Reply-To: <114F9869-8D2E-4121-9E3C-8A14AA701BB5@mac.com>
References: <42C9F6B0.7030104@adelphia.net>
	<114F9869-8D2E-4121-9E3C-8A14AA701BB5@mac.com>
Message-ID: <42CACBEC.3060203@adelphia.net>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

> I do not concur.  RS and Perens both believe strongly in the right of
> creators to decide how to offer their creation.  They believe that
> non-open software is more or less immoral but not that everyone should
> be forced to offer their software creations under licenses of their
> liking.  Besides, the issue from an extropian viewpoint is one of what
> forms of licensing of what kinds of software under what circumstances
> expand extropy.   That this or that original light or exponent of
> Free/Open Software has opinions distasteful to some of us is not
> terribly important.

I concurred based on the idea that slashdotters typically are a diverse
crowd, not necessarily based on the licenses that are supported on
there.  I confess to be somewhat new to extropy and this list.  I am
curious as to what opinions are present on here on the issue of
licensing/patents/IP etc...  My experience has mainly been centered
around the computing industry in general, and Linux/open source
specifically, and not necessarily focused on transhumanism, though it's
very quickly becoming a topic of interest for me.

> I am often surprised by the gibbering monkey chatter level and the
> seeming serious level of ignorance.  I am also surprised to encounter
> a lot of young geeks who seem to have not a clue of how fast
> technology is changing the world and  possess no positive vision (to
> say the least).    It seems to be uncool to dream and seek to make the
> dream real.

Exactly.  I spent a brief time in nature centric preoccupations, which
denied things such as technology and transhumanism.  Having quickly lost
my interest, i went back to computers and quickly realized the conundrum
of being technologically oriented and at the same time being
anti-technology minded.  The far better response would be to find
rational solutions to advance mankind rather than be controlled by an
irrational fear.

--Jacob


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Wed Jul  6 00:28:44 2005
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 17:28:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] FWD (PvT) AP: Most Iraq Suicide Bombs by Foreigners
Message-ID: <42CB25BC.2020400@mindspring.com>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5109609,00.html

AP: Most Iraq Suicide Bombs by Foreigners

Thursday June 30, 2005 7:01 PM

By PATRICK QUINN and KATHERINE SHRADER

Associated Press Writers

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) - The vast majority of suicide attackers in Iraq 
are thought to be foreigners - mostly Saudis and other Gulf Arabs - 
and the trend has become more pronounced this year with North 
Africans also streaming in to carry out deadly missions, U.S. and 
Iraqi officials say.

The bombers are recruited from Sunni communities, smuggled into Iraq 
from Syria after receiving religious indoctrination, and then quickly 
bundled into cars or strapped with explosive vests and sent to their 
deaths, the officials told The Associated Press. The young men are 
not so much fighters as human bombs - a relatively small but deadly 
component of the Iraqi insurgency.

``The foreign fighters are the ones that most often are behind the 
wheel of suicide car bombs, or most often behind any suicide 
situation,'' said U.S. Air Force Brig. Gen. Don Alston, spokesman for 
the Multinational Force in Iraq.

Officials have long believed that non-Iraqis infiltrating the country 
through its porous borders with Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia were 
behind most suicide missions, and the wave of bloody strikes in 
recent months has confirmed that thinking.

Authorities have found little evidence that Iraqis have been behind 
the near-daily stream of suicide attacks over the past six months, 
U.S. and Iraqi intelligence officials said, speaking on condition of 
anonymity because of the subject's sensitivity.

There have been a few exceptions.

On election day Jan. 30, a mentally handicapped Iraqi boy, wearing a 
suicide vest, attacked a polling station. An attack on a U.S. 
military mess hall in the northern city of Mosul in December that 
killed 22 also was believed to have been carried out by an Iraqi, as 
was a deadly June 11 attack on the heavily guarded Baghdad 
headquarters of the Interior Ministry's feared Wolf Brigade.

Since 2003, less than 10 percent of more than 500 suicide attacks 
have been carried out by Iraqis, according to one defense official. 
So far this year, there have been at least 213 suicide attacks - 172 
by vehicle and 41 by bombers on foot - according to an AP count.

Another U.S. official said American authorities believe Iraqis are 
beginning to look at suicide bombers as a liability. ``Just as there 
is no shortage of people willing to do this, nor is there any 
shortage of targets, and they tend to be police,'' the official said.

The trend doesn't mean Iraqis aren't part of the bloody insurgency: 
On the contrary, Iraqi insurgents are thought to be responsible for 
much of the violence and fighting in the country, although most of 
those are non-suicide attacks.

``I still think 80 percent of the insurgency, the day to day 
activity, is Iraqi - the roadside bombings, mortars, direct weapons 
fire, rifle fire, automatic weapons fire,'' said Kenneth Katzman, a 
Middle East expert with the Congressional Research Service, which 
advises U.S. lawmakers.

But he added: ``The foreign fighters attract the headlines with the 
suicide bombings, no question.''

The key role of foreign fighters in suicide attacks is one reason 
many senior military officials, including the top U.S. general in the 
Middle East, tend to view the war in Iraq as slowly developing into 
an international struggle against militant Islam.

The military brass say Islamic extremists like Abu Musab al-Zarqawi 
and his al-Qaida in Iraq organization are determined to start a civil 
war in Iraq by attacking Iraqi security forces and members of the 
country's Shiite majority.

``It's not about one man. It's about his network,'' the top general 
in the region, U.S. Gen. John Abizaid, said recently. ``His network 
exists inside Iraq. It's connected to al-Qaida. It's got facilitation 
nodes in Syria. It brings foreign fighters in from Saudi Arabia and 
from North Africa.''

One Iraqi official, Sabah Kadhim, an Interior Ministry spokesman, 
said the suicide attackers' main aim ``is to keep the country in 
chaos.''

They have managed to do just that.

In all, there have been more than 484 car bombings since the U.S. 
handed sovereignty to the United States one year ago, and the pace of 
attacks has escalated since Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari's 
government was named two months ago. Those attacks alone, mostly car 
bombs and suicide attacks, have killed about 1,350, according to an 
AP count.

A suicide bomber was responsible for the single deadliest act since 
the fall of Saddam Hussein two years ago - a Feb. 28 attack against a 
medical clinic in Hillah, south of Baghdad, that killed 125 people. 
Al-Qaida claimed responsibility for the attack by a man driving a 
pickup truck.

Another Interior Ministry official, Lt. Col. Ahmed al-Azawi, said 
some suicide bombers are as young as 15 - and he insisted that none 
were Iraqis.

The foreign militants are believed to come into the country for only 
a short time before they are sent on a suicide operation, said one 
senior U.S. military intelligence official in Iraq, who asked not to 
be named for security reasons.

``They are brought in, there is a lot of indoctrination that is 
forced on them here and they are moved very rapidly into a mission to 
deliver the bomb to commit suicide,'' the official said.

A U.S. official in Washington shared that assessment.

Overall, the number of foreign fighters coming into the country seems 
to be on the rise, compared to six months ago, Abizaid said. 
``There's probably about 1,000 foreign fighters and about somewhere 
less than 10,000 committed insurgents in the field,'' he said.

Of the 10,000 people being detained in Iraq, about 400 are 
foreigners, the U.S. military says.

The majority of foreign bombers in Iraq are believed to come from 
countries in the Persian Gulf, mainly Saudi Arabia and Yemen as well 
as Jordan, U.S. officials say. They say many are transported to Syria 
and then smuggled into Iraq, mostly overland through Qaim - a 
frontier city in Iraq's western desert.

U.S. Marines taking part in a major operation around Qaim on June 20 
found foreign passports and one roundtrip air ticket from Tripoli, 
Libya, to Damascus, Syria. They also found two passports from Sudan, 
two from Saudi Arabia, two from Libya, two from Algeria and one from 
Tunisia.

Up to 20 percent of the bombers might be from Algeria, according to 
forensic investigations after attacks, senior U.S. military officials 
have said on condition they not be named for security reasons. 
Another 5 percent each might be from Morocco and Tunisia, the 
officials said.

``We've also seen an influx of suicide bombers from North Africa, 
specifically Algeria, Tunisia and Morocco,'' Abizaid said.

Robert Baer, a CIA officer from 1976 to 1997 who spent the much of 
his career in the Middle East, recently returned to the region for a 
month to study suicide bombers as part of an investigation for 
Britain's Channel 4. His trip included a 10-day visit to 
predominantly Shiite Iran.

Baer said Sunni Arabs who take carry out suicide attacks feel Shiites 
are attacking Sunnis in Iraq. ``They look at the war in Iraq as an 
attack on Sunni Islam, not Iraq, not Saddam,'' he said.

In interviews while visiting prisons, terror groups and government 
officials, he was told that there are so many suicide bombers coming 
out of the Persian Gulf states that the loose networks that deploy 
jihadist martyrs - many run through mosques - are turning away 
potential attackers.

He said the mentality is: ``They have taken what is ours and they 
will take more if we don't stop them.''

---



-- 
"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 beb_cc at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 01:44:57 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 18:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] whoever heard of a moderate terrorist?
In-Reply-To: <42CB25BC.2020400@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20050706014457.74079.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Sure, before they can change their minds they are
blown up. Isn't that sweet, blowing those as young as
15 into bloody fragments in the name of Allah? 
And they call terrorists extremists. Well, whoever
heard of a moderate terrorist:
 "Hi, my name is Akbar, fly me to Iraq. I only
horribly maim people, rather than kill them, being
that I am a moderate terorist".



> The foreign militants are believed to come into the
> country for only a short time before they are sent
on a suicide
> operation [...] They are brought in, there is a lot
of
> indoctrination that is  forced on them here and they
are moved very >rapidly into a mission to deliver the
bomb to commit suicide,'' the >official said.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From xander25 at adelphia.net  Tue Jul  5 20:30:01 2005
From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob)
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 20:30:01 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <20050705180125.88220.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050705180125.88220.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42CAEDC9.1090307@adelphia.net>

I agree with you whole-heartedly.  I would also suggest a system of
thought not too dissimilar to silver-grey thought from John C. Wright's
Golden Age designed to hold on to what it means to be human as well as
to allow mankind to progress.  Yet another adaptation that I think
mankind is fully capable of, and could occur naturally when some future
men begin to realize the effects of the technological changes they made.

--jb

c c wrote:

> Here's another personal experience: I was very influenced by the 'back
> to nature' world view that attained wide popular currency around 1969
> and continues to this day (reaching its period of maximum intensity, I
> would say, about 1971-' 73)
> At any rate, science at that time gave me the sensation of being one
> of a pair of dice on a darwinian roulette table; though I knew
> nature eventually became an enemy of an older person, I thought the
> aging process could be counteracted to a shall we say
> socially acceptable extent by gradually improved nutrition and of
> course exercise, physical therapy, etc. It was not so much at the time
> I thought lengthening lifespans was unnatural, but rather nebulous
> thoughts revolved around the idea that lengthening lifespans might
> lead to certain diminishing returns in a longer but more complicated
> and not necessarily more pleasant and/or happier life; the
> exasperations of a more complicated life might shorten or ruin that
> life. The latter has been proven to me as valid in many cases, but
> most people-- as you imply-- can rise to the challenges &
> opportunities of overcoming and adapting.
>  
>  
>
> */Jacob <xander25 at adelphia.net>/* wrote:
>
>     In response to Mr. Halelamien,
>
>     Speaking as a former anti-technology guy (very short period of time in
>     my life), my fears of transhumanism came from two sources:
>
>     1) Destructive to the human spirit
>
>     The more technologically advanced a society becomes, the less
>     interested
>     it is in matters that concern his well-being. Likewise, he becomes
>     increasingly incapable of handling changing factors that endanger it.
>     Examine for instance the phenomona of the internet. How many computer
>     enthusiasts get out these days? How many get out into, appreciate, and
>     learn about nature? How many learn to socialize with others? I would
>     think these are fundamental aspects of what it means to be human.
>     Translated into transhumanism it becomes a matter of how will this new
>     technology affect humans? It could make our lives easier yes, but in
>     doing so make! s us slaves to the technology that was meant to
>     help us.
>     This is possibly where I think the slashdot poster was coming from, as
>     he wasn't clear. However, who says that technology needs to be
>     enslaving?
>
>     a. It opens doors to undiscovered potential we haven't been capable of
>     in the past.
>     b. The human spirit is about overcoming and adapting. It's there where
>     our strength appears. To figure out ways to preserve who we are, and
>     yet advance at the same time. Take for example the automobile. It
>     opened up a world of new possibilities. The caveat now is that we no
>     longer have to toil in ways done in the past. Humans developed
>     excercise (hence adapting) to reclaim to what was lost.
>
>     2) Damaging to organic tissue along with it's not natural! This can be
>     solved with time, it's just a matter of study. The problem is vastly
>     overstated. The unnatural part is refuted by asking what is natural?
>     If science and it's application is a product of the ! human mind,
>     and if
>     the human mind is natural, then how is it unnatural?
>
>     I am utterly shocked that both arguments come from either side of the
>     political fence (though seems to come more from the left). So, I don't
>     think it is a mainly political argument.
>
>     --Jacob Bennett
>     _______________________________________________
>     extropy-chat mailing list
>     extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>     http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From spike66 at comcast.net  Wed Jul  6 02:54:59 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:54:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507060256.j662uwR27657@tick.javien.com>


> Furthermore, humans, according to God's alleged
> design, were capable of living as long as 999 years (Methuselah)...

> Mike Lorrey

Philistine!  Methuselah lived only nine hundred SIXTY nine 
years, thou heathern!

(Genesis 5:27)

Still, I would cheerfully settle for 969 years.  For now.  {8^D

spike





From fauxever at sprynet.com  Wed Jul  6 02:58:10 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 19:58:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
References: <20050705180125.88220.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<42CAEDC9.1090307@adelphia.net>
Message-ID: <000e01c581d6$8b684ca0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Jacob" <xander25 at adelphia.net>

>I agree with you whole-heartedly.  I would also suggest a system of thought 
>not too dissimilar to silver-grey thought from John C. Wright's Golden Age 
>designed to hold on to what it means to be human as well as to allow 
>mankind to progress.  Yet another adaptation that I think mankind is fully 
>capable of, and could occur naturally when some future men begin to realize 
>the effects of the technological changes they made.

Curses!  Now all the slighted future women will have no choice but to fix 
your wagon.  (Ready, aim ... spokes galore!)

Olga the Maleficent






From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 03:48:36 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 20:48:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <200507060256.j662uwR27657@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <20050706034836.54094.qmail@web30712.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> 
> > Furthermore, humans, according to God's alleged
> > design, were capable of living as long as 999 years (Methuselah)...
> 
> > Mike Lorrey
> 
> Philistine!  Methuselah lived only nine hundred SIXTY nine 
> years, thou heathern!

I don't know who this Phil guy is, and I certainly don't support him,
but thanks for the correction.

> 
> (Genesis 5:27)
> 
> Still, I would cheerfully settle for 969 years.  For now.  {8^D

Yeah, for now. That should be enough time to journey to Fomalhaut and a
few other interesting, close-by solar systems.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Wed Jul  6 04:30:06 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 21:30:06 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Dead
Message-ID: <002c01c581e3$630ea2b0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

We talk about life and death and technology

here ...

... and there and everywhere the dead:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/photos/war_casualties/map/m10000.html

Olga 




From xander25 at adelphia.net  Wed Jul  6 00:26:05 2005
From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob)
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:26:05 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
In-Reply-To: <000e01c581d6$8b684ca0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
References: <20050705180125.88220.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<42CAEDC9.1090307@adelphia.net>
	<000e01c581d6$8b684ca0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <42CB251D.5080706@adelphia.net>

Olga Bourlin wrote:

> From: "Jacob" <xander25 at adelphia.net>
>
>> I agree with you whole-heartedly.  I would also suggest a system of
>> thought not too dissimilar to silver-grey thought from John C.
>> Wright's Golden Age designed to hold on to what it means to be human
>> as well as to allow mankind to progress.  Yet another adaptation that
>> I think mankind is fully capable of, and could occur naturally when
>> some future men begin to realize the effects of the technological
>> changes they made.
>
>
> Curses!  Now all the slighted future women will have no choice but to
> fix your wagon.  (Ready, aim ... spokes galore!)
>
> Olga the Maleficent

I'm not sure how to take that, jest or otherwise.  No slight was
intended.  I threw men (which according to Merriam Webster is an
appropriate use of the word) in there as a figure of speech representing
humankind (do we also change the word "humankind"?).  Generally, I am
not given well to political slight-of-hand which is destined to divert
into a side topic, like the one we are going into now.  I'll be sure to
keep my dictionary of politically correct jargon handy from now on.

If only men are fit to become philosophers that excludes Ayn Rand.

"My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being,
with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive
achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." 
--Ayn Rand

Note her wording.  I highly doubt anyone would call her a chauvinist,
particularly since she was female, as well as being a staunch
individualist.  Atlas Shrugged by the same author, in fact, made her
central character a heroine by the name of Dagny. The above quote
applied to her as well.

--jb


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Wed Jul  6 06:53:25 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2005 23:53:25 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] RE: Transhumanism == militant fascism (apparently)
References: <20050705180125.88220.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>	<42CAEDC9.1090307@adelphia.net><000e01c581d6$8b684ca0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<42CB251D.5080706@adelphia.net>
Message-ID: <000b01c581f7$68c2f6c0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Jacob" <xander25 at adelphia.net>
> Olga Bourlin wrote:
>> Curses!  Now all the slighted future women will have no choice but to fix 
>> your wagon.  (Ready, aim ... spokes galore!)
>
> I'm not sure how to take that, jest or otherwise.  No slight was intended. 
> I threw men (which according to Merriam Webster is an
 appropriate use of the word) in there as a figure of speech representing 
humankind (do we also change the word "humankind"?).

Tsk, tsk ... never trust a dictionary.  And, I was being facetious.  But - 
looka here - you changed from using "mankind" (as in your original post) to 
humankind.  Nothing wrong with humankind, my friend!

>  Generally, I am not given well to political slight-of-hand which is 
> destined to divert into a side topic, like the one we are going into now. 
> I'll be sure to keep my dictionary of politically correct jargon handy 
> from now on.

Nah, whatever works for you - don't worry about it.  Ingrained habits may 
become modified (if they make sense), or they won't (because they don't make 
sense).  Often, we are inspired - or not - depending on the company we keep 
(as there's reason and purpose for the latter).  But on a list like this ... 
one never knows whom one might meet.  ;c)

> If only men are fit to become philosophers that excludes Ayn Rand.

Ayn Rand?  Ayn Rand?  Rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr ...

> "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being,
> with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive 
> achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only 
> bsolute."  --Ayn Rand
>
> Note her wording.  I highly doubt anyone would call her a chauvinist,
> particularly since she was female, as well as being a staunch
> individualist.  Atlas Shrugged by the same author, in fact, made her
> central character a heroine by the name of Dagny. The above quote
> applied to her as well.

Chauvinist goes both ways (male chauvinist or female chauvinist), so that is 
neither here nor there.

Although that's not to say I wouldn't call Ayn Rand many things (and I 
have).  But as we discussed Ayn Rand here interminably some years ago, I 
don't want to belabor any points already made and insults already exchanged.

Welllllllll, except to say that Ayn Rand didn't have much of a sense of 
humor, did she?  Very, very unfortunate case.

Olga 




From giogavir at yahoo.it  Wed Jul  6 10:32:34 2005
From: giogavir at yahoo.it (giorgio gaviraghi)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:32:34 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Dead
In-Reply-To: <002c01c581e3$630ea2b0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20050706103234.65976.qmail@web26205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

plus a cost of 200B and rising
we could have gone to mars, defeated cancer, give free
education to millions 
was it worse just to kick Saddam out?
The same think could have been accomplished the
israeli way at a minimum cost and loss of lives
just get rid of him and his cronies personally 
--- Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> ha scritto: 

> We talk about life and death and technology
> 
> here ...
> 
> ... and there and everywhere the dead:
> 
>
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/photos/war_casualties/map/m10000.html
> 
> Olga 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



	

	
		
___________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB 
http://mail.yahoo.it


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Jul  6 11:08:25 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:08:25 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Books available online - free
Message-ID: <ee50357e05070604081eb9f15c@mail.gmail.com>

The Internet Public Library 
<http://ipl.sils.umich.edu/> 
maintains an index page of many sources of online books.

<http://ipl.si.umich.edu/div/subject/browse/hum60.60.00/>

The famous Project Gutenberg is there, of course.
<http://www.gutenberg.org/>

Some other good entries from IPL:

The Alex Catalogue of Electronic Texts is a collection of public
domain documents from American and English literature as well as
Western philosophy.
<http://www.infomotions.com/alex/>

Bibliomania. A thorough index of online texts ranging from Louisa May
Alcott's "Little Women" to Oscar Wilde's "The Picture of Dorian Gray".
<http://www.bibliomania.com/>

The Online Books Page
<http://digital.library.upenn.edu/books/>

Ibiblio
"Home to one of the largest 'collections of collections' on the
Internet, ibiblio.org is a conservancy of freely available
information, including software, music, literature, art, history,
science, politics, and cultural studies." There's a little of
something for everyone here -- a good place to browse.
<http://www.ibiblio.org/>

And many, many, more.  

BillK


From riel at surriel.com  Wed Jul  6 12:21:33 2005
From: riel at surriel.com (Rik van Riel)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 08:21:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] In defense of slashdotters (was transhumanism ==
	militant fascism)
In-Reply-To: <42CACBEC.3060203@adelphia.net>
References: <42C9F6B0.7030104@adelphia.net>
	<114F9869-8D2E-4121-9E3C-8A14AA701BB5@mac.com>
	<42CACBEC.3060203@adelphia.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61L.0507060811430.10084@imladris.surriel.com>

On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Jacob wrote:

> I concurred based on the idea that slashdotters typically are a diverse
> crowd, not necessarily based on the licenses that are supported on
> there.  I confess to be somewhat new to extropy and this list.  I am
> curious as to what opinions are present on here on the issue of
> licensing/patents/IP etc... 

The issues of licensing and patents really need to be
treated as separate, because they are.

On the licensing front, I believe that it is best for
software to be made available under the license that
stimulates innovation the most, for this piece of
software.

Sometimes a proprietary license is best, because the
development can really only be done by a small team of
dedicated professionals (who need to be paid) and the
software is for a niche market.

Sometimes the software is widely used infrastructure,
and the best license is one where everybody can
contribute, without fear of anybody else doing an
"embrace and extend" on the software.  This means a
license like the GPL, since that guarantees that you
can contribute code, without your competitor creating
a proprietary fork of the project.  We have seen cases
where a company publically states they are willing to
open up their code for inclusion in a GPL project, but
not a BSD licensed project.

Sometimes the software is meant to become widely used,
for example the ogg vorbis code.  Since the creators
would like ogg audio playback to be available in
proprietary software and devices too, the BSD license
works best for this scenario.


As for patents and software - I have seen no evidence
that patents stimulate invention in software (not even
pro-patent research found any!), but I have seen lots
of evidence that software patents stifle innovation.

Because of that I am against software patents.


Note that patents and licensing could be entirely
different in other industries.  Eg. in medicine there
are years of research going into a new drug, and a
patent helps protect that effort.  

This is a sharp contrast with software, where a patent
can be filed on any brilliant idea you came up with 
while eating lunch or standing in the shower. No research
required.


-- 
"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 scerir at libero.it  Wed Jul  6 13:18:26 2005
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:18:26 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Science magazine: 25 questions
References: <20050706103234.65976.qmail@web26205.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000401c5822d$31e04e10$04b01b97@administxl09yj>

http://www.sciencemag.org/sciext/125th/#inscience



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 14:13:13 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 07:13:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule,
	was: Re: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050704200952.51375.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050706141313.75223.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_reenlist_070505,00.html?ESRC=dod.nl

"Even though the Army appears likely to miss its goal of recruiting
80,000 new soldiers this year, it's ahead of the pace needed to reach
its goal of convincing 64,162 soldiers, from privates to top sergeants,
to re-enlist by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. 
 
Through the end of May, 45,333 soldiers had re-enlisted, said Lt. Col.
Pamela Hart, an Army spokeswoman at the Pentagon. That's 70 percent of
the Army's full-year goal. 

Nearly 11,000 soldiers from the elite 18th Airborne Corps, which
includes four of the Army's 10 active divisions, have "re-upped" this
year. That's about 86 percent of the corps' full-year goal, said the
corps commander, Maj. Gen. Virgil Packett. 

"The 18th Airborne Corps is carrying the Army right now in retention,"
Packett said. 

And leading the corps is the 82nd Airborne, which has reached 97
percent of its annual goal, even though it has deployed regularly to
Iraq and Afghanistan. "

First point:
This is an interesting dichotomy: the soldiers who are actually on the
ground and putting their lives at risk (and know what is really going
on in Iraq and Afghanistan) are re-enlisting far above levels the Army
was projecting, while recruitment of civilians (who only see what the
media tells them) is not likely to meet goals.

So, this seems to imply that the media is giving a biased and overly
negative view of what is really going on at the battlefront (plus
civilians are subject to a lot more negative propaganda they are more
likely to give credence to than a war veteran would).

Second Point:
The large increase in re-enlistment will mean the Army will meet its
manpower goals once again this year, i.e. no draft (sorry Samantha).
Moreover, since the manpower will constitute more experienced veterans,
the average unit effectiveness will go up and training costs (including
accidents and rookies puting comrades at risk in combat) will go down.


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Wed Jul  6 15:03:07 2005
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:03:07 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule, was: Re: [extropy-chat]
	give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050706141313.75223.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050706141313.75223.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507061656020.28115@zeus>

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>First point:
>This is an interesting dichotomy: the soldiers who are actually on the
>ground and putting their lives at risk (and know what is really going
>on in Iraq and Afghanistan) are re-enlisting far above levels the Army
>was projecting, while recruitment of civilians (who only see what the
>media tells them) is not likely to meet goals.
>
>So, this seems to imply that the media is giving a biased and overly
>negative view of what is really going on at the battlefront (plus
>civilians are subject to a lot more negative propaganda they are more
>likely to give credence to than a war veteran would).

There may be other factors at work: $$ benefits for listing/re-enlisting,
having no fallback plan for de-listing, and so on.

I think a real comparison should be done not with the Army goals of
re-enlisting, but with previously rates of re-enlisting soldiers in war
and peace times, e.g. how many re-enlisting soldiers per 100,000. Army
recruitment goals can change over time depending on current pressures,
while the attractivenes of an Army re-enslisting depends on what's the
deal really is.


Alfio



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 15:39:45 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 08:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule,
	was: Re: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507061656020.28115@zeus>
Message-ID: <20050706153945.21407.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
> 
> There may be other factors at work: $$ benefits for
> listing/re-enlisting, having no fallback plan for de-listing, and
> so on.
> 
> I think a real comparison should be done not with the Army goals of
> re-enlisting, but with previously rates of re-enlisting soldiers in
> war and peace times, e.g. how many re-enlisting soldiers per 100,000.

No, the proper comparison is the retention ratio to enlistment. In this
case, the recruitment goal is 90,000 and the re-enlistment goal is
64,000, which is about 70% of the recruitment goal, a very high
retention rate from my experience.

The 2004 retention goal was 56,000, which the Army beat by 800. It's
new recruitment goal in that year of 77,000 was met by an excess of 47
enlistees. Given that the 2005 goals were 8,000 higher for
re-enlistment and 13,000 higher for new recruits, it appears that my
impression was accurate. 

Regarding your claim that other concerns, such as employment options,
played the bigger role, do not seem accurate, as unemployment in the
civilian workforce is lower this year than it was last year, but
unemployment rates should hit both enlistees and reenlistees more
equally, or else favor reenlistees, because they enter the civilian job
market with more skills than a high school graduate. Re-enlistment
bonuses have been increased, primarily by making them tax-free if the
service member re-enlists while deployed to a combat zone, however
enlistment bonuses have also gone up as well by larger margins, with
three year active duty enlistment bonuses more than doubled to $20k and
job-specific bonuses doubled to $14,000. They also offer an $8k bonus
to those going to OCS. The Blue To Green program (getting USAF
personnel to reenlist over to the Army) earns a $5k-$10k bonus,
depending on skills.

In addition, last year:

"In other end-of-the year benchmarks: 
    ?The Marine Corps, whose amphibious units have fought in
Afghanistan and patrol the notorious Anbar Province in Iraq, says it is
on track to meet a goal of 36,773 recruits this fiscal year. 
    ?The Air Force three months ago exceeded a goal of retaining 55
percent of first-termers, garnering 68 percent. In fact, the branch is
20,000 over its budget-authorized personnel strength and is
transferring some airmen to the Army. 
    Air Force spokeswoman Jennifer Stephens attributed the sign-up rate
to patriotism, the civilian job market and job satisfaction. 
    "These are all trends we are seeing," she said. 
    Edgar Castillo, spokesman for Air Force Recruit Services at
Randolph Air Force Base in San Antonio, said the branch actually is
slashing accessions from 34,080 this year to 24,000 next year. 
    "There are people right now that want to join that we can't
accommodate," Mr. Castillo said. 
    ?The Navy will meet its marker of 39,700 enlisted recruits, as it
has for every year in recent memory, except 1998. The branch might miss
the goal for 11,000 new naval reservists, partly because active duty
retention rates are so high the pool of available recruits is shrinking
for certain skills. "

As indicated by the Navy reserve, goals for reserve and guard units are
not being met, but this is partly because so many active duty personnel
are re-enlisting and are therefore not available for reserve or guard recruitment.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Wed Jul  6 15:55:45 2005
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 17:55:45 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule, was: Re: [extropy-chat]
	give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050706153945.21407.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050706153945.21407.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507061752300.28115@zeus>


Hmm, it's sometimes difficult to follow this kind of news from 6,000 miles
away. Given that the media picture about this is uniformly negative, while
the Army picture is instead quite positive, one cannot avoid the
impression that everything is spinned this way or the other. Thanks for
all the data.

Alfio

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>
>--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
>>
>> There may be other factors at work: $$ benefits for
>> listing/re-enlisting, having no fallback plan for de-listing, and
>> so on.
>>
>> I think a real comparison should be done not with the Army goals of
>> re-enlisting, but with previously rates of re-enlisting soldiers in
>> war and peace times, e.g. how many re-enlisting soldiers per 100,000.
>
>No, the proper comparison is the retention ratio to enlistment. In this
>case, the recruitment goal is 90,000 and the re-enlistment goal is
>64,000, which is about 70% of the recruitment goal, a very high
>retention rate from my experience.
>
>The 2004 retention goal was 56,000, which the Army beat by 800. It's
>new recruitment goal in that year of 77,000 was met by an excess of 47
>enlistees. Given that the 2005 goals were 8,000 higher for
>re-enlistment and 13,000 higher for new recruits, it appears that my
>impression was accurate.
>
>Regarding your claim that other concerns, such as employment options,
>played the bigger role, do not seem accurate, as unemployment in the
>civilian workforce is lower this year than it was last year, but
>unemployment rates should hit both enlistees and reenlistees more
>equally, or else favor reenlistees, because they enter the civilian job
>market with more skills than a high school graduate. Re-enlistment
>bonuses have been increased, primarily by making them tax-free if the
>service member re-enlists while deployed to a combat zone, however
>enlistment bonuses have also gone up as well by larger margins, with
>three year active duty enlistment bonuses more than doubled to $20k and
>job-specific bonuses doubled to $14,000. They also offer an $8k bonus
>to those going to OCS. The Blue To Green program (getting USAF
>personnel to reenlist over to the Army) earns a $5k-$10k bonus,
>depending on skills.
>
>In addition, last year:
>
>"In other end-of-the year benchmarks:
>    ?The Marine Corps, whose amphibious units have fought in
>Afghanistan and patrol the notorious Anbar Province in Iraq, says it is
>on track to meet a goal of 36,773 recruits this fiscal year.
>    ?The Air Force three months ago exceeded a goal of retaining 55
>percent of first-termers, garnering 68 percent. In fact, the branch is
>20,000 over its budget-authorized personnel strength and is
>transferring some airmen to the Army.
>    Air Force spokeswoman Jennifer Stephens attributed the sign-up rate
>to patriotism, the civilian job market and job satisfaction.
>    "These are all trends we are seeing," she said.
>    Edgar Castillo, spokesman for Air Force Recruit Services at
>Randolph Air Force Base in San Antonio, said the branch actually is
>slashing accessions from 34,080 this year to 24,000 next year.
>    "There are people right now that want to join that we can't
>accommodate," Mr. Castillo said.
>    ?The Navy will meet its marker of 39,700 enlisted recruits, as it
>has for every year in recent memory, except 1998. The branch might miss
>the goal for 11,000 new naval reservists, partly because active duty
>retention rates are so high the pool of available recruits is shrinking
>for certain skills. "
>
>As indicated by the Navy reserve, goals for reserve and guard units are
>not being met, but this is partly because so many active duty personnel
>are re-enlisting and are therefore not available for reserve or guard recruitment.
>
>Mike Lorrey
>Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
>"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
>It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806)
>Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>____________________________________________________
>Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 16:08:25 2005
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:08:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Countdown to a Meltdown (Part 1)
Message-ID: <20050706160826.66885.qmail@web60021.mail.yahoo.com>

Extropes,

I found this piece interesting.  So I'm forwarding it
for your consideration.

Best, Jeff Davis

   "Everything's hard till you know how to do it."
                           Ray Charles

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

COUNTDOWN TO A MELTDOWN 
BY JAMES FALLOWS

Part 1
 
America's coming economic crisis. A look back from the
election of 2016
 
January 20, 2016, Master Strategy Memo
 
Subject: The Coming Year?and Beyond
 
Sir: 
. . . . . 
It is time to think carefully about the next year. Our
position is uniquely promising?and uniquely difficult.

The promise lies in the fact that you are going to win
the election. Nothing is guaranteed in politics, but 
based on everything we know, and barring an act of God
or a disastrous error on our side, one year from 
today you will be sworn in as the forty-sixth
president of the United States. And you will be the
first 
president since before the Civil War to come from
neither the Republican nor the Democratic Party.1 This
is 
one aspect of your electoral advantage right now:
having created our new party, you are already assured
of its 
nomination, whereas the candidates from the two legacy
parties are still carving themselves up in their 
primaries.2
 
The difficulty, too, lies in the fact that you are
going to win. The same circumstances that are bringing
an end 
to 164 years of two-party rule have brought tremendous
hardship to the country. This will be the first time 
since Franklin Roosevelt took office in 1933 that so
much is demanded so quickly from a new 
administration. Our challenge is not just to win the
election but to win in a way that gives us a chance to

address economic failures that have been fifty years
in the making.
 
That is the purpose of this memo: to provide the
economic background for the larger themes in our 
campaign. Although economic changes will be items one
through ten on your urgent "to do" list a year from 
now, this is not the place to talk about them in
detail. There will be plenty of time for that later,
with the 
policy guys. Instead I want to speak here not just as
your campaign manager but on the basis of our 
friendship and shared efforts these past twenty years.
Being completely honest about the country's problems 
might not be necessary during the campaign?sounding
pessimistic in speeches would hurt us. But we 
ourselves need to be clear about the challenge we
face. Unless we understand how we got here, we won't
be 
able to find the way out once you are in office. 

Politics is about stories?the personal story of how a
leader was shaped, the national story of how America's

long saga has led to today's dramas. Your personal
story needs no work at all. Dwight Eisenhower was the 
last president to enter office with a worldwide image
of competence, though obviously his achievements 
were military rather than technological. But we have
work to do on the national story.
 
When it comes to the old parties, the story boils down
to this: the Democrats can't win, and the Republicans 
can't govern. Okay, that's an overstatement; but the
more nuanced version is nearly as discouraging. 
 
The past fifty years have shown that the Democrats
can't win the presidency except when everything goes 
their way. Only three Democrats have reached the White
House since Lyndon Johnson decided to leave. In 
1976 they ran a pious-sounding candidate against the
political ghost of the disgraced Richard Nixon?and 
against his corporeal successor, Gerald Ford, the only
unelected incumbent in American history. In 1992 they 
ran their most talented campaigner since FDR, and even
Bill Clinton would have lost if Ross Perot had not 
stayed in the race and siphoned away votes from the
Republicans. And in 2008 they were unexpectedly saved 
by the death of Fidel Castro. This drained some of the
pro-Republican passion of South Florida's Cuban 
immigrants, and the disastrous governmental bungling
of the "Cuba Libre" influx that followed gave the 
Democrats their first win in Florida since 1996?along
with the election. But that Democratic administration 
could turn out to have been America's last. The
Electoral College map drawn up after the 2010 census 
removed votes from all the familiar blue states except
California, giving the Republicans a bigger head start

from the Sunbelt states and the South.
 
As for the Republicans, fifty years have shown they
can't govern without breaking the bank. Starting with 
Richard Nixon, every Republican president has left the
dollar lower, the federal budget deficit higher, the 
American trade position weaker, and the U.S.
manufacturing work force smaller than when he took
office. 
The story of the parties, then, is that the American
people mistrust the Republicans' economic record, and 
don't trust the Democrats enough to let them try to do
better. That is why?and it is the only reason 
why?they are giving us a chance. But we can move from
electoral to governmental success only with a clear 
understanding of why so much has gone so wrong with
the economy. Our internal polls show that nearly 90 
percent of the public thinks the economy is "on the
wrong track." Those readings should hold up, since
that's 
roughly the percentage of Americans whose income has
fallen in real terms in the past five years. 

The story we will tell them begins fifteen years ago,3
and it has three chapters. For public use we'll refer
to 
them by the names of the respective administrations.
But for our own purposes it will be clearer to think
of 
the chapter titles as "Cocking the Gun," "Pulling the
Trigger," and "Bleeding."

1. COCKING THE GUN 

Everything changed in 2001. But it didn't all change
on September 11. 
Yes, the ramifications of 9/11 will be with us for
decades, much as the aftereffects of Pearl Harbor 
explain the presence of thousands of U.S. troops in
Asia seventy-five years later. Before 2001 about 
12,000 American troops were stationed in the Middle
East?most of them in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Since 
2003 we have never had fewer than 100,000 troops in
CENTCOM's theater, most of them on active 
anti-insurgency duty. The locale of the most intense
fighting keeps changing?first Afghanistan and Iraq, 
then Pakistan and Egypt, now Saudi Arabia and the
frontier between Turkey and the Republic of 
Kurdistan?but the commitment goes on.
 
Before there was 9/11, however, there was June 7,
2001. For our purposes modern economic history began 
that day.

On June 7 President George W. Bush celebrated his
first big legislative victory. Only two weeks earlier
his 
new administration had suffered a terrible political
blow, when a Republican senator left the party and
gave 
Democrats a one-vote majority in the Senate. But the
administration was nevertheless able to persuade a 
dozen Democratic senators to vote its way and
authorize a tax cut that would decrease federal tax
revenues 
by some $1.35 trillion between then and 2010.
 
This was presented at the time as a way to avoid the
"problem" of paying down the federal debt too fast. 
According to the administration's forecasts, the
government was on the way to running up $5.6 trillion
in 
surpluses over the coming decade. The entire federal
debt accumulated between the nation's founding and 
 
2001 totaled only about $3.2 trillion?and for
technical reasons at most $2 trillion of that total
could be paid 
off within the next decade.4 Therefore some $3.6
trillion in "unusable" surplus?or about $12,000 for
every 
American?was likely to pile up in the Treasury. The
administration proposed to give slightly less than
half 
of that back through tax cuts, saving the rest for
Social Security and other obligations.
 
Congress agreed, and it was this achievement that the
president celebrated at the White House signing 
ceremony on June 7. "We recognize loud and clear the
surplus is not the government's money," Bush said at 
the time. "The surplus is the people's money, and we
ought to trust them with their own money." 
If the president or anyone else at that ceremony had
had perfect foresight, he would have seen that no 
surpluses of any sort would materialize, either for
the government to hoard or for taxpayers to get back.
(A 
year later the budget would show a deficit of $158
billion; a year after that $378 billion.) By the end
of 
Bush's second term the federal debt, rather than
having nearly disappeared, as he expected, had
tripled. If 
those in the crowd had had that kind of foresight,
they would have called their brokers the next day to
unload 
all their stock holdings. A few hours after Bush
signed the tax-cut bill, the Dow Jones industrial
average 
closed at 11,090, a level it has never reached again.5


In a way it doesn't matter what the national
government intended, or why all forecasts proved so
wrong. 
Through the rest of his presidency Bush contended that
the reason was 9/11?that it had changed the budget 
as it changed everything else. It forced the
government to spend more, for war and for homeland
security, 
even as the economic dislocation it caused meant the
government could collect less. Most people outside the

administration considered this explanation misleading,
or at least incomplete. For instance, as Bush began
his 
second term the nonpartisan Congressional Budget
Office said that the biggest reason for growing
deficits 
was the tax cuts.6 

But here is what really mattered about that June day
in 2001: from that point on the U.S. government had
less 
money to work with than it had under the previous
eight presidents. Through four decades and through 
administrations as diverse as Lyndon Johnson's and
Ronald Reagan's, federal tax revenue had stayed within
a 
fairly narrow band. The tax cuts of 2001 pushed it out
of that safety zone, reducing it to its lowest level
as a 
share of the economy in the modern era.7 And as we
will see, these cuts?the first of three rounds8?did so

just when the country's commitments and obligations
had begun to grow. 

As late as 2008 the trend could have been altered,
though the cuts of 2003 and 2005 had made things
worse. 
But in the late summer of 2008 Senate Republicans once
again demonstrated their mastery of the basic feints 
and dodges of politics. The tax cuts enacted during
Bush's first term were in theory "temporary," and set
to 
expire starting in 2010. But Congress didn't have to
wait until 2010 to decide whether to make them 
permanent, so of course the Republican majority
scheduled the vote at the most awkward moment possible

for the Democrats: on the eve of a close presidential
election. The Democratic senators understood their 
dilemma. Either they voted for the tax cuts and looked
like hypocrites for all their past complaints, or they

voted against them and invited an onslaught of "tax
and spend" attack ads in the campaign. Enough 
Democrats made the "smart" choice. They held their
seats in the election, and the party took back the 
presidency. But they also locked in the tax cuts,
which was step one in cocking the gun.9 
 
The explanation of steps two and three is much
quicker: People kept living 
longer, and they kept saving less. Increased longevity
is a tremendous human 
achievement but a fiscal challenge?as in any household
where people outlive (May 2005) 
their savings. Late in 2003 Congress dramatically
escalated the fiscal problem 
by adding prescription-drug coverage to Medicare, with
barely any discussion 
of its long-term cost. David M. Walker, the
government's comptroller general 
at the time, said that the action was part of "the
most reckless fiscal year in the 
history of the Republic," because that vote and a few
other changes added roughly $13 trillion to the 
government's long-term commitments.
 
>From the archives: The evaporation of personal savings
was marveled at by all economists but 
explained by few. Americans saved about eight percent
of their disposable 
income through the 1950s and 1960s, slightly more in
the 1970s and 1980s, 
slightly less and then a lot less in the 1990s. At the
beginning of this century 
they were saving, on average, just about nothing.10 
  
The possible reasons for this failure to
save?credit-card debt? a false sense of personal
saving without 
wealth thanks to the real-estate bubble?11 stagnant
real earnings for much of 
the population??mattered less than the results. The
country needed money to 
run its government, and Americans themselves weren't
about to provide it. 
This is where the final, secret element of the
gun-cocking process came into 
play: the unspoken deal with China. 

The terms of the deal are obvious in retrospect. Even
at the time, economists discussed the arrangement 
endlessly in their journals. The oddity was that so
few politicians picked up on what they said. The heart
of 
the matter, as we now know, was this simple equation:
each time Congress raised benefits, reduced taxes, or 
encouraged more borrowing by consumers, it shifted
part of the U.S. manufacturing base to China. 
Of course this shift had something to do with "unfair"
trade, undereducated American workers, dirt-cheap 
Chinese sweatshops, and all the other things that
American politicians chose to yammer about. But the 
"jobless recovery" of the early 2000s and the "jobless
collapse" at the end of the decade could never have 
occurred without the strange intersection of American
and Chinese (plus Japanese and Korean) plans. The 
Chinese government was determined to keep the value of
its yuan as low as possible, thus making Chinese 
exports as attractive as possible, so that Chinese
factories could expand as quickly as possible, to
provide 
work for the tens of millions of people trooping every
year to Shanghai or Guangzhou to enter the labor 
force. To this end, Chinese banks sent their extra
dollars right back to the U.S. Treasury, in loans to
cover the 
U.S. budget deficit; if they hadn't, normal market
pressures would have driven up the yuan's value.12
This, in 
turn, would have made it harder for China to keep
creating jobs and easier for America to retain them.
But 
Americans would have had to tax themselves to cover
the deficit. 
 
This arrangement was called "Bretton Woods Two," after
the regime that kept 
the world economy afloat for twenty-five years after
World War II. The 
question economists debated was how long it could
last. One group said it 
could go on indefinitely, because it gave each
country's government what it 
really wanted (for China, booming exports and
therefore a less dissatisfied 
population; for America, the ability to spend more
while saving and taxing 
less). But by Bush's second term the warning signals
were getting louder. 
"This is starting to resemble a pyramid scheme," the
Financial Times warned 
early in 2005.13 The danger was that the system was
fundamentally unstable. 
Almost overnight it could go from working well to
collapsing. If any one of the Asian countries piling
up 
dollars (and most were doing so) began to suspect that
any other was about to unload them, all the countries 
would have an incentive to sell dollars as fast as
possible, before they got stuck with worthless
currency. 
Economists in the "soft landing" camp said that
adjustments would be gradual, and that Chinese
self-interest 
would prevent a panic. The "hard landing" camp?well,
we know all too well what they were concerned 
about. 

2. PULLING THE TRIGGER
 
But by dying when he did, at eighty-two, and becoming
the "October surprise" of the 2008 campaign, 
Castro got revenge on the Republicans who had for
years supported the Cuban trade embargo. 
Better yet, he got revenge on his original enemies,
the Democrats, too.14 Castro couldn't have 
planned it, but his disappearance was the
beginning?the first puff of wind, the trigger?of the
catastrophe 
that followed.
 
Or perhaps we should call it the first domino to fall,
because what then happened had a kind of geometric 
inevitability. The next domino was a thousand miles
across the Caribbean, in Venezuela. Hugo Chavez, 
originally elected as a crusading left-winger, was by
then well into his role as an outright military
dictator. 
For years our diplomats had grumbled that Chavez was
"Castro with oil," but after the real Castro's death
the 
comparison had new meaning. A right-wing militia of
disgruntled Venezuelans, emboldened by the news 
that Castro was gone, attempted a coup at the
beginning of 2009, shortly after the U.S. elections.
Chavez 
captured the ringleaders, worked them over, and then
broadcast their possibly false "confession" that they 
had been sponsored by the CIA. That led to Chavez's
"declaration of economic war" against the United 
States, which in practice meant temporarily closing
the gigantic Amuay refinery, the source of one eighth
of 
all the gasoline used on American roads?and reopening
it two months later with a pledge to send no 
products to American ports. 
 
That was when the fourth?and worst?world oil shock
started.15 For at least 
five years economists and oilmen alike had warned that
there was no "give" in 
the world oil market. In the early 2000s China's
consumption was growing five 
times as fast as America's?and America was no slouch.
(The main difference 
was that China, like India, was importing oil mainly
for its factories, whereas 
the United States was doing so mainly for its big
cars.16) Even a temporary 
disruption in the flow could cause major dislocations.
 
All the earlier oil shocks had meant short-term
disruptions in supply (that's 
why they were "shocks"), but this time the long term
was also in question. Geologists had argued about 
"peaking" predictions for years, but the concept was
on everyone's lips by 2009.17 
The Democrats had spent George Bush's second term
preparing for everything except what was about to hit 
them. Our forty-fourth president seemed actually to
welcome being universally known as "the Preacher," a 
nickname like "Ike" or "Honest Abe." It was a sign of
how much emphasis he'd put on earnestly talking about 
faith, family, and firearms to voters in the
heartland, in his effort to help the Democrats close
the "values 
gap." But he had no idea what to do (to be fair, the
man he beat, "the Veep," would not have known either) 
when the spot price of oil rose by 40 percent in the
week after the Chavez declaration?and then everything 
else went wrong.
 
Anyone who needed further proof that God is a
Republican would have found it in 2009. When the price
of 
oil went up, the run on the dollar began. "Fixed
exchange rates with heavy intervention?in essence,
Bretton 
Woods Two] have enormous capacity to create an
illusory sense of stability that could be shattered
very 
quickly," Lawrence Summers had warned in 2004. "That
is the lesson of Britain in 1992, of Mexico in 1994, 
of emerging Asia in 1997, of Russia in 1998, and of
Brazil in 1998." And of the United States in 2009. It 
didn't help that Hugo Chavez had struck his notorious
then-secret deal with the Chinese: preferential future

contracts for his oil, which China needed, in return
for China's backing out of Bretton Woods Two, which 
Chavez wanted. 

There had been hints of how the falling dominoes would
look as early as January of 2005. In remarks made 
at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Fan
Gang, the director of China's nongovernmental 
National Economic Research Institute, said that "the
U.S. dollar is no longer seen as a stable currency."18

This caused a quick flurry in the foreign-exchange
markets. It was to the real thing what the World Trade

Center car bomb in 1993 was to 9/11. 

When we read histories of the late 1920s, we practi-
cally want to scream, Stop! Don't buy all that 
stock on credit! Get out of the market before it's too
late! When we read histories of the dot-com 
boom in the late 1990s, we have the same agonizing
sense of not being able to save the victims 
from themselves: Don't take out that home-equity loan
to buy stocks at their peak! For God's sake, 
sell your Cisco shares when they hit 70, don't wait
till they're back at 10!
 
In retrospect, the ugly end is so obvious and
inevitable. Why didn't people see it at the time? The
same 
clearly applies to what happened in 2009. Economists
had laid out the sequence of causes and effects in a 
"hard landing," and it worked just as they said it
would. 

Once the run on the dollar started, everything seemed
to happen at once. Two days after the Venezuelan oil 
shock the dollar was down by 25 percent against the
yen and the yuan. Two weeks later it was down by 50 
percent. By the time trading "stabilized," one U.S.
dollar bought only 2.5 Chinese yuan?not eight, as it
had 
a year earlier.19 

NOTES:

1. The last one was Millard Fillmore, a Whig. We will
not emphasize this detail.
 
2. Also, though I never thought I'd say it, thank God
for the Electoral College. In only two states,
Michigan and Maine, are 
you polling above 50 percent of the total vote?in
Michigan because of the unemployment riots, in Maine
because that's what 
they're like. But you will probably have a strong
plurality in at least forty other states, yielding a
Reagan-scale electoral-vote 
"mandate." 

3. Nothing in history ever quite "begins." Did
America's problems with militant Islam begin in 2001?
Or twenty years earlier, 
when we funded the anti-Soviet mujahideen in
Afghanistan, who later turned their weapons against
us? Or sixty years before 
that, with the breakup of the Ottoman Empire after
World War I? Or during the Crusades? Similarly,
warning signs of today's 
economic problems were apparent in the mid-1960s. But
the big change started fifteen years ago, at the
beginning of this 
century.
 
4. The federal debt consists of bills, notes, and
bonds that come due at different periods?thirteen
weeks, five years, twenty 
years. The main way to retire debt is to pay off
holders on the due date. Only $2 trillion worth of
debt would have matured 
within a decade, so only that much could be paid off.
That is why the Bush administration's first budget
message said, 
"Indeed, the President's Budget pays down the debt so
aggressively that it runs into an unusual problem?its
annual 
surpluses begin to outstrip the amount of maturing
debt starting in 2007." 

5. In 2005 Ben White, of The Washington Post, noted
the coincidence of the Dow's peak and Bush's signing
of the tax-cut 
bill. 
 
6. Late in January of 2005 the CBO calculated that
policy changes during Bush's first term had increased
the upcoming year's 
deficit by $539 billion. Of that amount about 37
percent could be attributed to warfare, domestic
security, and other 
post-9/11 commitments; 48 percent resulted from the
tax cuts; and the rest came from other spending
increases. 

7. This CBO chart illustrates the pattern. The big
dive is the result of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. 
>From 1962 to 2002, when federal revenues were low they
were around 17.5 percent of GDP, and when they were
high they 
neared 20 percent. Once, they went even higher: to
20.8 percent in Clinton's last year, driven there by
higher tax rates and 
by capital-gains revenue from the bubble economy. The
2001 changes pushed tax receipts down toward 16
percent?the 
lowest level since 1959. 

8. In 2003 Congress approved a second round of tax
cuts. In 2005, after a fifty-fifty deadlock, the
Senate failed to enact a 
"pay as you go" provision, which would have required
the administration to offset any tax cuts or spending
increases by 
savings in the budget.
 
9. Through the early 2000s the Government
Accountability Office issued warnings about the
consequences of extending the 
tax cuts. This chart, from 2004, showed what would
happen to the budget if the tax cuts were locked in. 
Its main point was that the basic operating costs of
the federal government (interest payments, Social
Security, and 
Medicare and Medicaid?the unglamorous long-term
payments it is legally committed to make) were
growing, and the money 
to cover them was not. As the GAO had predicted, our
tax revenue in 2015 left only a small margin after
covering fixed 
costs. From that remainder comes the Pentagon, the
national parks, and everything else. Soon revenues
won't cover even 
the fixed costs.
 
10. "In the last year, the net national savings rate
of the United States has been between one and two
percent," the 
economist and then president of Harvard Lawrence
Summers said in 2004, a year before the rate hit its
nadir. "It represents 
the lowest net national savings rate in American
history and, I believe, that of any major nation."
Summers gave the speech 
five years after his appointment as Treasury secretary
and five years before his nomination as chairman of
the Federal 
Reserve Board. 

11. Robert Shiller, an economist at Yale, was ahead of
most other observers in predicting the collapse of the
tech-stock 
bubble of the 1990s and the personal-real-estate
bubble a decade later. In a paper for the National
Bureau of Economic 
Research, published in 2001, he and two colleagues
observed that the housing boom intensified the savings
collapse. Every 
time homeowners heard that a nearby house had sold for
an astronomical price, they felt richer, even if they
had no 
intention of selling for years. That made them more
likely to go out and spend their theoretical
"gains"?and not to bother 
saving, since their house was doing it for them. "The
estimated effect of housing market wealth on
consumption is significant 
and large," Shiller and his colleagues concluded. If
people felt rich, they spent that way. 

12. As background for the speechwriters, here is the
longer version of what was happening. 
In normal circumstances economic markets have a way of
dealing with families, companies, or countries that
chronically 
overspend. For families or companies that way is
bankruptcy. For countries it is a declining currency.
By normal economic 
measures the American public was significantly
overspending in the early 2000s. For every $100 worth
of products and 
services it consumed, it produced only about $95 worth
within our borders. The other $5 worth came from
overseas. 
Normally an imbalance like this would push the dollar
steadily down as foreigners with surplus dollars from
selling oil or cars 
or clothes in America traded them for euros, yuan, or
yen. As demand for dollars fell and their value
decreased, foreign 
goods would become more expensive; Americans wouldn't
be able to afford as many of them; and ultimately
Americans 
would be forced to live within the nation's means. 
That is in fact what happened in America's trade with
Europe?and to a large extent with the oil-producing
world. The euro 
skyrocketed in value against the dollar, and oil
prices?which until the crisis of 2009 were fixed in
dollars?went up too, 
which preserved Saudi and Kuwaiti buying power for
European goods. 
It didn't work this way with China. Americans bought
and bought Chinese goods, and Chinese banks piled up
dollars?but 
didn't trade them back for yuan. Instead China's
central bank kept the yuan-to-dollar exchange rate
constant and used the 
dollars to buy U.S. Treasury notes. That is, they
covered the federal budget deficit. (Since Americans,
on average, were 
saving nothing, they couldn't cover it themselves.) To
a lesser extent Korean and Japanese banks did the same
thing. 
This was different from the situation in the 1980s and
1990s, when foreigners earned dollars from their
exports and used 
those dollars to buy American companies, real estate,
and stock. In those days foreigners invested heavily
in America 
because the payoff was so much greater than what they
could get in Frankfurt or Tokyo. In an influential
paper published in 
2004 the economists Nouriel Roubini, of New York
University, and Brad Setser, of Oxford University,
demonstrated that this 
was no longer the case. Increasingly it was not
individuals or corporations but foreign governments?in
particular, 
state-controlled banks in Asia?that were sending money
to America. And America was using it to finance the
federal budget 
deficit. 

13. The paper used this chart to show how foreign
money was supporting U.S. 
spending. 

14. We now know from the memoirs of his eldest son,
Fidelito, that Castro never 
moderated his bitter view of the Kennedy brothers?Jack
for authorizing the Bay 
of Pigs invasion, Bobby for encouraging the CIA to
assassinate Castro?and, by 
extension, their Democratic Party. Castro told his
children that if the United 
States and Cuba ever reconciled, he dreamed of doing
two things: throwing an 
opening-day pitch at Yankee Stadium, and addressing a
Republican convention in 
prime time. (From Mi Papa: The Castro I Knew, Las
Vegas: HarperCollins, 2009.)
 
15. The first one, starting in 1973, transformed the
world more than most wars 
do. It empowered OPEC; enriched much of the Middle
East; brought on five years 
of inflation, slow growth, and stock-market stagnation
in the United States; 
pushed Japan toward a radically more energy-efficient
industry; and more. The 
second, after the Iranian revolution of 1979, caused
the inflation that helped 
drive Jimmy Carter from office, and spilled over into
the recession of Ronald 
Reagan's first two years. The third, after Iraq's 1990
invasion of Kuwait, 
disrupted world trade enough to lay the groundwork for
Bill Clinton's "It's the 
economy, stupid" attack against George H.W. Bush. And
seven years after the 
shock of 2009 began, we are still feeling its effects.


16. After the first oil shock U.S. oil consumption
actually fell in absolute terms. In 1973, as the first
shock began, Americans 
consumed 35 "quads," or quadrillion BTUs, of oil. Ten
years later, with a larger population and a stronger
economy, they 
consumed only 30. But from that point on total
consumption moved back up. In 2003 Americans consumed
39 quads?and 
two thirds of that oil was for transportation.
Consumption for most other purposes, notably heating
and power generation, 
actually went down, thanks to more-efficient systems.
Industrial consumption was flat. So bigger cars and
longer commutes 
did make the difference.
 
17. Every oil field follows a pattern of production:
Its output rate starts slow and keeps getting faster
until about half the oil 
has been pumped from the field. Then the rate steadily
declines until the other half of the oil is gone.
Since total world 
production is the aggregate of thousands of fields, it
is presumed to follow a similar pattern. In 2005 the
research and 
engineering firm SAIC released a report commissioned
by the U.S. government on best guesses about the
worldwide peak 
and what would happen when it came. "No one knows with
certainty when world oil production will reach a
peak," the report 
said, "but geologists have no doubt that it will
happen." Of the twelve experts surveyed for the
report, six predicted that the 
peak would have occurred before 2010, and three more
that it would happen by 2020. 

The world was not going to "run out" of oil?at least
not immediately. Even at the peak, by definition, as
much as had ever 
been pumped in history was still there to be
extracted. But the rate of production, barrels per day
and per year, would 
steadily lessen while the rate of demand kept
increasing. The report was released when oil crossed
$50 a barrel; we are long 
into the era of oil at 30 euros, or $90.

18. That turned out to be the next-to-last convening
of the Davos conference, before the unproven but
damaging 
accusations that it was a front for the A. Q. Khan
combine. 

19. What happened to America almost exactly repeated
what had happened ten years earlier to Thailand,
Indonesia, and 
other countries during the Asian panic of 1997-1998.
South Korea lost 50 percent of the value of its
currency in two months; 
Indonesia lost 80 percent over the course of a year.
As in America, the collapse of each currency led to
equally deep 
stock-market declines. The Asian crash also turned
into a foreign-policy nightmare for the United States,
with Prime Minister 
Mahathir of Malaysia leading the denunciation of
U.S.-based financiers, including the "moron" George
Soros, for the 
"criminal" speculations that destroyed the economies
of smaller nations like his. Since Malaysia and
Indonesia are largely 
Muslim, and the financiers could be cast as part of
the great shadowy U.S.-Zionist cabal, the crash
worsened U.S. relations 
with the Islamic world. 



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 16:11:17 2005
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:11:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Countdown to a Meltdown (Part 2)
Message-ID: <20050706161117.53566.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com>

COUNTDOWN TO A MELTDOWN 
BY JAMES FALLOWS

Part 2

As the dollar headed down, assets denominated in
dollars suddenly looked like losers. Most Americans
had 
no choice but to stay in the dollar economy (their
houses were priced in dollars, as were their savings
and 
their paychecks), but those who had a choice unloaded
their dollar holdings fast.20 The people with choices 
were the very richest Americans, and foreigners of
every sort. The two kinds of assets they least wanted
to 
hold were shares in U.S.-based companies, since the
plummeting dollar would wipe out any conceivable 
market gains, and dollar-based bonds, including U.S.
Treasury debt. Thus we had twin, reinforcing panics: a

sudden decline in share prices plus a sudden selloff
of bonds and Treasury holdings. The T-note selloff 
forced interest rates up, which forced stock prices
further down, and the race to the bottom was on. 
Because interest rates had been so low for so long,
much of the public had forgotten how nasty life could
be 
when money all of a sudden got tight.21 Every part of
the cycle seemed to make every other part worse. 
Businesses scaled back their expansion or investment
plans, since borrowed money was more expensive. 
That meant fewer jobs. Mortgage rates went up, so
buyers who might have bid on a $400,000 house could 
now handle only $250,000. That pushed real-estate
values down; over time the $400,000 house became a 
$250,000 house. Credit-card rates were more onerous,
so consumers had to cut back their spending. Some 
did it voluntarily, others in compliance with the
Garnishee Amendments to the Bankruptcy Act of 2008. 
Businesses of every sort had higher fixed costs: for
energy, because of the oil-price spike; for imported 
components, because of the dollar's crash; for
everything else, because of ripple effects from those
changes 
and from higher interest rates. Those same businesses
had lower revenues, because of the squeeze on their 
customer base. Early in Bush's second term economists
had pointed out that the U.S. stock indexes were 
surprisingly weak considering how well U.S.
corporations had been doing.22 The fear of just these 
developments was why. 

Americans had lived through a similar
self-intensifying cycle before?but not since the late
1970s, when 
many of today's adults were not even born. Back in
those days the sequence of energy-price spike, dollar 
crash, interest-rate surge, business slowdown, and
stock-market loss had overwhelmed poor Jimmy 
Carter?he of the promise to give America "a government
as good as its people." This time it did the same to 
the Preacher, for all his talk about "a new Democratic
Party rooted in the oldest values of a free and
faithful 
country." When he went down, the future of his party
almost certainly went with him. 
The spate of mergers and acquisitions that started in
2010 was shocking at the time but looks inevitable in 
retrospect. When the CEOs of the three remaining U.S.
airlines had their notorious midnight meeting at the 
DFW Hilton, they knew they were breaking two dozen
antitrust laws and would be in financial and legal 
trouble if their nervy move failed. But it worked.
When they announced the new and combined AmFly 
Corporation, regulators were in no position to call
their bluff. At their joint press conference the CEOs
said, 
Accept our more efficient structure or we'll all
declare bankruptcy, and all at once. The efficiencies
meant 
half as many flights (for "fuel conservation") as had
been offered by the previously competing airlines, to
150 
fewer cities, with a third as many jobs (all
non-union).23 Democrats in Congress didn't like it,
nor did most 
editorialists, but the administration didn't really
have a choice. It could swallow the deal?or it could
get 
ready to take over the routes, the planes, the
payrolls, and the passenger complaints, not to mention
the 
decades of litigation. 

Toyota's acquisition of General Motors and Ford, in
2012, had a similar inevitability. Over the previous 
decade the two U.S. companies had lost money on every
car they sold. Such profit as they made was on 
SUVs, trucks, and Hummer-style big rigs. In 2008, just
before the oil shock, GM seemed to have struck gold 
with the Strykette?an adaptation of the Army's Stryker
vehicle, so famous from Iraq and Pakistan, whose 
marketing campaign attracted professional women. Then
the SUV market simply disappeared. With gasoline 
at $6 a gallon, the prime interest rate at 15 percent,
and the stock and housing markets in the toilet, no
one 
wanted what American car makers could sell.24 The weak
dollar, and their weak stock prices, made the 
companies a bargain for Toyota.25
 
For politicians every aspect of this cycle was a
problem: the job losses, the gasoline lines, the
bankruptcies, 
the hard-luck stories of lifetime savings vanishing as
the stock market headed down. But nothing matched 
the nightmare of foreclosures. 

For years regulators and financiers had worried about
the "over-leveraging" of the American housing market. 
As housing prices soared in coastal cities, people
behaved the way they had during the stock-market
run-up 
of the 1920s: they paid higher and higher prices; they
covered more and more of the purchase price with 
debt; more and more of that debt was on "floating
rate" terms?and everything was fine as long as prices 
stayed high and interest rates stayed low. 

When the market collapsed, Americans didn't behave the
way economic theory said they should.26 They 
behaved the way their predecessors in the Depression
had: they stayed in their houses, stopped paying their

mortgages, and waited for the banks to take the next
step. Through much of the Midwest this was a 
manageable problem: the housing market had gone less
berserk to begin with, and, as in the Great 
Depression, there was a longer-term, more personal
relationship between customers and financiers. But in
the 
fastest-growing markets?Orlando, Las Vegas, the
Carolina Research Triangle, northern Virginia?the
banks 
simply could not wait. The deal brokered at the White
House Security-in-Shelter Summit was ingenious: 
federal purchase of one million RVs and mobile homes,
many of them built at idle auto or truck factories; 
subsidies for families who agreed to leave foreclosed
homes without being evicted by marshals, such that 
they could buy RVs with no payments for five years;
and the use of land at decommissioned military bases 
for the new RV villages. But it did not erase the
blogcam live broadcasts of families being evicted, or
the 
jokes about the "Preachervilles" springing up at Camp
Lejeune, the former Fort Ord, and the Philadelphia 
naval shipyard. 

Here is how we know that a sitting president is going
to lose: he is seriously challenged in his own party's

primaries.27 So if the economic tailspin had left any
doubts about the prospects for the Preacher and his 
party, they were removed by the clamor to run against
him in the Democratic primaries of 2012. The party's 
biggest names were all there: the senators from New
York, Illinois, and Florida; the new governors of 
California and Pennsylvania; the mayor of New York,
when it looked as if the Olympic Games would still be 
held there that fall; and the actor who in his three
most recent films had captured Americans' idea of how
a 
president should look and sound, and who came closest
to stealing the nomination from the incumbent. 
He and the rest of them were probably lucky that their
campaigns fell short?not that any politician ever 
believes that. The Democratic nomination in 2012 was
obviously a poisoned chalice, but a politician can't 
help thinking that a poisoned chalice is better than
no chalice at all. The barrier none of them could have

overcome was the financial crisis of state and local
government.  

All that befell the federal budget during the collapse
of 2009-2012 happened to state and local governments, 
too, but more so. They had to spend more?on welfare,
Medicaid, jails, police officers?while taking in less.

One by one their normal sources of funding dried up.28
Revenues from the multi-state lottery and the 
FreedomBall drawings rose a bit. Unfortunately, the
surge of spending on casino gambling in forty-three 
states and on legalized prostitution in thirty-one
didn't benefit state and local governments, because
except in 
Nevada those activities were confined to Indian
reservations, and had only an indirect stimulative
effect. 
And many governors and mayors faced a reality the
president could avoid: they operated under
constitutions 
and charters that forbade deficit spending. So they
had no practical choice but to tighten the clamps at
both 
ends, cutting budgets and raising taxes. The process
had begun before the crash, as politicking in most
state 
capitols was dominated by "intractable" budget
disputes.29 When the downturn really hit, even
governors 
who had never heard of John Maynard Keynes sensed that
it was a bad idea to raise taxes on people who 
were being laid off and evicted. But they were obliged
by law to balance their budgets. All mayors and 
governors knew that it would be dicey to renege on
their basic commitments to education, public safety, 
public health, and public infrastructure. But even in
hindsight it is hard to know what else they could have

done. California did too much too fast in closing
sixty-three of its 110 community colleges30 and
imposing 
$9,500 annual "user fees" in place of the previous
nominal fees. Its solution to the financing crisis on
its 
high-end campuses was defter?especially the "Great
Pacific Partnership" between the University of 
California and Tsinghua University, in Beijing. This
was a win-win arrangement, in which the Chinese 
Ministry of Education took over the funding of the UC
Berkeley physics, computer-science, and biology 
laboratories, plus the genomics laboratory at UC San
Francisco, in exchange for a 51 percent share of all 
resulting patents. 

State and local governments across the country did
what they could. Fee-for-service became the norm?first

for "enrichment" programs in the schools, then to
underwrite teachers' salaries, then for emergency
police 
calls, then for inclusion in routine police and fire
patrols. First in Minnesota, soon after in Michigan,
New 
York, and Pennsylvania, there were awkward moments
when the governor, exercising his power as 
commander in chief of the state National Guard,
ordered the Guard's medical units to serve in
hospitals that 
had furloughed nurses and emergency-room doctors. The
Democratic president decided not to force the 
question of who had ultimate control over these
"citizen soldiers." This averted a showdown in the
short 
term, but became one more attack point for the
Republicans about weak and vacillating Democrats.
Cities 
within 150 miles of the Mexican border opened
police-service and trash-hauling contracts to
companies 
based in Mexico. The state of Georgia, extending a
practice it had begun in the early 2000s, said that it
would 
hire no new public school teachers except under the
"Partnership for Excellence" program, which brought in

cut-rate teachers from India.31 

The chaos in public services spelled the end for the
administration, and for the Democratic Party in the
long 
run. The Democrats couldn't defend the unions. They
couldn't defend pensioners. They couldn't even do 
much for their limousine liberals. The nation had
never been more in the mood for firm leadership. When
the 
"Desert Eagle" scored his astonishing coup in the
Saudi Arabian desert just before Christmas of 2011, 
America knew who its next leader would be. For a
four-star general to join his enlisted men in a
nighttime 
HALO32 special-operations assault was against all
established practice. The Eagle's determination to go 
ahead with the stunt revealed him to be essentially a
MacArthuresque ham. But the element of surprise was 
total, and the unit surrounded, captured, and gagged
Osama bin Laden before he was fully awake. 
The general's news conference the next day had the
largest live audience in history, breaking the record
set a 
few months earlier by the coronation of England's King
William V. The natural grace of this new American 
hero was like nothing the world had seen since Charles
Lindbergh landed in Paris. His politics were 
indistinct, but if anything, that was a plus. He was
strong on defense; urgent (without details) about
"fighting 
smart against our economic enemies"; and broadly
appealing on "values"?a devout Catholic who had 
brought the first openly gay commandos into a
front-line combat unit. ("When we were under fire, I
never 
asked who they loved, because I knew they loved our
flag.") Political pros had always assumed that 
America's first black president would be a Republican
and a soldier, and they were right. He just didn't
turn 
out to be Colin Powell. 

The only suspense in the election was how big the win
would be. By Labor Day it was clear that the 
Democrats might lose even the District of Columbia,
whose rich residents were resentful about their
ravaged 
stock portfolios, and whose poor residents had been
cut off from Medicaid, welfare, and schools. As the 
nation went, so went the District, and after
fifty-seven presidential elections the United States
had its first 
across-the-board electoral sweep.
  
3. BLEEDING 

The emergencies are over. As our current president
might put it, it's a war of attrition now. His 
administration hasn't made anything worse?and we have
to admit that early on his ease and 
confidence were like a balm. But he hasn't made
anything better, either. If not fully tired of him,
the 
public has grown as fatalistic about the Republicans'
ability to make any real difference as it already 
was about the Democrats'. The two-party system had
been in trouble for decades. It was rigid, polarizing,
and 
unrepresentative. The parties were pawns of special
interests. The one interest group they neglected was
the 
vast center of the American electorate, which kept
seeking split-the-difference policies. Eight years of
failure 
from two administrations have finally blown apart the
tired duopoly. The hopes of our nation are bleeding 
away along with our few remaining economic resources.
 
Here is the challenge: 

Our country no longer controls its economic
fundamentals. 
Compared with the America of the past, it has become
stagnant, classbound, and brutally unfair. 
Compared with the rest of the world, it is on the way
down. We think we are a great power?and our 
military is still ahead of China's. Everyone else
thinks that over the past twenty years we finally
pushed our 
luck too far. 

To deal with these problems once in office, we must
point out basic truths in the campaign. 
These truths involve the past sources of our growth:
savings, investment, education, innovation. We've 
thrown away every one of these advantages. What we
would do right now to have back the $1 trillion that 
Congress voted away in 2008 with the Freedom From
Death Tax Act!33 A relatively small share of that 
money might have kept our aerospace programs
competitive with Europe's34?to say nothing of
preparing us 
for advances in other forms of transportation. A
little more might have made our road and highway
system at 
least as good as China's.35 With what was left over,
our companies might have been able to compete with 
Germany's in producing the superfast, quiet, efficient
maglev trains that are now doing for travel what the
jet 
plane did in the 1950s. Even if we couldn't afford to
make the trains, with more money at least some of our 
states and regions might have been able to buy them,
instead of just looking enviously at what China,
India, 
and Iran have done.36 

Or we could have shored up our universities. True, the
big change came as early as 2002, in the wake of 
9/11, when tighter visa rules, whatever their effect
on reducing terrorism, cut off the flow of foreign
talent 
that American universities had channeled to American
ends.37 In the summer of 2007 China applied the 
name "twenty Harvards" to its ambition, announced in
the early 2000s, to build major research institutions 
that would attract international talent. It seemed
preposterous (too much political control, too great a 
language barrier), but no one is laughing now. The
Chinese mission to Mars, with astronauts from
Pakistan, 
Germany, and Korea, indicates the scope of China's
scientific ambition. And necessity has pushed China
into 
the lead in computerized translation technology, so
that foreign students can read Chinese characters. The

Historic Campus of our best-known university, Harvard,
is still prestigious worldwide. But its role is 
increasingly that of the theme park, like Oxford or
Heidelberg, while the most ambitious students compete 
for fellowships at the Har-Bai and Har-Bei campuses in
Mumbai and Beijing. These, of course, have become 
each other's main rivals?whether for scores on the
World Ingenuity Test or in the annual meeting of the 
teams they sponsor at the Rose Bowl. 

Or we could at last have begun to grapple with
health-care costs. We've managed to create the worst
of all 
worlds?what the Democrats call the "30-30 problem."
Thirty percent of our entire economy goes for health 
and medical costs,38 but 30 percent of our citizens
have no regular contact with the medical system.
(Except, 
of course, during quarantines in avian-flu season.)
For people who can afford them, the "tailored
therapies" 
of the past decade represent the biggest breakthrough
in medicine since antibiotics or anesthesia. The big 
killers?heart disease and cancers of the colon, lung,
breast, and prostate?are now manageable chronic 
diseases at worst, and the big moral issues involve
the question of whether Baby Boomers are living "too 
long." But the costs are astronomical, which raises
questions of both efficiency and justice. Google's 
embedded diagnostic technology dramatizes our problem:
based on nonstop biometric testing of the 
thirty-seven relevant enzymes and organ-output levels,
it pipes into cell-phone implants instructions for 
which treatment, pill, or action to take next. The
system is extremely popular?for the 10 million people
who 
can afford it. NetJet flights to the Bahamas for organ
replacement illustrate the point even more sharply, 
although here the breakthrough was less medical than
diplomatic. The World Trade Organization, after the 
most contentious proceeding in its history, ruled that
prohibiting commerce in human organs for transplant 
was an unjust trade barrier. The ruling may have
caused the final, fatal split in the Republican Party 
(libertarians were jubilant, religious conservatives
appalled), but it became the foundation of an
important 
Caribbean industry after threats of violence dissuaded
many transplant centers from operating within the 
United States. Meanwhile, despite the Strong
America-Strong Americans Act of 2009, which tied 
income-tax rates to body-mass index and cigarette
consumption, smoking and eating junk food have become 
for our underemployed class what swilling vodka was
for the dispossessed in Boris Yeltsin's Russia. 
All these issues involve money, and we can't avoid
talking about money in this campaign. But your ability
to 
address an even harder issue will largely determine
whether you can succeed in the job the voters are
about to 
give you. 

That problem is the sense of sunset, decline,
hopelessness. America has been so resilient as a
society because 
each American has imagined that the sky was the limit.
Obviously it was not for everyone, or always. From 
the beginning we've had a class system, and a
racial-caste system, and extended periods?the 1890s,
the 
1930s, the 1970s, the past few years?when many more
people than usual were struggling merely to survive. 
But the myth of equal opportunity has been closer to
reality here than in any other society, and the myth
itself 
has mattered.
 
My father, in explaining why it was so painful for him
to see a lifetime's savings melt away after the 
Venezuelan crisis, told me about a political speech he
remembered from his own youth. It was by Daniel 
Patrick Moynihan, a Harvard professor who later became
a politician. In the late 1960s, when American 
prosperity held despite bitter political turmoil,
Moynihan told left-wing students why preserving that 
prosperity should be important even to them. We know
Europe from its novels, Moynihan said: the old ones, 
by Austen and Dickens and Stendahl, and the more
recent ones, too. We know it as a static society.
Young 
people, seeking opportunity, have to wait for old
people to die. A whole life's prospects depend on the
size of 
an inheritance. People know their place. America,
Moynihan said fifty years ago, must never become a
place 
like that. 

That is the place we have become. Half this country's
households live on less than $50,000 a year. That 
sounds like a significant improvement from the $44,000
household median in 2003. But a year in private 
college now costs $83,000, a day in a hospital $1,350,
a year in a nursing home $150,000?and a gallon of 
gasoline $9. Thus we start off knowing that for half
our people there is no chance?none?of getting ahead 
of the game. And really, it's more like 80 percent of
the public that is priced out of a chance for future 
opportunity. We have made a perfect circle?perfect in
closing off options. There are fewer attractive jobs
to 
be had, even though the ones at the top, for
financiers or specialty doctors, are very attractive
indeed. And 
those who don't start out with advantages in getting
those jobs have less and less chance of moving up to 
them. 

Jobs in the middle of the skill-and-income
distribution have steadily vanished if any aspect of
them can be 
done more efficiently in China, India, or Vietnam. The
K-12 schools, the universities, the ambitious research

projects that could help the next generation qualify
for better jobs, have weakened or dried up.39 A
dynamic 
economy is always losing jobs. The problem with ours
is that we're no longer any good at creating new ones.

America is a less attractive place for new business
because it's a less attractive place, period.40 
In the past decade we've seen the telephone companies
disappear. Programming, data, entertainment, 
conversation?they all go over the Internet now.
Pharmaceuticals are no longer mass-produced but,
rather, 
tailored to each patient's genetic makeup. The big
airlines are all gone now, and much of publishing,
too. The 
new industries are the ones we want. When their
founders are deciding where to locate, though, they'll
see us 
as a country with a big market?and with an
undereducated work force, a rundown infrastructure,
and a 
shaky currency. They'll see England as it lost its
empire. They'll see Russia without the oil reserves, 
Brezhnev's Soviet Union without the repression.
They'll see the America that Daniel Patrick Moynihan 
feared. 

This story is now yours to tell, and later I'll turn
to notes for the stump speech. But remember that the
reality 
of the story reaches backward, and that is why I have
concentrated on the missed opportunities, the 
spendthrift recklessness, the warnings America heard
but tuned out. To tell it that way in public would of 
course only make things worse, and we can't afford the
recriminations or the further waste of time. The only 
chance for a new beginning is to make people believe
there actually is a chance.

NOTES:

20. Once the foreigners knew that the dollar had hit
bottom, they came back to buy shares at bargain
prices. But the 
currency run of 2009 showed the same pattern as the
tech-stock crash of 2000 and, indeed, the generalized
market panic of 
the 1930s: prices stayed depressed for years, because
investors who had suffered heavy losses were
understandably slow to 
return. 

21. Let's make up flash cards for the speechwriters,
so they are clear about the role of interest rates. 
When interest rates go up, these things go down:
stock-market prices, bond prices, housing prices,
overall economic growth 
rates, overall investment, overall job creation. 

The most important thing that goes up when interest
rates rise is the value of the dollar. We'll save the
cause and effect for 
our policy guys, but make sure the writers have these
points straight. 
For the speechwriters' benefit, let's spell this out
too: Why did the dollar panic raise interest rates?
Two related reasons. 
First, interest rates are ultimately set by supply and
demand. If the Treasury can't sell enough notes at
four percent to cover 
the deficit, it will keep raising the rate?to five,
six, ten percent?until it gets the money it needs.
Second, the main way a 
government can keep up the value of its currency is to
raise interest rates, hoping to attract investments
that would 
otherwise be made in yuan, euros, or yen.
 
22. In the spring of 2005, as stock averages slid week
by week, W. Bowman Cutter, a managing partner of the 
investment-banking firm Warburg Pincus, asked, "Why
are we not in a bull market now?" He said that if you
looked at the 
traditional measures of economic strength?high
corporate investment, rapid productivity improvements,
strong overall 
growth rates?"you would have to say that 2004 was the
best year of the past twenty." Interest rates at the
time were still 
very low. "If you transposed this to any other era in
history," Cutter said, "you would have a very strong
bull market. Why 
not now? Because the market is looking to the
long-term structural problems." If the market couldn't
go up when conditions 
were promising, it had no cushion when the crisis
began. 

23. Jobs in the airline industry had been plummeting
for years. In 2000 the eight largest carriers employed
432,000 people. 
Four years later a third of those jobs were gone. That
meant the loss of 136,000 mainly unionized, mainly
high-wage jobs, 
offset by a small increase in lower-paid jobs at
regional and discount airlines. 

24. U.S. auto companies and the U.S. auto-buying
public suffered in different ways from the "slowness"
of America's industry 
compared with Japan's, China's, and Korea's. It took
Detroit companies three years to shift production from
trucks and SUVs 
to hybrid cars; by that time the Asian brands owned
the market. Also, it took the American fleet as a
whole a surprisingly 
long time to change. The average car on America's
roads is nine years old, and in the course of a decade
only half of all cars 
are replaced. It takes a long time to work the older
gas-guzzlers out of the system.
 
25. The rising value of the euro and the troubled
state of the airline market might well have made
Boeing a similar target for 
the new Airbus-Mitsubishi consortium?but for the
Transformational Air Mobility Industrial Base Act of
2011, which converted 
Boeing's factories to national-defense production
facilities on a par with Navy shipyards.
 
26. Through the boom years speculators would borrow
the entire cost of a house. If they could "flip" it in
a year or two, the 
profit on the sale would offset the interest they'd
paid. But after mortgage rates "floated" up above 10
percent, the 
calculation changed. The house's value was heading
down, and the cost of covering the mortgage was
heading up. If the 
house were just another asset, the rational choice
would be to move out and give it back to the bank. But
houses aren't 
normal assets, and that's not what people did. 

27. The pattern goes back to the very beginning of the
modern primary system, after World War II, and it has
no exceptions. 
If an incumbent faces a serious, vote-getting rival
for his party's nomination, he goes on to lose the
White House. If not, he 
stays in.
 
28. State and local governments tax income, which was
falling; property, whose value was plummeting; and
retail sales, 
which were down as well. The blue states were somewhat
cushioned against the shocks in comparison with the
many red 
states that had declined to impose state income taxes.
Those states depended on property taxes, a
fast-disappearing 
revenue source. Also, since the Nixon years red and
blue states alike had relied on federal revenue
sharing. This was slashed 
as part of the Emergency Budget Act of 2012. 

29. In 2002 the Rockefeller Institute of Government
projected budget trends for the states through 2010,
and found that 
forty-four of them were headed for long-term deficits
like the ones plaguing the federal government. The
difference, again, is 
that many states were obliged to change their policies
to avoid the deficits. 

30. This accelerated a trend that had begun a decade
earlier in California. For instance, when the 2003
school year began, 
some 175,000 students could not find space in
community colleges?which, like K-12 public schools,
had previously offered 
enrollment to all eligible students.
 
31. Gwinnett County, near Atlanta, opened many school
administrators' eyes to this possibility in 2004, when
it brought in 
twenty-seven teachers from Hyderabad. In 2005 an
examination board in England outsourced the grading of
high-school 
achievement exams to workers in India. 

32. For "high-altitude, low-opening" parachute jump.
The jumpers leave the plane at 30,000 feet, free-fall
for nearly two 
minutes, and open their chutes at 1,000 feet, a few
seconds before impact. Because the airplanes are so
high, they cannot 
be seen or heard from the ground; and the jumpers
spend almost no time with their chutes visibly
deployed. 

33. In the spring of 2005 the Congressional Joint
Committee on Taxation estimated that ending the estate
tax would directly 
cut federal revenue by $72 billion in 2015. Other
groups calculated that the total impact on the budget,
including higher 
interest payments on a larger federal debt, would be
$100 billion a year, or $1 trillion over a decade. All
this tax relief flowed 
to the wealthiest one percent of Americans.
 
34. In 1990 the American aerospace industry employed
1,120,000 people. By 2004 that number had fallen by
nearly half, to 
593,000. During those same years the European
aerospace industry was growing in both sales and work
force. In 2003 
Airbus overtook Boeing in world market share for
commercial airliners.
 
35. In 2005 the American Society of Civil Engineers
released a "report card" on the state of America's
infrastructure?roads, 
dams, bridges, aviation, and so on. The overall grade
was D, with the highest mark being C+, for solid-waste
handling. 
According to the report, the most dramatic
underinvestment involved the nation's roads. Simply
maintaining the roads at the 
same level would cost $94 billion, the report said?or
half again as much as actual yearly investment levels.
Improving the 
roads would require about twice as much as the United
States was spending. 

36. In 2003 the city of Shanghai opened the world's
fastest maglev line, whose trains average 267 miles
per hour and arrive 
on schedule 99.7 percent of the time. An editor's note
in the Journal of the American Society of Civil
Engineers pointed out 
that half a dozen maglev proposals for American cities
were "stalled in one stage or another of planning,
permitting, or 
budgeting." The result, the journal's editor observed,
was this: "Traffic congestion on U.S. roads worsens,
energy prices 
fluctuate unpredictably, and, at least for the moment,
China pulls ahead of the United States on the path to
a safe, reliable, 
fast, and efficient means of transporting passengers."


37. Foreign enrollment in U.S. universities increased
steadily from 1971 through 2002. It fell the next
year, and has gone 
down ever since. 

38. It was under 8 percent in 1990 and under 12
percent in 2000. 

39. It's hard to remember or even to believe, but not
that long ago the school system was a valuable social
equalizer. More 
important, it was seen that way. Through the three
golden decades, from the late 1940s (when the GI Bill
kicked in) to the 
late 1970s (when Proposition 13 passed in California),
the federal government and the states put more money
than ever 
before into elementary schools, high schools, and
universities. More students than ever before finished
high school; more 
finished college; more felt they could go further than
their parents had. Proposition 13 was the California
ballot measure that 
cut property taxes by 30 percent and then capped their
future growth. It prefigured the federal tax cuts of
the early 2000s, 
because it pushed the level of revenue below its
historic "band." Before Proposition 13 California's
per capita spending on 
public schools was high, like Connecticut's or New
York's. Twenty years later it was well below the
national average, just 
ahead of Arkansas's.
 
40. In the early 2000s one third of American public
high school students failed to graduate on time. Niels
Christian Nielsen, a 
member of several corporate boards in Europe and the
United States, said at the University of California in
2005, "The big 
difference between Europe and America is the
proportion of people who come out of the system really
not being functional 
for any serious role. In Finland that is maybe two or
three percent. For Europe in general maybe fifteen or
twenty. For the 
United States at least thirty percent, maybe more. In
spite of all the press, Americans don't really get the
education 
difference. They generally still feel this is a
well-educated country and work force. They just don't
see how far the country is 
falling behind.



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Wed Jul  6 16:28:57 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:28:57 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Books available online - free
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e05070604081eb9f15c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ee50357e05070604081eb9f15c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070609282c364ee1@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/6/05, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> The Internet Public Library
> <http://ipl.sils.umich.edu/>
> maintains an index page of many sources of online books.
> ...

In addition to the good sources you mentioned, there have recently
been some new sci-fi novels released as free downloads. Below is the
text of one of my slashdot submissions which keeps on getting
rejected:

Two prominent science fiction authors have released their newest
novels as <a
href=http://www.thebookstandard.com/bookstandard/news/publisher/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000968186>free
downloads</a> (in addition to bookstore physical copies). The first is
<a href=http://craphound.com/someone/000363.html>Someone Comes to
Town, Someone Leaves Town</a>, by <a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cory_Doctorow>Cory Doctorow</a>.
This is an unconventional story about an entrepreneur (who happens to
be the child of a mountain and a washing machine) who gets involved in
a scheme to blanket Toronto with free wireless mesh network, among
other things.  The second is <a
href=http://www.accelerando.org/>Accelerando</a>, by <a
href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Stross>Charles Stross</a>,
which tells the tale of three generations of the Macx family
(beginning with perptually-slashdotted venture altruist Manfred Macx)
in the years leading up to and beyond a technological singularity. To
help provide more info on certain technical topics from Stross's
novel, I've started up a <a
href=http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Accelerando_Technical_Companion>Technical
Companion</a> on wikibooks.

Without html: Two prominent science fiction authors have released their newest
novels as free downloads (in addition to bookstore physical copies).
The first is Someone Comes to Town, Someone Leaves Town, by Cory
Doctorow. This is an unconventional story about an entrepreneur (who
happens to be the child of a mountain and a washing machine) who gets
involved in a scheme to blanket Toronto with free wireless mesh
network, among other things. The second is Accelerando, by Charles
Stross, which tells the tale of three generations of the Macx family
(beginning with perptually-slashdotted venture altruist Manfred Macx)
in the years leading up to and beyond a technological singularity. To
help provide more info on certain technical topics from Stross's
novel, I've started up a Technical Companion on wikibooks.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 16:52:30 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 09:52:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule,
	was: Re: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507061752300.28115@zeus>
Message-ID: <20050706165230.42900.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:

> 
> Hmm, it's sometimes difficult to follow this kind of news from 6,000
> miles
> away. Given that the media picture about this is uniformly negative,
> while
> the Army picture is instead quite positive, one cannot avoid the
> impression that everything is spinned this way or the other. Thanks
> for all the data.

See, this is the sort of bias I'm talking about. I've pretty much
proven my prior assertion, and the best you are willing to do is say
"everything is spinned this way or the other", as if that is somehow a
neutral appraisal that both sides are guilty. How does a soldier on the
street in Bagdad or the hills of Afghanistan spin his own opinion away
from the reality of his or her own experiences? That is just nonsensical.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From pgptag at gmail.com  Wed Jul  6 17:24:18 2005
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 19:24:18 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] South Korean firm plans hospital for stem cell
	therapy
Message-ID: <470a3c5205070610248a9b1d9@mail.gmail.com>

Yahoo News report<http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050705/sc_afp/healthskoreastem>that
a South Korea medical company said it plans to open the world's first
hospital exclusively providing treatment using stem cells obtained from 
umbilical cord blood.
Histostem Co. Ltd. <http://www.histostem.co.kr/english/english_1.htm> said 
it is close to a final agreement with an unnamed European investment company 
to set up the hospital in the southern resort island of Jeju in the first 
half of 2007. This will be the world's first hospital exclusively for 
umbilical cord blood stem-cell therapy.
In videotaped testimony screened at a press conference, several patients 
suffering from Buerger's disease, diabetes and liver cirrhosis said they had 
been improving remarkably following umbilical cord blood stem cell 
transplants.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050706/fbc12b20/attachment.html>

From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Wed Jul  6 17:30:41 2005
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 10:30:41 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Fwd: Countdown to a Meltdown (Part 1)
Message-ID: <1120671041.439@whirlwind.he.net>

Jeff Davis wrote:
> I found this piece interesting.  So I'm forwarding it
> for your consideration.


What is it supposed to be, badly crafted satire?  It is a nominal
prediction of the future based on caricatures, non sequiturs, and false
analogies.  There are a number of things looming, but it won't look like
this in play.


j. andrew rogers
 


From weg9mq at centralmail.zzn.com  Wed Jul  6 18:39:47 2005
From: weg9mq at centralmail.zzn.com (Edward Smith)
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 10:39:47 -0800
Subject: [extropy-chat] re: The Catalog Of Correctable Omnipresent Human
	Flaws
Message-ID: <A4E1C51DCBFD5174189CBEEF5B0C7143@weg9mq.centralmail.zzn.com>

"One step at a time, yo.  The human genome ain't the easiest learning
tool out there.  There's been tons of ongoing work just trying to
understand what all the various bits are."

That is why I said, in part 3 (Application), that research must be
conducted first, and that research should be the main focus of the
new mailing list and it's corresponding reference. I even named the
mailing list 'extropy-research'.


"A few
people have tried basic gene therapy on humans; unfortunately, we know
so little that the attempts killed people."

Gene therapy (which has caused cancer in humans) is the
genetic modification of grown beings, not the genetic
modification of zygotes, and what I am proposing is the genetic
modification of human zygotes. The modification of animal
zygotes (mostly experimental laboratory mice) has not caused
death, cancer, or any other problems, so that will be the case in
humans. In the rare cases that it may cause such problems, it is
only the death of a zygote and not the death of a grown being.


Get your Free E-mail at http://centralmail.cjb.net
___________________________________________________________
Get your own Web-based E-mail Service at http://www.zzn.com


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Wed Jul  6 17:58:56 2005
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 19:58:56 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule, was: Re: [extropy-chat]
	give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050706165230.42900.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050706165230.42900.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507061935440.17628@zeus>

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:
>
>> Hmm, it's sometimes difficult to follow this kind of news from 6,000
>> miles
>> away. Given that the media picture about this is uniformly negative,
>> while
>> the Army picture is instead quite positive, one cannot avoid the
>> impression that everything is spinned this way or the other. Thanks
>> for all the data.
>
>See, this is the sort of bias I'm talking about. I've pretty much
>proven my prior assertion, and the best you are willing to do is say
>"everything is spinned this way or the other", as if that is somehow a
>neutral appraisal that both sides are guilty. How does a soldier on the
>street in Bagdad or the hills of Afghanistan spin his own opinion away
>from the reality of his or her own experiences? That is just nonsensical.

My previous message was poor wording (sorry, English is still a second
language). The "spin you don't know if it can believed or not" refers to
when you don't have numbers and other data. You did a pretty good research
and now there are some numbers. A negative media influence at home is a
possible and reasonable cause. Different thinkers can anyway arrive at
different conclusions, because it's different to prove things like this
without doubts.

If one was to make a Wikipedia-style NPOV statement, the result would be
something like this:

== Begin wikipedia article fragment ==

While new recruitment for the Army have been lower than expected,
re-enlisting numbers are higher than Army goals (lots of numbers and
examples follow. References to actual Army releases are even better...).

A possible explanation is that potential soldiers are negatively impressed
by an overly-negative media coverage of the war, while instead soldiers
who have seen the war first-hand have a more positive view of the subject,
in a significant enough way to substantially change their opinion. This
would point to a bias in the media coverage of the war (see [[Media
coverage of the Iraq war]] for a detailed analysis of this topic).

Opponents of this view say instead that the reporting of the war is
accurate, and that the numbers can be justified by ....

== End wikipedia article fragment ==

Of course one can stop short of the last paragraph, that would instead be
written by someone who doesn't share the same interpretation of the data.
Or by the same author, regardless of his opinion, if he knows what people
holding the opposite view say. Of course, pointing out any errors in the
reasoning is fair game.

See, it's quite boring :-)

Alfio


From extropy at unreasonable.com  Wed Jul  6 17:58:42 2005
From: extropy at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 13:58:42 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule
In-Reply-To: <20050706153945.21407.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507061656020.28115@zeus>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20050706131225.0457a008@unreasonable.com>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>     ?The Navy will meet its marker of 39,700 enlisted recruits, as it
>has for every year in recent memory, except 1998. The branch might miss
>the goal for 11,000 new naval reservists, partly because active duty
>retention rates are so high the pool of available recruits is shrinking
>for certain skills.

One data point -- my sister just chose to leave the Navy. She is an 
Annapolis grad, trained on nuclear reactors, who has served on an Aegis 
cruiser and two aircraft carriers. I was surprised the Navy let her go, 
especially since she recently got her master's, paid by the Navy. (Usually 
paid degrees require an additional service commitment.) She told me that, 
to the contrary, the Navy encouraged her to leave.

I assume it's an issue of adjusting the active duty skill mix. And perhaps 
they want her skills in the reserves.

I hadn't heard about the Blue to Green program. It will be interesting to 
see how well it works out. Reminds me of Starship Troopers, Chapter 13 --

>A man can't buck for Sky Marshal unless he has commanded both a regiment 
>and a capital ship -- go through M. I. and take his lumps and then become 
>a Naval officer (I think little Birdie had that in mind), or first become 
>an astrogator-pilot and follow it with Camp Currie, etc.
>
>I'll listen respectfully to any man who has done both.

I wonder how that would work in practice. The Goldwater-Nichols requirement 
of joint operations duty is a step towards this, but doesn't ensure that 
the officer has all the skills expected of officers from other services.

We do have people talented and motivated enough for multiple bootcamps, 
e.g., M.D./J.D.'s, Navy Seals, astronaut after becoming doctor or test 
pilot, etc.


-- David Lubkin.



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 18:49:14 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 11:49:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <470a3c5205070610248a9b1d9@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050706184914.23765.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Observatories doing spectral analysis of post-Deep Impact ejecta show a
very strong presence of water, ethane, methanol, hydrogen cyanide,
acetylene, hydroxy, and carbon monoxide. The impactor apparently
vaporized only after penetrating deeply, raising impact site
temperatures to several thousand degrees.

The Spitzer space telescope will be observing Tempel until August 17th
to estimate a full assay of the material continuing to escape from the
crater created by the impactor. Preliminary info seems to confirm that
they will be very useful fuelling stations for future solar system
exploration and development.

In fact, hitching a ride on Tempel might be a really good way to send a
manned mission to Jupiter, as such a mission will have plenty of time
to refine cometary material to refuel their ship with once they've
rendezvoused with Tempel, fuel that will be very necessary to return to
Earth. Tempel currently has an orbital period of 5.5 years, a perhilion
of 1.5 AU, which is quite near Mars' orbit, and an aphelion that is
pretty near jupiter orbit.

This might be a good option for a successful mission to Mars: to
establish the infrastructure for a mission to Jupiter. An important
question: what future Tempel 1  perhilions bring it close to Mars
itself rather than just Mars orbit? Which such encounters bring it
closest to Jupiter?

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From kevin at kevinfreels.com  Wed Jul  6 19:47:29 2005
From: kevin at kevinfreels.com (kevinfreels.com)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 14:47:29 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Dead
References: <002c01c581e3$630ea2b0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <01c301c58263$8b829050$0100a8c0@kevin>

What is interesting is that they list people who died of non-cambat related
things such as disease, accidents, etc.
Has anyone done a comparison study of deaths with a control group similar to
the composition of the forces we have in the region?
Supposing we have 300,000 able bodies 18-40 yr olds over there. What are the
death rates compared to the same population here?

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Olga Bourlin" <fauxever at sprynet.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 11:30 PM
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Dead


> We talk about life and death and technology
>
> here ...
>
> .. and there and everywhere the dead:.
>
>
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/content/news/photos/war_casualties/map/m10000.html
>
> Olga
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 19:40:36 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <20050706184914.23765.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050706194036.38707.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Update: it appears that the next perhilion will bring it close to Mars
and will end up close to Jupiter the following aphelion. That is 5.5
years from now. We know we can get to Mars in 6 months (this is how
long Deep Impact took to get to Tempel). A well financed project could
send twin missions together: one to Mars, the other to Jupiter via
Tempel, if launched 5 years from now. The Jupiter mission could use its
Tempel fuel to reach Jupiter from Tempel's aphelion, and get back out
of that gravity well, then use a solar sail to brake its return to
Earth. 

Such a mission may be able to fuel up with more than they used to get
to Mars orbit, using XCORs flexible inflatable fuel tank technology.

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Observatories doing spectral analysis of post-Deep Impact ejecta show
> a
> very strong presence of water, ethane, methanol, hydrogen cyanide,
> acetylene, hydroxy, and carbon monoxide. The impactor apparently
> vaporized only after penetrating deeply, raising impact site
> temperatures to several thousand degrees.
> 
> The Spitzer space telescope will be observing Tempel until August
> 17th
> to estimate a full assay of the material continuing to escape from
> the
> crater created by the impactor. Preliminary info seems to confirm
> that
> they will be very useful fuelling stations for future solar system
> exploration and development.
> 
> In fact, hitching a ride on Tempel might be a really good way to send
> a
> manned mission to Jupiter, as such a mission will have plenty of time
> to refine cometary material to refuel their ship with once they've
> rendezvoused with Tempel, fuel that will be very necessary to return
> to
> Earth. Tempel currently has an orbital period of 5.5 years, a
> perhilion
> of 1.5 AU, which is quite near Mars' orbit, and an aphelion that is
> pretty near jupiter orbit.
> 
> This might be a good option for a successful mission to Mars: to
> establish the infrastructure for a mission to Jupiter. An important
> question: what future Tempel 1  perhilions bring it close to Mars
> itself rather than just Mars orbit? Which such encounters bring it
> closest to Jupiter?
> 
> Mike Lorrey
> Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
> Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
> 
> 
> 		
> ____________________________________________________
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
> http://auctions.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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. 
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail 


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Wed Jul  6 19:43:40 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:43:40 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Dead
In-Reply-To: <01c301c58263$8b829050$0100a8c0@kevin>
References: <002c01c581e3$630ea2b0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<01c301c58263$8b829050$0100a8c0@kevin>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070612437951e492@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/6/05, kevinfreels.com <kevin at kevinfreels.com> wrote:
> What is interesting is that they list people who died of non-cambat related
> things such as disease, accidents, etc.
> Has anyone done a comparison study of deaths with a control group similar to
> the composition of the forces we have in the region?
> Supposing we have 300,000 able bodies 18-40 yr olds over there. What are the
> death rates compared to the same population here?

Here's an interesting figure from businessweek:

(can't find original article)

http://www.businessweek.com//magazine/content/02_43/art02_43/a43tab11.gif

To quote one line from the table, in the period of 1993-1995 there
were 1.6 million active troops, 36 dead from terrorist attacks, 1714
from accidents, 0 from hostile action, 236 from homicide, and 718
self-inflicted.


From sjatkins at mac.com  Wed Jul  6 19:50:30 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 12:50:30 -0700
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule,
	was: Re: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050706141313.75223.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050706141313.75223.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E2377655-F953-437C-A52D-5859861CDE01@mac.com>

More likely explanation is that the stats are biased to attempt a  
lemming effect on others to re-enlist.  Unless you have been hiding  
in a very deep foxhole indeed it doesn't look like a very   
intelligent choice.  Of course the economy looks pretty poor outside  
the military and their may be other contributing factors.   I would  
want independent verification of such statistics at the very least.

- samantha

On Jul 6, 2005, at 7:13 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> http://www.military.com/NewsContent/ 
> 0,13319,FL_reenlist_070505,00.html?ESRC=dod.nl
>
> "Even though the Army appears likely to miss its goal of recruiting
> 80,000 new soldiers this year, it's ahead of the pace needed to reach
> its goal of convincing 64,162 soldiers, from privates to top  
> sergeants,
> to re-enlist by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.
>
> Through the end of May, 45,333 soldiers had re-enlisted, said Lt. Col.
> Pamela Hart, an Army spokeswoman at the Pentagon. That's 70 percent of
> the Army's full-year goal.
>
> Nearly 11,000 soldiers from the elite 18th Airborne Corps, which
> includes four of the Army's 10 active divisions, have "re-upped" this
> year. That's about 86 percent of the corps' full-year goal, said the
> corps commander, Maj. Gen. Virgil Packett.
>
> "The 18th Airborne Corps is carrying the Army right now in retention,"
> Packett said.
>
> And leading the corps is the 82nd Airborne, which has reached 97
> percent of its annual goal, even though it has deployed regularly to
> Iraq and Afghanistan. "
>
> First point:
> This is an interesting dichotomy: the soldiers who are actually on the
> ground and putting their lives at risk (and know what is really going
> on in Iraq and Afghanistan) are re-enlisting far above levels the Army
> was projecting, while recruitment of civilians (who only see what the
> media tells them) is not likely to meet goals.
>
> So, this seems to imply that the media is giving a biased and overly
> negative view of what is really going on at the battlefront (plus
> civilians are subject to a lot more negative propaganda they are more
> likely to give credence to than a war veteran would).
>
> Second Point:
> The large increase in re-enlistment will mean the Army will meet its
> manpower goals once again this year, i.e. no draft (sorry Samantha).
> Moreover, since the manpower will constitute more experienced  
> veterans,
> the average unit effectiveness will go up and training costs  
> (including
> accidents and rookies puting comrades at risk in combat) will go down.
>
>
> Mike Lorrey
> Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806)
> Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 20:18:04 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 13:18:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule,
	was: Re: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <E2377655-F953-437C-A52D-5859861CDE01@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050706201804.83716.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

This just doesn't wash, Samantha. Firstly, a unit that has 70-97%
retention has no need of a 'lemming effect'. Secondly, the guy on the
ground in Iraq should know better than a kid out of high school what
the trade offs are: he's older and more experienced in both work on the
outside as well as what is going on in Iraq. It should be easier for a
recruiter to snowjob a high school kid into enlisting than getting an
experienced trooper to re-up if things were so bad over there. The fact
that it is the reverse indicates things aren't so bad at all and kids
here are being lied to by the media.

If the civilian economy were a worse option, then high school kids
should be signing up more than previously, while experienced troopers
would be more likely to go civilian because they have more skills and
experience than a kid out of high school.

If the statistics were not accurate, I am positive that liberal
democrats (and particularly socialist rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)) on
the armed services committees would make the facts known and use it to
beat a drum of Bush lying.

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

> More likely explanation is that the stats are biased to attempt a  
> lemming effect on others to re-enlist.  Unless you have been hiding  
> in a very deep foxhole indeed it doesn't look like a very   
> intelligent choice.  Of course the economy looks pretty poor outside 
> the military and their may be other contributing factors.   I would  
> want independent verification of such statistics at the very least.
> 
> - samantha
> 
> On Jul 6, 2005, at 7:13 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > http://www.military.com/NewsContent/ 
> > 0,13319,FL_reenlist_070505,00.html?ESRC=dod.nl
> >
> > "Even though the Army appears likely to miss its goal of recruiting
> > 80,000 new soldiers this year, it's ahead of the pace needed to
> reach
> > its goal of convincing 64,162 soldiers, from privates to top  
> > sergeants,
> > to re-enlist by the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30.
> >
> > Through the end of May, 45,333 soldiers had re-enlisted, said Lt.
> Col.
> > Pamela Hart, an Army spokeswoman at the Pentagon. That's 70 percent
> of
> > the Army's full-year goal.
> >
> > Nearly 11,000 soldiers from the elite 18th Airborne Corps, which
> > includes four of the Army's 10 active divisions, have "re-upped"
> this
> > year. That's about 86 percent of the corps' full-year goal, said
> the
> > corps commander, Maj. Gen. Virgil Packett.
> >
> > "The 18th Airborne Corps is carrying the Army right now in
> retention,"
> > Packett said.
> >
> > And leading the corps is the 82nd Airborne, which has reached 97
> > percent of its annual goal, even though it has deployed regularly
> to
> > Iraq and Afghanistan. "
> >
> > First point:
> > This is an interesting dichotomy: the soldiers who are actually on
> the
> > ground and putting their lives at risk (and know what is really
> going
> > on in Iraq and Afghanistan) are re-enlisting far above levels the
> Army
> > was projecting, while recruitment of civilians (who only see what
> the
> > media tells them) is not likely to meet goals.
> >
> > So, this seems to imply that the media is giving a biased and
> overly
> > negative view of what is really going on at the battlefront (plus
> > civilians are subject to a lot more negative propaganda they are
> more
> > likely to give credence to than a war veteran would).
> >
> > Second Point:
> > The large increase in re-enlistment will mean the Army will meet
> its
> > manpower goals once again this year, i.e. no draft (sorry
> Samantha).
> > Moreover, since the manpower will constitute more experienced  
> > veterans,
> > the average unit effectiveness will go up and training costs  
> > (including
> > accidents and rookies puting comrades at risk in combat) will go
> down.
> >
> >
> > Mike Lorrey
> > Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> > "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> > It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
> >                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806)
> > Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
> > Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
> > http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 20:46:49 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 13:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] awesome photo
In-Reply-To: <20050706202729.49821.qmail@web51610.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050706204650.50989.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

http://charles.robinsontwins.org/photogal/pretty/tornado.jpg




__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050706/2cddf937/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 21:31:14 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 14:31:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
Message-ID: <20050706213114.43386.qmail@web34409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Pessimists act as a reality check, counteracting the predictions of cheerleading prognosticators who want to encourage others, even by being baselessly optimistic.
You can see where luddite cyberpunks are coming from, they have been told of the brave world of Tomorrow, and merely a cursory glance at humanity reveals there are generations, or even centuries, of resistance left to progress. And here we are naturally defining progress on our terms. If we can convince enough recalcitrants, then the future is more on our extropian/transhumanist terms than on someone else's. Win enough hearts & minds and we obstensibly own the future. This is a subtext, or the subtext to Luddite critiques of progress. Ludds are not merely criticizing what we want, they are criticizing us for wanting to 'control' the future, they are criticizing us not merely for 'playing God', but even for having the temerity to say we want, let alone deserve to exist beyond our original lifespans. When ludds say, "who do you think you are?", they mean that literally, they mean to say, "what even gives you the right to exist, and especially, what gives you the prerogative to strive
 for unlimited lifespans and in the process change the future to your specifications... and even 'own' the future?". They are playing for keepsies, they sense the future is up for grabs. And they are correct.
I'm no confirmed pessimist yet living where I live has given me a 360 degree panorama view of what is going on. I'm what most consider a fool, but fools go where futurists fear to tread. It's more complicated than even those as in the know-- as you are-- are aware of. I suspect we are communicating at cross purposes with our opponents concerning everything imaginable. 
 


__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050706/699ad7f9/attachment.html>

From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Wed Jul  6 21:45:44 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 14:45:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prion protein gene and long-term memory
Message-ID: <e88b73ce05070614452da769b6@mail.gmail.com>

Below are a couple of abstracts from articles recently mentioned in
this post by Carl Zimmer:

http://www.corante.com/loom/archives/2005/07/05/return_of_mad_cow_memories.php

The most interesting line (for me) was this one from the first
abstract: "Twenty-four hours after a word list learning task, carriers
of either the 129MM or the 129MV genotype recalled 17% more
information than 129VV carriers, whereas short-term memory was
unaffected."

=============
The prion gene is associated with human long-term memory
Andreas Papassotiropoulos, M. Axel Wollmer, Adriano Aguzzi, Christoph
Hock, Roger M. Nitsch, and Dominique J.-F. de Quervain

http://hmg.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/ddi228v1

Human cognitive processes are highly variable across individuals and
are influenced by both genetic and environmental factors. Whereas
genetic variations affect short-term memory in humans, it is unknown
whether genetic variability has also an impact on long-term memory.
Because prion-like conformational changes may be involved in the
induction of long-lasting synaptic plasticity, we examined the impact
of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the prion protein gene
(PRNP) on long-term memory in healthy young humans. SNPs in the
genomic region of PRNP were associated with better long-term memory
performance in two independent populations with different educational
background. Among the examined PRNP SNPs the common Met129Val
polymorphism yielded the highest effect size. Twenty-four hours after
a word list learning task, carriers of either the 129MM or the 129MV
genotype recalled 17% more information than 129VV carriers, whereas
short-term memory was unaffected. These results suggest a role for the
prion protein in the formation of long-term memory in humans.


===========
PRIONS AS ADAPTIVE CONDUITS OF MEMORY AND INHERITANCE
James Shorter & Susan Lindquist

http://www.nature.com/nrg/journal/v6/n6/abs/nrg1616_fs.html

Changes in protein conformation drive most biological processes, but
none have seized the imagination of scientists and the public alike as
have the self-replicating conformations of prions. Prions transmit
lethal neurodegenerative diseases by means of the food chain. However,
self-replicating protein conformations can also constitute molecular
memories that transmit genetic information. Here, we showcase
definitive evidence for the prion hypothesis and discuss examples in
which prion-encoded heritable information has been harnessed during
evolution to confer selective advantages. We then describe situations
in which prion-enciphered events might have essential roles in
long-term memory formation, transcriptional memory and genome-wide
expression patterns.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 21:50:45 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 14:50:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050706213114.43386.qmail@web34409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050706215046.94927.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Pessimists act as a reality check, counteracting the predictions of
> cheerleading prognosticators who want to encourage others, even by
> being baselessly optimistic.
> You can see where luddite cyberpunks are coming from, they have been
> told of the brave world of Tomorrow, and merely a cursory glance at
> humanity reveals there are generations, or even centuries, of
> resistance left to progress. And here we are naturally defining
> progress on our terms. If we can convince enough recalcitrants, then
> the future is more on our extropian/transhumanist terms than on
> someone else's. Win enough hearts & minds and we obstensibly own the
> future. This is a subtext, or the subtext to Luddite critiques of
> progress. Ludds are not merely criticizing what we want, they are
> criticizing us for wanting to 'control' the future, they are
> criticizing us not merely for 'playing God', but even for having the
> temerity to say we want, let alone deserve to exist beyond our
> original lifespans. 

Then they are confused, or you are. The only people who want to control
the future are luddites who want to legislate technology out of
existence. We want the future to happen as it should.

> When ludds say, "who do you think you are?", they
> mean that literally, they mean to say, "what even gives you the right
> to exist, and especially, what gives you the prerogative to strive
>  for unlimited lifespans and in the process change the future to your
> specifications... and even 'own' the future?". They are playing for
> keepsies, they sense the future is up for grabs. And they are
> correct.

Primarily because too many of us see the future as 'inevitable'.
Nothing is inevitable. China turned away from its great age of
exploration by one act of government. It would otherwise have dominated
the planet centuries ago. The Inca banned the wheel. The luddites can
and will choose a new dark age and the deaths of billions in order to
be right.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 21:58:51 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 14:58:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050706215046.94927.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050706215851.69302.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Nothing is inevitable. China turned away from its
> great age of
> exploration by one act of government. It would
> otherwise have dominated
> the planet centuries ago. The Inca banned the wheel.
> The luddites can
> and will choose a new dark age and the deaths of
> billions in order to
> be right.

And the true irony of it all is that the luddites are
willing to use all of the latest cutting edge
technologies to do so. If you don't believe me, look
at all the luddite blogs and such. They would burn
Prometheus at the stake with the fire he brought them.

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From sjatkins at mac.com  Wed Jul  6 22:08:46 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 15:08:46 -0700
Subject: Army re-enlistment ahead of schedule,
	was: Re: [extropy-chat] give a small window into the military mind
In-Reply-To: <20050706201804.83716.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050706201804.83716.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8EE93F21-1A6D-40D5-82CA-10427927E560@mac.com>


On Jul 6, 2005, at 1:18 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> This just doesn't wash, Samantha. Firstly, a unit that has 70-97%
> retention has no need of a 'lemming effect'.

It doesn't wash to question the source of a statistic and wait for  
confirmation from other sources before attempting much  
interpretation?  Since when?  Does the administration have a stake in  
persuading the troops that their buds are re-upping.  Of course they  
do.   That alone should call for caution.   How is my early guess  
less valid than your straight out claim that the media has been lying  
to us?   This is the same media that you yourself point out under  
report many things embarrassing to the State.   Doesn't that seem a  
tad out of balance and unjustified to you?


> Secondly, the guy on the
> ground in Iraq should know better than a kid out of high school what
> the trade offs are: he's older and more experienced in both work on  
> the
> outside as well as what is going on in Iraq. It should be easier for a
> recruiter to snowjob a high school kid into enlisting than getting an
> experienced trooper to re-up if things were so bad over there.

The stats on death and injury much less the hideous multi-level  
expense and our questionable reasons for being there don't paint a  
very rosy picture.   Therefore it seems reasonable to me to hold this  
stat somewhat in suspicion and requiring a bit more explanation than  
your apparent leap that things aren't so bad there and the morale is  
great.


> The fact
> that it is the reverse indicates things aren't so bad at all and kids
> here are being lied to by the media.

You cannot legitimately conclude any such thing at this point from  
this one stat.

>
> If the civilian economy were a worse option, then high school kids
> should be signing up more than previously, while experienced troopers
> would be more likely to go civilian because they have more skills and
> experience than a kid out of high school.
>

If they can actually get out.  There is apparently some trouble in  
doing so.

> If the statistics were not accurate, I am positive that liberal
> democrats (and particularly socialist rep. Bernie Sanders (I-VT)) on
> the armed services committees would make the facts known and use it to
> beat a drum of Bush lying.
>

It is early.  Wait and see.

- s


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Wed Jul  6 22:11:28 2005
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 00:11:28 +0200 (MEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <20050706194036.38707.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050706194036.38707.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507070006230.20984@zeus>

On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>A well financed project could
>send twin missions together: one to Mars, the other to Jupiter via
>Tempel, if launched 5 years from now.

Unfortunately, given ordinary space missions design, build and test times,
launching 5 years from now requires the project to start about next week.
The only possibility would be to re-use some previous, tested design and
make some replica, with only minor tweaks.

Alfio


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Wed Jul  6 23:35:23 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 16:35:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050706215851.69302.qmail@web60515.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050706233523.4925.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

you've got it right. they sure do. I feel embarrassed
even talking to them at all, feel like a pushy
creature from space who demands, "tell me what is
going on-- what is it you think, what do y'all want?"


> And the true irony of it all is that the luddites
> are
> willing to use all of the latest cutting edge
> technologies to do so. If you don't believe me, look
> at all the luddite blogs and such. They would burn
> Prometheus at the stake with the fire he brought
> them.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 01:10:56 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 18:10:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507070006230.20984@zeus>
Message-ID: <20050707011056.18494.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Alfio Puglisi <puglisi at arcetri.astro.it> wrote:

> On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >A well financed project could
> >send twin missions together: one to Mars, the other to Jupiter via
> >Tempel, if launched 5 years from now.
> 
> Unfortunately, given ordinary space missions design, build and test
> times, launching 5 years from now requires the project to start about
> next week. The only possibility would be to re-use some previous,
> tested design and make some replica, with only minor tweaks.

The Deep Impact mission was designed and built and launched in two
years, and that was a government project with all its paperwork and
bureaucracy.

But you are right, however Bigelow Aerospace has some excellent space
habitat modules http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/news.html and the
design for its "Nautilus Moon Cruiser" seems just the ticket. Bigelows
first hab module will be launching on SpaceX's Falcon 5 booster in
November. Their $50 million "Americas Space Prize" deadline is 2010,
which I'm betting Rutan will have won by 2007 or 2008.

If it turns out that a 2011 rendezvous cannot occur, it appears that
Tempel orbits in a 1:2 resonance with Jupiter, which has an 11.86 year
orbit. With Mars having a nearly 2 year orbit, it appears that using
Tempel as a bus for an orbital transfer can happen about every 12
years. That amount of time should allow for plenty of private space
development. Once Bigelow's orbital hotels are in operation in 2010, a
moon base is apparently their next step a few years later, which is all
the infrastructure needed to launch missions to Mars and Jupiter in
2023.

In the mean-time, a robotic mission following the same route aboard
Tempel in 2011 would be a good proof-of-concept without requiring as
much logistical support or risk to humans.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 02:11:51 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 19:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050706215046.94927.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707021151.84823.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I am confused when you write, "as it should". This is the dispute in a nutshell. They think they should be able to leave a 'reasonably natural' future to their descendents. I agree their future wouldn't even be natural to begin with, however their vision of patrimony is lodged in their minds like foundation stone. That is not much of an exaggeration. They want to whelp children, educate them, the children become affluent & have children themselves, the grandparents die off and the younger generations inherit estates used to educate those at the front of the line;
 it's self-perpetuating, so when you write, "We want the future to happen as it should", they agree with you...they merely have a wholly different notion of the future happening "as it should".


Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

>Then they are confused, or you are. The only people who want to control
>the future are luddites who want to legislate technology out of
>existence. We want the future to happen as it should.



		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050706/da9eeb10/attachment.html>

From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Thu Jul  7 02:21:45 2005
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 22:21:45 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050705181757.32738.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E30C156B-DC9B-4599-8BB8-8B2E1B5BF386@bonfireproductions.com>


And since spike made mention on Methusalah's age:

On Jul 5, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>  while the angels allegedly took Ezekiel
> for a galactic joyride.


I think you meant Enoch, and only in the Director's Cut.

=)


]3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050706/5a23d376/attachment.html>

From fauxever at sprynet.com  Thu Jul  7 02:59:22 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 19:59:22 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] The Dead
References: <002c01c581e3$630ea2b0$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<01c301c58263$8b829050$0100a8c0@kevin>
Message-ID: <004201c5829f$e0fc9df0$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "kevinfreels.com" <kevin at kevinfreels.com>

> Supposing we have 300,000 able bodies 18-40 yr olds over there. What are 
> the death rates compared to the same population here?

... when you tote this up, don't forget to add the dead Iraqis, as well.

Olga 




From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jul  7 03:22:34 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:22:34 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <20050707011056.18494.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200507070324.j673OfR24052@tick.javien.com>

> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey
> 
> ... it appears that using
> Tempel as a bus for an orbital transfer can happen about every 12
> years...
> 
> Mike Lorrey

When you say "using Tempel as a bus" it sounds like you are
somehow riding it, or it is providing something other than
propellant.  If you want to land on Tempel, you have already
provided the delta V to match its orbit.  In that case, you
would end up at its aphelion with or without the comet.  

It isn't clear to me why you would need the comet at all,
unless it is to fill your propellant tanks with 
whatever material available there, probably water, maybe
the methane.  Of course you will still need to come up
with a lot of energy to heat the propellant, which I
am assuming you would do via nuclear fission.  Is that
what you had in mind?

spike






From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jul  7 03:28:44 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:28:44 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <E30C156B-DC9B-4599-8BB8-8B2E1B5BF386@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <200507070330.j673UfR24737@tick.javien.com>

On Behalf Of Bret Kulakovich
Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments


And since spike made mention on Methusalah's age:

On Jul 5, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:


while the angels allegedly took Ezekiel
for a galactic joyride.


I think you meant Enoch, and only in the Director's Cut...




I assumed he meant that wheels within wheels thing
in Ezekiel chapter 1 verses 16 thru 20. 

spike



From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Jul  7 03:51:33 2005
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 20:51:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <200507070330.j673UfR24737@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <200507070353.j673raR27238@tick.javien.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-
> bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike
> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2005 8:29 PM
> To: 'ExI chat list'
> Subject: RE: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
> 
> On Behalf Of Bret Kulakovich
> Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
> 
> 
> And since spike made mention on Methusalah's age:
> 
> On Jul 5, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> 
> while the angels allegedly took Ezekiel
> for a galactic joyride.
> 
> 
> I think you meant Enoch, and only in the Director's Cut...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I assumed he meant that wheels within wheels thing
> in Ezekiel chapter 1 verses 16 thru 20.
> 
> spike


Or if he did mean Enoch, he was referring to Genesis
chapter 5 verse 24, whereunto it sayeth:  Enoch
"walked with God; then he was no more for God took him."

I suspect however that what actually happened 
is that Enoch walked, then he was no more, for 
two or three Philistine heatherns took him, and 
whacketh him with a baseball bat, wherefore to 
taketh away his myrrh.

spike







From amara at amara.com  Thu Jul  7 04:27:20 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 06:27:20 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
Message-ID: <p06210200bef25d628813@[150.146.134.133]>


Alfio
>Unfortunately, given ordinary space missions design, build and test
>times, launching 5 years from now requires the project to start about
>next week. The only possibility would be to re-use some previous, tested
>design and make some replica, with only minor tweaks.

yes, and often, _at least_ 5 yrs! Parts of the Deep Impact design
go back to CRAF (similar to Cassini's heritage) --> mid 80s-early 90s

CRAF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRAF

http://www.beltonspace.com/
Deep Impact: A Large-Scale Active Experiment on a Cometary Nucleus M.F.
A'Hearn, M.J.S. Belton, A. Delamere, and W.H. Blume.Paper accepted for
publication in Space Science Reviews in January 2005.

"The actual heritage of Deep Impact, came in part from an early,
unpublished, concept study led by M. Neugebauer (M.J.S. Belton,
personal communication) for JPL as part of the work for the Comet
Rendezvous Asteroid Flyby (CRAF) mission that was subsequently
cancelled. Although, in that study, a hypersonic impact was not
envisioned. Prior to the selection of Deep Impact by NASA, other
proposals for impact experiments had been rejected on technical
feasibility grounds or have failed.  Since the selection of Deep Impact
by NASA, there have been additional proposals to NASA's Discovery
Program for other types of impact experiments on asteroids."
[...]
"Deep Impact is the eighth mission in NASA's Discovery Program.  It
was proposed and accepted as a partnership between the University of
Maryland, which provides the scientific direction and manages the
science and the outreach, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, which manages
the project development and carries out the operations, and Ball
Aerospace and Technologies Corp., which provides the spacecraft and
instruments,other than some components that are provided by JPL. "

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

Usually the work for the "feasibility" (Phase A?) takes years, and
there's no guarantee for selection.

The Deep Impact mission was selected by NASA in 1999.

The Deep Impact 'construction' began in January 2000.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Discovery newsletter: "Discovery Dispatch" September 2000 Volume 1
Number 1

"As the second most recently selected  Discovery mission, Deep Impact
began  work in January 2000 and held System  Requirements and
Conceptual Design  Reviews in May.  The preliminary  spacecraft design
is progressing well, as  the team considers recommendations  made by
the review board and works to  close action items generated at the
review. A number of mission documents have been completed in draft
form."


www.astro.umd.edu/academics/ar00&01.pdf
University of Maryland Department of Astronomy College Park, Maryland
20742 S0002-75379322641-5 This report covers the period 1 October
1999 to 31 August 2001.

5.3.1 Deep Impact The Deep Impact project, a NASA Discovery program
mission under the direction of M. A'Hearn, continued its development.
The major step was completing the Preliminary Design Review and being
confirmed by NASA to proceed into the construction phases. This
mission will deliver a large, high-speed impactor to the nucleus of
comet 9P/ Tempel 1 and observe the results of the impact from the
flyby spacecraft and from Earth scheduled launch, July 2004,
encounter July 2005. Key scientific achievements during the current
year include determining the size of the nucleus using thermal
infrared observations from the Keck telescope effective radius 2.5
km, albedo 4%; effort led by Fernandez, UHawaii and reanalyzing
observations made with IRAS to determine the dust environment for
which shielding must be provided. The IRAS observations show that the
comet is like several other Jupiter-family comets in having a particle
size distribution with a much smaller ratio of small optical
wavelength sized dust to large 10 microns dnd larger dust than do
comets 1P/Halley and others known for their dust output effort led by
Lisse, UMD. See http:// deepimpact.umd.edu. McFadden, with support
from science team members and Gretchen Walker, addressed the number
and wavelengths of filters required to meet science objectives for the
Deep Impact mission, and offered an initial in-flight calibration plan
for the Earth flyby. McFadden hired the Education and Public Outreach
Team including: Stephanie McLaughlin, Gretchen Walker, Elizabeth
Warner, Kathleen Holmay, Gary Emerson and Maura Rountree-Brown. Work
continues on developing the EPO plan. Teacher workshops were developed
and presented at JPL. Research assistants Warner and McLaughlin spread
news about the mission and observing opportunities to amateur
astronomer gatherings including club meetings in Virginia and South
Carolina and star parties in Texas and Wyoming. Stephanie McLaughlin
started and manages the Small Telescope Science Program and continues
the analysis of data received from the program's participants. Since
March 2000, a network of about 40 amateur and professional astronomers
from around the world have been making groundbased, broad-band,
photometric CCD observations of comet 9P/Tempel 1, the target of the
Deep Impact mission. The network participants will continue to observe
the comet through January, 2001, after which they will monitor comets
for other space missions until Tempel 1 returns in 2004.

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

-- 

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


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 04:42:04 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 21:42:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707021151.84823.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707044204.80509.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com>



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I am confused when you write, "as it should". This
> is the dispute in a nutshell. They think they should
> be able to leave a 'reasonably natural' future to
> their descendents. 

This is a fault of theirs due to their narrow vision
and unreasoning fear. That they choose to think of
technology as "unnatural" speaks volumes. As a
biologist by profession and a naturalist at heart, I
don't see the relevant difference between a motorhome
and the shell of a hermit crab. Is there truly any
meaningful difference between a machine gun and a
tiger's claws or the venom of a spitting cobra? The
very Tao of life is to reconfigure the atoms of the
universe for survival advantage. That the reformed
atoms are incorporated into venom to be secreted by a
creature's body or into the robot another creature has
built in his garage is irrelevant, most especially to
those atoms themselves.
      All the destruction done to nature that is
decried by neo-luddites is not the result of
technology that is unnatural, it is instead the result
of a worldview in which humanity is somehow special
and separate from the nature in which we are imbedded.
That they adhere to this view, yet condemn the
physical manifestations of such artifical conceptual
boundaries is ludicrous. Yes machines can pollute the
environment and kill the fish, but they could also
terraform the whole earth in a tropical paradise. All
that matters is the purpose they are designed to do
fufill.
      That they somehow think that nature is this
precious delicate thing that requires their pathetic
stewardship is very disrespectful of the power and
majesty of nature. This is not to say that there is no
value to preservation of biodiversity but such should
be recognized and acknowledged for what it is:
humanocentricism masquerading as charity. What it
should be is a manifestation of mankind's
understanding that he is mutually interdependent on
the ecosystem in which he lives. If the neo-luddite
had had the misfortune of being born a milkweed plant,
his precious endangered monarch's offspring would
relish feasting upon him without mercy.
      The luddite's every argument is merely the
rationalization of the vague fear he feels in the pit
of his stomach. The fear of change. The fear that
technology will shatter his illusions of autonomy and
security. That he will somehow have to change his
lifestyle in order to survive. I have no pity for the
man foolish enough to want to earn a living by racing
NASCAR on foot.
   
   

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 04:55:44 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 21:55:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <200507070353.j673raR27238@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <20050707045544.96261.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com>



--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> 
> Or if he did mean Enoch, he was referring to Genesis
> chapter 5 verse 24, whereunto it sayeth:  Enoch
> "walked with God; then he was no more for God took
> him."
> 
> I suspect however that what actually happened 
> is that Enoch walked, then he was no more, for 
> two or three Philistine heatherns took him, and 
> whacketh him with a baseball bat, wherefore to 
> taketh away his myrrh.
> 
Nay. For though Enoch walked in the Alley of the
Shadow of Muggers it plainly states that he walked
with God. And God was parked nearby. They probably
went to Denny's. ;)


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 05:26:22 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2005 22:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707044204.80509.qmail@web60523.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707052622.47432.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Does it derive from subject-object dualism, e.g. "we
are in this world but not of this world"?



 >it is instead the result of a worldview in which
humanity is somehow >special and separate from the
nature in which we are imbedded.


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Thu Jul  7 07:59:12 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 00:59:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <20050707011056.18494.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0507070006230.20984@zeus>
	<20050707011056.18494.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce0507070059648f2d81@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/6/05, Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> But you are right, however Bigelow Aerospace has some excellent space
> habitat modules http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/news.html and the
> design for its "Nautilus Moon Cruiser" seems just the ticket. Bigelows
> first hab module will be launching on SpaceX's Falcon 5 booster in
> November. 

I think it used to be scheduled for November, but after some bumping
of schedules (partially due to launch range conflicts between SpaceX's
Falcon I and the Air Force's Titan IV), the first launch of the Falcon
V (carrying Bigelow's prototype hab module) is the second quarter of
2006:

http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=falcon&content=http%3A//www.spacex.com/falcon_overview.php
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=updates&content=http%3A//www.spacex.com/updates.php

I'm actually a little skeptical of even this launch date, as the first
launch of the Falcon I is late September. ~6 months seems like an
awfully short time to go from a rocket with one first-stage engine to
a rocket with five such engines. I would love to be pleasantly
surprised, though.

> Their $50 million "Americas Space Prize" deadline is 2010,
> which I'm betting Rutan will have won by 2007 or 2008.

I'm not so sure about that -- Rutan seems plenty busy with other
projects at the moment. I'd pin my money on SpaceX (which has already
announced their intention to compete for the ASP), or -maybe- a team
with SpaceX building the rocket and Rutan building a reentry vehicle
as payload.

> If it turns out that a 2011 rendezvous cannot occur, it appears that
> Tempel orbits in a 1:2 resonance with Jupiter, which has an 11.86 year
> orbit. With Mars having a nearly 2 year orbit, it appears that using
> Tempel as a bus for an orbital transfer can happen about every 12
> years. That amount of time should allow for plenty of private space
> development. Once Bigelow's orbital hotels are in operation in 2010, a
> moon base is apparently their next step a few years later, which is all
> the infrastructure needed to launch missions to Mars and Jupiter in
> 2023.

Exciting times. In case anyone hasn't seen the recent PopSci articles
on Bigelow's projects, here are some links:

"The Five-Billion-Star Hotel"
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,20967,1027551,00.html

"Low-Earth Orbit, and Beyond: Preview Bigelow's moon cruiser and
corporate space yacht"
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,20967,1027555,00.html


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 08:27:28 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 01:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707052622.47432.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707082728.65921.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Does it derive from subject-object dualism, e.g. "we
> are in this world but not of this world"?
> 
> 
Yes, precisely. It stems from basic instincts of
survival and primitive notions of self and is
reinforced in large part by a western religion that
teaches two very damaging notions. One being that this
world and life are a necessarily temporary. The other
being that we are above, better than, and separate
from everything that flies, swims, or crawls this
world with us. A biologist can see the primordial worm
in our genes and there are saints and villians amongst
the dolphins too. If we differ in any fundamental way
from the other creatures it is in that we have minds.
And then, only to the extent of quantity as opposed to
some difference of qualia. Thus a simple bacterium, by
possesing a system of restriction enzymes that can
recognize foreign gene sequences from invading DNA
such as viruses and transposons and destroy them, can
be said to hold a rudimentary biochemical notion of
"self". And by swimming away from a drop of vinegar
can be said to exhibit an "instinct" for survival or a
"fear" of death. Truly Dawkins needed no disclaimer by
way of excuse for ascribing anthropomorphic motives to
genes . Genes do not just seem to be selfish, they
really ARE selfish. Just like a cockroach does not
just seem to fear death, a cockroach DOES fear death. 

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail 
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: 
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html 



From giogavir at yahoo.it  Thu Jul  7 10:38:28 2005
From: giogavir at yahoo.it (giorgio gaviraghi)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 12:38:28 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce0507070059648f2d81@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050707103828.8776.qmail@web26204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>

unfortunately Bigelow's design has a major flaw
by laying the floors parallel to the cylinder it will
not allow artificial gravity and is not optimizing the
interior space
to do that the best solution is to lay the floors
perpendiculat to the cylinder, connect the modules
with a ring structure that will allow future expansion
and additional modules and rotate around a central
hub, connected with spikes to the circular ring
For future utilization anext generation space station
or space hotel must bre provided with some sort of
artificial gravity to avoid most negative effects of
zero G situation
--- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> ha
scritto: 

> On 7/6/05, Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > But you are right, however Bigelow Aerospace has
> some excellent space
> > habitat modules
> http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/news.html and the
> > design for its "Nautilus Moon Cruiser" seems just
> the ticket. Bigelows
> > first hab module will be launching on SpaceX's
> Falcon 5 booster in
> > November. 
> 
> I think it used to be scheduled for November, but
> after some bumping
> of schedules (partially due to launch range
> conflicts between SpaceX's
> Falcon I and the Air Force's Titan IV), the first
> launch of the Falcon
> V (carrying Bigelow's prototype hab module) is the
> second quarter of
> 2006:
> 
>
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=falcon&content=http%3A//www.spacex.com/falcon_overview.php
>
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=updates&content=http%3A//www.spacex.com/updates.php
> 
> I'm actually a little skeptical of even this launch
> date, as the first
> launch of the Falcon I is late September. ~6 months
> seems like an
> awfully short time to go from a rocket with one
> first-stage engine to
> a rocket with five such engines. I would love to be
> pleasantly
> surprised, though.
> 
> > Their $50 million "Americas Space Prize" deadline
> is 2010,
> > which I'm betting Rutan will have won by 2007 or
> 2008.
> 
> I'm not so sure about that -- Rutan seems plenty
> busy with other
> projects at the moment. I'd pin my money on SpaceX
> (which has already
> announced their intention to compete for the ASP),
> or -maybe- a team
> with SpaceX building the rocket and Rutan building a
> reentry vehicle
> as payload.
> 
> > If it turns out that a 2011 rendezvous cannot
> occur, it appears that
> > Tempel orbits in a 1:2 resonance with Jupiter,
> which has an 11.86 year
> > orbit. With Mars having a nearly 2 year orbit, it
> appears that using
> > Tempel as a bus for an orbital transfer can happen
> about every 12
> > years. That amount of time should allow for plenty
> of private space
> > development. Once Bigelow's orbital hotels are in
> operation in 2010, a
> > moon base is apparently their next step a few
> years later, which is all
> > the infrastructure needed to launch missions to
> Mars and Jupiter in
> > 2023.
> 
> Exciting times. In case anyone hasn't seen the
> recent PopSci articles
> on Bigelow's projects, here are some links:
> 
> "The Five-Billion-Star Hotel"
>
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,20967,1027551,00.html
> 
> "Low-Earth Orbit, and Beyond: Preview Bigelow's moon
> cruiser and
> corporate space yacht"
>
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,20967,1027555,00.html
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



	

	
		
___________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB 
http://mail.yahoo.it


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jul  7 14:17:58 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 09:17:58 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with neo-Darwinism
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Amazing scenes: just when you think Christian dogmatists have realized it's 
not safe to get in the ring with science, we learn that divinely directed 
evolution is the truth, and Darwin plus genetics is just plain wrong:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/07/opinion/07schonborn.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print

July 7, 2005


Finding Design in Nature

By CHRISTOPH SCH?NBORN [Roman Catholic cardinal archbishop of Vienna, was 
the lead editor of the official 1992 Catechism of the Catholic Church.]

Vienna

EVER since 1996, when Pope John Paul II said that evolution (a term he did 
not define) was "more than just a hypothesis," defenders of neo-Darwinian 
dogma have often invoked the supposed acceptance - or at least acquiescence 
- of the Roman Catholic Church when they defend their theory as somehow 
compatible with Christian faith.

But this is not true. The Catholic Church, while leaving to science many 
details about the history of life on earth, proclaims that by the light of 
reason the human intellect can readily and clearly discern purpose and 
design in the natural world, including the world of living things.

Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in 
the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned process of random 
variation and natural selection - is not. Any system of thought that denies 
or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is 
ideology, not science.

Consider the real teaching of our beloved John Paul. While his rather vague 
and unimportant 1996 letter about evolution is always and everywhere cited, 
we see no one discussing these comments from a 1985 general audience that 
represents his robust teaching on nature:

"All the observations concerning the development of life lead to a similar 
conclusion. The evolution of living beings, of which science seeks to 
determine the stages and to discern the mechanism, presents an internal 
finality which arouses admiration. This finality which directs beings in a 
direction for which they are not responsible or in charge, obliges one to 
suppose a Mind which is its inventor, its creator."

He went on: "To all these indications of the existence of God the Creator, 
some oppose the power of chance or of the proper mechanisms of matter. To 
speak of chance for a universe which presents such a complex organization 
in its elements and such marvelous finality in its life would be equivalent 
to giving up the search for an explanation of the world as it appears to 
us. In fact, this would be equivalent to admitting effects without a cause. 
It would be to abdicate human intelligence, which would thus refuse to 
think and to seek a solution for its problems."

Note that in this quotation the word "finality" is a philosophical term 
synonymous with final cause, purpose or design. In comments at another 
general audience a year later, John Paul concludes, "It is clear that the 
truth of faith about creation is radically opposed to the theories of 
materialistic philosophy. These view the cosmos as the result of an 
evolution of matter reducible to pure chance and necessity."

Naturally, the authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church agrees: 
"Human intelligence is surely already capable of finding a response to the 
question of origins. The existence of God the Creator can be known with 
certainty through his works, by the light of human reason." It adds: "We 
believe that God created the world according to his wisdom. It is not the 
product of any necessity whatever, nor of blind fate or chance."

In an unfortunate new twist on this old controversy, neo-Darwinists 
recently have sought to portray our new pope, Benedict XVI, as a satisfied 
evolutionist. They have quoted a sentence about common ancestry from a 2004 
document of the International Theological Commission, pointed out that 
Benedict was at the time head of the commission, and concluded that the 
Catholic Church has no problem with the notion of "evolution" as used by 
mainstream biologists - that is, synonymous with neo-Darwinism.

The commission's document, however, reaffirms the perennial teaching of the 
Catholic Church about the reality of design in nature. Commenting on the 
widespread abuse of John Paul's 1996 letter on evolution, the commission 
cautions that "the letter cannot be read as a blanket approbation of all 
theories of evolution, including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which 
explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the 
development of life in the universe."

Furthermore, according to the commission, "An unguided evolutionary process 
- one that falls outside the bounds of divine providence - simply cannot 
exist."

Indeed, in the homily at his installation just a few weeks ago, Benedict 
proclaimed: "We are not some casual and meaningless product of evolution. 
Each of us is the result of a thought of God. Each of us is willed, each of 
us is loved, each of us is necessary."

Throughout history the church has defended the truths of faith given by 
Jesus Christ. But in the modern era, the Catholic Church is in the odd 
position of standing in firm defense of reason as well. In the 19th 
century, the First Vatican Council taught a world newly enthralled by the 
"death of God" that by the use of reason alone mankind could come to know 
the reality of the Uncaused Cause, the First Mover, the God of the 
philosophers.

Now at the beginning of the 21st century, faced with scientific claims like 
neo-Darwinism and the multiverse hypothesis in cosmology invented to avoid 
the overwhelming evidence for purpose and design found in modern science, 
the Catholic Church will again defend human reason by proclaiming that the 
immanent design evident in nature is real. Scientific theories that try to 
explain away the appearance of design as the result of "chance and 
necessity" are not scientific at all, but, as John Paul put it, an 
abdication of human intelligence.




From brentn at freeshell.org  Thu Jul  7 15:36:56 2005
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Thu,  7 Jul 2005 11:36:56 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <r02010500-1038-F3DA525EEEFC11D9948A000393A47D36@[70.7.217.174]>

 (7/7/05 9:17) Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

>Amazing scenes: just when you think Christian dogmatists have realized it's 
>not safe to get in the ring with science, we learn that divinely directed 
>evolution is the truth, and Darwin plus genetics is just plain wrong:


I recall that we had an argument about whether the Catholic church truly accepted evolutionary science about 18 months ago or so.  I hope that the apologists for the Catholic Church here note this. 

In more amusing news, this puts the fundamentalists here in a fun position, since they widely consider the Catholic Church to be 'unChristian.'  Maybe this will temper their support for 'intelligent design?'  We could only be so lucky....


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

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


From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Thu Jul  7 18:21:56 2005
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:21:56 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <7641ddc605070711215b05eefe@mail.gmail.com>

The priest wrote:

....the Catholic Church will again defend human reason.... 
 ### Do you notice that he is trying to fit into an intellectual framework 
defined in opposition to the Church a long time ago? He is bending over 
backwards to accomodate the rhetoric of science, rather than arrogantly 
dismiss it, as the likes of him would have done not a long time ago.
 This is nice: he is not playing on his turf, and his turf is no longer as 
big as it used to be. One day there may be none left.
 Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050707/8e04e689/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jul  7 18:46:12 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 13:46:12 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible
	with	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <7641ddc605070711215b05eefe@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<7641ddc605070711215b05eefe@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707134300.01ce8858@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 01:21 PM 7/7/2005 -0500, Rafal wrote:

>The [Cardinal] wrote:
>
>....the Catholic Church will again defend human reason....
>
>### Do you notice that he is trying to fit into an intellectual framework 
>defined in opposition to the Church a long time ago? He is bending over 
>backwards to accomodate the rhetoric of science

I don't think so. His language is pure Thomist Aristoteleanism (final 
causes, etc). Science of a 2350-year-old sort, but not as we know it, Jim.

Damien Broderick



From sjatkins at mac.com  Thu Jul  7 18:51:26 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 11:51:26 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <64F76938-508F-45A9-BA62-58E56CC7AF69@mac.com>

As disgusting as this is, where exactly does it dismiss genetics or  
evolution plus genetics?   Genetics is the ultimate proof of common  
ancestry and relationshiip among species.  It is also the means by  
which change comes about.   But I don't see where the screed denies  
genetics per se.

- samantha

On Jul 7, 2005, at 7:17 AM, Damien Broderick wrote:

> Amazing scenes: just when you think Christian dogmatists have  
> realized it's not safe to get in the ring with science, we learn  
> that divinely directed evolution is the truth, and Darwin plus  
> genetics is just plain wrong:
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/07/opinion/07schonborn.html? 
> th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print
>
> July 7, 2005
>
>
> Finding Design in Nature
>
> By CHRISTOPH SCH?NBORN [Roman Catholic cardinal archbishop of  
> Vienna, was the lead editor of the official 1992 Catechism of the  
> Catholic Church.]
>
> Vienna
>
> EVER since 1996, when Pope John Paul II said that evolution (a term  
> he did not define) was "more than just a hypothesis," defenders of  
> neo-Darwinian dogma have often invoked the supposed acceptance - or  
> at least acquiescence - of the Roman Catholic Church when they  
> defend their theory as somehow compatible with Christian faith.
>
> But this is not true. The Catholic Church, while leaving to science  
> many details about the history of life on earth, proclaims that by  
> the light of reason the human intellect can readily and clearly  
> discern purpose and design in the natural world, including the  
> world of living things.
>
> Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but  
> evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense - an unguided, unplanned  
> process of random variation and natural selection - is not. Any  
> system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the  
> overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science.
>
> Consider the real teaching of our beloved John Paul. While his  
> rather vague and unimportant 1996 letter about evolution is always  
> and everywhere cited, we see no one discussing these comments from  
> a 1985 general audience that represents his robust teaching on nature:
>
> "All the observations concerning the development of life lead to a  
> similar conclusion. The evolution of living beings, of which  
> science seeks to determine the stages and to discern the mechanism,  
> presents an internal finality which arouses admiration. This  
> finality which directs beings in a direction for which they are not  
> responsible or in charge, obliges one to suppose a Mind which is  
> its inventor, its creator."
>
> He went on: "To all these indications of the existence of God the  
> Creator, some oppose the power of chance or of the proper  
> mechanisms of matter. To speak of chance for a universe which  
> presents such a complex organization in its elements and such  
> marvelous finality in its life would be equivalent to giving up the  
> search for an explanation of the world as it appears to us. In  
> fact, this would be equivalent to admitting effects without a  
> cause. It would be to abdicate human intelligence, which would thus  
> refuse to think and to seek a solution for its problems."
>
> Note that in this quotation the word "finality" is a philosophical  
> term synonymous with final cause, purpose or design. In comments at  
> another general audience a year later, John Paul concludes, "It is  
> clear that the truth of faith about creation is radically opposed  
> to the theories of materialistic philosophy. These view the cosmos  
> as the result of an evolution of matter reducible to pure chance  
> and necessity."
>
> Naturally, the authoritative Catechism of the Catholic Church  
> agrees: "Human intelligence is surely already capable of finding a  
> response to the question of origins. The existence of God the  
> Creator can be known with certainty through his works, by the light  
> of human reason." It adds: "We believe that God created the world  
> according to his wisdom. It is not the product of any necessity  
> whatever, nor of blind fate or chance."
>
> In an unfortunate new twist on this old controversy, neo-Darwinists  
> recently have sought to portray our new pope, Benedict XVI, as a  
> satisfied evolutionist. They have quoted a sentence about common  
> ancestry from a 2004 document of the International Theological  
> Commission, pointed out that Benedict was at the time head of the  
> commission, and concluded that the Catholic Church has no problem  
> with the notion of "evolution" as used by mainstream biologists -  
> that is, synonymous with neo-Darwinism.
>
> The commission's document, however, reaffirms the perennial  
> teaching of the Catholic Church about the reality of design in  
> nature. Commenting on the widespread abuse of John Paul's 1996  
> letter on evolution, the commission cautions that "the letter  
> cannot be read as a blanket approbation of all theories of  
> evolution, including those of a neo-Darwinian provenance which  
> explicitly deny to divine providence any truly causal role in the  
> development of life in the universe."
>
> Furthermore, according to the commission, "An unguided evolutionary  
> process - one that falls outside the bounds of divine providence -  
> simply cannot exist."
>
> Indeed, in the homily at his installation just a few weeks ago,  
> Benedict proclaimed: "We are not some casual and meaningless  
> product of evolution. Each of us is the result of a thought of God.  
> Each of us is willed, each of us is loved, each of us is necessary."
>
> Throughout history the church has defended the truths of faith  
> given by Jesus Christ. But in the modern era, the Catholic Church  
> is in the odd position of standing in firm defense of reason as  
> well. In the 19th century, the First Vatican Council taught a world  
> newly enthralled by the "death of God" that by the use of reason  
> alone mankind could come to know the reality of the Uncaused Cause,  
> the First Mover, the God of the philosophers.
>
> Now at the beginning of the 21st century, faced with scientific  
> claims like neo-Darwinism and the multiverse hypothesis in  
> cosmology invented to avoid the overwhelming evidence for purpose  
> and design found in modern science, the Catholic Church will again  
> defend human reason by proclaiming that the immanent design evident  
> in nature is real. Scientific theories that try to explain away the  
> appearance of design as the result of "chance and necessity" are  
> not scientific at all, but, as John Paul put it, an abdication of  
> human intelligence.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Jul  7 19:02:17 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 14:02:17 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible
	with	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <64F76938-508F-45A9-BA62-58E56CC7AF69@mac.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<64F76938-508F-45A9-BA62-58E56CC7AF69@mac.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707135802.01c73aa0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 11:51 AM 7/7/2005 -0700, samantha wrote:

>As disgusting as this is, where exactly does it dismiss genetics or
>evolution plus genetics?

I wrote

>Darwin plus genetics

Would it have helped if I'd written [Darwin(contest of phenotypes)+genetics 
(heritable punctate genotypes)] as my explication of `neo-Darwinism'?

The Cardinal catechist wrote:

>defenders of
>>neo-Darwinian dogma have often invoked the supposed acceptance - or
>>at least acquiescence - of the Roman Catholic Church when they
>>defend their theory as somehow compatible with Christian faith.
>>
>>But this is not true.



From sentience at pobox.com  Thu Jul  7 19:22:35 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 12:22:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <42CD80FB.4030107@pobox.com>

Damien Broderick wrote:
> Amazing scenes: just when you think Christian dogmatists have realized 
> it's not safe to get in the ring with science, we learn that divinely 
> directed evolution is the truth, and Darwin plus genetics is just plain 
> wrong:
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/07/opinion/07schonborn.html?th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print 
> 
> EVER since 1996, when Pope John Paul II said that evolution (a term he 
> did not define) was "more than just a hypothesis," defenders of 
> neo-Darwinian dogma have often invoked the supposed acceptance - or at 
> least acquiescence - of the Roman Catholic Church when they defend their 
> theory as somehow compatible with Christian faith.
> 
> But this is not true.

As indeed it is not.  The Judeo-Christian origin myth is no more compatible 
with Darwinism than it is with the Standard Model of the Big Bang.

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


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 19:47:21 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 12:47:21 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707021151.84823.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707194721.29506.qmail@web30708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

"As it should" means without government bans on technology. The
development and progress of the human race along its natural track
includes technology, for we are technological creatures through and
through. Nature is about change. What luddites want is unnatural stasis
at a specific level of development.

--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I am confused when you write, "as it should". This is the dispute in
> a nutshell. They think they should be able to leave a 'reasonably
> natural' future to their descendents. I agree their future wouldn't
> even be natural to begin with, however their vision of patrimony is
> lodged in their minds like foundation stone. That is not much of an
> exaggeration. They want to whelp children, educate them, the children
> become affluent & have children themselves, the grandparents die off
> and the younger generations inherit estates used to educate those at
> the front of the line;
>  it's self-perpetuating, so when you write, "We want the future to
> happen as it should", they agree with you...they merely have a wholly
> different notion of the future happening "as it should".
> 
> 
> Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> >Then they are confused, or you are. The only people who want to
> control
> >the future are luddites who want to legislate technology out of
> >existence. We want the future to happen as it should.
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
>  Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.>
_______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 19:53:13 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 12:53:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <E30C156B-DC9B-4599-8BB8-8B2E1B5BF386@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <20050707195313.38555.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Bret Kulakovich <bret at bonfireproductions.com> wrote:

> 
> And since spike made mention on Methusalah's age:
> 
> On Jul 5, 2005, at 2:17 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >  while the angels allegedly took Ezekiel
> > for a galactic joyride.
> 
> 
> I think you meant Enoch, and only in the Director's Cut.

No, although Enoch was also taken up by God, although his grandson,
Noah, was also originally named Enoch. There is, however, a celebrated
section of Ezekiel in which he is visited by beings in vehicles that
had "wheels within wheels" that arrived in clouds of fire and thunder,
which allegedly brought him up to a heavenly visit. UFO nutters like
Von Daniken and Berlitz assert it as evidence of ancient Close
Encounters with aliens.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 20:07:15 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:07:15 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <64F76938-508F-45A9-BA62-58E56CC7AF69@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050707200715.97730.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>



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

> As disgusting as this is, where exactly does it
> dismiss genetics or  
> evolution plus genetics?   Genetics is the ultimate
> proof of common  
> ancestry and relationshiip among species.  It is
> also the means by  
> which change comes about.   But I don't see where
> the screed denies  
> genetics per se.
> 

Maybe its implied by him not resembling his father?


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 20:18:14 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:18:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <42CD80FB.4030107@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20050707201814.72335.qmail@web60525.mail.yahoo.com>



--- "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
wrote:

> As indeed it is not.  The Judeo-Christian origin
> myth is no more compatible 
> with Darwinism than it is with the Standard Model of
> the Big Bang.

If you actually believe that the myth is literally
true then you are right they are not compatible. But
if you look it as a myth, then they are compatible.
Just like Batman and Darwin are compitable in the
sense that neither Darwin nor Batman contradict one
another.


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail 
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: 
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html 



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 20:23:01 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 13:23:01 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dirk . . . are you alright?
Message-ID: <20050707202301.1506.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>

Hey Dirk,

I heard about the terrorist bombing this morning in
London. I hope you and yours as well as any other
Extro-Brits are safe.

Peace,


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From dirk at neopax.com  Thu Jul  7 20:36:57 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 21:36:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Dirk . . . are you alright?
In-Reply-To: <20050707202301.1506.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050707202301.1506.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42CD9269.4010503@neopax.com>

The Avantguardian wrote:

>Hey Dirk,
>
>I heard about the terrorist bombing this morning in
>London. I hope you and yours as well as any other
>Extro-Brits are safe.
>
>  
>
I'm OK thanks.
I'm far more likely to be killed on London's roads than I am in any 
bombings.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.10/43 - Release Date: 06/07/2005



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 21:12:57 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:12:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <200507070324.j673OfR24052@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <20050707211257.7391.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:

> > bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lorrey
> > 
> > ... it appears that using
> > Tempel as a bus for an orbital transfer can happen about every 12
> > years...
> > 
> > Mike Lorrey
> 
> When you say "using Tempel as a bus" it sounds like you are
> somehow riding it, or it is providing something other than
> propellant.  If you want to land on Tempel, you have already
> provided the delta V to match its orbit.  In that case, you
> would end up at its aphelion with or without the comet.  
> 
> It isn't clear to me why you would need the comet at all,
> unless it is to fill your propellant tanks with 
> whatever material available there, probably water, maybe
> the methane.  Of course you will still need to come up
> with a lot of energy to heat the propellant, which I
> am assuming you would do via nuclear fission.  Is that
> what you had in mind?

The evidence from the impactor is that exposure of the subsurface to
sunlight is sufficient to evaporate significant quantities of material.
The surface layer of dust is somewhere between 1-10 meters thick.
Sinking well bores into the ice and heating them with solar energy
should be sufficient to develop a significant flow of fluid at low
pressure (<100 milibars). 

The water could be electrolyized over a 2 year period by an SP-100
class reactor on the journey outward into its constituents, and useful
organics can be distilled out of solution prior to electrolysis to
provide other fuels. (ethane, methanol, and acetylene are all useful)
The mission might choose to leave significant stores of purified fuels,
along with the purification equipment, on the comet for future missions
lacking in refining equipment.

Tempel reaches perhilion about 20 million miles from Jupiter orbit, so
the extra delta v gained by refuelling for that jump won't need to be
boosted from Earth or refined from  lunar materials. The scienfic gains
of spending time examining the comet in depth on the surface will also
pay significant dividends (plus providing the ability to lay claim to
its resources for the venture that lands on it first).

Getting to Jupiter is only a small part of the necessary delta-v for
the whole mission, maybe 30-40% at most. You need to brake into Jupiter
orbit, then escape again from Jupiter orbit, then brake all the way
down on return to Earth orbit, otherwise you'll be showing up near
earth with at least 30,000 mph of velocity, plus the 25,000 you'll be
picking up as you fall into earth's gravity well..

Here is the delta-v budget for the mission:

Leaving Lunar orbit: ~3.4 km/s - escape from Earth/Moon system
Trip to Tempel perhilion:  8 km/s   - climbing up the Sun's gravity
well to rendesvous point
Landing on Tempel: ~10.5 km/s - Must match Tempel velocity, about 23k
mph faster. 

Everthing below this point comes from refueling on Tempel and possibly
other locations:
Transferring from Tempel orbit to Jupiter-Sun orbit: 5.1 km/s
Entering orbit around Jupiter: up to 49 km/s (aerobraking and gravity
assist should contribute to this)
Orbital maneuvering around Jovian system: undetermined, this may
involve landing on one or more small ice moons to refuel again.
Escaping Jupiter orbit: up to 49 km/s (gravity assist should contribute
to this)
Return to Earth/moon system: 27 km/s

Refueling at Tempel will make such a mission possible. Using Mars as a
gravity assist to help reach Tempel is also a possibility, as is using
it to assist in braking the return to Luna orbit. Return trip after
escaping Jupiter would be primarily by braking with solar sail.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 21:19:54 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: themes in anti-transhumanist arguments
In-Reply-To: <20050707045544.96261.qmail@web60520.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707211954.61095.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> --- spike <spike66 at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Or if he did mean Enoch, he was referring to Genesis
> > chapter 5 verse 24, whereunto it sayeth:  Enoch
> > "walked with God; then he was no more for God took
> > him."
> > 
> > I suspect however that what actually happened 
> > is that Enoch walked, then he was no more, for 
> > two or three Philistine heatherns took him, and 
> > whacketh him with a baseball bat, wherefore to 
> > taketh away his myrrh.
> > 
> Nay. For though Enoch walked in the Alley of the
> Shadow of Muggers it plainly states that he walked
> with God. And God was parked nearby. They probably
> went to Denny's. ;)

This was also prior to the Flood, so Philistines were not yet even a
twinkle in the eye or a stain on Phil's toga.

Enoch, though, sounds to me like he used to walk around talking to his
invisible friend, i.e. he was likely suffering from a mild form of
Tourettes or was schizophrenic, then fell into a fugue state and a
coma. At least his grand-kid was productive and built a big gopherwood
box when his invisible friend told him to...

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 21:21:03 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707052622.47432.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707212103.61525.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

It might, but curiously, such dualism contradicts the "we are the
world" claims of their new agey environmentalist worldview.

--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Does it derive from subject-object dualism, e.g. "we
> are in this world but not of this world"?
> 
> 
> 
>  >it is instead the result of a worldview in which
> humanity is somehow >special and separate from the
> nature in which we are imbedded.
> 
> 
> 		
> ____________________________________________________
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
> http://auctions.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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 21:30:05 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:30:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] SPACE: Deep Impact shows strong spectral lines...
In-Reply-To: <20050707103828.8776.qmail@web26204.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707213005.14196.qmail@web30702.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Making a spinning hub with four hab modules rotating around it
shouldn't be difficult. The floor plan in the pics is just an artists
rendition, it is apparently quite flexible. A spin hub would be
necessary for a Mars or Jupiter mission, but isn't for Bigelow's plans
in and around the Earth/Moon system.

However, spinning may not be strictly necessary, so long as a track is
available around the interior circumference, they can run around it and
create their own personal gravity, just like the Skylab astronauts did.

--- giorgio gaviraghi <giogavir at yahoo.it> wrote:

> unfortunately Bigelow's design has a major flaw
> by laying the floors parallel to the cylinder it will
> not allow artificial gravity and is not optimizing the
> interior space
> to do that the best solution is to lay the floors
> perpendiculat to the cylinder, connect the modules
> with a ring structure that will allow future expansion
> and additional modules and rotate around a central
> hub, connected with spikes to the circular ring
> For future utilization anext generation space station
> or space hotel must bre provided with some sort of
> artificial gravity to avoid most negative effects of
> zero G situation
> --- Neil Halelamien <neuronexmachina at gmail.com> ha
> scritto: 
> 
> > On 7/6/05, Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > But you are right, however Bigelow Aerospace has
> > some excellent space
> > > habitat modules
> > http://www.bigelowaerospace.com/news.html and the
> > > design for its "Nautilus Moon Cruiser" seems just
> > the ticket. Bigelows
> > > first hab module will be launching on SpaceX's
> > Falcon 5 booster in
> > > November. 
> > 
> > I think it used to be scheduled for November, but
> > after some bumping
> > of schedules (partially due to launch range
> > conflicts between SpaceX's
> > Falcon I and the Air Force's Titan IV), the first
> > launch of the Falcon
> > V (carrying Bigelow's prototype hab module) is the
> > second quarter of
> > 2006:
> > 
> >
>
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=falcon&content=http%3A//www.spacex.com/falcon_overview.php
> >
>
http://www.spacex.com/index.html?section=updates&content=http%3A//www.spacex.com/updates.php
> > 
> > I'm actually a little skeptical of even this launch
> > date, as the first
> > launch of the Falcon I is late September. ~6 months
> > seems like an
> > awfully short time to go from a rocket with one
> > first-stage engine to
> > a rocket with five such engines. I would love to be
> > pleasantly
> > surprised, though.
> > 
> > > Their $50 million "Americas Space Prize" deadline
> > is 2010,
> > > which I'm betting Rutan will have won by 2007 or
> > 2008.
> > 
> > I'm not so sure about that -- Rutan seems plenty
> > busy with other
> > projects at the moment. I'd pin my money on SpaceX
> > (which has already
> > announced their intention to compete for the ASP),
> > or -maybe- a team
> > with SpaceX building the rocket and Rutan building a
> > reentry vehicle
> > as payload.
> > 
> > > If it turns out that a 2011 rendezvous cannot
> > occur, it appears that
> > > Tempel orbits in a 1:2 resonance with Jupiter,
> > which has an 11.86 year
> > > orbit. With Mars having a nearly 2 year orbit, it
> > appears that using
> > > Tempel as a bus for an orbital transfer can happen
> > about every 12
> > > years. That amount of time should allow for plenty
> > of private space
> > > development. Once Bigelow's orbital hotels are in
> > operation in 2010, a
> > > moon base is apparently their next step a few
> > years later, which is all
> > > the infrastructure needed to launch missions to
> > Mars and Jupiter in
> > > 2023.
> > 
> > Exciting times. In case anyone hasn't seen the
> > recent PopSci articles
> > on Bigelow's projects, here are some links:
> > 
> > "The Five-Billion-Star Hotel"
> >
> http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,20967,1027551,00.html
> > 
> > "Low-Earth Orbit, and Beyond: Preview Bigelow's moon
> > cruiser and
> > corporate space yacht"
> >
> http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviation/article/0,20967,1027555,00.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > extropy-chat mailing list
> > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> >
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 	
> 		
> ___________________________________ 
> Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB 
> http://mail.yahoo.it
> _______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From xander25 at adelphia.net  Thu Jul  7 15:33:29 2005
From: xander25 at adelphia.net (Jacob)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 15:33:29 +0000
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707082728.65921.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050707082728.65921.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42CD4B49.80507@adelphia.net>

The duality exists in science as well, or more precisely the application
of it.  Science consists of learning about the universe, and the laws
inherent in it.  It's application consists mainly of using those laws to
benefit mankind.  Flight goes against gravity, so do rocket boosters. 
You can't control the world unless you are, to some extent, apart from
it (which our minds separate us from it).  The duality exists where you
recognize that the human mind is itself natural.  It exists within the
natural world, where human beings do.  I, for one, fail to see how this
is a damaging concept.  It on one hand teaches us responsibility, and on
the other allows progress to take place.  There's a contradiction here
that if you analyze more closely points to one conclusion.  Human beings
exist, humans have brains, brains help the human understand how the
universe works, this allows the human to control the universe, this also
comes with responsibility that if we accept we also becomes the
caretakers of this universe.  Transhumanism can't exist in a world which
insists that we are no more than the sum of our parts, with no potential
to advance passed that.  I am, therefore I think.

--jb

The Avantguardian wrote:

>--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Does it derive from subject-object dualism, e.g. "we
>>are in this world but not of this world"?
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>Yes, precisely. It stems from basic instincts of
>survival and primitive notions of self and is
>reinforced in large part by a western religion that
>teaches two very damaging notions. One being that this
>world and life are a necessarily temporary. The other
>being that we are above, better than, and separate
>from everything that flies, swims, or crawls this
>world with us. A biologist can see the primordial worm
>in our genes and there are saints and villians amongst
>the dolphins too. If we differ in any fundamental way
>from the other creatures it is in that we have minds.
>And then, only to the extent of quantity as opposed to
>some difference of qualia. Thus a simple bacterium, by
>possesing a system of restriction enzymes that can
>recognize foreign gene sequences from invading DNA
>such as viruses and transposons and destroy them, can
>be said to hold a rudimentary biochemical notion of
>"self". And by swimming away from a drop of vinegar
>can be said to exhibit an "instinct" for survival or a
>"fear" of death. Truly Dawkins needed no disclaimer by
>way of excuse for ascribing anthropomorphic motives to
>genes . Genes do not just seem to be selfish, they
>really ARE selfish. Just like a cockroach does not
>just seem to fear death, a cockroach DOES fear death. 
>
>The Avantguardian 
>is 
>Stuart LaForge
>alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu
>
>"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
>-Bill Watterson
>
>
>		
>__________________________________ 
>Yahoo! Mail 
>Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: 
>http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html 
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>  
>



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 21:35:38 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 14:35:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <r02010500-1038-F3DA525EEEFC11D9948A000393A47D36@[70.7.217.174]>
Message-ID: <20050707213538.24299.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

>  (7/7/05 9:17) Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> >Amazing scenes: just when you think Christian dogmatists have
> realized it's 
> >not safe to get in the ring with science, we learn that divinely
> directed 
> >evolution is the truth, and Darwin plus genetics is just plain
> wrong:
> 
> 
> I recall that we had an argument about whether the Catholic church
> truly accepted evolutionary science about 18 months ago or so.  I
> hope that the apologists for the Catholic Church here note this. 
> 
> In more amusing news, this puts the fundamentalists here in a fun
> position, since they widely consider the Catholic Church to be
> 'unChristian.'  Maybe this will temper their support for 'intelligent
> design?'  We could only be so lucky....

It wouldn't. Fundamentalists accuse the Church of being the house of
the Whore of Babylon, i.e. the representative of Satan on earth. Satan
and his reps may be unchristian, but they would still believe in the
validity of God and his design, of which they are a part...

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 22:01:32 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 15:01:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707212103.61525.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707220132.7943.qmail@web34401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I was referring to the Christian doctrine of being in this world not of it... Xians think God gave us stewardship of His creation on earth. Xians are 'we are the world' new age environmentalists? Since when? Is this a new twist?

Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:It might, but curiously, such dualism contradicts the "we are the
world" claims of their new agey environmentalist worldview.



		
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050707/f864d5fc/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 22:05:27 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 15:05:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707194721.29506.qmail@web30708.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707220527.87051.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Agreed. But this is our interpretation, not theirs. There is no common ground.


 
Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:
"As it should" means without government bans on technology. The
development and progress of the human race along its natural track
includes technology, for we are technological creatures through and
through. Nature is about change.
		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050707/ab2f1020/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 23:00:08 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:00:08 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707220132.7943.qmail@web34401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707230008.85159.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Oh, there are plenty of christian environmentalists, but the
contradiction was the point: the luddites are generally monists when it
comes to their environmental theology, but dualists when it comes to
applying it politically.

--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I was referring to the Christian doctrine of being in this world not
> of it... Xians think God gave us stewardship of His creation on
> earth. Xians are 'we are the world' new age environmentalists? Since
> when? Is this a new twist?
> 
> Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:It might, but curiously, such
> dualism contradicts the "we are the
> world" claims of their new agey environmentalist worldview.
> 
> 
> 
> 		
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
>  Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.>
_______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Thu Jul  7 23:31:20 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 16:31:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707212103.61525.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050707233120.15907.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> It might, but curiously, such dualism contradicts
> the "we are the
> world" claims of their new agey environmentalist
> worldview.
> 

     But if they truly believed their own claims, then
they would realize that we and our technology are as
natural as any other species that has evolved to the
point of out-competing other species. If they truly
believed that "we are the world" and they truly
understood the world, and thereby themselves, then
they would embrace change knowing that the world
always has and will continue to change, transform, and
evolve.

      Their contention, that the best relationship we
can have with nature is to completely "let it be" and
refrain from making any change or impact to our
ecosystem, is moronic. It essentially asserts that the
best way to mind the baby is to take off to Vegas and
leave the baby it to its own devices. In this, the
average green-luddite seems to think that the most
responsible method of stewardship of the planet is to
essentially mimic inanimate objects that are sort of
"just there" and try not to actually have any kind of
effect on our environment. Whereas even the lowly
tse-tse fly or anthrax bacterium unabashedly make huge
impacts on ecosystems in a thoroughly selfish manner.
One of the funniest jokes nature pulled on those guys
is all the damage that elephants in Kenya are doing to
trees crucial for the "preservation" of the
surrounding ecosystem. They were the ones that pushed
so hard to prevent the hunting of elephants and now
their beloved endangered species is deforesting the
state parks and killing a thousand other species. They
are mortified and confused as their philosophy of
non-interference is resulting in an ecological
"disaster" and nature is laughing at them.  For all
their talk of being "new-age" their philosophy of
luddism is no more legitimate, enlightened, or
well-reasoned than the luddites that think God will
punish us for using technology.  
  
    It bugs me when they make such a fuss
distinguishing between "organic" produce and GM
produce. As if somehow genetically engineered tomatoes
are not truly alive. In my paradigm if something is
not inorganic (i.e. composed of minerals and compounds
not containing carbon) it is by definition organic. If
they want so bad to distinguish their farming methods
from those afforded by technology, they should just
call them "primitive" or something a bit more accurate
instead of bastardizing a technically precise
scientific term.

     It also irks me to no end when I see some trendy
Hollywood starlet who goes on TV on behalf of PETA or
some such to condemn me for using mice in my
biomedical research. What truly drives me to
distraction is that, short of being prevented from
roaming where they will, those mice live exceedingly
well for mice. Are the starlets' houses teeming with
vermin due to their passionate beliefs and activism on
the part of furry rodents? Or do they set mouse traps
and call exterminators to kill them? Hell the
neighboring lab actually supplies their mice with
several hundreds of dollars worth of cocaine on a
weekly basis. 

     If you were a mouse how would you choose to live?
In the lap of luxury where surplus food and water (and
sometimes cocaine) were provided and you were
guaranteed numerous opportunities to mate and your
offspring were likewise well cared for, at the expense
of having experiments performed on you? Or in the cold
sterility of the starlett's house where there are
traps, poisons, and predators like the starlett's cat
and your chances of surviving long enough to find an
attractive mouse of the opposite sex were extremely
slim? If the starlet was not a hypocrite, she should
set up her home as a mouse sanctuary. Until then, she
should contemplate the fate of her own mice and not
mine.

      Worry not my fellow extropes, if the luddites
seem to have an advantage now, it is only temporary.
For as you may have noticed, the dinosaurs had their
day in the sun but then those that refused to become
birds are no more. Such is nature's decree and their
dodoism will be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Their
worry of being "replaced" by machines fuels their fear
of change. Their fear of change manifests itself as a
refusal to adapt. Their refusal to adapt virtually
guarantees that in a rapidly changing environment,
they will be replaced, if not by machines, then by us
and our offspring. Like a deer caught in someone's
headlights, they are paralyzed by their fear of the
oncoming future and will suffer similar consequences. 
 

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Jul  8 01:07:58 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2005 18:07:58 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism
In-Reply-To: <20050707213538.24299.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050707213538.24299.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42CDD1EE.6020609@pobox.com>

I think RK Milholland says it best.  I feel much the same way - about the 
"really impressed" part, that is.

http://www.newgolddreams.com/ngd8.shtml

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


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Fri Jul  8 01:36:46 2005
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 11:06:46 +0930
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
Message-ID: <710b78fc0507071836742e6906@mail.gmail.com>

"Why Australians will never be prosperous"

Media Release (1 page):
http://www.tai.org.au/MediaReleases_Files/MediaReleases/PR%20Prosperity.pdf

Full Paper (longer):
http://www.tai.org.au/Publications_Files/Papers&Sub_Files/Prosperity%20webpaper%204.pdf

This is from the Australia Institute (http://www.tai.org.au/), no idea
about their credibility, but check out their website, there's plenty
of detail.

Except of interest from the media release:
"The results show that the proportion of Australians who
indicate they are totally satisfied with life overall declines as
income increases; 21 per cent
of those in the lowest income group say they are totally satisfied
while only 13 per cent of
those in the highest income group feel the same way. Overall life
satisfaction is little
affected by differences in wealth."

-- 
Emlyn

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


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 02:24:30 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 19:24:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050707230008.85159.qmail@web30710.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050708022431.36817.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

okay, now I get it.

--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Oh, there are plenty of christian environmentalists,
> but the
> contradiction was the point: the luddites are
> generally monists when it
> comes to their environmental theology, but dualists
> when it comes to
> applying it politically.



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From neptune at superlink.net  Fri Jul  8 02:38:31 2005
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2005 22:38:31 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
References: <710b78fc0507071836742e6906@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003101c58366$21e229e0$3e893cd1@pavilion>

I thought I heard or read of similar claims with Americans?  I don't
think a declining satisfaction will stop most people from chasing after
wealth.

Regards,

Dan



From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Jul  8 09:23:52 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 10:23:52 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0507071836742e6906@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0507071836742e6906@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e05070802234390fcfe@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/8/05, Emlyn wrote:
> "The results show that the proportion of Australians who
> indicate they are totally satisfied with life overall declines as
> income increases; 21 per cent
> of those in the lowest income group say they are totally satisfied
> while only 13 per cent of
> those in the highest income group feel the same way. Overall life
> satisfaction is little
> affected by differences in wealth."
> 

One of the best known quality of life surveys is the annual Economist review.
<http://www.economist.com/theworldin/international/displayStory.cfm?story_id=3372495&d=2005>

pdf file for more detail:
<http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/QUALITY_OF_LIFE.pdf>

They say that there are many more factors than money in giving people
life satisfaction. In general, within a country more money will make
people happier, but not that much. Double your income doesn't come
near twice as happy!

For example, the UK ranks 29th in the world - well below its rank on
income per person and bottom among the EU countries. Social and family
breakdown is high, offsetting the impact of high incomes and low
unemployment.

Australia ranks 6th in the world and all the countries above have
colder climates. So the beach and barbie lifestyle sounds best to me.
;)

BillK


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Jul  8 15:40:35 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 10:40:35 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050708104024.01d225a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Britain 2002:

Child pedestrians:
Killed  79
Killed or seriously injured  2,828

Adult pedestrians:
Killed 696
Killed or seriously injured  5,803

Motorcyclists and passengers:
Killed 609
Killed or seriously injured 7,500

Car drivers and passengers:
Killed 1,747
Killed or seriously injured 18,728 



From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Jul  8 16:24:27 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 17:24:27 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050708104024.01d225a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050708104024.01d225a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e05070809241285d8e0@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/8/05, Damien Broderick wrote:
> Britain 2002:
> 
> Child pedestrians:
> Killed  79
> Killed or seriously injured  2,828
> 
> Adult pedestrians:
> Killed 696
> Killed or seriously injured  5,803
> 
> Motorcyclists and passengers:
> Killed 609
> Killed or seriously injured 7,500
> 
> Car drivers and passengers:
> Killed 1,747
> Killed or seriously injured 18,728
> 

People overreact emotionally to disasters and are very poor at risk
analysis. And you won't get any thanks for pointing this out. You
cruel, heartless, calculating monster!  ;)

Look at the panic about shark attacks in Florida in the news.
(About ten people annually are killed by sharks worldwide).

Try telling them that 9/11 deaths are similar to monthly U.S. traffic
fatalities.
Compare the road safety budgets with homeland security budgets. 

9/11 fatalities were several to ten times fewer than annual deaths
from falls (in the home or workplace), or from suicide, or from
homicide.

Instead of rationally apportioning funds to the worst or most unfair
societal predicaments, homeland security budgets soar.

In the UK we will probably have huge spending on nonsensical security
measures now, just like in the US..

BillK


From pgptag at gmail.com  Fri Jul  8 16:53:33 2005
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 18:53:33 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Wiring the Brain at the Nanoscale
Message-ID: <470a3c520507080953320bfbc3@mail.gmail.com>

This NSF press release<http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=104288&org=NSF&from=news>describes
nanowires in blood vessels which may help monitor and stimulate
neurons in the brain. Some day, nanowires routed to the brain through the 
circulatory system may help patients.
Working with platinum nanowires 100 times thinner than a human hair--and 
using blood vessels as conduits to guide the wires--a team of U.S. and 
Japanese researchers has demonstrated a technique that may one day allow 
doctors to monitor individual brain cells and perhaps provide new treatments 
for neurological diseases such as Parkinson's.
Writing in the July 5, 2005, online issue of The Journal of Nanoparticle 
Research, the researchers explain it is becoming feasible to create 
nanowires far thinner than even the tiniest capillary vessels. That means 
nanowires could, in principle, be threaded through the circulatory system to 
any point in the body without blocking the normal flow of blood or 
interfering with the exchange of gasses and nutrients through the 
blood-vessel walls.
The team describes a proof-of-principle experiment in which they first 
guided platinum nanowires into the vascular system of tissue samples, and 
then successfully used the wires to detect the activity of individual 
neurons lying adjacent to the blood vessels.
"Nanotechnology is becoming one of the brightest stars in the medical and 
cognitive sciences," said Mike Roco, Senior Advisor for Nanotechnology at 
the National Science Foundation (NSF), which funded the research.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050708/4e62e0ac/attachment.html>

From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Fri Jul  8 17:16:48 2005
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 10:16:48 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
Message-ID: <1120843008.27185@whirlwind.he.net>

Dan wrote:
> I thought I heard or read of similar claims with Americans?
> I don't think a declining satisfaction will stop most people
> from chasing after wealth.


In countries where wealth is primarily self-made, which would include
the USA and probably Australia (but not most countries in western
Europe), I would *expect* declining satisfaction in the wealthiest
individuals -- it is a self-selecting population.

One of the key characteristics of really successful entrepreneurs is
that they are "hungry" by nature i.e. they are never satisfied.  In
Silicon Valley, being "hungry" is often considered a non-negotiable
characteristic of core team members when building new companies.  There
is a strong correlation between this property and business success,
which puts a lot of the wealth in their hands as a group.  This is also
why successful entrepreneurs rarely retire, going on to more ventures. 
They are driven toward stressful environments with hard problems to tackle.


This may not explain all of it, but I'll bet it explains some of it. 
Most successful entrepreneurs I know are as dissatisfied after they have
millions in the bank as when they were first starting out.  The money is
somewhat immaterial toward that end.  They may not be unhappy per se,
but they are hardly ever satisfied.


cheers,

j. andrew rogers



From peter at optimal.org  Fri Jul  8 17:40:33 2005
From: peter at optimal.org (Peter Voss)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 10:40:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] a2i2 is Hiring for its Artificial General
	Intelligence (AGI) Project
Message-ID: <PEEMKNGIGPHOFALFFNGHMECKFAAA.peter@optimal.org>

All Systems Go for Project Aigo - We're Hiring!

Please spread the word. Help us find additional talent.

http://adaptiveai.com/news/index.htm

Towards Increased Intelligence!

Peter Voss

a2i2 - Adaptive A.I. Inc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050708/9f200d28/attachment.html>

From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 20:18:11 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:18:11 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e05070809241285d8e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050708201812.21129.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com>



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

> 
> Instead of rationally apportioning funds to the
> worst or most unfair
> societal predicaments, homeland security budgets
> soar.
> 
> In the UK we will probably have huge spending on
> nonsensical security
> measures now, just like in the US..
> 

But you already have some of the best security
measures that I know of. From what I understand,
London has more security cameras per square mile of
any city in the world. Which of course begs the
question of how the bombers did what they did. You are
right about the screwy risk assessment involved but
also keep in mind that terrorists count on and could
not function without the medias love of
sensationalizing dangers way above their relative
risk. So long as both politicians and terrorists are
beholden to the media, you will see politicians enact
wasteful and overblown but very visible security
measures against low-risk yet high-profile terrorism.


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Fri Jul  8 20:33:38 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 21:33:38 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e05070809241285d8e0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050708104024.01d225a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<ee50357e05070809241285d8e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42CEE322.4030606@neopax.com>

BillK wrote:

>On 7/8/05, Damien Broderick wrote:
>  
>
>>Britain 2002:
>>
>>Child pedestrians:
>>Killed  79
>>Killed or seriously injured  2,828
>>
>>Adult pedestrians:
>>Killed 696
>>Killed or seriously injured  5,803
>>
>>Motorcyclists and passengers:
>>Killed 609
>>Killed or seriously injured 7,500
>>
>>Car drivers and passengers:
>>Killed 1,747
>>Killed or seriously injured 18,728
>>
>>    
>>
>
>People overreact emotionally to disasters and are very poor at risk
>analysis. And you won't get any thanks for pointing this out. You
>cruel, heartless, calculating monster!  ;)
>
>Look at the panic about shark attacks in Florida in the news.
>(About ten people annually are killed by sharks worldwide).
>
>Try telling them that 9/11 deaths are similar to monthly U.S. traffic
>fatalities.
>Compare the road safety budgets with homeland security budgets. 
>
>9/11 fatalities were several to ten times fewer than annual deaths
>from falls (in the home or workplace), or from suicide, or from
>homicide.
>
>Instead of rationally apportioning funds to the worst or most unfair
>societal predicaments, homeland security budgets soar.
>
>In the UK we will probably have huge spending on nonsensical security
>measures now, just like in the US..
>
>
>  
>
Maybe Nanny will cut our paracetamol allowance when shopping from 32 to 16.
[Think of the lives it will save]

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.10/43 - Release Date: 06/07/2005



From dirk at neopax.com  Fri Jul  8 20:34:34 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 21:34:34 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <20050708201812.21129.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050708201812.21129.qmail@web60522.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42CEE35A.5090305@neopax.com>

The Avantguardian wrote:

>--- BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Instead of rationally apportioning funds to the
>>worst or most unfair
>>societal predicaments, homeland security budgets
>>soar.
>>
>>In the UK we will probably have huge spending on
>>nonsensical security
>>measures now, just like in the US..
>>
>>    
>>
>
>But you already have some of the best security
>measures that I know of. From what I understand,
>London has more security cameras per square mile of
>any city in the world. Which of course begs the
>question of how the bombers did what they did. You are
>  
>
Quite easily.
It's the getting away afterwards that's difficult.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.10/43 - Release Date: 06/07/2005



From sjatkins at mac.com  Fri Jul  8 20:52:10 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 13:52:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
In-Reply-To: <1120843008.27185@whirlwind.he.net>
References: <1120843008.27185@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <287B6C00-5EFA-4765-8225-C7757A63E69E@mac.com>


On Jul 8, 2005, at 10:16 AM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

> Dan wrote:
>
>> I thought I heard or read of similar claims with Americans?
>> I don't think a declining satisfaction will stop most people
>> from chasing after wealth.
>>
>
>
> In countries where wealth is primarily self-made, which would include
> the USA and probably Australia (but not most countries in western
> Europe), I would *expect* declining satisfaction in the wealthiest
> individuals -- it is a self-selecting population.
>
> One of the key characteristics of really successful entrepreneurs is
> that they are "hungry" by nature i.e. they are never satisfied.  In
> Silicon Valley, being "hungry" is often considered a non-negotiable
> characteristic of core team members when building new companies.

Really?  Where did you derive this conclusion?  What type of  
"hunger"?  I have been part of this particular scene for a couple of  
decades now.  I certainly look for a level of "hunger"if you will.   
But it is a deep drive or cause to make something that the players  
are passionate about.  It isn't necessarily a drive for money.  The  
best uber-geeks I have met are driven by something more than or  
besides just  money.   I know another set of extremely bright and  
often successful  people who are simply "playful".  They go for what  
appears to be fun to them even though it entails a level of effort  
that most people would never take on.

I don't see that either group is necessarily given by lack of  
satisfaction though.   For many of them although they found companies  
the business end is simply means to make the dream real.

> There
> is a strong correlation between this property and business success,
> which puts a lot of the wealth in their hands as a group.  This is  
> also
> why successful entrepreneurs rarely retire, going on to more ventures.
> They are driven toward stressful environments with hard problems to  
> tackle.
>
>
> This may not explain all of it, but I'll bet it explains some of it.
> Most successful entrepreneurs I know are as dissatisfied after they  
> have
> millions in the bank as when they were first starting out.  The  
> money is
> somewhat immaterial toward that end.  They may not be unhappy per se,
> but they are hardly ever satisfied.

If they are the driven to create types then the money is largely  
freedom to do what they wish and resource.

It is possible to be satisfied in the sense needed by happiness  
moment by moment while still striving toward goals.  Satisfaction can  
be had in the movement and effort toward goals.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050708/b0f7e6dc/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 23:22:34 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050708104024.01d225a0@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050708232234.98037.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Ah, but they weren't all killed by the same insane driver...

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> Britain 2002:
> 
> Child pedestrians:
> Killed  79
> Killed or seriously injured  2,828
> 
> Adult pedestrians:
> Killed 696
> Killed or seriously injured  5,803
> 
> Motorcyclists and passengers:
> Killed 609
> Killed or seriously injured 7,500
> 
> Car drivers and passengers:
> Killed 1,747
> Killed or seriously injured 18,728 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 23:28:51 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:28:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <42CEE322.4030606@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050708232851.306.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Al Qaeda has very little interest now in hijacking American airliners or terrorizing airports. Of course they hate America and would do anything they could, including a return to hijacking jets, but they have other options, they got away with 9-11 and they are satisfied with that operation; they aren't determined to go after American aviation at this time.
The government had to do what it did after 9-11 on airplanes, at airports; but the government knows the barn door has been closed after the cows are gone. Soon London and the UK will put into effect all the measures needed to win a battle that was lost on July 7th.


 

__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050708/736cd732/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 23:30:04 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:30:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e05070809241285d8e0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050708233004.56471.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

> On 7/8/05, Damien Broderick wrote:
> > Britain 2002:
> > 
> > Child pedestrians:
> > Killed  79
> > Killed or seriously injured  2,828
> > 
> > Adult pedestrians:
> > Killed 696
> > Killed or seriously injured  5,803
> > 
> > Motorcyclists and passengers:
> > Killed 609
> > Killed or seriously injured 7,500
> > 
> > Car drivers and passengers:
> > Killed 1,747
> > Killed or seriously injured 18,728
> > 
> 
> People overreact emotionally to disasters and are very poor at risk
> analysis. And you won't get any thanks for pointing this out. You
> cruel, heartless, calculating monster!  ;)
> 
> Look at the panic about shark attacks in Florida in the news.
> (About ten people annually are killed by sharks worldwide).

And two people drowned in a rip-tide after 6 pm on New Hampshire's
shores, so now the state is spending several hundred grand on rip tide
warning signs and extended life-guard hours. The thing you aren't
considering is the opportunity costs of not doing anything. NH's beach
is a tourist mecca (as is London). Nothing keeps the tourists and their
dollars away more than the impression that nothing is being done about
a perceived risk.

> 
> Try telling them that 9/11 deaths are similar to monthly U.S. traffic
> fatalities.
> Compare the road safety budgets with homeland security budgets. 

Not a valid comparison. You'd need to include the cost of bumpers,
crush-zone engineering, airbags, door I-beams, and seatbelts that every
car owner pays for in the price of their vehicle. Multiply that by
every vehicle on the road.

> 
> 9/11 fatalities were several to ten times fewer than annual deaths
> from falls (in the home or workplace), or from suicide, or from
> homicide.

Just as more toddlers die in 5 gallon buckets than by firearms, but you
don't see any 5 gallon bucket control laws. More people die on toilets
than anywhere else, but there are no laws regulating their use.

> 
> Instead of rationally apportioning funds to the worst or most unfair
> societal predicaments, homeland security budgets soar.
> 
> In the UK we will probably have huge spending on nonsensical security
> measures now, just like in the US..

You mean all those cameras and gun bans weren't?

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 23:34:40 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:34:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0507071836742e6906@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050708233440.10744.qmail@web30713.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

> "Why Australians will never be prosperous"
> 
> Media Release (1 page):
>
http://www.tai.org.au/MediaReleases_Files/MediaReleases/PR%20Prosperity.pdf
> 
> Full Paper (longer):
>
http://www.tai.org.au/Publications_Files/Papers&Sub_Files/Prosperity%20webpaper%204.pdf
> 
> This is from the Australia Institute (http://www.tai.org.au/), no
> idea
> about their credibility, but check out their website, there's plenty
> of detail.
> 
> Except of interest from the media release:
> "The results show that the proportion of Australians who
> indicate they are totally satisfied with life overall declines as
> income increases; 21 per cent
> of those in the lowest income group say they are totally satisfied
> while only 13 per cent of
> those in the highest income group feel the same way. Overall life
> satisfaction is little
> affected by differences in wealth."

Not a valid comparison. You want a then vs now comparison of the same
people. When bloke A was in the lowest income group vs when he is later
in the highest income group, how likely is he to be satisfied now vs
then? I'll bet those in the highest income level who are upwardly
mobile were even less satisfied when they were poorer. The 87% of the
richest who are unsatisfied are unsatisfied because they are driven
individuals who want even more. Maybe that is unhealthy or not, but how
some other people who are poorer feel now has little relevance to 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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Fri Jul  8 23:44:56 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 16:44:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050708233004.56471.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050708234456.93355.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

England has to do what it must, but they wont necessarily be safer, they will just feel better. My uneducated guess is the war wont be won until neutron bombs are used in such locations as Tora Bora and other hangouts for the al qaeda unemployed.

Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

--- BillK 
wrote:

> On 7/8/05, Damien Broderick wrote:
> > Britain 2002:
> > 
> > Child pedestrians:
> > Killed 79
> > Killed or seriously injured 2,828
> > 
> > Adult pedestrians:
> > Killed 696
> > Killed or seriously injured 5,803
> > 
> > Motorcyclists and passengers:
> > Killed 609
> > Killed or seriously injured 7,500
> > 
> > Car drivers and passengers:
> > Killed 1,747
> > Killed or seriously injured 18,728
> > 
> 
> People overreact emotionally to disasters and are very poor at risk
> analysis. And you won't get any thanks for pointing this out. You
> cruel, heartless, calculating monster! ;)
> 
> Look at the panic about shark attacks in Florida in the news.
> (About ten people annually are killed by sharks worldwide).

And two people drowned in a rip-tide after 6 pm on New Hampshire's
shores, so now the state is spending several hundred grand on rip tide
warning signs and extended life-guard hours. The thing you aren't
considering is the opportunity costs of not doing anything. NH's beach
is a tourist mecca (as is London). Nothing keeps the tourists and their
dollars away more than the impression that nothing is being done about
a perceived risk.

> 
> Try telling them that 9/11 deaths are similar to monthly U.S. traffic
> fatalities.
> Compare the road safety budgets with homeland security budgets. 

Not a valid comparison. You'd need to include the cost of bumpers,
crush-zone engineering, airbags, door I-beams, and seatbelts that every
car owner pays for in the price of their vehicle. Multiply that by
every vehicle on the road.

> 
> 9/11 fatalities were several to ten times fewer than annual deaths
> from falls (in the home or workplace), or from suicide, or from
> homicide.

Just as more toddlers die in 5 gallon buckets than by firearms, but you
don't see any 5 gallon bucket control laws. More people die on toilets
than anywhere else, but there are no laws regulating their use.

> 
> Instead of rationally apportioning funds to the worst or most unfair
> societal predicaments, homeland security budgets soar.
> 
> In the UK we will probably have huge spending on nonsensical security
> measures now, just like in the US..

You mean all those cameras and gun bans weren't?

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
-William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat


		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050708/f4d62fc2/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 01:59:58 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 18:59:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] clash of un-civilizations
In-Reply-To: <20050708234456.93355.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709015958.1553.qmail@web34409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

(Mike, those people happen to die parked on top of
toilets, not because of anything the toilets are doing
to them).
We are in World War 4, it is a clash of civilizations,
not just an ideological war as WWs1-3 were. When Rummy
says we'll be in Iraq for 12 years you multiply that
by two and you get a more plausible time frame: about
a quarter century. 
What weapons have been used or will be used; bunker
busters with small nukes? What else?


> More people die on toilets
> than anywhere else, but there are no laws regulating
> their use.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From dgc at cox.net  Sat Jul  9 03:40:57 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 23:40:57 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <20050708232851.306.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050708232851.306.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42CF4749.3000008@cox.net>

c c wrote:

> Al Qaeda has very little interest now in hijacking American airliners 
> or terrorizing airports. Of course they hate America and would do 
> anything they could, including a return to hijacking jets, but they 
> have other options, they got away with 9-11 and they are satisfied 
> with that operation; they aren't determined to go after American 
> aviation at this time.
> The government had to do what it did after 9-11 on airplanes, at 
> airports; but the government knows the barn door has been closed after 
> the cows are gone. Soon London and the UK will put into effect all the 
> measures needed to win a battle that was lost on July 7th.
>
More generally, Al-Qaeda (or whoever) is winning,  Al Queda spent 
approximately 30 man-years on the 9-11 attack.  The US government has 
spent at least 10,000 man years on a specific and unnecessary response 
to that attack, in the form of airport screeners. This response is 
unnecessary because airline passengers and crew will no longer tolerate 
a 9-11 type attack. Al Qaeda will not attempt another 9-11 type attack 
because they know it cannot succeed. This has nothing to do with TSA, 
and everything to do with the heightened awareness of the flying public.

Similarly, there is little to gain by increasing security measures after 
the horrific London attacks. The UK authorities should ask public 
transportation users to be on the lookout for unattended packages, but 
even if the authorities make no official request, an unattended parcel 
will not be tolerated on a public transportation system, starting now. 
On 9-11, the passengers of the fourth airplane learned the lesson of 
personal vigilance from the reports from the first three aircraft, even 
though they had only minimal information. The rest of the traveling 
public now has had a lot more time to assimilate the information, so 
9-11 is not reproducible.

Similarly 7-7 will be a lot harder to reproduce. any poor college 
student in any major metropolitan area who inadvertently leaves a 
backpack on a bus or subway car will be in serious trouble, because the 
other passengers will take action: the student will be thrown to the 
floor and the pack back will be thrown off the vehicle. During the next 
year we will see at least a hundred such incidents.

Suicide bombings are still a threat, From a purely rational perspective, 
this threat cannot be countered if each suicide agent can kill more than 
one victim. Fortunately, suicide is strongly counter indicated by 
evolution, so the cost of each suicide to the opposition is more than 
just a single life.




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jul  9 03:58:29 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 22:58:29 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <42CF4749.3000008@cox.net>
References: <20050708232851.306.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<42CF4749.3000008@cox.net>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050708225344.01c9b8c8@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 11:40 PM 7/8/2005 -0400, Dan Clemmensen wrote:

>any poor college student in any major metropolitan area who inadvertently 
>leaves a backpack on a bus or subway car will be in serious trouble, 
>because the other passengers will take action: the student will be thrown 
>to the floor and the pack back will be thrown off the vehicle.

It's more complicated than that. When I was in London for the first time 
last year, I was interested to see that at least some trains (maybe those 
serving the airport?) allocated space for passenger luggage; you put your 
bag there, then went and found a seat. I thought this was awfully trusting. 
Presumably this facility will now be abolished, and bombs will be 
hand-delivered by suicide cretins.

Damien Broderick



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 04:27:47 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:27:47 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <42CF4749.3000008@cox.net>
Message-ID: <20050709042747.27319.qmail@web34409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Yes, when someone says 'al qaeda' they are alluding to
al qaeda- allied or al qaeda-inspired orgs involved in
financing, planning, and directly operating
asymmetrical combat ops.
My question is: what weaponry has been used by America
so far? What is in the works? I've read reports of
nuke tipped bunker busters having been used already,
but disregard military rumors until guys in (or
retired from) Defense can fill us in on that which is
obviously not classified. 


> More generally, Al-Qaeda (or whoever) is winning, 
> Al Queda spent 
> approximately 30 man-years on the 9-11 attack.  The
> US government has 
> spent at least 10,000 man years on a specific and
> unnecessary response 
> to that attack


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail 
Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour: 
http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html 



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 04:36:57 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2005 21:36:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <42CF4749.3000008@cox.net>
Message-ID: <20050709043657.95698.qmail@web34406.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

nothing whatsoever to do with The Security Apparatus?



> This has
> nothing to do with TSA, 
> and everything to do with the heightened awareness
> of the flying public.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From claribel at intermessage.com  Sat Jul  9 05:57:20 2005
From: claribel at intermessage.com (Claribel)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 01:57:20 -0400
Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
Message-ID: <002501c5844b$12993010$7c863040@WIGGLES>


From: The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>


    But if they truly believed their own claims, then
they would realize that we and our technology are as
natural as any other species that has evolved to the
point of out-competing other species. If they truly
believed that "we are the world" and they truly
understood the world, and thereby themselves, then
they would embrace change knowing that the world
always has and will continue to change, transform, and
evolve.

Claribel: This is my position exactly. I am both New Age and 
ranshumanist  -- yes, some people do exist who embrace both metaphysics and 
advanced science. I do not regard them as incompatible, if each is kept in 
its proper sphere. I wonder if anyone here is familiar with the Integral 
approach of Ken Wilber? (http://wilber.shambhala.com/) This philosophy 
applies an evolutionary approach to all domains ranging from physical and 
biological to social, mental and spiritual. In some ways, I think it's a 
little too pat in drawing such equivalences, but I have found meaningful 
insights in it.

We are the world. The world is growing and changing... beautiful.

The Avantguardian:

Their contention, that the best relationship we
can have with nature is to completely "let it be" and
refrain from making any change or impact to our
ecosystem, is moronic. It essentially asserts that the
best way to mind the baby is to take off to Vegas and
leave the baby it to its own devices. In this, the
average green-luddite seems to think that the most
responsible method of stewardship of the planet is to
essentially mimic inanimate objects that are sort of
"just there" and try not to actually have any kind of
effect on our environment. Whereas even the lowly
tse-tse fly or anthrax bacterium unabashedly make huge
impacts on ecosystems in a thoroughly selfish manner

Claribel: Another excellent point. The predominant New Age version of nature 
is very sanitized. I've always considered it ironic that we should "walk 
lightly on the earth" when it doesn't walk lightly on us (or on itself, 
considering earthquakes and tsunamis.)

The Avantguardian:

 It also irks me to no end when I see some trendy
Hollywood starlet who goes on TV on behalf of PETA or
some such to condemn me for using mice in my
biomedical research. What truly drives me to
distraction is that, short of being prevented from
roaming where they will, those mice live exceedingly
well for mice....Hell the neighboring lab actually supplies their mice with
several hundreds of dollars worth of cocaine on a
weekly basis.

Claribel: Is this for drug experiments, or for pain-killers? I've often 
wondered why experimenters don't just lobotomize the pain centers of their 
animals' brains. Could you explain the usual procedures for controlling pain 
and trauma in laboratory specimens?

I will admit that, since I eat meat and perform ruthless genocide with 
flypaper and ant traps (almost literal genocide, since I've destroyed 
several breeding populations in my house), it would be hypocritical for me 
to condemn the whole idea of sacrificing animals' lives in research.

Claribel 




From claribel at intermessage.com  Sat Jul  9 06:09:18 2005
From: claribel at intermessage.com (Claribel)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 02:09:18 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 22, Issue 15
References: <200507081800.j68I09R13377@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c5844d$9dc9e650$7c863040@WIGGLES>


From: "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>

> In countries where wealth is primarily self-made, which would include
> the USA and probably Australia (but not most countries in western
> Europe), I would *expect* declining satisfaction in the wealthiest
> individuals -- it is a self-selecting population.
>
> One of the key characteristics of really successful entrepreneurs is
> that they are "hungry" by nature i.e. they are never satisfied.  In
> Silicon Valley, being "hungry" is often considered a non-negotiable
> characteristic of core team members when building new companies.  There
> is a strong correlation between this property and business success,
> which puts a lot of the wealth in their hands as a group.  This is also
> why successful entrepreneurs rarely retire, going on to more ventures.
> They are driven toward stressful environments with hard problems to 
> tackle.
>
> This may not explain all of it, but I'll bet it explains some of it.
> Most successful entrepreneurs I know are as dissatisfied after they have
> millions in the bank as when they were first starting out.  The money is
> somewhat immaterial toward that end.  They may not be unhappy per se,
> but they are hardly ever satisfied.

I've always thought that "satisfaction" is a vastly overrated virtue, and 
using it to measure "happiness" or "subjective well being", as some 
experimenters have, will produce skewed results. Divine dissatisfaction is 
the root of human greatness.

Am I happy? Moderately to extremely so, depending on my mood (occasional, 
biologically-driven depressive episodes excepted). Am I satisfied with my 
life and level of being as it currently is? Hell, NO. Am I satisfied with 
the progress I've been making? Yes. Perhaps it's the last variable that 
explains it.

Claribel 




From amara at amara.com  Sat Jul  9 06:28:49 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 08:28:49 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
Message-ID: <p06210201bef51ea687e1@[23.237.66.13]>

>When I was in London for the first time last year, I was interested to
>see that at least some trains (maybe those serving the airport?)
>allocated space for passenger luggage;

This practice is common on most European trains that service airports,
it is hard for me to imagine this particular train design disappearing.

Amara


From giogavir at yahoo.it  Sat Jul  9 07:09:25 2005
From: giogavir at yahoo.it (giorgio gaviraghi)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 09:09:25 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a comparison with London bombings
In-Reply-To: <20050708232851.306.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709070925.92842.qmail@web26206.mail.ukl.yahoo.com>


--- c c <bebI don'y know about Al Qaeda interests but
they have plenty of options to create and spread
terror.
Since they are utilizing suicide bombers they could
easily send trucks full of explosives in New York
bridges or tunnels, destroying them, killing thousands
and paralyzing an entire city for months if not years.
Do the same in London or whichever city they may
select, destroy cruise ships by ramming them with
small boats full of explosives and so on.
If you consider the options they have endless
alternatives and possibilities that we can't forese
nor prevent.
Our only alternative is to fight them by 
1 identify them wherever they are
2-capturing or killing them asap
3-get rid of their leaders by reaching each one of
them_cc at yahoo.com> ha scritto: 

> Al Qaeda has very little interest now in hijacking
> American airliners or terrorizing airports. Of
> course they hate America and would do anything they
> could, including a return to hijacking jets, but
> they have other options, they got away with 9-11 and
> they are satisfied with that operation; they aren't
> determined to go after American aviation at this
> time.
> The government had to do what it did after 9-11 on
> airplanes, at airports; but the government knows the
> barn door has been closed after the cows are gone.
> Soon London and the UK will put into effect all the
> measures needed to win a battle that was lost on
> July 7th.
> 
> 
>  
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com >
_______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 



	

	
		
___________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB 
http://mail.yahoo.it


From marc_geddes at yahoo.co.nz  Sat Jul  9 07:35:51 2005
From: marc_geddes at yahoo.co.nz (Marc Geddes)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 19:35:51 +1200 (NZST)
Subject: [extropy-chat] a2i2 is Hiring for its Artificial General Intelligence
	(AGI) Project 
Message-ID: <20050709073551.11132.qmail@web31503.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

The glaring oxymoron on your news page would tend to
put me off.  The oxymoron....

"...completion of 'Project Aigo': fully functional,
commercializable AGI technology."

My own general theory of AGI has been complete for 1-2
months now.  If only I had my theory combined with
your business skills combined with Eliezer's IQ ...
there'd have been a Singularity by now.

As it is, the world will probably have to wait another
15-30 for real AGI, whilst I struggle with border-line
poverty and an IQ well below the super-genius level to
fully formalize my theory *sigh*

---

THE BRAIN is wider than the sky,  
  For, put them side by side,  
The one the other will include  
  With ease, and you beside. 

-Emily Dickinson

'The brain is wider than the sky'
http://www.bartleby.com/113/1126.html

---

Please visit my web-site:

Mathematics, Mind and Matter
http://www.riemannai.org/

---

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Jul  9 11:13:30 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 04:13:30 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050708234456.93355.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050708234456.93355.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <DF2BCB69-EDB6-40CA-9857-6929231F06FD@mac.com>


On Jul 8, 2005, at 4:44 PM, c c wrote:

> England has to do what it must, but they wont necessarily be safer,  
> they will just feel better. My uneducated guess is the war wont be  
> won until neutron bombs are used in such locations as Tora Bora and  
> other hangouts for the al qaeda unemployed.

If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish  
that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such  
a thing was done.  But since I understand what you apparently miss I  
would not wish that on you.  What you are missing is that all "those.  
people" are all potential immortals.  Exactly why do they deserve to  
miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their   
(relatively) *very* early childhood?  We who have not learned yet to  
truly understand indefinitely long life or understand its requisites  
are willing to kill all too easily.

- samantha
>



From amara at amara.com  Sat Jul  9 11:45:43 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 13:45:43 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] on The Climate Change Question
Message-ID: <p06210202bef550fe5465@[23.237.66.13]>

I found the 'Reason Online' site today, and input my following text
into the commentary that follows Baily's Greenhouse Hypocrisy Exposed:

http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2005/06/greenhouse_hypo.shtml


It is certainly worth to continue learning and studying the Sun-Earth
system, in general, and the global warming in particular, in order to
be able to separate man-made causes from natural reasons, and to
estimate the costs. The climate change question is perhaps the most
crucial question today that science should answer for the
policy-makers.

As a person not working in the climate field, but as a scientist
(astronomer), nevertheless, I have listened to many scientific
arguments (pro and con). When I read detailed climate change reports,
all pointing to real man-made warming trends, within a short ~1/2-year
in the well-researched and close-to-mainstream press: _The Economist_,
_New Scientist_, and _Physics Today_, then I notice, because surely
these cannot all be the results of the scientists riding the gravy
train, as the skeptics claim.

I suggest for the readers to pick up:

1) The Economist: ''A Canary in the Coal Mine'', November 13, 2004.

2) Fred Pearce, ''Climate Change: Menace or Myth?'', New Scientist,
12 February 2005.

3) Judith Lean ''Living with a Variable Sun,'' June 2005 Physics
Today.

 From 1), you will read that the (very sensitive) Arctic _is_ warming,
and such a warming could have alarming consequences on global climate.
Are we sure that there is a man-made warming trend, though? Yes, if
you read in detail the next two references.

Reference 2) states the primary physics of what gases (for example,
CO2) in the atmosphere trap infrared radiation emitted by the Earth's
surface, which leads to a greenhouse effect, and the article shows the
increase of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere over the last 60
years. Increased atmospheric heat is the simple physical and chemical
result. The warming is real, but how does that compare to 'natural'
warming in Earth's history, due to variabilities in the Sun's output?

The third 3) reference describes the Sun-Earth energy flow in detail,
and what should be particularly interesting to readers of this subject
are the terrestrial responses to solar activity. The author Lean
writes (pg.37):

	''Contemporary habitat pressure is primarily from human
	activity rather than solar. The atmospheric concentration of
	CO2 has increased 31% since 1750. A doubling of
	greenhouse-gas concentrations is projected to warm Earth's
	surface by 4.2K. Solar-driven surface temperature changes
	are substantially less, unlikely to exceed 0.5K and maybe as
	small as 0.1K (points to Fig 3). Nevertheless, they must be
	reliably specified so that policy decisions on global change
	have a firm scientific basis. Furthermore, climate
	encompasses more than surface temperatures, and future
	surprises, perhaps involving the Sun's influence on drought
	and rainfall, are possible.''

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 real malady is fear of life, not of death."   -- Naguib Mahfouz


From amara at amara.com  Sat Jul  9 11:52:32 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 13:52:32 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Science under seige (ACLU)
Message-ID: <p06210205bef56a4d42f2@[23.237.66.13]>

Science under seige report(s)
http://www.aclu.org/Privacy/Privacy.cfm?ID=18445&c=39

ACLU REPORT
''Academic freedom and scientific inquiry have come under
sustained assault since September 11, 2001. Spurred by
misguided and often disingenuous security concerns, the Bush
Administration has sought to impose growing restrictions on
the free flow of scientific information, unreasonable
barriers to the use of scientific materials, and increased
monitoring of and restrictions on foreign university
students.''


From brentn at freeshell.org  Sat Jul  9 12:31:18 2005
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sat,  9 Jul 2005 08:31:18 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] on The Climate Change Question
In-Reply-To: <p06210202bef550fe5465@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <r02010500-1038-59CDF6E0F07511D9948A000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>

 (7/9/05 13:45) Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:

>I found the 'Reason Online' site today, and input my following text
>into the commentary that follows Baily's Greenhouse Hypocrisy Exposed:


Amara,

Thanks for posting this to the list - I'll be interested in checking those articles. I had only seen the Physics Today article previously (by virtue of it coming to my doorstep, sadly.).

I fear, however, that you are wasting your time and breath in trying to convince the so-called 'climate skeptics' to consider rational evidence.  My experience has been that their rejection of any evidence pointing towards human-driven global warming borders on the religious.  No matter how much evidence I've seen to the contrary, I still hear it claimed, frequently, that there are 'no reputable scientists' that believe in global warming.  Even more disturbing is the persistent rejection that climate scientists are interested in how the solar cycle has affected warming trends, despite ample evidence to the contrary.  My only explanation is that they are indulging in classic psychological projection, attributing to their opponents the symptoms of their own pathos.


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

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


From jonkc at att.net  Sat Jul  9 14:39:52 2005
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 10:39:52 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism.
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <001901c58494$374210f0$b4ef4d0c@MyComputer>

I must respectfully disagree with His Eminence Cardinal Schonborn; I don't
think there is any conflict between Evolution and Catholic theology. I agree
there is a huge contradiction between Evolution and the idea of a benevolent
God because each tiny advance Evolution produces must be paid for in a world
of pain and unhappiness and death; however as neither the Christian nor the
Islamic God is benevolent there is no contradiction with Evolution.
Therefore I humbly suggest church officials stop worrying about Evolution
and concentrate on things they have real world experience with, like chasing
little boys.

   John K Clark




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Jul  9 14:56:03 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 09:56:03 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050709095305.01ce0088@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

A regular columnist in the Australian newspaper `explains' why life 
extension would be a terrible prospect:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,15863203,00.html

----------
Christopher Pearson: No future in eternity

09jul05

I SUPPOSE most people have sometime or other toyed with the fantasy of 
eternal youth and health. Damien Broderick, a science contributor with The 
Australian, has turned it into a magnificent obsession.

In his futurological books The Spike: Accelerating into the Unimaginable 
Future and The Last Mortal Generation: How Science Will Alter Our Lives in 
the 21st Century, he has seriously canvassed the chances that immortality 
is at hand. In last week's The Weekend Australian Review he was at it 
again, reviewing a new work by Ray Kurzweil and Terry Grossman entitled 
Fantastic Voyage: Live Long Enough to Live Forever.

Surveying the latest evidence, Broderick is up-beat. "It seems likely that 
powerful research programs will let us first slow, then halt, the leading 
causes of death - heart disease, cancer, stroke, infections - then, 
perhaps, reverse ageing, that slow terrible corrosion of our youthful flesh 
and lively minds."

How can this be? "Knowledge is doubling and deepening at a prodigious rate, 
and even that rate is accelerating ... some of those alive now may thrive 
indefinitely, kept youthful by the same recuperative processes that build 
brand-new babies from ageing sperm and ova."

Fine and dandy for the fortunate young, you may be thinking, but what about 
the rest of us? Are we the last to feed the worms or crematorial fires? 
"Perhaps not, if a kind of maintenance engineering can be applied to our 
ailing bodies. The remedy may be complicated: genomic profiling, pills, 
supplements, stringent diet, more exercise than we care for ... In the 
slightly longer term, our bodies may be infused with swarms of machines not 
much larger than viruses, nanobots designed to scavenge wastes and repair 
tissue damage at the scale of cells."

Broderick envisages a future in which "every human will have the choice of 
staying healthily young indefinitely or of stepping aside, if they choose, 
to make room for a new life, assuming, of course that we linger on this 
planet and that we remain strictly human".

 From a futurologist's perspective, inter-planetary emigration is probably 
neither here nor there. However, an attenuated relationship with the 
strictly human does raise philosophical problems. Broderick is a 
techno-triumphalist; tomorrow belongs to him. "No doubt the arguments will 
continue for generations until all those opposed to endless life have died."

If his confidence is warranted, it's surprising that there hasn't been more 
of a fuss made about such startling developments. Admittedly you can go to 
the Immortality Institute's website or log on to the World Transhumanist 
Association, but so far not a peep out of the federal Government. Are they 
just trying, yet again, "to underpromise and deliver in spades" as John 
Howard is wont to say? Usually voluble sources were tight-lipped, so I 
decided to try thinking like a futurologist.

Supposing immortality were technically feasible, how would people avail 
themselves of the opportunity? First World economics suggests that they'd 
have to pay for it and that, like any scarce resource, it would be rationed 
by price. Initially the capital cost would be astronomical and keep eternal 
youth as the preserve of the very rich and, no doubt, their pets.

If electoral pressure -- and occasional riots -- obliged the G8 governments 
to pour endless public funding into nanobot research, cryogenics and 
cloning, the unit cost would fall. But even if immortality became a 
national health service item, there would still be tricky distributional 
issues. For example, someone would have to make decisions about who was 
least likely to benefit from treatment and explain why they'd, as it were, 
missed the bus.

Then again, think of the recriminations from the Third World, unless the 
elixir of life were made freely available and as UN cant puts it: "Within a 
socially acceptable time frame."

Or forget about the recriminations and think instead about a rogue state or 
a terrorist organisation getting a nuclear weapon. How easy to hold the 
life-enhanced (but by no means indestructible) populations of the developed 
world to ransom: the slogan would be immortality for all or for none.

Even if enlightened self-interest triumphed, in an orderly transition to a 
post-mortal world, there would still be pesky economic issues to sort out. 
What, for example, happens to countries where huge amounts of capital are 
diverted from other kinds of productive investment into a bottomless pit of 
human resource development? In a society where those entering into 
immortality spend most of their time at the gym or taking (on Broderick's 
reckoning) 250 pills a day, who does the work and prepares the food?

After time and tide have borne away the last mortal cohort, there'd be an 
end to the transfers of inherited capital that previously helped keep the 
wheels of industry and speculative enterprise turning. For fear of running 
short, business and investors would become highly risk-averse. While some 
optimists might reckon that there's always time to make more money, most of 
us would be playing it safe and hoarding or saving up for planetary 
migration and to fund the next generation of life-enhancers.

Talking of the next generation, reproduction as we have known it would lose 
any sense of urgency. The notion of immortality through progeny and the 
survival of one's genes would fade away. Indeed, given the amount of time 
that would have to be devoted to personal regeneration, it would be 
surprising if people had any left over to devote to parenting. Besides, the 
zero population growth lobby and the greens would doubtless be arguing that 
there's no more room, at least on this over-crowded continent.

Presumably, in the transition period, adopting Third World babies would be 
permitted. It might also be possible - borrowing the model of carbon 
emissions trading - to buy the reproductive entitlements of adults who'd 
been talked into renouncing their access to immortality. Forward-thinking 
regimes such as China's might well set up a market in the reproductive 
rights of long-term prisoners and those condemned to death, to cover 
administrative costs and so forth and to complement the existing trade in 
body parts.

Futurologists seldom take much notice of scarcity economics and they're apt 
to assume technological progress means abundance for all. It hasn't so far, 
of course, and -- if scarce resources meant rationing the right to 
reproduce -- we would all be in terrible trouble. For it is the experience 
of parenthood that most effectively teaches us, men especially, the lessons 
of selflessness. That hard-wired capacity for unconditional love of 
helpless offspring turns self-preoccupied adolescents into adults almost 
overnight. Without parenthood, the race would become spoiled and go to rack 
and ruin.

It is, I suppose, just conceivable that Broderick may be right about the 
theoretical possibility of indefinitely prolonged life. However, human 
nature is less malleable than human physiology and ill-adapted to 
immortality's challenges. I also have my doubts about whether, if offered 
the everlasting option, all that many of us would take it.

After all, well-adjusted people tend to develop a serene acceptance of 
finitude. Then again, the sense of an ending is all that makes some lives, 
especially very long ones, bearable in the meantime. Robert Louis 
Stevenson's popular Requiem captures the sense of a welcome end:

Under the wide and starry sky

Dig the grave and let me lie.

Glad did I live and gladly die,

And I laid me down with a will.

This be the verse you grave for me:

Here he lies where he longed to be,

Home is the sailor, home from sea,

And the hunter home from the hill.

? The Australian



From pharos at gmail.com  Sat Jul  9 16:12:33 2005
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 17:12:33 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050709095305.01ce0088@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050709095305.01ce0088@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e05070909126c03ed3c@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/9/05, Damien Broderick wrote:
> A regular columnist in the Australian newspaper `explains' why life
> extension would be a terrible prospect:
> 
> http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,15863203,00.html
> 
> ----------
> Christopher Pearson: No future in eternity
> 

Actually, I find a lot to agree with in this article.
(Excluding his obviously misguided criticism of Mr Broderick :) )

He is surprised that governments are keeping quiet about life
extension. Well, the slogan 'No pensions for immortals' is hardly a
vote-winner. Governments already have a huge pensions problem with the
relatively minor life-extension already happening. The population is
no longer dying off around 70 and the survivors are now realizing that
the government has spent all their pension contributions instead of
investing them.

He is certainly correct that the people will insist their governments
provide immortality treatments for everyone as soon as practicable. If
the people see the rich and leading politicians becoming immortal, the
demand will be unstoppable. The immortals will be unable to leave
their homes for fear of assassination by the jealous mortals. And wars
with the mortal nations are also very likely if they are not given the
treatments quickly enough.

I think he is also correct that immortals will become very risk averse
in lifestyle and in investments. There would be a slowdown in the
economy as older minds don't indulge in the spending fads and toys
that fascinate young minds. The 'We've seen it all before' attitude
would apply to everyone.

I also agree that reproduction would virtually disappear. It already
has in most developed societies. His mention of rationing reproductive
rights is a mistake though. Most immortals won't want children and the
few that do can have them without causing any overpopulation problems
as some immortals will continue to die due to accidents or suicide or
homicide.

His contention that immortals could become a race of self-preoccupied,
spoilt prima donnas strikes me at first as surprisingly plausible.
Immortals will have an exaggerated sense of caring for themselves. But
then if we are living in a society of prima donnas, nobody will put up
with anyone else's tantrums. :)

BillK


From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Sat Jul  9 18:04:10 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 11:04:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
Message-ID: <20050709180410.GB23924@ofb.net>

I guess there's no way to jump in and preserve threading...

BillK pharos at gmail.com wrote:

> He is certainly correct that the people will insist their governments
> provide immortality treatments for everyone as soon as practicable. If
> the people see the rich and leading politicians becoming immortal,
> 
> I think he is also correct that immortals will become very risk averse
> in lifestyle and in investments. There would be a slowdown in the
> economy as older minds don't indulge in the spending fads and toys
> that fascinate young minds.
> 
> Most immortals won't want children

All this strikes me as partaking of the same type of thinking as the article
Damien B. posted, a type I think suffers from the flaw of essentialism,
viewing immortals and mortals as distinct types, with some clean transition
point.

The article says:

> Then again, think of the recriminations from the Third World, unless the 
> elixir of life were made freely available and as UN cant puts it: "Within a 
> socially acceptable time frame."

But there are African countries where the life expectancy is under 40.  A
nearly 20 year difference between India and the top countries.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_tot_pop

I would say, more likely than a discrete elixir of life, let alone any way of
telling "immortals" from "mortals", or even a sense of "immortality", is
simply better and better medical care, better prevention or genetic cleaning,
more and better replacement of parts.  A whole suite of ways of enhancing the
body's ability to maintain itself in the face of entropy.  And rather than
"woot, we're immortal!" there'll just be longer and longer achieved lifespans.  

There could be the point some call "actuarial escape velocity", when someone's
life expectancy starts advancing more than a year per year, but at that point
-- a statistical one -- lots of people will still be dying, diluting the
psychological impact.

There won't be an elixir to demand, but lots of trained doctors, drugs,
medical scanners and robots.  What we have today, but more so.

-xx- Damien X-) 


From kurt at metatechnica.com  Sat Jul  9 18:19:43 2005
From: kurt at metatechnica.com (Kurt Schoedel)
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 11:19:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
Message-ID: <E1DrJvT-0002Ke-QA@svr58.ehostpros.com>

I disagree with the notion that post-mortals will be more risk 
adverse, especially in business.

Young people take risks and start companies because they are young and 
have lots of time and freedom to take such risks. If the business 
fails, they can either try something else or just get a job.

Older people are risk adverse because the have families (a.k.a. 
expenses) and must save for retirement (a.k.a. save up so that they 
are not destitute when they become aged). There is also the age 
discrimination issue. Many people over 40 are no longer allowed the 
opportunities to explore and try new things, careerwise. If you do, 
you get hammered and cannot get back to where you were before. The 
system rejects you because you are considered "over the hill" and 
considered a depreciating asset.

This sorts of things make people risk adverse. With postmortality and 
the end of aging, these fears go away and one is free to try whatever 
you want.
Kurt Schoedel
MetaTechnica


From amara at amara.com  Sat Jul  9 19:17:18 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 21:17:18 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with neo-Darwinism.
Message-ID: <p06210200bef5d11f5c18@[23.237.66.13]>

It is not difficult to find more incompatibilities in current news
events.

On 5/24/05, I wrote a piece here (subject: Bioethics Essay- Revised)
giving a view of Thomas Aquinas (14th century) regarding the role of
the woman's womb in relation to the sperm, and how he defined
'rational' soul as the union of the male and female, and that without
this union it was merely a 'sensitive' soul, and incomplete. (1)

To continue with describing Thomas' philosophy (treatise:_On Being and
Essence_), he said that the rational soul is produced by special
creation at the moment when the organism is sufficiently developed to
receive it. In the first stage of embryonic development, the vital
principle has merely vegetative powers; then a sensitive soul comes
into being, formed from the evolving potencies of the organism --
*later yet*, this is replaced by the perfect rational soul (2). In
other words in this medieval man's (the 'Angelic Doctor') view, the
soul did not start at conception but started some considerable time
afterwards.

Thomas' view was an enormous step forward for the Catholic Church, and
the accepted truth for a long time afterwards. So then if one wishes
to be a 'good' Catholic, how to reconcile the view of the 'modern'
Church that a fully rational soul is infused into the embryo at the
first moment of its existence?

This irony was not lost on some Italian media journalists in the May
and June discussions of the (now failed) Referendum last month, since
one of the four points on which the Italians were voting was
_at conception_ 'Rights given to a human embryo under the law' (3).
Unfortunately, even though most Italians are not 'good' Catholics,
the public's technophobias and the Vatican's large-scale mass public
relations and undemocratic voting strategies (urging the Italians
to *not vote*), resulted in the shockingly low (esp. for Italians)
25% voter turnout, hence torpedoing the Referendum.

References
(1) http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2005-May/016333.html
and
_Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature_
Nonfiction. By William R. Newman. University of Chicago Press, pg.
188.

(2) http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14663b.htm

(3) 
http://www.kaisernetwork.org/daily_reports/print_report.cfm?DR_ID=27656&dr_cat=2

-- 

********************************************************************
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/
********************************************************************
"Sometimes it takes a few more days due to customs clearance"
-- computer vendor to Amara


From scerir at libero.it  Sat Jul  9 19:29:18 2005
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 21:29:18 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050709095305.01ce0088@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000501c584bc$80b23d50$d9be1b97@administxl09yj>

> After all, well-adjusted people 
> tend to develop a serene acceptance 
> of finitude.

It seems that Seneca gave
a different, maybe deeper,
definition of death, a definition
which could explain the (supposed)
serene acceptance.

[Letters to Lucilius, 1)
'For we are mistaken when we look forward to death; 
the major portion of death has already passed. 
Whatever years be behind us are in death's hands.'

 
 





From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Sat Jul  9 19:30:49 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:30:49 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism.
In-Reply-To: <p06210200bef5d11f5c18@[23.237.66.13]>
References: <p06210200bef5d11f5c18@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <20050709193049.GA3130@ofb.net>

On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 09:17:18PM +0200, Amara Graps wrote:

> Thomas' view was an enormous step forward for the Catholic Church, and
> the accepted truth for a long time afterwards. So then if one wishes

I had the impression this goes back to St. Augustine and his own looking to
Aristotle, with the soul coming in at 40 or 90 days after conception, and
later penitentials giving lesser penalties to early abortion than later.  (The
Church never approved of abortion, but early abortion was considered birth
control, not as bad as murder.)

-xx- Damien X-) 


From max at maxmore.com  Sat Jul  9 19:42:42 2005
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 14:42:42 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Webcast of the First Workshop on Geoethical
	Nanotechnology
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050709143637.03e70428@pop-server.austin.rr.com>

An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/309d062b/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 19:55:04 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 12:55:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <DF2BCB69-EDB6-40CA-9857-6929231F06FD@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050709195504.94897.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Samantha, I dont know how to communicate with you as we both speak the same language but I cannot express my difference of opinion with you at all. It is as if I came from another planet. You write as if I have taken a definite position on the war. Such is not the case, I don't know what is going on, and every time I ask a dissident or conspiracy theorist for info on the secret aspects of the allied war the inevitable reply is forthcoming, "do your own research". It is so predictable, thereafter the personal attacks start. But though I have severe doubts concerning the allies, I have no respect for al qaeda or bin Laden whatsoever. I see no intrinsic difference between the 'Werewolves' terrorists of 1945-6 Germany and al qaeda, bin Laden is just a religious thug. BTW if you don't like the designation 'terrorist' then substitute 'freedom fighter', the name Islamo-militants call themselves or are called means nothing. For starters you would have to fill me in on grave allied secrets,
 which you can't do. We could start with a morals discussion of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings of 60 years ago, but we would go nowhere, being intellectuals. Morality aside, soldiers do; intellectuals perseverate.
 
>If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish 
>that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such 
>a thing was done. But since I understand what you apparently miss I 
>would not wish that on you. What you are missing is that all "those. 
>people" are all potential immortals. Exactly why do they deserve to 
>miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their 
>(relatively) *very* early childhood? We who have not learned yet to 
>truly understand indefinitely long life or understand its requisites 
>are willing to kill all too easily.

- samantha
>

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


		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/73a55b07/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Sat Jul  9 20:14:36 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:14:36 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with neo-Darwinism.
Message-ID: <p06210201bef5dff2d5ba@[23.237.66.13]>

Damien Sullivan:
>I had the impression this goes back to St. Augustine and his own
>looking to Aristotle, with the soul coming in at 40 or 90 days after
>conception, and later penitentials giving lesser penalties to early
>abortion than later.  (The Church never approved of abortion, but
>early abortion was considered birth control, not as bad as murder.)

Damien, can you suggest a reference for Augustine's input? (I am
writing an article on this topic.) I know that Aquinas adopted alot of
Augustine (but I dont know what), and I know that Aquinas was an
Aristotle scholar, purging the Aristotle texts of the Arab commentary
by Ibn Sina (1037), ("Avicenna"), to make it more 'pure'. As far as I
know  Aristotle didn't talk about the soul, his main input into the
historical (present: cloning) debate would be his 'spontaneous
generation' ideas. (is this right?)

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 never hurts to be conservative where the galactic plane is involved."
   -- Chris Fassnacht


From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Sat Jul  9 20:26:31 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 13:26:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism.
In-Reply-To: <p06210201bef5dff2d5ba@[23.237.66.13]>
References: <p06210201bef5dff2d5ba@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <20050709202631.GA8875@ofb.net>

On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 10:14:36PM +0200, Amara Graps wrote:
> Damien Sullivan:
> >I had the impression this goes back to St. Augustine and his own
> >looking to Aristotle, with the soul coming in at 40 or 90 days after

> Damien, can you suggest a reference for Augustine's input? (I am

Not a direct scholarly one; my opinion was formed by googling [augustine
abortion]; I think I'd looked at most of the top links.  (The topmost one
claims

   |The Jewish faith was generally opposed to both infanticide and  |
   |abortion. An exception occurred if the continuation of a        |
   |pregnancy posed a risk to the life of the pregnant woman or to  |
   |her other children. In such cases, the pregnant woman is        |
   |actually obligated to abort the fetus; the fetus is then        |
   |considered "radef" -- pursuer.

which amused me.  The 20th century Catholic church allegedly opposes abortion
even if the mother will die otherwise, and made it grounds for automatic
excommunication.  Worse than murder!

-xx- Damien X-) 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Jul  9 20:32:10 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 13:32:10 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050709195504.94897.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050709195504.94897.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <C2805C9B-0CAB-4A77-A575-56DC34C8CAB5@mac.com>


On Jul 9, 2005, at 12:55 PM, c c wrote:

> Samantha, I dont know how to communicate with you as we both speak  
> the same language but I cannot express my difference of opinion  
> with you at all. It is as if I came from another planet. You write  
> as if I have taken a definite position on the war.

I wrote in response to the suggestion that a neutron bomb was some  
kind of solution to terrorism.   You are not the only one that has  
made such a suggestion.  I believe I must speak up at such times.


> Such is not the case, I don't know what is going on, and every time  
> I ask a dissident or conspiracy theorist for info on the secret  
> aspects of the allied war the inevitable reply is forthcoming, "do  
> your own research". It is so predictable, thereafter the personal  
> attacks start. But though I have severe doubts concerning the  
> allies, I have no respect for al qaeda or bin Laden whatsoever. I  
> see no intrinsic difference between the 'Werewolves' terrorists of  
> 1945-6 Germany and al qaeda, bin Laden is just a religious thug.  
> BTW if you don't like the designation 'terrorist' then substitute  
> 'freedom fighter', the name Islamo-militants call themselves or are  
> called means nothing. For starters you would have t! o fill me in  
> on grave allied secrets, which you can't do. We could start with a  
> morals discussion of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings of 60  
> years ago, but we would go nowhere, being intellectuals. Morality  
> aside, soldiers do; intellectuals perseverate.

Please reread what I wrote.  It goes far deeper than this so-called  
war and a personal interchange.   What I wrote is not about persons  
or personalities.  The above does not touch the fundamental thing I  
was attempting to bring out.

>
> >If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish
> >that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such
> >a thing was done. But since I understand what you apparently miss I
> >would not wish that on you. What you are missing is that all "those.
> >people" are all potential immortals. Exactly why do they deserve to
> >miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their
> >(relatively) *very* early childhood? We who have not learned yet to
> >truly understand indefinitely long life or understand its requisites
> >are willing to kill all too easily.
>
> - samantha
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/e6d84deb/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Jul  9 21:06:16 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 14:06:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Prelate: Catholicism incompatible with
	neo-Darwinism.
In-Reply-To: <001901c58494$374210f0$b4ef4d0c@MyComputer>
References: <6.2.1.2.0.20050707091241.01d63e00@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<001901c58494$374210f0$b4ef4d0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <04AD3BCD-A668-4271-B3CE-FE1F6155E854@mac.com>


On Jul 9, 2005, at 7:39 AM, John K Clark wrote:

> I must respectfully disagree with His Eminence Cardinal Schonborn;  
> I don't
> think there is any conflict between Evolution and Catholic  
> theology. I agree
> there is a huge contradiction between Evolution and the idea of a  
> benevolent
> God because each tiny advance Evolution produces must be paid for  
> in a world
> of pain and unhappiness and death; however as neither the Christian  
> nor the
> Islamic God is benevolent there is no contradiction with Evolution.
> Therefore I humbly suggest church officials stop worrying about  
> Evolution
> and concentrate on things they have real world experience with,  
> like chasing
> little boys.
>
>   John K Clark
>

It is no great surprise to rational people that many aspects of  
Christianity (and of course other religions) are incompatible with  
reality.  It is good to see the Church admitting such.   Now if we  
can just point out to be people what the real take home lesson is.    
Reality beats myth, superstition and dogma.  Honest exploration of  
reality cannot help but show them up where they are false and/or  
unsupported.  Yet somehow people have been sold such a tight package  
deal that they believe much of what they hold to be of value in life  
becomes valueless if they begin to question various bits of  
ungrounded flotsam they have allowed nto enter their minds through  
the gates of religion.

Yes, Catholic dogma is incompatible with evolution.  So much the  
worse for Catholic dogma.

- samantha



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 21:26:49 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 14:26:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha,
	i read your message very carefully-- it is poignant, very important
In-Reply-To: <C2805C9B-0CAB-4A77-A575-56DC34C8CAB5@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

...However it concerns something too deep, it would take a treatise to reply to it, for brevity's sake we are limited to amateur-chat on the war, we're not current or ex military personnel, we dont know what is going on at the highest or middle levels, and as you've mentioned before you don't know what is transpiring on the ground in Iraq. I'm reading your message over & over, but we can't go any farther with your message below than we can with any other message. All our messages are discrete academic chirpings from those who don't know all that much about such complex and complicated ethical issues. Or even the historical background; there's too much to go into.
 Let's get a first-rate ethicist with an extensive background in defense to sign up for extropy-chat and then we might go somewhere, wherever than 'somewhere' may be. But, somehow,  I really and truly doubt it. 
 

Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish 
>that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such 
>a thing was done. But since I understand what you apparently miss I 
>would not wish that on you. What you are missing is that all "those. 
>people" are all potential immortals. Exactly why do they deserve to 
>miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their 
>(relatively) *very* early childhood? We who have not learned yet to 
>truly understand indefinitely long life or understand its requisites 
>are willing to kill all too easily.

- samantha

		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/69c54905/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 22:26:05 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 15:26:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] clash of un-civilizations
In-Reply-To: <20050709015958.1553.qmail@web34409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709222605.86371.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> (Mike, those people happen to die parked on top of
> toilets, not because of anything the toilets are doing
> to them).

This isn't quite true. People slip on wet bathroom floors and hit their
heads on the commode, they strain themselves while doing their business
and suffer from strokes, heart attacks, aneurisms, thrombosis, among
other ailments. The point is that when you sit on a toilet, there is a
greater chance of not getting up than if you'd not sat on it at that
particular moment, a chance which is more significant than most risks
that most people consider are things to worry about. It's just that
toilets are such a part of everyone's life and their utility is so
obvious (like cars) that the idea of not using them and going back to
squatting on a field or sitting in an outhouse is unthinkable.

If only a small portion of the population used toilets today, it would
be far easier to get them banned based on a handful of fatalities while
sitting on them than not.

> We are in World War 4, it is a clash of civilizations,
> not just an ideological war as WWs1-3 were. When Rummy
> says we'll be in Iraq for 12 years you multiply that
> by two and you get a more plausible time frame: about
> a quarter century. 

It certainly wouldn't be the longest period of war in history. There
was the Thirty Years War between the european powers around the
beginning of the 18th century, and the Sixty Years War of Dutch
Independence. Of course, the Vietnamese generally regard their war of
independence stretching from 1945 to 1975 as well, and given the level
of intensity to this conflict, it is more on a par with the North
American Indian conflict with the US through the 19th century, most of
which US historians don't regard as wars other than for a few periods.

A clash of civilizations is very much an ideological war over how
civilizations are to be run. In this case, you have groups of
arab-supremacists high on Andalusian fantasies and pulp islamo-fascist
theology who want the middle east, and much of the rest of the world,
for islam and nothing else, while some of the world is intent on
tolerance and individual liberty and the rest is trying to ignore
things as much as possible hoping it will go away.

> What weapons have been used or will be used; bunker
> busters with small nukes? What else?

We won't use nukes until and unless some state finally acknowledges
backing the jihad, and unless they use them first.


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 22:32:51 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 15:32:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <DF2BCB69-EDB6-40CA-9857-6929231F06FD@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050709223251.11434.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

>  
> If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish
> that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such
> a thing was done.  But since I understand what you apparently miss I 
> would not wish that on you.  What you are missing is that all "those.
> people" are all potential immortals.  Exactly why do they deserve to 
> miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their   
> (relatively) *very* early childhood?  

It appears here, Samantha, that you now contradict your reaction to
Robert Bradbury a while back when he expressed similar sentiments about
the deaths of millions due to ignorance and superstition.

Of course they could miss eternity because of their own mistakes. Maybe
they should, that is the point of evolution: to weed out the unfit. How
does the transhumanist movement expect the Singularity to be an
evolutionary step upward if we bootstrap every idiot and moron? I have
no problem with an entrance exam to posthumanity.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Sat Jul  9 22:41:26 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 15:41:26 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050709223251.11434.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <DF2BCB69-EDB6-40CA-9857-6929231F06FD@mac.com>
	<20050709223251.11434.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709224126.GA26075@ofb.net>

On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 03:32:51PM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:

> Of course they could miss eternity because of their own mistakes. Maybe
> they should, that is the point of evolution: to weed out the unfit. How
> does the transhumanist movement expect the Singularity to be an
> evolutionary step upward if we bootstrap every idiot and moron? I have
> no problem with an entrance exam to posthumanity.

Even if it excluded you, for being deemed too anti-social to be kept around
forever?

-xx- Damien X-) 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 22:50:58 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 15:50:58 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and not merely a great ethicist with lengthy
	hands-on Defense background
Message-ID: <20050709225058.25809.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

...but also one who knows history inside out as well as current events. Then we might begin to go somewhere. Even so would be as in a large drawing room with a full size puzzle on the floor, each holding one or two tiny pieces of the puzzle, scratching our heads. We're like meteorologists with pencils trying to draw a map of a hurricane.
Sure, study the issues, try to get a grasp, but you'll be studying all your life.
 
Here's a basic mathematical certainty: when Rumsfeld says we'll be in Iraq about twelve years, you multiply it by two and you have the number 24. We will be in Iraq a quarter century? Not unlikely, we were involved the Cold War from about 1944- 1989.

		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/6f8ba935/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 22:56:12 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 15:56:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] clash of un-civilizations
In-Reply-To: <20050709222605.86371.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709225612.45744.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Here we are in agreement, not to mention the Hundred Years War, the War Of The Roses.


 
It certainly wouldn't be the longest period of war in history. There
was the Thirty Years War between the european powers around the
beginning of the 18th century, and the Sixty Years War of Dutch
Independence. Of course, the Vietnamese generally regard their war of
independence stretching from 1945 to 1975 as well, and given the level
of intensity to this conflict, it is more on a par with the North
American Indian conflict with the US through the 19th century, most of
which US historians don't regard as wars other than for a few periods.


__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/17f2a647/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 22:58:38 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 15:58:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] on The Climate Change Question
In-Reply-To: <r02010500-1038-59CDF6E0F07511D9948A000393A47D36@[192.168.123.152]>
Message-ID: <20050709225838.27217.qmail@web30714.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



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

>  (7/9/05 13:45) Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> 
> >I found the 'Reason Online' site today, and input my following text
> >into the commentary that follows Baily's Greenhouse Hypocrisy
> Exposed:
> 
> 
> Amara,
> 
> Thanks for posting this to the list - I'll be interested in checking
> those articles. I had only seen the Physics Today article previously
> (by virtue of it coming to my doorstep, sadly.).
> 
> I fear, however, that you are wasting your time and breath in trying
> to convince the so-called 'climate skeptics' to consider rational
> evidence.  My experience has been that their rejection of any
> evidence pointing towards human-driven global warming borders on the
> religious.  No matter how much evidence I've seen to the contrary, I
> still hear it claimed, frequently, that there are 'no reputable
> scientists' that believe in global warming. 

This is not true, at least if you are talking about me. I have never
said such a thing. What I have said is that, contrary to the claims of
the chicken-littles, the climatology, geology, astrophysics, and other
relevant scientific communities are NOT in any sort of consensus
regarding anthropogentic global warming (which means there are many for
and against the hypothesis, which varies from year to year, depending
on the science available). Quite a number of "scientists" from
irrelevant and unrelated disciplines (like sociology, political
science, anthropology, medicine, psychiatry, etc) have signed
statements as if their opinion means anything conclusive.

That there is an immense amount of misrepresentation (as Mr. Neal's
statement above) including, for instance, island nations blaming all
local sea level rise on global warming (in the case of Somoa it is
claiming 0.5 meters per year sea level rise) rather than geological
subsidence that is a natural process of the life cycle of seamount type
islands. When the global average sea level rise is 2 mm per year, and
most of that is solely due to the rise of the Caspian Sea basin, which
has nothing to do with the melting of any ice sheets or ice caps at
either pole, then misrepresentations are being made for political
reasons.

Every change of the weather now is attributed to the global warming
boogeyman when it is generally nothing of the sort. The North Atlantic
Occilation, for instance, is totally ignored by the chicken littles.
They also ignore natural phenomena or their lack. For instance, Mt.
Pinatubo's eruption put so much dust in the atmosphere that it cooled
the earth for several years, but the chicken littles dismiss the idea
that warming may be occuring because we are not having as many major
volcanic eruptions as have happened in past centuries. Tambora,
Krakatoa, among other super eruptions, as well as a significant impact
event about 1,000 years ago, have in the past spewed massive amounts of
ash in the atmosphere at enough frequency to suppress global
temperatures for long periods of time. The idea that we are emerging
from a minor ice age and returning to the type of climate the human
race enjoyed from about 7,000 BC to the late Roman era is unthinkable.

Global warming chicken littles also engage in political and academic
repression, INCLUDING a person or persons subscribed to this list who
have communicated with others in their movement and attempted to use my
opinions to damage the academic career of a relative of mine.

> Even more disturbing is
> the persistent rejection that climate scientists are interested in
> how the solar cycle has affected warming trends, despite ample
> evidence to the contrary.  My only explanation is that they are
> indulging in classic psychological projection, attributing to their
> opponents the symptoms of their own pathos.

Solar cycles are not the only atronomical factor involved. The
interaction of the galactic radiation out put with the heliopause has
an impact upon both the Sun's activity, the Earths electromagnetic
field and radiation belts, and the movement of dust in the solar
system.



Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 23:10:30 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:10:30 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] on The Climate Change Question
In-Reply-To: <p06210202bef550fe5465@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <20050709231030.18286.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:> 
> 3) Judith Lean ''Living with a Variable Sun,'' June 2005 Physics
> Today.
> 
>  From 1), you will read that the (very sensitive) Arctic _is_
> warming, and such a warming could have alarming consequences on
global
> climate.
> Are we sure that there is a man-made warming trend, though? Yes, if
> you read in detail the next two references.

Few doubt that the arctic is warming. Only an idiot can look at the
open seas of the northwest passage, compare it to photos from last
century, and think otherwise, but regional climate change is not global
climate change, nor are environmental changes of less than 30-100 years
any sort of significant change of any permanence. Ask the Anasazi about
climate change.

> 
> Reference 2) states the primary physics of what gases (for example,
> CO2) in the atmosphere trap infrared radiation emitted by the Earth's
> surface, which leads to a greenhouse effect, and the article shows
> the
> increase of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere over the last 60
> years. Increased atmospheric heat is the simple physical and chemical
> result. The warming is real, but how does that compare to 'natural'
> warming in Earth's history, due to variabilities in the Sun's output?

Among other things, such as changes in the populations of ruminant,
ungulate, and other methane producing animals. Methane is six times
more effective as a green house gase than CO2. 20-30% of the methane in
the atmosphere is produced by the cattle of India. By any measurement
of the many liters of methane such animals release each day indicates
that the average third world family cow contributes more to global
warming than the average American family car. What is the history of
methane production worldwide? Did the white buffalo hunters of the
American west cause the severe cold temperatures of the late 19th
century by shooting all the buffalo (temperatures against which the
global warming chicken littles use as a baseline)?

> 
> The third 3) reference describes the Sun-Earth energy flow in detail,
> and what should be particularly interesting to readers of this
> subject
> are the terrestrial responses to solar activity. The author Lean
> writes (pg.37):
> 
> 	''Contemporary habitat pressure is primarily from human
> 	activity rather than solar. The atmospheric concentration of
> 	CO2 has increased 31% since 1750. A doubling of
> 	greenhouse-gas concentrations is projected to warm Earth's
> 	surface by 4.2K. Solar-driven surface temperature changes
> 	are substantially less, unlikely to exceed 0.5K and maybe as
> 	small as 0.1K (points to Fig 3). Nevertheless, they must be
> 	reliably specified so that policy decisions on global change
> 	have a firm scientific basis. Furthermore, climate
> 	encompasses more than surface temperatures, and future
> 	surprises, perhaps involving the Sun's influence on drought
> 	and rainfall, are possible.''

The 4.2K claim is the maximum claimed by the UN climate change panel
report and is generally considered unsupported by the science. Maximum
real temperature change over the 21st century (total) is considered to
be 0.5-2.0 K (including astronomical) when CO2 levels are expected to
double.

Of course, these are the same brilliant mathematicians who claimed in
1975 that we had 30 years of oil left. I think I'll take my chances.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 23:16:52 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:16:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] clash of un-civilizations
In-Reply-To: <20050709222605.86371.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709231652.29650.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Meant to in passing remark there have been reports & rumors of planned use of small amounts of nuclear material on bunkerbusters, or perhaps that small amounts of nuclear material have already been placed on bunkerbusters and perhaps already used in the field. However i don't care much, don't stay up at night sobbing for al qaeda or SS, kamikaze pilots, khmer rouge or whomever.
Only reason i have any interest is my father was in the Army Air Force from '43- '45, and he sketched a general picture of how intellectuals fight wars in their smoking rooms, High Command makes the decisions, and armed forces obey the orders flowing from those decisions. Military personnel rarely like war because more than obviously it is their posteriors being directed in range of meat mincers


We won't use nukes until and unless some state finally acknowledges
backing the jihad, and unless they use them first.


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
-William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/b55eecb1/attachment.html>

From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 23:18:24 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:18:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050709224126.GA26075@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <20050709231824.30603.qmail@web30714.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Damien Sullivan <phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 09, 2005 at 03:32:51PM -0700, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> > Of course they could miss eternity because of their own mistakes.
> Maybe
> > they should, that is the point of evolution: to weed out the unfit.
> How
> > does the transhumanist movement expect the Singularity to be an
> > evolutionary step upward if we bootstrap every idiot and moron? I
> have
> > no problem with an entrance exam to posthumanity.
> 
> Even if it excluded you, for being deemed too anti-social to be kept
> around
> forever?

Me, anti-social? Hardly. Being anti-socialist does not make one
anti-social. Nor does coddling fools.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sat Jul  9 23:24:02 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:24:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] and not merely a great ethicist with lengthy
	hands-on Defense background
In-Reply-To: <20050709225058.25809.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050709232402.5246.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> ...but also one who knows history inside out as well as current
> events. Then we might begin to go somewhere. Even so would be as in a
> large drawing room with a full size puzzle on the floor, each holding
> one or two tiny pieces of the puzzle, scratching our heads. We're
> like meteorologists with pencils trying to draw a map of a hurricane.
> Sure, study the issues, try to get a grasp, but you'll be studying
> all your life.
>  
> Here's a basic mathematical certainty: when Rumsfeld says we'll be in
> Iraq about twelve years, you multiply it by two and you have the
> number 24. We will be in Iraq a quarter century? Not unlikely, we
> were involved the Cold War from about 1944- 1989.

The distinction between the cold war and the present is that trade with
the states sponsoring or otherwise supporting terrorism is too
lucrative for a cold war strategy of economic embargo, as we employed
against the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact. Seing how the coalition
against Iraq unravelled through the 90's as the UN, nations and
individuals were bribed to corrupt the system, doing the same to Saudi
Arabia, Iran, Syria, and others would not last long, not unless the
terrorists really get agressive and attack France, Germany, and Russia
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://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Jul  9 23:39:55 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:39:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha,
	i read your message very carefully-- it is poignant, very important
In-Reply-To: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>

There is only us.  There are no others to consider the complex and  
ethical issues.  There are no ordained ones of church or academia  
that we may turn over the responsibility to.  History is largely in  
front of us.  We have so much potential freedom to write what we will  
there.   We cannot duck deciding what to write.    The world is being  
made new.  We can make it a faster less forgiving copy of the old  
natural world if we wish or are too afraid or haven't the energy to  
consider what we wish to create.   The real possibility of  
indefinitely long life adds more to the equation than any expert in  
pre-emortality ethics and military history can address.  We can't  
solve such things here but we can begin to talk about them and  
attempt to include them in our thoughts about what is and is not a  
good course of action in keeping with our deepest goals.

- samantha


On Jul 9, 2005, at 2:26 PM, c c wrote:

> ...However it concerns something too deep, it would take a treatise  
> to reply to it, for brevity's sake we are limited to amateur-chat  
> on the war, we're not current or ex military personnel, we dont  
> know what is going on at the highest or middle levels, and as  
> you've mentioned before you don't know what is transpiring on the  
> ground in Iraq. I'm reading your message over & over, but we can't  
> go any farther with your message below than we can with any other  
> message. All our messages are discrete academic chirpings from  
> those who don't know all that much about such complex and  
> complicated ethical issues. Or even the historical background;  
> there's too much to go into.
>  Let's get a first-rate ethicist with an extensive background in  
> defense to sign up for extropy-chat and then we might go somewhere,  
> wherever than 'somewhere' may be. But, somehow,  I really and truly  
> doubt it.
>
>
> Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> >If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish
> >that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such
> >a thing was done. But since I understand what you apparently miss I
> >would not wish that on you. What you are missing is that all "those.
> >people" are all potential immortals. Exactly why do they deserve to
> >miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their
> >(relatively) *very* early childhood? We who have not learned yet to
> >truly understand indefinitely long life or understand its requisites
> >are willing to kill all too easily.
>
> - samantha
>
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/7ffd8b99/attachment.html>

From dirk at neopax.com  Sat Jul  9 23:49:49 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 00:49:49 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha,	i read your message very carefully--
	it is poignant, very important
In-Reply-To: <F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>
References: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>
Message-ID: <42D0629D.8070509@neopax.com>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

> There is only us.  There are no others to consider the complex and 
> ethical issues.  There are no ordained ones of church or academia that 
> we may turn over the responsibility to.  History is largely in front 
> of us.  We have so much potential freedom to write what we will 
> there.   We cannot duck deciding what to write.    The world is being 
> made new.  We can make it a faster less forgiving copy of the old 
> natural world if we wish or are too afraid or haven't the energy to 
> consider what we wish to create.   The real possibility of 
> indefinitely long life adds more to the equation than any expert in 
> pre-emortality ethics and military history can address.  We can't 
> solve such things here but we can begin to talk about them and attempt 
> to include them in our thoughts about what is and is not a good course 
> of action in keeping with our deepest goals.
>
The future gets made by people who make it.
No other qualifications required.
Hitler and Ghandi can debate who had the most influence, with historians 
as judges.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/44 - Release Date: 08/07/2005



From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Jul  9 23:48:16 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 16:48:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050709223251.11434.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050709223251.11434.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <A934B0F3-F9BF-4EAB-8B95-9C5DA25CCACC@mac.com>


On Jul 9, 2005, at 3:32 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>
> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish
>> that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such
>> a thing was done.  But since I understand what you apparently miss I
>> would not wish that on you.  What you are missing is that all "those.
>> people" are all potential immortals.  Exactly why do they deserve to
>> miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their
>> (relatively) *very* early childhood?
>>
>
> It appears here, Samantha, that you now contradict your reaction to
> Robert Bradbury a while back when he expressed similar sentiments  
> about
> the deaths of millions due to ignorance and superstition.

No.  His "solution" denied what he was attempting to further.

>
> Of course they could miss eternity because of their own mistakes.  
> Maybe
> they should, that is the point of evolution: to weed out the unfit.

We are not talking of evolution but of what we propose to do.

> How
> does the transhumanist movement expect the Singularity to be an
> evolutionary step upward if we bootstrap every idiot and moron?

Idiots and morons have the potential to grow beyond their idiocy.  I  
trust you have noticed some growth in yourself over time.

We are every one an "idiot and moron" compared to what we seek to  
become.  I don't see where some of the idiots and morons are capable  
of summarily saying that some other idiots and morons deserve no  
chance.  I am not a total pacifist but I believe death should only be  
dealt when there is no other way and that we should be very conscious  
of what we are doing in light of our own dreams and goals.

> I have
> no problem with an entrance exam to posthumanity.

Administered by the likes of you or I?  I have a huge problem with that.

- samantha
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/951db1d3/attachment.html>

From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Sun Jul 10 00:31:32 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 20:31:32 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <A934B0F3-F9BF-4EAB-8B95-9C5DA25CCACC@mac.com>
References: <20050709223251.11434.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<A934B0F3-F9BF-4EAB-8B95-9C5DA25CCACC@mac.com>
Message-ID: <42D06C64.4090508@humanenhancement.com>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

> We are every one an "idiot and moron" compared to what we seek to 
> become. 


I must say, this is one of the most concise ways of describing my own 
attitude towards our current relationship to our hopefully-impending 
transition to Posthumanity that I have ever read. I've tried to say the 
same thing many times, in many ways, but this is just perfect.

Hope you don't mind if I borrow it now and again.

Joseph

Enhance your body "beyond well" and your mind "beyond normal": 
http://www.humanenhancement.com
New Jersey Transhumanist Association: http://www.goldenfuture.net/njta
PostHumanity Rising: http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ (updated 6/14/05)


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Jul 10 00:43:16 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 19:43:16 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha's ? weird ?? format ?
In-Reply-To: <F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>
References: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050709194102.01c64f78@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

Is it just Eudora? Everything I get from Samantha is cluttered with ? or 
??, between sentences, inside sentences, at the end, which I take to be 
characters Eudora can't read.

Damien Broderick



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 01:16:32 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:16:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha,
	i read your message very carefully-- it is poignant, very important
In-Reply-To: <42D0629D.8070509@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710011632.63880.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Responsibility in the context of this war? What
responsibility do we armchair mind-warriors have?
Intellectuals are thinkers, those risking their hides
in the armed services are doers. And if you were to go
to prison, just say- hypothetically- for refusing to
register for conscription, you would be a doer as
well. Or if you went to Iraq and protested the war
there, that would be surely be taking responsibility.
But what are we here risking? How are we responsible?
What are any of us doing to resist this war? Aside
from gestures and statements?


> There are no ordained ones of
> church or academia that 
> > we may turn over the responsibility to.  
>Samantha


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 01:39:36 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 02:39:36 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha, i read your message very carefully--
	it is poignant, very important
In-Reply-To: <20050710011632.63880.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710011632.63880.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D07C58.3070109@neopax.com>

c c wrote:

>Responsibility in the context of this war? What
>responsibility do we armchair mind-warriors have?
>Intellectuals are thinkers, those risking their hides
>in the armed services are doers. And if you were to go
>to prison, just say- hypothetically- for refusing to
>register for conscription, you would be a doer as
>well. Or if you went to Iraq and protested the war
>there, that would be surely be taking responsibility.
>But what are we here risking? How are we responsible?
>What are any of us doing to resist this war? Aside
>from gestures and statements?
>
>  
>
Why did the US lose the Vietnam War?

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/44 - Release Date: 08/07/2005



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 01:57:57 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 18:57:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nam
In-Reply-To: <42D07C58.3070109@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710015757.8564.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

For one thing, the country was very long and had, as
is well known, much jungle to use as cover by the
communists and their allies. I wager you that if Iraq
had jungle cover we never would have invaded Iraq. The
Soviets were determined to supply the communists.
Vietnamese leftists felt they were cheated out of a
fair election. Americans protested the war from 1962
to 1973. LBJ was an asshole, Richard Nixon was an even
bigger asshole. Other reasons, too. We could write a
book....



> Why did the US lose the Vietnam War? 
> Dirk


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 02:12:08 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 03:12:08 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050710015757.8564.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710015757.8564.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D083F8.901@neopax.com>

c c wrote:

>For one thing, the country was very long and had, as
>is well known, much jungle to use as cover by the
>communists and their allies. I wager you that if Iraq
>had jungle cover we never would have invaded Iraq. The
>Soviets were determined to supply the communists.
>Vietnamese leftists felt they were cheated out of a
>fair election. Americans protested the war from 1962
>to 1973. LBJ was an asshole, Richard Nixon was an even
>bigger asshole. Other reasons, too. We could write a
>book....
>
>
>  
>
>>Why did the US lose the Vietnam War? 
>>Dirk
>>    
>>
>
>  
>
Allow me to quote you:
"Or if you went to Iraq and protested the war there, that would be 
surely be taking responsibility.But what are we here risking? How are we 
responsible?What are any of us doing to resist this war? Aside from 
gestures and statements?"

Well, let me make the point more forcefully.
The US lost not because of any military defeat but because of those 
"gestures and statements", made not by the Vietnamese, or even US 
tourists in Vietnam but by people in the US and around the world.

The Iraqi resistance knows that the US  does not have the will to fight 
for twelve years, most especially because popular support for the war is 
collapsing. And I make a point of criticising the war, and the bogus 
reasons for it, at every oportunity thereby helping that process along.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/44 - Release Date: 08/07/2005



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 02:50:44 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 19:50:44 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <42D083F8.901@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710025045.18220.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I'm no military historian, Dirk, yet Hanoi was never
captured; Baghdad was captured in a matter of weeks.
All the protesting Americans- and as you reminded me-
others around the world engaged in during the Vietnam
War, was during an unending jungle war, the enemy
backed by USSR & China. America was not overthrowing
North Vietnam, the US was trying to replicate the
stalemate of Korea 1950-'53 (America was fighting the
last war). You can't compare the opposition to the
Vietnam War to the opposition to the Iraq War today.
The opposition to the Iraq War is tepid, the
opposition to the Vietnam War was not. Two years after
1965, resisters were doing all sorts of creative
things. Here it is two years after the Iraq invasion
and what is happening here? You tell me.  Just as you
want nothing to do with the Iraq War I want nothing
with protesting it.
The Consensus Party is serious and worthy, And so are
you. But with memories of manipulating marxist
masochoid mindprisoners, that is it for me. People can
fight their own mind-wars.

> Well, let me make the point more forcefully.
> The US lost not because of any military defeat but
> because of those 
> "gestures and statements", made not by the
> Vietnamese, or even US 
> tourists in Vietnam but by people in the US and
> around the world.
> 
> The Iraqi resistance knows that the US  does not
> have the will to fight 
> for twelve years, most especially because popular
> support for the war is 
> collapsing. And I make a point of criticising the
> war, and the bogus 
> reasons for it, at every oportunity thereby helping
> that process along.
> 
> -- 
> Dirk
> 
> The Consensus:-
> The political party for the new millenium
> http://www.theconsensus.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/44 -
> Release Date: 08/07/2005
> 
> 



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sun Jul 10 03:15:31 2005
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 20:15:31 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha,
	i read your message very carefully--	it is poignant, very important
Message-ID: <1120965331.6131@whirlwind.he.net>

Dirk wrote:
> Why did the US lose the Vietnam War?


The US didn't lose the war in any military sense -- it was all but over
when the US withdrew.  The US walked away when all that was left was to
mop up, for complicated political reasons.  Even the communist
government of North Viet Nam agrees on that point in their official
history of the war.  Two more years and it would have very likely been
officially "over".  Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and all that.

For various reasons, the South Vietnamese could not hold it together on
their own, despite the fact that we left them in a clearly dominant
position.


j. andrew rogers




From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 04:07:50 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 21:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050710015757.8564.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050710040750.41618.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

This is entirely wrong. The US lost no battles whatsoever, despite
being hamstrung by stupid rules of engagement that caused the deaths of
thousands of American soldiers. How the US lost the Vietnam War was at
home in the US, where the Chinese and Vietnamese financed nationwide
anti-war protests that were organized by various socialist and
communist groups from the ACP to SDS, as documented in General Giap's
autobiography. In addition, our media was a propaganda front for the
North Vietnamese government, proven by the documented fact that the
Saigon bureau chief for Time magazine was a colonel in the NVA
intelligence service, as documented in his own biography and Vietnamese
government awards... We lost the war on the home front, and no place
else.

In this, there is a similarity to today in that the international left,
particularly stalinist groups like WWP, which have engaged in an
entryist campaign since the 1980's to compromise other organizations,
is now the western propaganda front for the Baathists and al qaeda,
which of course the major media is paying absolutely no attention to,
when it should be THE story to cover.

--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> For one thing, the country was very long and had, as
> is well known, much jungle to use as cover by the
> communists and their allies. I wager you that if Iraq
> had jungle cover we never would have invaded Iraq. The
> Soviets were determined to supply the communists.
> Vietnamese leftists felt they were cheated out of a
> fair election. Americans protested the war from 1962
> to 1973. LBJ was an asshole, Richard Nixon was an even
> bigger asshole. Other reasons, too. We could write a
> book....
> 
> 
> 
> > Why did the US lose the Vietnam War? 
> > Dirk
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jul 10 04:11:13 2005
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2005 23:11:13 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: [Exi-bay-announce] Re: [Exi-la] Webcast of the
 First Workshop on Geoethical Nanotechnology
In-Reply-To: <87pstr9vk2.fsf@snark.piermont.com>
References: <6.2.1.2.2.20050709143637.03e70428@pop-server.austin.rr.com>
	<87pstr9vk2.fsf@snark.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050709230604.048717f0@pop-server.austin.rr.com>

At 10:41 PM 7/9/2005, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

> > Geoethical nanotechnology is the development and implementation under a
> > global regulatory framework of machines capable of assembling molecules
>
>Unless I see evidence to the contrary, I'm afraid I'll be rather
>suspicious that the word "Geoethical" and the phrase "global
>regulatory framework" are not biocompatible with my lunch, so tuning
>in to this "webcast" might cause me to lose it.
>
>It is sad to see people who once wrote eloquently about libertarian
>approaches to the world giving even lip service to words like "global
>regulatory framework".

I'm not sure if she (Martine Rothblatt) ever wrote about libertarian 
approaches to the world.  Where do you find this inconsistence Perry?

And, why would you hang your future so tightly to any one political theory 
when no one political theory is substantially adequate to intelligently 
address the rate of change and the effects of change and how the world can 
function in order to protect individuality and freedom.

If you are referring to Max, and perhaps this is a long shot on my part, 
but if you are, then you would find that his eloquence has evolved, not 
declined.

Natasha

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist, Designer
Studies of the Future, University of Houston

Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler
Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050709/31dc07f1/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Sun Jul 10 04:44:10 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 06:44:10 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
Message-ID: <p06210200bef65730c828@[23.237.66.13]>

>Really?  Where did you derive this conclusion?  What type of 
>"hunger"?  I have been part of this particular scene for a couple of 
>decades now.  I certainly look for a level of "hunger"if you will.  

Samantha,

Whether it is true or not, perhaps it is a fashionable concept
presently..
Didn't Steve Jobs say this at Stanford recently? I keep seeing
references in the news to this 'hunger' aspect of entrepreneurs.

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/grad-061505.html
http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505

Amara
-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
"My, this game does teach new words!" --Hobbes


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 04:56:09 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 21:56:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <20050710040750.41618.qmail@web30704.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050710045609.47929.qmail@web34406.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Apologia if the post on Vietnam was entirely wrong.
 I was associated with WWP from '74-5, and they are
indeed Stalinoids. One of their Grand Klockards told
me "the other groups think we are like Mansonoids".
Back then their youth outreach org was called Youth
Against War and Fascism (YAWF). Larry Holmes, who is
today near the top of the WWP organization, said
during a discussion of how things are not always the
way they seem, "well, we are in favor of war". I
visited their old HQ (on 12th St) in NYC in 1977, and
asked one of them if WWP supported Pol Pot. He looked
embarrassed and replied, "We support Kampuchea".
Leslie Feinberg is a longtime hardcore WWP member, a
transgender warrior, she is interested in some aspects
of transhumanism, with friends like her we wouldn't
need enemies.
Mike, would you send me a private email about how they
are doing their campaign to compromise other orgs? I
don't like mind wars, but there are exceptions to
every rule, are there not? At war with WWP? Count me
in! Not ashamed to hold a grudge in this case.


>groups like WWP, which have
> engaged in an
> entryist campaign since the 1980's to compromise
> other organizations,
> is now the western propaganda front for the
> Baathists and al qaeda,
> which of course the major media is paying absolutely
> no attention to,
> when it should be THE story to cover.
r reasons, too.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sun Jul 10 05:03:23 2005
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:03:23 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
Message-ID: <1120971803.26837@whirlwind.he.net>

Amara wrote:
> Whether it is true or not, perhaps it is a fashionable concept
> presently..
> Didn't Steve Jobs say this at Stanford recently? I keep seeing
> references in the news to this 'hunger' aspect of entrepreneurs.


The descriptive of "hungry" has been in use since I first moved to
Silicon Valley, some 15 years ago.  It is not a new adjective in the
entrepreneurial world, and certainly not in Silicon Valley.

Many (most?) people think they meet this description, but few actually
do in practice.  I would say maybe 10% of all startup inclined
individuals actually qualify based on my personal experience, which is
not exactly limited.  The very best crucibles are startups that
bootstrap to profitability over several years rather than being funded
early.  They will often have a 3-4x staffing turnover along the way due
to people who couldn't cut it, but there is always a small number that
can handle the whole ride from inception, no matter where it takes you.
 Those people are "hungry".  If you are starting a new company, the
ideal personality type is someone who has survived that kind of fire in
the past as one can generally be fairly certain they will survive the
diamond anvil that is the startup business.

In a nutshell, it is some combination of high competence and a
constitution of steel in the face of extreme adversity.  Most people
cannot take that kind of beating for very long.  The ones who can
survive that environment for years on end are worth their weight in gold
in a startup environment.  Those people are "hungry".


cheers,

j. andrew rogers





From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul 10 05:25:57 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 22:25:57 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha's ? weird ?? format ?
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050709194102.01c64f78@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050709194102.01c64f78@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <C0B20C97-0B70-4DBE-BAE1-F77C02930FDF@mac.com>

I am using Mail on a Mac with no special settings.    So I'm not sure  
what could be causing such.

On Jul 9, 2005, at 5:43 PM, Damien Broderick wrote:

> Is it just Eudora? Everything I get from Samantha is cluttered  
> with ? or ??, between sentences, inside sentences, at the end,  
> which I take to be characters Eudora can't read.
>
> Damien Broderick
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From amara at amara.com  Sun Jul 10 05:34:29 2005
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 07:34:29 +0200
Subject: [extropy-chat] on The Climate Change Question
Message-ID: <p06210201bef6618c35b2@[23.237.66.13]>

Brent Neal:
>Thanks for posting this to the list - I'll be interested in checking
>those articles. I had only seen the Physics Today article previously
>(by virtue of it coming to my doorstep, sadly.).

You're welcome.

>I fear, however, that you are wasting your time and breath in trying
>to convince the so-called 'climate skeptics' to consider rational
>evidence.

No I wrote that immediately after I finished reading Lean's article

(Judith Lean ''Living with a Variable Sun,'' June 2005, Physics
Today.)

so then expressing my impression. She did a great job. While I think
the articles in Physics Today are generally of high quality, this one
blew me away. A comprehensive and readable synthesis of so much good
information!

>My experience has been that their rejection of any evidence
>pointing towards human-driven global warming borders on the religious.
>  No matter how much evidence I've seen to the contrary, I still hear
>it claimed, frequently, that there are 'no reputable scientists' that
>believe in global warming.  Even more disturbing is the persistent
>rejection that climate scientists are interested in how the solar
>cycle has affected warming trends, despite ample evidence to the
>contrary.  My only explanation is that they are indulging in classic
>psychological projection, attributing to their opponents the symptoms
>of their own pathos.

To be honest I've not carefully followed all of the arguments, but
this story is an old one; perhaps 20 years of arguments/discussions.
I have atmospheric scientist friends who were convinced 10 years ago,
at the same time (10 yrs ago) the solar physicists in the group I was
working were not as convinced as them. Lean's article shows to me that
an agreement about many aspects of global warming exists now among the
relevant scientists. I don't know when this general agreement began,
but it seems to exist now.

Me, I am just a bystander, not very interested in convincing anyone.
I am highly selective in my magazine subscriptions (weekly journals and
some overseas shipping costs are a killer on my poverty budget), so I
cannot ignore when, in a short period of time, I am reading articles
in my magazines on the same topic, and they are concluding more or
less the same thing. There is a lot of supporting evidence now.

Amara
-- 

********************************************************************
Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
********************************************************************
      "Trust in the Universe, but tie up your camels first."
                (adaptation of a Sufi proverb)



From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Sun Jul 10 05:45:11 2005
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:45:11 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] mitochondrial quantum leap
In-Reply-To: <p06210201bef6618c35b2@23.237.66.13>
References: <p06210201bef6618c35b2@23.237.66.13>
Message-ID: <7641ddc605070922454c414ebf@mail.gmail.com>

Today our team confirmed our previous preliminary data showing that we
can achieve robust mitochondrial transfection and protein expression
in mitochondria of live rats, after an injection of genetically
engineered mitochondrial DNA complexed with our protofection
transfection agent. A significant fraction of cells in the brain is
transfected with this single injection even though we so far did not
optimize the dose.

This achievement has important implications for medicine: protofection
technology works in vivo, and should be capable of replacing damaged
mitochondrial genomes.

Stay tuned.


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul 10 06:19:08 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 23:19:08 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
In-Reply-To: <p06210200bef65730c828@[23.237.66.13]>
References: <p06210200bef65730c828@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <A2CFF18A-E441-487D-A9ED-0937193D1926@mac.com>

Thanks for these two links.  I really enjoyed the transcript.  If  
first met Steve and Steve when they were a couple of semi-hippie  
tecnology freaks like many of the people I was hanging with at the  
itme.  They were toting this homebrew computer in a wood box.  At the  
time I was having a lot of trouble telling the real visionaries from  
the just plained obsessed but not going anywhere folks.  So I went to  
back to school instead of attempting to join the fledgling company.   
I don't remember if they were even talking about a company then.  But  
they were really passionate.

I see stuff about love - loving what you are doing and passion which  
I guess is a type of hunger sort of.  That I know is very real and  
critical.  In hiring situations I always pass on people that have no  
passion.  The passion doesn't have to even be in what they are being  
interviewed for.   But without that spark that sometimes bursts into  
huge creativity  something great  is much less likely to come from  
the  team.   Those wonderful periods of passionate creative fire are  
one of the yummiest and most desirable things in life.  But yeah, he  
does end with the catchy "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish".

I could kick myself for the times I have "settled" in my career.  I  
won't do that any more.

He gets more than a little deathist in many places.  Yes, death and  
its [until now] relatively quick inevitability can be used in  
advantages ways; most anything can be with a bit of skill.  But this  
hardly makes death something wonderful or "the best invention of  
Life".   We can do much better.   We can renew ourselves without it.   
I am sick of hearing excuses and apologetics for death.



- samantha

On Jul 9, 2005, at 9:44 PM, Amara Graps wrote:

>> Really?  Where did you derive this conclusion?  What type of  
>> "hunger"?  I have been part of this particular scene for a couple  
>> of decades now.  I certainly look for a level of "hunger"if you will.
>>
>
> Samantha,
>
> Whether it is true or not, perhaps it is a fashionable concept
> presently..
> Didn't Steve Jobs say this at Stanford recently? I keep seeing
> references in the news to this 'hunger' aspect of entrepreneurs.
>
> http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/grad-061505.html
> http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2005/june15/jobs-061505
>
> Amara
> -- 
>
> ********************************************************************
> Amara Graps, PhD          email: amara at amara.com
> Computational Physics     vita:  ftp://ftp.amara.com/pub/resume.txt
> Multiplex Answers         URL:   http://www.amara.com/
> ********************************************************************
> "My, this game does teach new words!" --Hobbes
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul 10 06:34:52 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2005 23:34:52 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Why Australians will never be prosperous
In-Reply-To: <1120971803.26837@whirlwind.he.net>
References: <1120971803.26837@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <0C02796B-6EB6-4211-9784-D8441A5D492D@mac.com>


On Jul 9, 2005, at 10:03 PM, J. Andrew Rogers wrote:

> Amara wrote:
>
>> Whether it is true or not, perhaps it is a fashionable concept
>> presently..
>> Didn't Steve Jobs say this at Stanford recently? I keep seeing
>> references in the news to this 'hunger' aspect of entrepreneurs.
>>
>
>
> The descriptive of "hungry" has been in use since I first moved to
> Silicon Valley, some 15 years ago.  It is not a new adjective in the
> entrepreneurial world, and certainly not in Silicon Valley.
>
> Many (most?) people think they meet this description, but few actually
> do in practice.  I would say maybe 10% of all startup inclined
> individuals actually qualify based on my personal experience, which is
> not exactly limited.  The very best crucibles are startups that
> bootstrap to profitability over several years rather than being funded
> early.  They will often have a 3-4x staffing turnover along the way  
> due
> to people who couldn't cut it, but there is always a small number that
> can handle the whole ride from inception, no matter where it takes  
> you.
>  Those people are "hungry".  If you are starting a new company, the
> ideal personality type is someone who has survived that kind of  
> fire in
> the past as one can generally be fairly certain they will survive the
> diamond anvil that is the startup business.

Yep.  Many years ago I was employee #9 at a startup.  All of us were  
engineers except for one person doing about 6 jobs at the level of  
secretary, payroll, HR, reception, accounting.  I was used to working  
hard but the early days were killer.  I immersed so deeply and for  
such long hours I thought my brain would explode.  I was there for a  
bit under 3 years.

Now I am starting my own company.  For now it is bootstrap all the  
way.  But I will happily accept money if it doesn't cost too much  
control.

>
> In a nutshell, it is some combination of high competence and a
> constitution of steel in the face of extreme adversity.  Most people
> cannot take that kind of beating for very long.  The ones who can
> survive that environment for years on end are worth their weight in  
> gold
> in a startup environment.  Those people are "hungry".
>

I am re-honing my hunger.  I sated my hunger on whatever paid well  
for too many years.  And though I hate to admit it, it is much harder  
to build and sustain that kind of intense focused energy at 51.

- samantha


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 07:25:37 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 00:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e05070909126c03ed3c@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050710072537.42452.qmail@web60517.mail.yahoo.com>



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

> I think he is also correct that immortals will
> become very risk averse
> in lifestyle and in investments. There would be a
> slowdown in the
> economy as older minds don't indulge in the spending
> fads and toys
> that fascinate young minds. The 'We've seen it all
> before' attitude
> would apply to everyone.

I disagree. Anybody who is willing to radically alter
their biochemistry/physiology/bodies in order to live
longer will be very prone to pragmatism and willing to
take risk. Indeed the first few will likely be
daredevils since nobody will really know what to
expect (i.e. a treatment that immortalizes mice could
entirely possibly kill a human). They will also likely
be very mature and adult and feel fairly fufilled by
life, thus their personality will likely be fairly
stable. While once the technique becomes perfected, we
can expect more risk averse immortals to join the
pool, the first and therefore oldest will most likely
be risk-takers and people of action. Individuals
unlikely to be afraid of speculation and not the kind
to sit on their hordes. Of course they may very well
be greedy as they most certainly would be rich but
they would be smart gamblers and not investment
bankers.


> 
> His contention that immortals could become a race of
> self-preoccupied,
> spoilt prima donnas strikes me at first as
> surprisingly plausible.
> Immortals will have an exaggerated sense of caring
> for themselves. But
> then if we are living in a society of prima donnas,
> nobody will put up
> with anyone else's tantrums. :)

I doubt they would be any more prima donnas than the
very people on this list, myself included. ;)


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 07:55:51 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 00:55:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] more great reasons to be dead
In-Reply-To: <000501c584bc$80b23d50$d9be1b97@administxl09yj>
Message-ID: <20050710075551.55566.qmail@web60524.mail.yahoo.com>



--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:

> > After all, well-adjusted people 
> > tend to develop a serene acceptance 
> > of finitude.
> 
> It seems that Seneca gave
> a different, maybe deeper,
> definition of death, a definition
> which could explain the (supposed)
> serene acceptance.
> 
> [Letters to Lucilius, 1)
> 'For we are mistaken when we look forward to death; 
> the major portion of death has already passed. 
> Whatever years be behind us are in death's hands.'

Yes, I do think Seneca was deeper if less lyrical. I,
however think serene acceptance of death comes from
the realization that the oblivion to which one goes
can be no worse than the oblivion from which one came.
Remember back to before memory and that is death. 

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 08:34:10 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 01:34:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] on The Climate Change Question
In-Reply-To: <20050709225838.27217.qmail@web30714.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050710083410.62426.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Mike Lorrey <mlorrey at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> Global warming chicken littles also engage in
> political and academic
> repression, INCLUDING a person or persons subscribed
> to this list who
> have communicated with others in their movement and
> attempted to use my
> opinions to damage the academic career of a relative
> of mine.

Mike, I agree with you that there is not yet
conclusive proof of an anthropogenic cause of global
warming. Moreover your point about methane generation
of ruminants is accurate. I for one would like to see
cattle kept under large tents that trap the methane
and utilize it for the powering of devices. (inspired
by Mad Max:Beyond Thunderdome of course) In answer to
your question about the history of the naturally
occuring levels of methane in earths atmosphere, in
recent time scales I don't know. But on geologic time
scales, it is widely held that methane was once one of
the predominant constituents of the atmosphere in very
early times. Since then, presumably, it has been
declining. I do imagine that large herbivorous
dinosaurs probably farted huge volumes of methane. 
      But I object to fossil fuels more on the grounds
of their toxic effects, both by oil spillage during
transport and by polluting the air with free-radicals,
nanoparticles, sulfides, and other substances noxious
to life. I resent the fact that the oil companies are
using the controversy over global warming as a straw
man to defend the rest of their irresponible, toxic,
and sometimes violent practices. As far as I know,
global warming (whether it is actually happening
because of us or not) has not killed anyone yet. The
other negative effects of fossil fuel usage have
killed far too many. Aside from the growing percentage
of children diagnosed with asthma and allergies every
year, there are the wars and the terrorists and other
indirect factors as well. Acid rain and the Asian
Brown Cloud can both be demonstrated to be caused by
burning fossil fuels. Even gulf war syndrome is now
thought to be caused by very large doses of the same
things that we all are breathing this very minute. The
sooner we switch to an alcohol economy, the longer we
will live.
      Heat dissapation will always be a technical
hurdle imposed on our engineering by thermodynamics,
thus global warming will be an issue for some time to
come. But we need to deal with the toxins first and
foremost.


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
__________________________________ 
Discover Yahoo! 
Find restaurants, movies, travel and more fun for the weekend. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/weekend.html 



From benboc at lineone.net  Sun Jul 10 08:36:53 2005
From: benboc at lineone.net (ben)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 09:36:53 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Immortals (was: more great reasons to be dead)
In-Reply-To: <200507092350.j69NoCR18616@tick.javien.com>
References: <200507092350.j69NoCR18616@tick.javien.com>
Message-ID: <42D0DE25.7090803@lineone.net>

Damien Sullivan wrote:

"I would say, more likely than a discrete elixir of life, let alone any 
way of
telling "immortals" from "mortals", or even a sense of "immortality", is
simply better and better medical care, better prevention or genetic 
cleaning,
more and better replacement of parts.  A whole suite of ways of 
enhancing the
body's ability to maintain itself in the face of entropy.  And rather than
"woot, we're immortal!" there'll just be longer and longer achieved 
lifespans.  "

There's an easy way of telling an immortal apart from everybody else. 
They need two birthday cakes to hold all the candles.

You raise a good point, but i wonder what the general reaction will be 
to the first person who passes their 120th birthday in demonstrably good 
health. Nobody has ever done that before, so it will be a unique and 
special event. They will be a special person, and the media will 
probably lap it up. Might this not start a general perception that there 
are such things as 'immortals'?

Or will this point be reached so gradually that it's not so special, and 
is completely expected? I can't believe that somebody won't make a big 
deal of it. If nothing else, it will mark a record that's been broken, 
and that's always 'newsworthy'. And the candlemakers will be celebrating.

ben


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 09:44:16 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 02:44:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <42D083F8.901@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710094416.46048.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:

> Well, let me make the point more forcefully.
> The US lost not because of any military defeat but
> because of those 
> "gestures and statements", made not by the
> Vietnamese, or even US 
> tourists in Vietnam but by people in the US and
> around the world.
> 
> The Iraqi resistance knows that the US  does not
> have the will to fight 
> for twelve years, most especially because popular
> support for the war is 
> collapsing. And I make a point of criticising the
> war, and the bogus 
> reasons for it, at every oportunity thereby helping
> that process along.

      Interestingly enough, I agree with you Dirk in
that public sentiment/opinion (most importantly
American public opinion) is the kryptonite of the
American soldier. When they are inspired by a cause
that we believe in, they are capable of homeric deeds.
But when they no longer believe they are fighting for
the people and things they love, they can be routed by
barefoot guys with bows and arrows. 
     That being said, I still think U.S. withdrawal
without replacement by U.N. peacekeepers, would be a
huge tragic mistake. All economic self-interest of the
U.S. aside (and we would lose big) we would be
knowingly allowing a four way civil war that will at
best result in a return of the Baathists to their
murderous splendour and at worst the creation of three
more fractious states that will further destabilize
the Middle East. And you will have more countries for
terrorists to hide in while they plan their next
London bombing. Sooner or later they may get a nuke.
     If your "gestures and statements" campaign
succeeds, one of two possible outcomes will result
depending entirely on your motive. If your motive was
to deal a punitive economic blow to the U.S. for
invading a country that was formerly on EVERYBODY's
shit list then you will have succeeded. If your motive
was to save lives, whether they were those of the
Iraqis, Americans, or even your own fellow Brits, you
will have failed. I would not presume to guess your
motives.


The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 10:04:28 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 03:04:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] mitochondrial quantum leap
In-Reply-To: <7641ddc605070922454c414ebf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050710100428.49127.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Today our team confirmed our previous preliminary
> data showing that we
> can achieve robust mitochondrial transfection and
> protein expression
> in mitochondria of live rats, after an injection of
> genetically
> engineered mitochondrial DNA complexed with our
> protofection
> transfection agent. A significant fraction of cells
> in the brain is
> transfected with this single injection even though
> we so far did not
> optimize the dose.
> 
> This achievement has important implications for
> medicine: protofection
> technology works in vivo, and should be capable of
> replacing damaged
> mitochondrial genomes.

Wow. Not to mention customizing entirely new ones. Can
I get some mitochodria with a few extra copies of the
SOD gene? :)

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 11:01:45 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 04:01:45 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <002501c5844b$12993010$7c863040@WIGGLES>
Message-ID: <20050710110146.43208.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Claribel <claribel at intermessage.com> wrote:

> 
> Claribel: This is my position exactly. I am both New
> Age and 
> ranshumanist  -- yes, some people do exist who
> embrace both metaphysics and 
> advanced science. I do not regard them as
> incompatible, if each is kept in 
> its proper sphere. I wonder if anyone here is
> familiar with the Integral 
> approach of Ken Wilber?
> (http://wilber.shambhala.com/)
In my opinion the relationship of metaphysics to
science is that metaphysics encompasses science and as
science grows, metaphysics shrinks. Perhaps someday
science will understand all and there will be no more
metaphysics left, but then again - maybe not.



 This philosophy 
> applies an evolutionary approach to all domains
> ranging from physical and 
> biological to social, mental and spiritual. In some
> ways, I think it's a 
> little too pat in drawing such equivalences, but I
> have found meaningful 
> insights in it.

I prefer to philosophize rather than to read about
someone else doing it, but I will check it out.

> Claribel: Another excellent point. The predominant
> New Age version of nature 
> is very sanitized. I've always considered it ironic
> that we should "walk 
> lightly on the earth" when it doesn't walk lightly
> on us (or on itself, 
> considering earthquakes and tsunamis.)

You are awakening to your own power. Stomp as deeply
into the earth as you want, and you will not stomp
deeper than 70 ton ultrasaurus did a few hundred
million years ago. Now you can no longer even see his
footprint, just a single shoulder-blade that got
lucky. You cannot hurt the earth any more than a
newborn can suckle too hard on its mother's teat.

> Claribel: Is this for drug experiments, or for
> pain-killers? I've often 
> wondered why experimenters don't just lobotomize the
> pain centers of their 
> animals' brains. Could you explain the usual
> procedures for controlling pain 
> and trauma in laboratory specimens?

The cocaine experiments are done in a different lab so
I do not know the details of what they are studying,
but I believe it has something to do with the effects
of chronic cocaine use on immunity and the ability to
resist infection with viruses. (like HIV, Herpes,
etc.)
In answer to your second question, if we do surgery of
any kind on the animals, we anesthetise them first. If
instead it is time to "harvest", we euthanise them
humanely by either breaking their necks very quickly,
which renders them unconscious immediately and
painlessly or by gassing them with CO2 likewise
painless and quick.

> 
> I will admit that, since I eat meat and perform
> ruthless genocide with 
> flypaper and ant traps (almost literal genocide,
> since I've destroyed 
> several breeding populations in my house), it would
> be hypocritical for me 
> to condemn the whole idea of sacrificing animals'
> lives in research.
> 

Eating meat is no longer genocide since the
agricultural revolution. Now it is the perptuation of
the species that such meat comes from. The chickens
are far better off than the condors. As far as my
sacrifice of mice or your war waged against the ants-
be at peace. For nothing is wasted in nature. The
worms, fungi, and other humble scavengers of the earth
would thank you for the bounty if they could.

Are you perchance a Wiccan?  

The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul 10 12:05:20 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 05:05:20 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050710094416.46048.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710094416.46048.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <904ADFDA-7A93-41EE-B3BC-4C2534C92E86@mac.com>


On Jul 10, 2005, at 2:44 AM, The Avantguardian wrote:

>
>       Interestingly enough, I agree with you Dirk in
> that public sentiment/opinion (most importantly
> American public opinion) is the kryptonite of the
> American soldier. When they are inspired by a cause
> that we believe in, they are capable of homeric deeds.
> But when they no longer believe they are fighting for
> the people and things they love, they can be routed by
> barefoot guys with bows and arrows.

The kryptonite of the soldier is the idiocy of politicians wasting  
the lives of soldiers on meaningless conflicts.  It is the job of the  
American people to speak up when such idiocy becomes obvious.

>      That being said, I still think U.S. withdrawal
> without replacement by U.N. peacekeepers, would be a
> huge tragic mistake. All economic self-interest of the
> U.S. aside (and we would lose big) we would be
> knowingly allowing a four way civil war that will at
> best result in a return of the Baathists to their
> murderous splendour and at worst the creation of three
> more fractious states that will further destabilize
> the Middle East. And you will have more countries for
> terrorists to hide in while they plan their next
> London bombing. Sooner or later they may get a nuke.

Sooner or later my grandma may get a nuke.  Please don't throw in  
gratuitous maybes of this kind.

>      If your "gestures and statements" campaign
> succeeds, one of two possible outcomes will result
> depending entirely on your motive. If your motive was
> to deal a punitive economic blow to the U.S. for
> invading a country that was formerly on EVERYBODY's
> shit list then you will have succeeded. If your motive
> was to save lives, whether they were those of the
> Iraqis, Americans, or even your own fellow Brits, you
> will have failed. I would not presume to guess your
> motives.
>

Are you going to blame the people for telling the truth about this  
outrageous stupidity to the best of their abilities to know it?   My  
motive is to get the US out of their and bring in the UN for the  
purpose of returning the country to the Iraqis.   The economic blow  
will be far worse imho if we stay.   I also disagree that our being  
there saves more lives than if we left.

- samantha



From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Jul 10 12:21:13 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 05:21:13 -0700
Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <002501c5844b$12993010$7c863040@WIGGLES>
References: <002501c5844b$12993010$7c863040@WIGGLES>
Message-ID: <684E4711-AAA7-44C8-9175-ADEC1195ECE7@mac.com>


On Jul 8, 2005, at 10:57 PM, Claribel wrote:

>
> From: The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>
>
>
>    But if they truly believed their own claims, then
> they would realize that we and our technology are as
> natural as any other species that has evolved to the
> point of out-competing other species. If they truly
> believed that "we are the world" and they truly
> understood the world, and thereby themselves, then
> they would embrace change knowing that the world
> always has and will continue to change, transform, and
> evolve.
>
> Claribel: This is my position exactly. I am both New Age and  
> ranshumanist  -- yes, some people do exist who embrace both  
> metaphysics and advanced science. I do not regard them as  
> incompatible, if each is kept in its proper sphere. I wonder if  
> anyone here is familiar with the Integral approach of Ken Wilber?  
> (http://wilber.shambhala.com/) This philosophy applies an  
> evolutionary approach to all domains ranging from physical and  
> biological to social, mental and spiritual. In some ways, I think  
> it's a little too pat in drawing such equivalences, but I have  
> found meaningful insights in it.
>

Please define "metaphysics" or simply say what it means to you.  I do  
not believe in such separate spheres.   Why is truth to be  
partitioned so?

>
> The Avantguardian:
>
> It also irks me to no end when I see some trendy
> Hollywood starlet who goes on TV on behalf of PETA or
> some such to condemn me for using mice in my
> biomedical research. What truly drives me to
> distraction is that, short of being prevented from
> roaming where they will, those mice live exceedingly
> well for mice....Hell the neighboring lab actually supplies their  
> mice with
> several hundreds of dollars worth of cocaine on a
> weekly basis.
>
> Claribel: Is this for drug experiments, or for pain-killers? I've  
> often wondered why experimenters don't just lobotomize the pain  
> centers of their animals' brains. Could you explain the usual  
> procedures for controlling pain and trauma in laboratory specimens?
>
> I will admit that, since I eat meat and perform ruthless genocide  
> with flypaper and ant traps (almost literal genocide, since I've  
> destroyed several breeding populations in my house), it would be  
> hypocritical for me to condemn the whole idea of sacrificing  
> animals' lives in research.
>

You are aware that ants and termites and such are by far the largest  
part of the biomass of earth?   The little bit of ant death in your  
home is utterly undetectable considering the size of the overall  
population.  Unless you believe it is rational to live as a Jain your  
statements of some kind of guilt in this manner are meaningless.

- samantha


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sun Jul 10 13:04:49 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 09:04:49 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Samantha's ? weird ?? format ?
In-Reply-To: <C0B20C97-0B70-4DBE-BAE1-F77C02930FDF@mac.com>
References: <20050709212649.30882.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<F5917375-A501-420C-8F68-A96389458BE8@mac.com>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050709194102.01c64f78@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
	<C0B20C97-0B70-4DBE-BAE1-F77C02930FDF@mac.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507100759450.-238491@pentium.mb.willtown.net>


I'm using Pine on Windows 98 SE and have no troubles with Samantha's
posts. ISO-8859-1 character set.

Regards,
MB


On Sat, 9 Jul 2005, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> I am using Mail on a Mac with no special settings.    So I'm not sure
> what could be causing such.
>
> On Jul 9, 2005, at 5:43 PM, Damien Broderick wrote:
>
> > Is it just Eudora? Everything I get from Samantha is cluttered
> > with ? or ??, between sentences, inside sentences, at the end,
> > which I take to be characters Eudora can't read.


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 15:35:16 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 08:35:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <20050710045609.47929.qmail@web34406.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050710153516.59067.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

It's well documented that they run ANSWER, the main anti-war group
today, and have organised most anti-war protests in the US through this
front. They also comprise the whole of the staff of International
Action Center, a group founded and still somewhat run by former US
Attorney General Ramsey Clark. They have their hooks into IWW and TAO
as well. They have sent a number of their people through the
protester/saboteur bootcamps run by the Ruckus Society. There seems to
be at least a few WWP people involved in Jeremy Rifkin's group.

WWP and several of these other groups accepted, prior to the Iraq war,
significant sums from Saddam Hussein, according to records captured in
Bagdad. Whether they continue to receive funds from the Baathist Party
in Syria, as is suspected, has not yet been confirmed.

They are therefore to be considered the mouthpiece of the
stalinist/baathist movement in the US and anything they do or say
should therefore be discounted as agitprop disinformation of the enemy.

--- c c <beb_cc at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Apologia if the post on Vietnam was entirely wrong.
>  I was associated with WWP from '74-5, and they are
> indeed Stalinoids. One of their Grand Klockards told
> me "the other groups think we are like Mansonoids".
> Back then their youth outreach org was called Youth
> Against War and Fascism (YAWF). Larry Holmes, who is
> today near the top of the WWP organization, said
> during a discussion of how things are not always the
> way they seem, "well, we are in favor of war". I
> visited their old HQ (on 12th St) in NYC in 1977, and
> asked one of them if WWP supported Pol Pot. He looked
> embarrassed and replied, "We support Kampuchea".
> Leslie Feinberg is a longtime hardcore WWP member, a
> transgender warrior, she is interested in some aspects
> of transhumanism, with friends like her we wouldn't
> need enemies.
> Mike, would you send me a private email about how they
> are doing their campaign to compromise other orgs? I
> don't like mind wars, but there are exceptions to
> every rule, are there not? At war with WWP? Count me
> in! Not ashamed to hold a grudge in this case.
> 
> 
> >groups like WWP, which have
> > engaged in an
> > entryist campaign since the 1980's to compromise
> > other organizations,
> > is now the western propaganda front for the
> > Baathists and al qaeda,
> > which of course the major media is paying absolutely
> > no attention to,
> > when it should be THE story to cover.
> r reasons, too.
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 


Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Sun Jul 10 16:22:27 2005
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 12:22:27 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] mitochondrial quantum leap
In-Reply-To: <20050710100428.49127.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <7641ddc605070922454c414ebf@mail.gmail.com>
	<20050710100428.49127.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7641ddc60507100922ac8f482@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/10/05, The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Wow. Not to mention customizing entirely new ones. Can
> I get some mitochodria with a few extra copies of the
> SOD gene? :)
> 
### Yes, you could - but you wouldn't need to! If you can replace your
mitos every twenty years, you don't need to protect them as if your
life depended on them, or be careful about using them up. No more
veggies and antioxidants. The wildest lifestyle of smoky bacon,
tobacco, and booze could be sustained indefinitely, or at least as
long as your nuclear DNA doesn't give up.

But on the other hand, yes, you could splice new genes into your
mitos, maybe something to improve control of cancerogenesis, which
could otherwise still remain your Achilles' heel. Even with fresh
mitos the nuclear mutations may be sufficient to cause cancer,
although at a lower rate than with sick mitos.

And of course you could have super-charged mitos, for extreme
endurance and high IQ. One of the limitations of intelligence is the
energetic capacity of neurons, as shown in mice with mitochondrial
replacement achieved by a breeding program.

Rafal


From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 16:34:17 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 09:34:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <904ADFDA-7A93-41EE-B3BC-4C2534C92E86@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050710163417.85920.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> 
> Are you going to blame the people for telling the truth about this  
> outrageous stupidity to the best of their abilities to know it?   My 
> motive is to get the US out of their and bring in the UN for the  
> purpose of returning the country to the Iraqis.   The economic blow  
> will be far worse imho if we stay.   I also disagree that our being  
> there saves more lives than if we left.

Samantha, who do you think historically makes up the bulk of UN
peacekeeping forces? The UN has about 57,000 peacekeeping troops
deployed around the world, most of whom are 'observers' without any
capacity even to defend themselves, never mind protect others. There is
absolutely no way the UN could take control of things in Iraq without
the US being the bulk of its force. You are also being ignoring
history, as well as being unrealistic: the UN already came into Iraq,
got bombed, turned tail, and ran screeching like a little girl.

You can disagree all you want about numbers of lives saved, but the
numbers contradict your beliefs.

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 16:39:48 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:39:48 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <20050710153516.59067.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710153516.59067.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D14F54.2090706@neopax.com>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>WWP and several of these other groups accepted, prior to the Iraq war,
>significant sums from Saddam Hussein, according to records captured in
>Bagdad. Whether they continue to receive funds from the Baathist Party
>in Syria, as is suspected, has not yet been confirmed.
>
>  
>
Well, better just ask the CIA who can be relied upon to provide truthful 
answers to all such question. NOT.
Would these be the same records that smeared George Galloway?
Your naivete is touching.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 16:41:09 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:41:09 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050710163417.85920.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710163417.85920.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D14FA5.2010704@neopax.com>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>--- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>Are you going to blame the people for telling the truth about this  
>>outrageous stupidity to the best of their abilities to know it?   My 
>>motive is to get the US out of their and bring in the UN for the  
>>purpose of returning the country to the Iraqis.   The economic blow  
>>will be far worse imho if we stay.   I also disagree that our being  
>>there saves more lives than if we left.
>>    
>>
>
>Samantha, who do you think historically makes up the bulk of UN
>peacekeeping forces? The UN has about 57,000 peacekeeping troops
>deployed around the world, most of whom are 'observers' without any
>capacity even to defend themselves, never mind protect others. There is
>absolutely no way the UN could take control of things in Iraq without
>the US being the bulk of its force. You are also being ignoring
>history, as well as being unrealistic: the UN already came into Iraq,
>got bombed, turned tail, and ran screeching like a little girl.
>
>  
>
That's because the US likes it that way.
You think Bush would be cheering if the Chinese offered half a million 
troops to provide the UN with real teeth?

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 16:42:24 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 17:42:24 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050710094416.46048.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710094416.46048.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D14FF0.2080107@neopax.com>

The Avantguardian wrote:

>--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Well, let me make the point more forcefully.
>>The US lost not because of any military defeat but
>>because of those 
>>"gestures and statements", made not by the
>>Vietnamese, or even US 
>>tourists in Vietnam but by people in the US and
>>around the world.
>>
>>The Iraqi resistance knows that the US  does not
>>have the will to fight 
>>for twelve years, most especially because popular
>>support for the war is 
>>collapsing. And I make a point of criticising the
>>war, and the bogus 
>>reasons for it, at every oportunity thereby helping
>>that process along.
>>    
>>
>
>      Interestingly enough, I agree with you Dirk in
>that public sentiment/opinion (most importantly
>American public opinion) is the kryptonite of the
>American soldier. When they are inspired by a cause
>that we believe in, they are capable of homeric deeds.
>But when they no longer believe they are fighting for
>the people and things they love, they can be routed by
>barefoot guys with bows and arrows. 
>     That being said, I still think U.S. withdrawal
>without replacement by U.N. peacekeepers, would be a
>huge tragic mistake. All economic self-interest of the
>U.S. aside (and we would lose big) we would be
>knowingly allowing a four way civil war that will at
>best result in a return of the Baathists to their
>murderous splendour and at worst the creation of three
>more fractious states that will further destabilize
>the Middle East. And you will have more countries for
>terrorists to hide in while they plan their next
>London bombing. Sooner or later they may get a nuke.
>     If your "gestures and statements" campaign
>succeeds, one of two possible outcomes will result
>depending entirely on your motive. If your motive was
>to deal a punitive economic blow to the U.S. for
>invading a country that was formerly on EVERYBODY's
>shit list then you will have succeeded. If your motive
>was to save lives, whether they were those of the
>Iraqis, Americans, or even your own fellow Brits, you
>will have failed. I would not presume to guess your
>motives.
>  
>
You don't have to guess.
They have been explained here, on Usenet and on the Consensus site.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Sun Jul 10 17:01:01 2005
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 10:01:01 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
Message-ID: <1121014861.20123@whirlwind.he.net>

Dirk wrote:
> You think Bush would be cheering if the Chinese offered half a million 
> troops to provide the UN with real teeth?


If you'd thought about this for more than half a second, you would
realize that the US is the only one that can do it because the US is the
only country left that can project significant military and logistical
force beyond its own borders.  Even the UK is a shadow of what it could
do a couple decades ago in the force projection arena, and they are the
runner-up.

The Chinese have zero ability to project military force beyond
immediately adjacent territories on their land borders.  It is absurd
that you would even suggest that the Chinese could provide "teeth" to
the UN, unless the UN needs troops on the Chinese border.  Wishing
otherwise does not make it reality.

The canard about a mighty Chinese military will stay a canard for at
least another decade or two, so get used to the idea.


j. andrew rogers



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Jul 10 17:37:03 2005
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 12:37:03 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] HAPPY BIRTHDAY ANDERS!
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050710122428.0291a450@pop-server.austin.rr.com>


Please join me in making a toast to Anders Sandberg!  "May you live all the 
days of your life." Jonathan Swift


"Here's to you old friend, may you live a thousand years,
Just to sort of cheer things up, in this vale of [trans]human tears;
And may I live a thousand too-a thousand-less one day,
Because I wouldn't want to be on earth, and hear you'd passed away. (Anon)


And for fun:

"Inside every older person is a younger person - wondering what the hell 
happened." Cora Harvey Armstrong

"To me, old age is always 15 years older than I am." Bernard Baruch

"Old age isn't so bad when you consider the alternative." Maurice Chevalier

"Of late I appear
To have reached that stage
When people who look old
Who are only my age."
Richard Armour

"When I was younger, I could remember anything, whether it happened or 
not." Mark Twain

"I'm at an age when my back goes out more than I do." Phyllis Diller

"A diplomat is a man who always remembers a woman's
birthday but never remembers her age."  Robert Frost

"You are only young once, but you can be immature for a lifetime." John P. 
Grier

"If I'd known I was going to live this long (100 years),
I'd have taken better care of myself."  Ubie Blake

"Men are like wine. Some turn to vinegar, but the best improve with age." 
C.E.M. Joad

"Let us respect gray hairs, especially our own." J. P. Sears

"Age is a high price to pay for maturity." Tom Stoppard

"If we could be twice young and twice old we could correct all our 
mistakes." Euripides

"Growing old is like being increasingly penalized for a crime you have not 
committed." Anthony Powell


Cheers!
Natasha


<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha <http://www.natasha.cc/>Vita-More
Cultural Strategist, Designer
Studies of the Future, University of Houston
President, <http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute
Founder, <http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture

Knowledge is the most democratic source of power.  Alvin Toffler
Random acts of kindness... Anne Herbet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050710/60d9a831/attachment.html>

From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 17:48:56 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 10:48:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <42D14F54.2090706@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710174856.88221.qmail@web34412.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Maybe so but, anyway, WWP can't be trusted across the
street, they in no way can be considered democratic.
WWP doesn't want peace in the Mideast, they want
peoples' war all across the region, and most of WWP
are motivated by revenge. Interesting in the morbid
sense, they are strongly pro-gay rights but can you
imagine if they were to actually pull off their
hopeless Revolution:
 "Comrade Lesbian Linda, we regret to inform you of
your dismissal from the Peoples' Vanguard Theatre
Company, and we so sorry to tell you are under arrest
as Party deviationist and saboteur". 
No parody, they absolutely mean business, when the WWP
Grand Dragon of Art (who specialized in psychedelic Ho
Chi Minh wall posters) confided, "the other groups
think we are like Manson", he was trying to impart
something. Just glancing at their site it was apparent
they haven't changed in the 30 years since I saw them
close up.

> Well, better just ask the CIA who can be relied upon
> to provide truthful 
> answers to all such question. NOT.
> Would these be the same records that smeared George
> Galloway?
> Your naivete is touching.
> 
> -- 
> Dirk
> 
> The Consensus:-
> The political party for the new millenium
> http://www.theconsensus.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 -
> Release Date: 09/07/2005
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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 mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 18:09:59 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 11:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <42D14F54.2090706@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710180959.25679.qmail@web30701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:

> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >WWP and several of these other groups accepted, prior to the Iraq
> war,
> >significant sums from Saddam Hussein, according to records captured
> in
> >Bagdad. Whether they continue to receive funds from the Baathist
> Party
> >in Syria, as is suspected, has not yet been confirmed.
> >
> >  
> >
> Well, better just ask the CIA who can be relied upon to provide
> truthful answers to all such question. NOT.
> Would these be the same records that smeared George Galloway?
> Your naivete is touching.

Your excuse making for stalinists and baathists is revealing. It also
displays ignorance and naivete of the international left and its
agenda. Domestic revolutionary and insurgency groups come under the
surveillance of the FBI's Department 5, not the CIA.

http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=370660

http://caosblog.com/archives/803

"The FBI considers the WWP a terrorist organization. On May 10, 2001,
FBI Director Louis Freeh stated that ?Anarchists and extremist
socialist groups ? many of which, such as the Workers World Party, have
an international presence and, at times, also represent a potential
threat in the United States.? Imagine that; the mainstream media
somehow missed the fact that the most ubiquitous organizer of
?anti-war? protests is directed by a terrorist support group. Shouldn?t
a question on this front be aimed directly at Ramsey Clark at one of
his regular press conferences?

The Korean Truth Commission and Pastors for Peace are staunch allies of
Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro, respectively, and both groups continue to
support these murderous regimes? violation of International law. In
addition to its role as a front for the support of
totalitarian/communist governments in North Korea and Cuba, members of
ANSWER?s steering committee such as the Muslim Student Association and
the Free Palestine Alliance continue to provide ideological, logistical
and financial support for organizations devoted to the destruction of
the state of Israel, including the terrorist group, Hamas. A
comprehensive investigation of the members of ANSWER?s steering
committee make it clear that the organization is in actuality one of
Peace?s greatest enemies. "

This isn't the first time the WWP has pandered for overseas thugs. They
also accepted funds and lobbied for former Yugoslav President Slobodan
Milosevich. Ramsey Clark served as legal counsel in the US for Saddam
Hussein. The WWP also runs the KTC, the Korea Truth Commission, a front
for North Korean thug-in-chief Kim Jong Il.

http://www.brookesnews.com/031502peacerally.html
http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2592
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/310163.shtml
http://www.infoshop.org/texts/wwp.html
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5734
http://www.leftwatch.com/archives/years/2005/000001.html
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=370637

"The IAC has felt the sting. In a statement it blasted those who
"dishonestly claim that ANSWER is a 'front' group in order to diminish
the coalition," though it acknowledges "the presence of socialists and
Marxists, in particular members of the Workers World Party." Their
critics, IAC says, are racists: "Those who claim that ANSWER is a
'front' organization demonstrate their own racist and elitist
perception of reality." 

And ANSWER has ripped what it calls "a repugnant red-baiting campaign
against the ANSWER coalition because of its role as a principal
organizer of the mass grass-roots movement of opposition to war
throughout the United States." 

The WWP is nothing if not consistent. According to a 1974 congressional
report, it split from the Socialist Workers Party in 1959 in a dispute
over the Soviet invasion of Hungary three years before. The Socialist
Workers opposed the invasion, while Workers World partisans supported
it. "In 1968, the Workers World Party supported the invasion of
Czechoslovakia by the communist Warsaw Pact armies," the report
continued. The party, which never numbered more than a few hundred
people, supported the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese army against the
United States during the Vietnam War, according to the congressional
report. Some of its activities were coordinated with enemy military
actions. An April 8, 1972, internal letter "To All Branches" of the
party urged participation in "antiwar" demonstrations in support of a
Viet Cong offensive in South Vietnam. The letter's author, John
Catalinotto, remains in the party as managing editor of its weekly
Workers World "newspaper," and occasionally represents the IAC. 

Party members received revolutionary training in Cuba as members of the
Venceremos Brigades in the 1960s and early 1970s, and at about that
time the party oriented itself ideologically with North Korea. Deirdre
Griswold Stapp, a voice of the party and currently editor of Workers
World, described how the party functioned in a 1972 report to the Cuban
Communist Party. Explaining its "international relationships," she told
Cuban leaders about the WWP's new contacts with North Korea, via a
front group called the American Servicemen's Union, according to
congressional investigators. "The chairman of the American Servicemen's
Union, Andy Stapp, recently visited the Democratic People's Republic of
Korea and opened friendly discussions with the party there," she wrote.
She later married Stapp. 

In a speech to the 6th Congress of the League of Socialist Working
Youth of Korea, the youth branch of North Korea's ruling party, Andy
Stapp praised "Comrade Kim Il-sung, ever victorious, iron-willed,
brilliant commander and outstanding leader of the international
communist and working-class movements," according to a transcript
published in a congressional report. "As instructed by Marshal Kim
Il-sung, the outstanding leader of the international and working-class
movements, the No. 1 target of all the revolutionary people in the
world is U.S. imperialism. In order to avenge the many oppressed people
who have died a bloody death, and in order to build a new society in
America in which everyone enjoys happiness, as in Korea, I recognize
the great juche idea of Marshal Kim Il-sung as the Marxism-Leninism of
the present time." 

Stapp committed himself and his organization to armed violence and to
promoting mutiny within the U.S. military. According to the transcript
of his speech broadcast over Radio Pyongyang, Stapp stated, "The
American Servicemen's Union will study as documents, that must be read,
the works of genius of Marshal Kim Il-sung. ... With the juche idea as
the guiding compass of struggle, we will consolidate the branches of
the American Servicemen's Union in order to rally more soldiers around
the organization. In this way the American GIs will fight against their
real enemies, against the policy of aggression and war enforced on them
by the U.S. ruling circles and the fascist military officers." 

He added that his goal was "to build a powerful American Servicemen's
Union that will turn the guns against their fascist officers. ... If
the American Servicemen's Union cuts the windpipe of U.S. imperialism
inside the army while at the same time it is mutilated in all parts of
the world, U.S. imperialism will surely perish forever." 

Today, the WWP and its fronts claim to be nonviolent, but they remain
as enthusiastic as ever about North Korea. Visiting Pyongyang to
celebrate the 90th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-sung in April
2002, Griswold Stapp signed a statement denouncing President George W.
Bush's "notorious antiterrorism war" and demanding that "the Korean
peninsula be reunified without fail under the wise leadership of the
respected leader Kim Jong-il following the banner of the Three Charters
for the national reunification set forth by the great President Kim
Il-sung." Filing an article from the North Korean capital for the July
23, 2002, issue of Workers World, Griswold Stapp called Pyongyang
"truly one of the most beautiful cities in the world." 

Brian Becker, a WWP secretariat member and a director of ANSWER and the
IAC, visited North Korea in March 2002 to denounce the United States,
discredit the presence of U.S. troops in South Korea and reaffirm a
commitment to reunify the divided peninsula along the lines of the plan
set by Kim Jong-il. Becker serves as a spokesman for the IAC and its
antiwar campaign. 

The second major coordinating faction of the present-day antiwar
movement, headed by UPJ under Leslie Cagan's leadership, has its roots
in the old Soviet "active-measures" agitprop networks, say
homeland-security experts. 

Insight has traced Cagan's career to Cuba, where in the early 1970s as
a member of the Venceremos Brigades she received revolutionary training
and indoctrination. In the last years of the Cold War, Cagan organized
mass protests from an office called Mobilization for Survival,
according to former congressional investigators. She coordinated with
Soviet international front organizations and the CPUSA as the vanguard
element of broader-based demonstrations around the world against U.S.
resistance to Soviet expansion. This magazine has obtained Mobilization
for Survival documents from the 1980s that show the group's support for
Marxist-Leninist insurgencies and terrorist groups in the Third World,
Middle Eastern terrorists (including the Popular Front for the
Liberation of Palestine), Soviet-backed dictatorships in Africa and
Latin America, and Soviet-inspired campaigns for the unilateral
disarmament of the United States. 

In 1990-91, when the United States led an international coalition to
free Kuwait from the Iraqi military, Cagan coordinated the National
Campaign for Peace in the Middle East to organize grass-roots
opposition to the liberation. Also in 1991, when the CPUSA broke into
two factions, Cagan cofounded the splinter group, called the Committees
of Correspondence. Now she runs the UPJ, coordinating opposition to the
war on terrorism in general and the effort to destroy Saddam's arsenal
of weapons of mass destruction. 

Meanwhile, longtime Cagan associate Michael Meyerson is helping to run
protests in New York, according to the Associated Press. Formerly a
member of the national council or "Politburo" of the CPUSA, Meyerson
has been involved in protests since at least 1960. It was Meyerson who,
in a 1965 visit to Hanoi, was made an "honorary nephew" of North
Vietnamese Communist Party leader Ho Chi Minh. He returned home to
attend "antiwar" protests sporting a Viet Cong cap and the ring he
famously said was made from the wreckage of an American fighter plane.
He ran the U.S. Peace Council, the New York-based branch of the World
Peace Council, a Soviet international front organization that,
according to 1982 CIA and FBI testimony before the House Permanent
Select Committee on Intelligence, received covert funding and direction
from the KGB. "



Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 19:37:05 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 12:37:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] obit of WWP founder
Message-ID: <20050710193705.48195.qmail@web34404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

This link is to a '98 obituary, of the founder of WWP, written by a Communist who describes his distaste for the byzantine workings of WWP and its neoStalinists.
http://www.wsws.org/public_html/iwb2-98/marcy.htm







__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050710/18158a9e/attachment.html>

From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 19:55:16 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:55:16 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] obit of WWP founder
In-Reply-To: <20050710193705.48195.qmail@web34404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710193705.48195.qmail@web34404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D17D24.3070109@neopax.com>

c c wrote:

> This link is to a '98 obituary, of the founder of WWP, written by a 
> Communist who describes his distaste for the byzantine workings of WWP 
> and its neoStalinists.
> http://www.wsws.org/public_html/iwb2-98/marcy.htm
>
I think it's relatively easy to see that people who claim to be 
Socialists while abandoning the interests of the working class are just 
opportunistic fakes.
The only Socialist Party I rather like is the 100yr old Socialist Party 
of Great Britain
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/about.html

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From mlorrey at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 20:02:35 2005
From: mlorrey at yahoo.com (Mike Lorrey)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 13:02:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] obit of WWP founder
In-Reply-To: <42D17D24.3070109@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050710200235.23154.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:

> c c wrote:
> 
> > This link is to a '98 obituary, of the founder of WWP, written by a
> 
> > Communist who describes his distaste for the byzantine workings of
> WWP 
> > and its neoStalinists.
> > http://www.wsws.org/public_html/iwb2-98/marcy.htm
> >
> I think it's relatively easy to see that people who claim to be 
> Socialists while abandoning the interests of the working class are
> just opportunistic fakes.
> The only Socialist Party I rather like is the 100yr old Socialist
> Party of Great Britain
> http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/about.html

SWP UK is of course the largest component of the Respect Coalition
party, whose sole member in parliament is Joe Galloway, aka "The Member
from Bagdad Central".

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
                                      -William Pitt (1759-1806) 
Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From dirk at neopax.com  Sun Jul 10 20:31:17 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:31:17 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] obit of WWP founder
In-Reply-To: <20050710200235.23154.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710200235.23154.qmail@web30703.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D18595.2060607@neopax.com>

Mike Lorrey wrote:

>--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>c c wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>This link is to a '98 obituary, of the founder of WWP, written by a
>>>      
>>>
>>>Communist who describes his distaste for the byzantine workings of
>>>      
>>>
>>WWP 
>>    
>>
>>>and its neoStalinists.
>>>http://www.wsws.org/public_html/iwb2-98/marcy.htm
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>I think it's relatively easy to see that people who claim to be 
>>Socialists while abandoning the interests of the working class are
>>just opportunistic fakes.
>>The only Socialist Party I rather like is the 100yr old Socialist
>>Party of Great Britain
>>http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/about.html
>>    
>>
>
>SWP UK is of course the largest component of the Respect Coalition
>party, whose sole member in parliament is Joe Galloway, aka "The Member
>from Bagdad Central".
>
>  
>
So what has that to do with SPGB ??????????????

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Jul 10 23:43:19 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 16:43:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <1121014861.20123@whirlwind.he.net>
Message-ID: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>



--- "J. Andrew Rogers" <andrew at ceruleansystems.com>
wrote:


> If you'd thought about this for more than half a
> second, you would
> realize that the US is the only one that can do it
> because the US is the
> only country left that can project significant
> military and logistical
> force beyond its own borders.  Even the UK is a
> shadow of what it could
> do a couple decades ago in the force projection
> arena, and they are the
> runner-up.
> 
> The Chinese have zero ability to project military
> force beyond
> immediately adjacent territories on their land
> borders.  It is absurd
> that you would even suggest that the Chinese could
> provide "teeth" to
> the UN, unless the UN needs troops on the Chinese
> border.  Wishing
> otherwise does not make it reality.

Actually the Chinese COULD be the teeth of the U.N. if
the U.S. would be so kind as to be the legs and give
them a ride. I don't think anyone would want to tangle
with American aircraft carriers loaded down with
Chinese marines. If the U.N. wasn't a joke, that is
exactly what would be happening in the Middle East
right now. But, to turn a cliche on its head, being as
there is no "team" in U.N., it won't happen. 



The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 00:42:58 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:42:58 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>

The Linux community has an aphorism:
"Many eyes make all bugs shallow."

We can extend this concept to anti-terrorism. The London police are 
currently asking the public for any video records they may have of the 
time surrounding the London bombings. We need to train the public to 
immediately begin taking pictures whenever something bad happens in 
public. The basic rule should be: If you cannot think of something more 
useful to do, take pictures. When taking pictures, if you do not have 
and obviously important subject, then take a multi-shot panorama.

If every Londoner with a cell-phone camera had taken a 10-shot panorama 
at the time of the bombing, we would almost certainly have a picture of 
at least one of the bombers.

To speed the analysis, we should also add a volunteer analytic 
infrastructure. If every relevant Londoner made panoramic pictures, 
there would be far more pictures than police analysts could process 
quickly. But each photographer could add the pictures to a distributed 
database, and each photographer (plus innumerable volunteers) could do a 
preliminary analysis.

Similarly, pictures from all the security cameras in London could be 
made public. This would permit volunteers to assist the police in the 
analysis.

To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be encouraged to 
make random pictures in public places, more or less continuously. If 
nothing  interesting happens, most of these digital pictures will never 
even be stored. If something bad happens, the pictures from prior to the 
event would become available for analysis.

Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in public 
places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.

I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept during the 
ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 00:52:17 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:52:17 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>

The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.

In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis. Yesterday, 20 
Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this year, on average, at least 
50 Iraqis per week have been killed by insurgents, and some number of 
insurgents and/or Iraqi non-combatants have been killed by American 
and/or Alliance troops.

Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss of 
lives in Iraq?



From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Mon Jul 11 00:58:16 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:58:16 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>

David Brin, who has written on the subject of the changing 
(disappearing) notion of privacy, covered this explicitly in his novel 
"Earth".

He posits a future in which private surveilance (by cameras embedded in 
sunglasses, which transmit in realtime to secure data archives) causes a 
drastic drop in violent crime. If every potential mugging victim is 
recording everything he sees, muggers become a lot less numerous.

The classic response to questions of "what happened to my right to 
privacy?" in Brin's world, is "What do you have to hide?"

Joseph

Enhance your body "beyond well" and your mind "beyond normal": 
http://www.humanenhancement.com
New Jersey Transhumanist Association: http://www.goldenfuture.net/njta
PostHumanity Rising: http://transhumanist.blogspot.com/ (updated 6/14/05)

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> The Linux community has an aphorism:
> "Many eyes make all bugs shallow."
>
> We can extend this concept to anti-terrorism. The London police are 
> currently asking the public for any video records they may have of the 
> time surrounding the London bombings. We need to train the public to 
> immediately begin taking pictures whenever something bad happens in 
> public. The basic rule should be: If you cannot think of something 
> more useful to do, take pictures. When taking pictures, if you do not 
> have and obviously important subject, then take a multi-shot panorama.
>
> If every Londoner with a cell-phone camera had taken a 10-shot 
> panorama at the time of the bombing, we would almost certainly have a 
> picture of at least one of the bombers.
>
> To speed the analysis, we should also add a volunteer analytic 
> infrastructure. If every relevant Londoner made panoramic pictures, 
> there would be far more pictures than police analysts could process 
> quickly. But each photographer could add the pictures to a distributed 
> database, and each photographer (plus innumerable volunteers) could do 
> a preliminary analysis.
>
> Similarly, pictures from all the security cameras in London could be 
> made public. This would permit volunteers to assist the police in the 
> analysis.
>
> To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be encouraged to 
> make random pictures in public places, more or less continuously. If 
> nothing  interesting happens, most of these digital pictures will 
> never even be stored. If something bad happens, the pictures from 
> prior to the event would become available for analysis.
>
> Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in public 
> places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.
>
> I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept during 
> the ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
>


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 01:03:21 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:03:21 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <42D1C559.1060501@cox.net>

Joseph Bloch wrote:

> David Brin, who has written on the subject of the changing 
> (disappearing) notion of privacy, covered this explicitly in his novel 
> "Earth".
>
> He posits a future in which private surveilance (by cameras embedded 
> in sunglasses, which transmit in realtime to secure data archives) 
> causes a drastic drop in violent crime. If every potential mugging 
> victim is recording everything he sees, muggers become a lot less 
> numerous.
>
> The classic response to questions of "what happened to my right to 
> privacy?" in Brin's world, is "What do you have to hide?"
>
I discussed "The Transparent society" with Brin at the Foresight fellows 
conference in 1998, the year it was published.  I'm even enough of a 
fanboy that I got him to autograph my copy :-)

My proposal here is that we should put Brin's theory/observation into 
practice. We can do this without any new infrastructure. A large enough 
percentage of the population is now carrying cameras: we just need to 
use them.




From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 01:08:01 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:08:01 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <42D1C671.7080003@cox.net>

Joseph Bloch wrote:

> David Brin, who has written on the subject of the changing 
> (disappearing) notion of privacy, covered this explicitly in his novel 
> "Earth".
>
Sorry: I was referring to Brin's non-fiction work "The Transparent 
Society," not to "Earth", although I got him to autograph "Earth" also. 
"Earth" is particularly appropriate today, given Hurricane Denis.



From andrew at ceruleansystems.com  Mon Jul 11 01:32:43 2005
From: andrew at ceruleansystems.com (J. Andrew Rogers)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:32:43 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
Message-ID: <1121045563.19203@whirlwind.he.net>

Avantguardian wrote:
> Actually the Chinese COULD be the teeth of the U.N. if
> the U.S. would be so kind as to be the legs and give
> them a ride.


And provide the logistics.  Doing things this way would not save much US
money, though perhaps it would save a few US soldier lives at the
expense of a great many more Chinese soldier lives.  The Chinese
military is not exactly professional in the sense most expect with a
modern western military -- the results won't be equivalent.

But that would require that Chinese soldiers be under direct US command
for all intents and purposes, and I do not see the Chinese going along
with that any time soon.  You'll notice that the countries that do
regularly go into real combat operations together have long experience
working together under joint commands, and when it involves the US,
usually under US battle management.


cheers,

j. andrew rogers






From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 01:37:32 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 02:37:32 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> The Linux community has an aphorism:
> "Many eyes make all bugs shallow."
>
> We can extend this concept to anti-terrorism. The London police are 
> currently asking the public for any video records they may have of the 
> time surrounding the London bombings. We need to train the public to 
> immediately begin taking pictures whenever something bad happens in 
> public. The basic rule should be: If you cannot think of something 
> more useful to do, take pictures. When taking pictures, if you do not 
> have and obviously important subject, then take a multi-shot panorama.
>
> If every Londoner with a cell-phone camera had taken a 10-shot 
> panorama at the time of the bombing, we would almost certainly have a 
> picture of at least one of the bombers.
>
> To speed the analysis, we should also add a volunteer analytic 
> infrastructure. If every relevant Londoner made panoramic pictures, 
> there would be far more pictures than police analysts could process 
> quickly. But each photographer could add the pictures to a distributed 
> database, and each photographer (plus innumerable volunteers) could do 
> a preliminary analysis.
>
> Similarly, pictures from all the security cameras in London could be 
> made public. This would permit volunteers to assist the police in the 
> analysis.
>
> To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be encouraged to 
> make random pictures in public places, more or less continuously. If 
> nothing  interesting happens, most of these digital pictures will 
> never even be stored. If something bad happens, the pictures from 
> prior to the event would become available for analysis.
>
> Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in public 
> places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.
>
> I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept during 
> the ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.

An average Londoner will be picked up on hundreds of cameras on a normal 
day.
The security services have had the City cameras connected to computer 
syatems that tracks every car entering and leaving that area for years, 
due to IRA attacks. I also recall that they were trialling a system in 
the 90s where the face of every person caught on camera was compared to 
a database of wanted people.

The bombers will undoubtedly have been caught on camera and even now 
extremely powerful computersystems will be running pattern matching and 
people-tracing algorithms on all captured video for hours before and 
hours after the attack. I suspect that by now they may well have 
pictures of some of those responsible.

It's how the last London bomber was caught.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 01:38:30 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 02:38:30 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.
>
> In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis. Yesterday, 20 
> Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this year, on average, at 
> least 50 Iraqis per week have been killed by insurgents, and some 
> number of insurgents and/or Iraqi non-combatants have been killed by 
> American and/or Alliance troops.
>
> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss 
> of lives in Iraq?

Because London is not supposed to be a major war zone.
Iraq is.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Mon Jul 11 01:49:19 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 18:49:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com><42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <002001c585ba$c2ca8270$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Dirk Bruere" <dirk at neopax.com>

> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss of 
>> lives in Iraq?
>
> Because London is not supposed to be a major war zone.
> Iraq is.

But a life is a life.

I will jump to a hunch, and say that IMO something like what is imputed in 
the article below cannot be discounted:

"JonBenet Ramsey, Laci Peterson, Elizabeth Smart... all household names 
right? Well then how about Alexis Patterson, Georgia Moses, or even Evelyn 
Hernandez? Chances are you've never heard of them. Yet all of these women 
were victims of brutal kidnappings. The difference is that Patterson, Moses, 
and Hernandez were women of color and the reality is that nobody cares. "

http://www.popandpolitics.com/articles_detail.cfm?articleID=1545

Olga




From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jul 11 01:52:24 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 20:52:24 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050710205030.01cc6e40@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 08:52 PM 7/10/2005 -0400, Dan wrote:

>Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss of 
>lives in Iraq?

Because we are tribal animals.

If 50 Iraqi scientists were being `executed' by fanatics every day or week, 
I think we'd* be more angstish.

*those on this list

Damien Broderick 



From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 01:55:22 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:55:22 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>

Dirk Bruere wrote:

> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be encouraged 
>> to make random pictures in public places, more or less continuously. 
>> If nothing  interesting happens, most of these digital pictures will 
>> never even be stored. If something bad happens, the pictures from 
>> prior to the event would become available for analysis.
>>
>> Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in public 
>> places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.
>>
>> I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept during 
>> the ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.
>
>
> An average Londoner will be picked up on hundreds of cameras on a 
> normal day.
> The security services have had the City cameras connected to computer 
> syatems that tracks every car entering and leaving that area for 
> years, due to IRA attacks. I also recall that they were trialling a 
> system in the 90s where the face of every person caught on camera was 
> compared to a database of wanted people.
>
> The bombers will undoubtedly have been caught on camera and even now 
> extremely powerful computersystems will be running pattern matching 
> and people-tracing algorithms on all captured video for hours before 
> and hours after the attack. I suspect that by now they may well have 
> pictures of some of those responsible.
>
> It's how the last London bomber was caught.
>
Yes, Dick. The authorities do have a lot of video coverage, garnered at 
great expense, and they are working hard at analyzing it. The 
authorities have (in the last six hours or so) broadcast a request to 
the public for any video or other pictures that the public may have.

This request conveys two facts:
1) the "official" record is incomplete.
2) the "official analysts have not yet found the perpetrators.

I do not contend that "official"cameras and analysts are inadequate. 
Rather, I contend that society need not depend on the official 
infrastructure. As individuals, we can instead fine the perpetrators 
ourselves. Ten thousand amateurs are at least as effective as a hundred 
professionals. This is the "cathedral" versus the "bazaar" with a 
vengence (using the term advisedly.)


From mawelch at gmail.com  Mon Jul 11 02:02:16 2005
From: mawelch at gmail.com (Matthew Welch)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:02:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <813086600507101902558827f8@mail.gmail.com>

I'd be happier not having to worry about taking photos of my boring
life even if I might one day brush shoulders with a bomber.

On 7/10/05, Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> 
> > The Linux community has an aphorism:
> > "Many eyes make all bugs shallow."
> >
> > We can extend this concept to anti-terrorism. The London police are
> > currently asking the public for any video records they may have of the
> > time surrounding the London bombings. We need to train the public to
> > immediately begin taking pictures whenever something bad happens in
> > public. The basic rule should be: If you cannot think of something
> > more useful to do, take pictures. When taking pictures, if you do not
> > have and obviously important subject, then take a multi-shot panorama.
> >
> > If every Londoner with a cell-phone camera had taken a 10-shot
> > panorama at the time of the bombing, we would almost certainly have a
> > picture of at least one of the bombers.
> >
> > To speed the analysis, we should also add a volunteer analytic
> > infrastructure. If every relevant Londoner made panoramic pictures,
> > there would be far more pictures than police analysts could process
> > quickly. But each photographer could add the pictures to a distributed
> > database, and each photographer (plus innumerable volunteers) could do
> > a preliminary analysis.
> >
> > Similarly, pictures from all the security cameras in London could be
> > made public. This would permit volunteers to assist the police in the
> > analysis.
> >
> > To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be encouraged to
> > make random pictures in public places, more or less continuously. If
> > nothing  interesting happens, most of these digital pictures will
> > never even be stored. If something bad happens, the pictures from
> > prior to the event would become available for analysis.
> >
> > Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in public
> > places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.
> >
> > I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept during
> > the ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.
> 
> An average Londoner will be picked up on hundreds of cameras on a normal
> day.
> The security services have had the City cameras connected to computer
> syatems that tracks every car entering and leaving that area for years,
> due to IRA attacks. I also recall that they were trialling a system in
> the 90s where the face of every person caught on camera was compared to
> a database of wanted people.
> 
> The bombers will undoubtedly have been caught on camera and even now
> extremely powerful computersystems will be running pattern matching and
> people-tracing algorithms on all captured video for hours before and
> hours after the attack. I suspect that by now they may well have
> pictures of some of those responsible.
> 
> It's how the last London bomber was caught.
> 
> --
> Dirk
> 
> The Consensus:-
> The political party for the new millenium
> http://www.theconsensus.org
> 
> 
> 
> --
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Jul 11 02:04:34 2005
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:04:34 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050710205030.01cc6e40@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050710205030.01cc6e40@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20050710210148.01d46e48@pop-server.satx.rr.com>

At 08:52 PM 7/10/2005 -0500, I wrote:

>If 50 Iraqi scientists were being `executed' by fanatics every day or 
>week, I think we'd* be more angstish.

Let me rephrase that. If [n] Iraqi scientists were being [`collaterally 
damaged to death'] by anyone except [Bush, Blair, Howard, etc] every day or 
week, I think we'd* be more angstish.

>*[many of] those on this list


Damien Broderick



From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 02:00:38 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:00:38 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net>

Dirk Bruere wrote:

> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
>> The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.
>>
>> In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis. Yesterday, 20 
>> Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this year, on average, at 
>> least 50 Iraqis per week have been killed by insurgents, and some 
>> number of insurgents and/or Iraqi non-combatants have been killed by 
>> American and/or Alliance troops.
>>
>> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss 
>> of lives in Iraq?
>
>
> Because London is not supposed to be a major war zone.
> Iraq is.
>
According to the US Government, major war operations ceased in Iraq in 
mid 2004. Why is an Iraqi life less important than the life of a 
Londoner? The US Government contends that Iraq is NOT a "major war zone."


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Jul 11 02:11:59 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 19:11:59 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1D56F.8070309@pobox.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.
> 
> In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis. Yesterday, 20 
> Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this year, on average, at least 
> 50 Iraqis per week have been killed by insurgents, and some number of 
> insurgents and/or Iraqi non-combatants have been killed by American 
> and/or Alliance troops.
> 
> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss of 
> lives in Iraq?

Speak for yourself.  Half a minute in London is no different than half a 
minute in Iraq.

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


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 02:15:15 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:15:15 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050710205030.01cc6e40@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<6.2.1.2.0.20050710205030.01cc6e40@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <42D1D633.8090701@cox.net>

Damien Broderick wrote:

> At 08:52 PM 7/10/2005 -0400, Dan wrote:
>
>> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss 
>> of lives in Iraq?
>
>
> Because we are tribal animals.
>
> If 50 Iraqi scientists were being `executed' by fanatics every day or 
> week, I think we'd* be more angstish.
>
> *those on this list
>
I think you are correct.

If we are Anglophones, we identify with the London dead in the abstract. 
We abstract the Iraqi dead as "them" and the London dead as "us."
But is this valid? Some percentage of the Iraqis dead are Anglophone. 
(Certainly, the US dead US troops.) Some of the London dead are Sunnis, 
even if you exclude the perpetrators.

As Extropians, we should presumably be beyond nationalism and racism. 
Why is a London life more relevant than a Baghdad life?


From jbloch at humanenhancement.com  Mon Jul 11 02:21:35 2005
From: jbloch at humanenhancement.com (Joseph Bloch)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:21:35 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>	<42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
	<42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1D7AF.1000403@humanenhancement.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> This request conveys two facts:
> 1) the "official" record is incomplete.
> 2) the "official analysts have not yet found the perpetrators.


I would submit there is a third possibility:

3) the "official" record has yielded a lead, but one which requires 
confirmation from another source before it can be acted upon.

Joseph


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 02:28:03 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:28:03 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com> <42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1D933.4040301@neopax.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
>> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be encouraged 
>>> to make random pictures in public places, more or less continuously. 
>>> If nothing  interesting happens, most of these digital pictures will 
>>> never even be stored. If something bad happens, the pictures from 
>>> prior to the event would become available for analysis.
>>>
>>> Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in public 
>>> places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.
>>>
>>> I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept during 
>>> the ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.
>>
>>
>>
>> An average Londoner will be picked up on hundreds of cameras on a 
>> normal day.
>> The security services have had the City cameras connected to computer 
>> syatems that tracks every car entering and leaving that area for 
>> years, due to IRA attacks. I also recall that they were trialling a 
>> system in the 90s where the face of every person caught on camera was 
>> compared to a database of wanted people.
>>
>> The bombers will undoubtedly have been caught on camera and even now 
>> extremely powerful computersystems will be running pattern matching 
>> and people-tracing algorithms on all captured video for hours before 
>> and hours after the attack. I suspect that by now they may well have 
>> pictures of some of those responsible.
>>
>> It's how the last London bomber was caught.
>>
> Yes, Dick. The authorities do have a lot of video coverage, garnered 
> at great expense, and they are working hard at analyzing it. The 
> authorities have (in the last six hours or so) broadcast a request to 
> the public for any video or other pictures that the public may have.
>
> This request conveys two facts:
> 1) the "official" record is incomplete.
> 2) the "official analysts have not yet found the perpetrators.
>
> I do not contend that "official"cameras and analysts are inadequate. 
> Rather, I contend that society need not depend on the official 
> infrastructure. As individuals, we can instead fine the perpetrators 
> ourselves. Ten thousand amateurs are at least as effective as a 
> hundred professionals. This is the "cathedral" versus the "bazaar" 
> with a vengence (using the term advisedly.)
>
I'm not sure how useful that would be since most of the effort is 
looking for correlations between camera shots, in time sequence. That 
is, picking which faces out of a crowd occurs in what sequence on what 
cameras in order to determine movements pre and post event. It needs all 
the data to be run through the same algorithm, probably on a distributed 
computing system eg grid computing. I don't see the open source guys 
getting into the surveillance state thing and to me it sounds difficult 
since face recognition is only a subset of the problem.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 02:30:57 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:30:57 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com> <42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net>
Message-ID: <42D1D9E1.3030900@neopax.com>

Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
>> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>>
>>> The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.
>>>
>>> In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis. Yesterday, 20 
>>> Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this year, on average, at 
>>> least 50 Iraqis per week have been killed by insurgents, and some 
>>> number of insurgents and/or Iraqi non-combatants have been killed by 
>>> American and/or Alliance troops.
>>>
>>> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the 
>>> loss of lives in Iraq?
>>
>>
>>
>> Because London is not supposed to be a major war zone.
>> Iraq is.
>>
> According to the US Government, major war operations ceased in Iraq in 
> mid 2004. Why is an Iraqi life less important than the life of a 
> Londoner? The US Government contends that Iraq is NOT a "major war zone."
>
The US government can content what it likes.
Maybe all its troops are being shot and blown up by muggers.

As for why an Iraqi life seems less important than a London one, there 
are many reasons, not least the fact that I spend half my time in London 
rather than Iraq. I suspect that Iraqis feel that what has happened in 
London is nothing special. Works both ways.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 02:35:57 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:35:57 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <813086600507101902558827f8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
	<813086600507101902558827f8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42D1DB0D.9050100@cox.net>

Matthew Welch wrote:

>I'd be happier not having to worry about taking photos of my boring
>life even if I might one day brush shoulders with a bomber.
>  
>
This is your option. You do not need to participate. If a small 
percentage of the population participates, then we win. As I recall. 
there are about 100 Londoners in each carriage in the London Underground 
during rush hour. Assume that 2 percent of these people choose to 
participate. Then we have on average two cameras per carriage. Assume 
that participation jumps to 20% after an event occurs: we have 20 
cameras per carriage.

If no event occurs, assume that participation in analysis is zero: every 
day, the commuters simply purge their pictures. If an event occurs, I 
think that essentially all of the pictures will be made available, and 
all of the picture-takers. plus a very large number of volunteer 
analysts, will look at the pictures.


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 03:12:20 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 04:12:20 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050711024536.20192.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711024536.20192.qmail@web60519.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D1E394.9060605@neopax.com>

The Avantguardian wrote:

>--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>You don't have to guess.
>>They have been explained here, on Usenet and on the
>>Consensus site.
>>
>>    
>>
>
>     I have now checked out your website. I understand
>you now. Your premise that nation-states must be
>sancrosanct as a mechanism of maintaining cultural
>diversity is a premise I can understand but don't
>necessarily share. Diversity can be maintained so long
>as freedom reigns and human rights are preserved. We
>  
>
The Ideal American Culture.
What about postHuman cultures that are hive minds, or super-hierarchies? 
Or how about the engineering of postHumans with strong territorial and 
xenophobic tendencies? Are they to be banned from day one?
What about people who don't recognise your versions of freedoms and 
rights as being correct?
There are more visions of the future of Humanity than just the ones 
mentioned here, and I see many of them as being in fundamental conflict 
from the start.

>don't really need a byzantine hodgepodge of republics,
>democracies, monarchies, plutocracies, oligarchies,
>theocracies, and dictatorships on our planet to
>maintain cultural diversity. We just need universal
>freedom. The Muslims in the U.S. are just as Islamic
>as the ones in the Middle East, they just happen to be
>free and tolerant.
>  
>
I beg to differ.
Most people, let alone Moslems, are not 'free and tolerant'.

>      If you REALLY believe that we should suffer the
>existence of archaic forms of government in far flung
>corners of the world, then we should go all the way
>set them up as "historical anthropological preserves"
>and forbid the transfer of technology beyond that of
>agrarian societies into their borders.
>     I don't trust caliphs and sheiks to wield germs
>and nukes responsibly, not with what they have shown
>me so far.   
>
>  
>
So in your future there is really only One Culture - The American Way.
In the end we all need to control the bit of turf we stand upon, whether 
metaphorical or literal. Territoriality is not going to disappear in the 
future. Or at least, not in my future, which obvious differs from yours.
That two Transhumanists should be in such conflict is less an irony and 
more a prophecy.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date: 09/07/2005



From megao at sasktel.net  Mon Jul 11 02:31:58 2005
From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc.)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 21:31:58 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] Extropian-geoethical-biotech-Vermont-Conference
Message-ID: <42D1DA1E.6050902@sasktel.net>

I find this quite ironic to me.

This  Extropian oriented  Conference is headquartered where myself and a 
friend  stayed when we went down to investigate
a person who later  tried to  gut our business Extropian Agroforestry 
Ventures in March 1999.

We have gone on to commercialize cannabis medicine with Lifespan  Pharma 
Inc. with the first significant activity  this very month.

A curious personal connection to this area of Vermont.


Morris Johnson







From neptune at superlink.net  Mon Jul 11 03:33:00 2005
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:33:00 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com><42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net><42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>
	<002001c585ba$c2ca8270$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <00ff01c585c9$3d919940$9a893cd1@pavilion>

On Sunday, July 10, 2005 9:49 PM Olga Bourlin fauxever at sprynet.com
wrote:
> I will jump to a hunch, and say that IMO something like what is
imputed in
> the article below cannot be discounted:
>
> "JonBenet Ramsey, Laci Peterson, Elizabeth Smart... all household
names
> right? Well then how about Alexis Patterson, Georgia Moses, or even
Evelyn
> Hernandez? Chances are you've never heard of them. Yet all of these
women
> were victims of brutal kidnappings. The difference is that Patterson,
Moses,
> and Hernandez were women of color and the reality is that nobody
cares. "

I think it can be discounted for one reason alone:  they become
household names partly because of other people.  For instance, someone
else might not be racist, either implicitly or explicitly, but unless
they closely follow non-mainstream news closely, she or he will hear
more about the former set and much less about the latter.

Regards,

Dan



From neuronexmachina at gmail.com  Mon Jul 11 05:41:26 2005
From: neuronexmachina at gmail.com (Neil H.)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 22:41:26 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
Message-ID: <e88b73ce0507102241221da9ab@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/10/05, Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.
> 
> In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis. Yesterday, 20
> Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this year, on average, at least
> 50 Iraqis per week have been killed by insurgents, and some number of
> insurgents and/or Iraqi non-combatants have been killed by American
> and/or Alliance troops.
> 
> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss of
> lives in Iraq?

Or for that matter, why we're more upset by the loss of lives in
London than by a similar number of lost lives in, say, Jerusalem. I'm
not completely certain myself, but I suspect a large part of it has to
do with the fact that this is the first time (I think) that militant
Islamists have attacked the UK. Novel events tend to be more salient
and important from an information perspective.

-- Neil


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 06:12:09 2005
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:12:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <42D1E394.9060605@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050711061209.13277.qmail@web60511.mail.yahoo.com>



--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:

>> Diversity can be maintained so
> long
> >as freedom reigns and human rights are preserved.
> >  
> >
> The Ideal American Culture.
> What about postHuman cultures that are hive minds,
> or super-hierarchies? 
> Or how about the engineering of postHumans with
> strong territorial and 
> xenophobic tendencies? Are they to be banned from
> day one?
> What about people who don't recognise your versions
> of freedoms and 
> rights as being correct?

Why do you call it the Ideal American Culture? Do you
believe that liberty and civil rights are an entirely
American construct? Why? Are not the English or the
French just as free? Don't you have rights too? I am
speaking on a plane of abstraction here where my
country of residence is inconsequential. We Americans
did not invent these concepts nor is the American
culture necessarily the best possible implementation
thereof. 

> There are more visions of the future of Humanity
> than just the ones 
> mentioned here, and I see many of them as being in
> fundamental conflict 
> from the start.

Then let them come and vy for hearts and minds of men.
Somehow I just don't see the tranhumanist government
of the future evolving from the Sultany of Brunai or
some theocracy. Empires and republics fade with time.
Freedom and rights should not.

> I beg to differ.
> Most people, let alone Moslems, are not 'free and
> tolerant'.

But they COULD be and what is so wrong with that?

> So in your future there is really only One Culture -
> The American Way.

Not necessarily. Acknowledging that I am a patriotic
American, you seem more obsessed with America than I
am. Why can't it be the Athenian way? Or the Japanese
way? Or the way of a republic of nation-states that
does not yet exist? All I am saying is that any
culture a people want to have, whether it has yet to
be invented or even if it is that of long lost
Atlantis should be allowed to prosper so long as they
respect fundamental human rights.

> In the end we all need to control the bit of turf we
> stand upon, whether 
> metaphorical or literal. Territoriality is not going
> to disappear in the 
> future.

I agree that territoriality is not going to go away.
This troubles me because philosophically I am not
altogether certain that there is a right to property
beyond the molecules of ones body and the turf upon
one stands. Scientifically, I know that we evolved to
compete with one another for territory. Spiritually I
feel everything I have including the very atoms of my
body, I merely borrow from the universe. Is there
anything more enlightened to the aquisition of
property and wealth than the mere legal sanctioning of
primate territoriality and dominance? Are we doomed to
be literate monkeys? 




The Avantguardian 
is 
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"The surest sign of intelligent life in the universe is that they haven't attempted to contact us." 
-Bill Watterson


		
__________________________________ 
Discover Yahoo! 
Get on-the-go sports scores, stock quotes, news and more. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/mobile.html


From john at kozubik.com  Mon Jul 11 06:16:26 2005
From: john at kozubik.com (John Kozubik)
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2005 23:16:26 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
Message-ID: <20050710230613.M89964@kozubik.com>


Dan,

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> If every Londoner with a cell-phone camera had taken a 10-shot panorama
> at the time of the bombing, we would almost certainly have a picture of
> at least one of the bombers.
>
> To speed the analysis, we should also add a volunteer analytic
> infrastructure. If every relevant Londoner made panoramic pictures,
> there would be far more pictures than police analysts could process
> quickly. But each photographer could add the pictures to a distributed
> database, and each photographer (plus innumerable volunteers) could do a
> preliminary analysis.


Ok.  But how do you distinguish fake data and analysis from real data and
analysis ?  What if the criminals involved created hundreds or thousands
of CGI photos of real and/or fake persons at the scene and submitted them
as part of the broader public response ?

Such a barrage of misleading information could hamper the investigation at
best, and falsely redirect it at worse.

Comments ?

-----
John Kozubik - john at kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 07:45:32 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:45:32 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] tolerant?
In-Reply-To: <42D1E394.9060605@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050711074532.43651.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Muslims in the US could be considered free, they can
travel freely, thay have first and second amendment
rights, they are relatively safe, and so forth; but
whether muslims in the US are tolerant remains to be
seen. It appears they will gradually become more
tolerant. But at this time they are not tolerant,
certainly they are not tolerant of swine. "on
Judgement Day", an Islamic informed me, "all pigs are
going to be killed-- they are unclean".


> The Muslims in the U.S. are just as
> Islamic
> >as the ones in the Middle East, they just happen to
> be
> >free and tolerant.


> I beg to differ.
> Most people, let alone Moslems, are not 'free and
> tolerant'.



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 07:55:14 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 00:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] tolerant?
In-Reply-To: <20050711074532.43651.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050711075514.81714.qmail@web34404.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

However might I add there is a duality involved here.
Since swine are considered unclean Islamics will not
kill them for pork. Being unclean has its privileges!
As the homeless person said, "though I don't have a
place of my own to bathe, at least I don't have to
clean my shower".


> certainly they are not tolerant of swine. "on
> Judgement Day", an Islamic informed me, "all pigs
> are
> going to be killed-- they are unclean".



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Mon Jul 11 09:07:24 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 02:07:24 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] tolerant?
References: <20050711074532.43651.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000b01c585f7$f4d7d910$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "c c" <beb_cc at yahoo.com>

> Muslims in the US could be considered free, they can
> travel freely, thay have first and second amendment
> rights, they are relatively safe, and so forth; but
> whether muslims in the US are tolerant remains to be
> seen. It appears they will gradually become more
> tolerant.

1) Islam is not monolithic (same goes for Jews and Christians).

2) Intolerance and mutual exclusivity (often even within their own 
religions) makes religions thrive - it is their main "product."

> But at this time they are not tolerant,
> certainly they are not tolerant of swine. "on
> Judgement Day", an Islamic informed me, "all pigs are
> going to be killed-- they are unclean".

"On Judgement Day," a Christian informed me, "all heathens will know the 
wrath of [g]od."

Olga 




From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Jul 11 10:16:33 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:16:33 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Nam
In-Reply-To: <20050710163417.85920.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710163417.85920.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <6C5F1CDB-D9E0-4064-A6F4-A3DA64884C2D@mac.com>


On Jul 10, 2005, at 9:34 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>
> --- Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Are you going to blame the people for telling the truth about this
>> outrageous stupidity to the best of their abilities to know it?   My
>> motive is to get the US out of their and bring in the UN for the
>> purpose of returning the country to the Iraqis.   The economic blow
>> will be far worse imho if we stay.   I also disagree that our being
>> there saves more lives than if we left.
>>
>
> Samantha, who do you think historically makes up the bulk of UN
> peacekeeping forces? The UN has about 57,000 peacekeeping troops
> deployed around the world, most of whom are 'observers' without any
> capacity even to defend themselves, never mind protect others.  
> There is
> absolutely no way the UN could take control of things in Iraq without
> the US being the bulk of its force.


Did I say there would be no US troops under the UN uspices?  I don't  
believe I did.

> You are also being ignoring
> history, as well as being unrealistic: the UN already came into Iraq,
> got bombed, turned tail, and ran screeching like a little girl.

Hardly a fair characterization but then I wouldn't expect one from you.

>
> You can disagree all you want about numbers of lives saved, but the
> numbers contradict your beliefs.
>

What numbers are those?


- samantha


From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Jul 11 10:53:57 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:53:57 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <20050710180959.25679.qmail@web30701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710180959.25679.qmail@web30701.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <631DA022-E02B-4038-9722-D97E726E7E6D@mac.com>

Baathists were a relatively weak group until we forced them into  
power in Iraq.  bit afaik Baathists are no more uniformly evil than  
the other sects at play.


I really don't care a lot if some of the groups organizing protesters  
are not very nice folks if the people themselves will get off their  
duff and speak up.

The FBI considers people who take the Constitution seriously as  
likely terrorists so excuse me if I am not too impressed with a claim  
that they consider the WWP to be terrorists.

There are no scare quotes around anti-war protest.

Look at the thugs you are pandering for Mike.

- samantha

On Jul 10, 2005, at 11:09 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:

>
>
> --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>
>
>> Mike Lorrey wrote:
>>
>>
>>> WWP and several of these other groups accepted, prior to the Iraq
>>>
>> war,
>>
>>> significant sums from Saddam Hussein, according to records captured
>>>
>> in
>>
>>> Bagdad. Whether they continue to receive funds from the Baathist
>>>
>> Party
>>
>>> in Syria, as is suspected, has not yet been confirmed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Well, better just ask the CIA who can be relied upon to provide
>> truthful answers to all such question. NOT.
>> Would these be the same records that smeared George Galloway?
>> Your naivete is touching.
>>
>
> Your excuse making for stalinists and baathists is revealing. It also
> displays ignorance and naivete of the international left and its
> agenda. Domestic revolutionary and insurgency groups come under the
> surveillance of the FBI's Department 5, not the CIA.
>
> http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=370660
>
> http://caosblog.com/archives/803
>
> "The FBI considers the WWP a terrorist organization. On May 10, 2001,
> FBI Director Louis Freeh stated that ?Anarchists and extremist
> socialist groups ? many of which, such as the Workers World Party,  
> have
> an international presence and, at times, also represent a potential
> threat in the United States.? Imagine that; the mainstream media
> somehow missed the fact that the most ubiquitous organizer of
> ?anti-war? protests is directed by a terrorist support group.  
> Shouldn?t
> a question on this front be aimed directly at Ramsey Clark at one of
> his regular press conferences?
>
> The Korean Truth Commission and Pastors for Peace are staunch  
> allies of
> Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro, respectively, and both groups  
> continue to
> support these murderous regimes? violation of International law. In
> addition to its role as a front for the support of
> totalitarian/communist governments in North Korea and Cuba, members of
> ANSWER?s steering committee such as the Muslim Student Association and
> the Free Palestine Alliance continue to provide ideological,  
> logistical
> and financial support for organizations devoted to the destruction of
> the state of Israel, including the terrorist group, Hamas. A
> comprehensive investigation of the members of ANSWER?s steering
> committee make it clear that the organization is in actuality one of
> Peace?s greatest enemies. "
>
> This isn't the first time the WWP has pandered for overseas thugs.  
> They
> also accepted funds and lobbied for former Yugoslav President Slobodan
> Milosevich. Ramsey Clark served as legal counsel in the US for Saddam
> Hussein. The WWP also runs the KTC, the Korea Truth Commission, a  
> front
> for North Korean thug-in-chief Kim Jong Il.
>
> http://www.brookesnews.com/031502peacerally.html
> http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2592
> http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/310163.shtml
> http://www.infoshop.org/texts/wwp.html
> http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5734
> http://www.leftwatch.com/archives/years/2005/000001.html
> http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=370637
>
> "The IAC has felt the sting. In a statement it blasted those who
> "dishonestly claim that ANSWER is a 'front' group in order to diminish
> the coalition," though it acknowledges "the presence of socialists and
> Marxists, in particular members of the Workers World Party." Their
> critics, IAC says, are racists: "Those who claim that ANSWER is a
> 'front' organization demonstrate their own racist and elitist
> perception of reality."
>
> And ANSWER has ripped what it calls "a repugnant red-baiting campaign
> against the ANSWER coalition because of its role as a principal
> organizer of the mass grass-roots movement of opposition to war
> throughout the United States."
>
> The WWP is nothing if not consistent. According to a 1974  
> congressional
> report, it split from the Socialist Workers Party in 1959 in a dispute
> over the Soviet invasion of Hungary three years before. The Socialist
> Workers opposed the invasion, while Workers World partisans supported
> it. "In 1968, the Workers World Party supported the invasion of
> Czechoslovakia by the communist Warsaw Pact armies," the report
> continued. The party, which never numbered more than a few hundred
> people, supported the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese army against the
> United States during the Vietnam War, according to the congressional
> report. Some of its activities were coordinated with enemy military
> actions. An April 8, 1972, internal letter "To All Branches" of the
> party urged participation in "antiwar" demonstrations in support of a
> Viet Cong offensive in South Vietnam. The letter's author, John
> Catalinotto, remains in the party as managing editor of its weekly
> Workers World "newspaper," and occasionally represents the IAC.
>
> Party members received revolutionary training in Cuba as members of  
> the
> Venceremos Brigades in the 1960s and early 1970s, and at about that
> time the party oriented itself ideologically with North Korea. Deirdre
> Griswold Stapp, a voice of the party and currently editor of Workers
> World, described how the party functioned in a 1972 report to the  
> Cuban
> Communist Party. Explaining its "international relationships," she  
> told
> Cuban leaders about the WWP's new contacts with North Korea, via a
> front group called the American Servicemen's Union, according to
> congressional investigators. "The chairman of the American  
> Servicemen's
> Union, Andy Stapp, recently visited the Democratic People's  
> Republic of
> Korea and opened friendly discussions with the party there," she  
> wrote.
> She later married Stapp.
>
> In a speech to the 6th Congress of the League of Socialist Working
> Youth of Korea, the youth branch of North Korea's ruling party, Andy
> Stapp praised "Comrade Kim Il-sung, ever victorious, iron-willed,
> brilliant commander and outstanding leader of the international
> communist and working-class movements," according to a transcript
> published in a congressional report. "As instructed by Marshal Kim
> Il-sung, the outstanding leader of the international and working-class
> movements, the No. 1 target of all the revolutionary people in the
> world is U.S. imperialism. In order to avenge the many oppressed  
> people
> who have died a bloody death, and in order to build a new society in
> America in which everyone enjoys happiness, as in Korea, I recognize
> the great juche idea of Marshal Kim Il-sung as the Marxism-Leninism of
> the present time."
>
> Stapp committed himself and his organization to armed violence and to
> promoting mutiny within the U.S. military. According to the transcript
> of his speech broadcast over Radio Pyongyang, Stapp stated, "The
> American Servicemen's Union will study as documents, that must be  
> read,
> the works of genius of Marshal Kim Il-sung. ... With the juche idea as
> the guiding compass of struggle, we will consolidate the branches of
> the American Servicemen's Union in order to rally more soldiers around
> the organization. In this way the American GIs will fight against  
> their
> real enemies, against the policy of aggression and war enforced on  
> them
> by the U.S. ruling circles and the fascist military officers."
>
> He added that his goal was "to build a powerful American Servicemen's
> Union that will turn the guns against their fascist officers. ... If
> the American Servicemen's Union cuts the windpipe of U.S. imperialism
> inside the army while at the same time it is mutilated in all parts of
> the world, U.S. imperialism will surely perish forever."
>
> Today, the WWP and its fronts claim to be nonviolent, but they remain
> as enthusiastic as ever about North Korea. Visiting Pyongyang to
> celebrate the 90th anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-sung in April
> 2002, Griswold Stapp signed a statement denouncing President George W.
> Bush's "notorious antiterrorism war" and demanding that "the Korean
> peninsula be reunified without fail under the wise leadership of the
> respected leader Kim Jong-il following the banner of the Three  
> Charters
> for the national reunification set forth by the great President Kim
> Il-sung." Filing an article from the North Korean capital for the July
> 23, 2002, issue of Workers World, Griswold Stapp called Pyongyang
> "truly one of the most beautiful cities in the world."
>
> Brian Becker, a WWP secretariat member and a director of ANSWER and  
> the
> IAC, visited North Korea in March 2002 to denounce the United States,
> discredit the presence of U.S. troops in South Korea and reaffirm a
> commitment to reunify the divided peninsula along the lines of the  
> plan
> set by Kim Jong-il. Becker serves as a spokesman for the IAC and its
> antiwar campaign.
>
> The second major coordinating faction of the present-day antiwar
> movement, headed by UPJ under Leslie Cagan's leadership, has its roots
> in the old Soviet "active-measures" agitprop networks, say
> homeland-security experts.
>
> Insight has traced Cagan's career to Cuba, where in the early 1970s as
> a member of the Venceremos Brigades she received revolutionary  
> training
> and indoctrination. In the last years of the Cold War, Cagan organized
> mass protests from an office called Mobilization for Survival,
> according to former congressional investigators. She coordinated with
> Soviet international front organizations and the CPUSA as the vanguard
> element of broader-based demonstrations around the world against U.S.
> resistance to Soviet expansion. This magazine has obtained  
> Mobilization
> for Survival documents from the 1980s that show the group's support  
> for
> Marxist-Leninist insurgencies and terrorist groups in the Third World,
> Middle Eastern terrorists (including the Popular Front for the
> Liberation of Palestine), Soviet-backed dictatorships in Africa and
> Latin America, and Soviet-inspired campaigns for the unilateral
> disarmament of the United States.
>
> In 1990-91, when the United States led an international coalition to
> free Kuwait from the Iraqi military, Cagan coordinated the National
> Campaign for Peace in the Middle East to organize grass-roots
> opposition to the liberation. Also in 1991, when the CPUSA broke into
> two factions, Cagan cofounded the splinter group, called the  
> Committees
> of Correspondence. Now she runs the UPJ, coordinating opposition to  
> the
> war on terrorism in general and the effort to destroy Saddam's arsenal
> of weapons of mass destruction.
>
> Meanwhile, longtime Cagan associate Michael Meyerson is helping to run
> protests in New York, according to the Associated Press. Formerly a
> member of the national council or "Politburo" of the CPUSA, Meyerson
> has been involved in protests since at least 1960. It was Meyerson  
> who,
> in a 1965 visit to Hanoi, was made an "honorary nephew" of North
> Vietnamese Communist Party leader Ho Chi Minh. He returned home to
> attend "antiwar" protests sporting a Viet Cong cap and the ring he
> famously said was made from the wreckage of an American fighter plane.
> He ran the U.S. Peace Council, the New York-based branch of the World
> Peace Council, a Soviet international front organization that,
> according to 1982 CIA and FBI testimony before the House Permanent
> Select Committee on Intelligence, received covert funding and  
> direction
> from the KGB. "
>
>
>
> Mike Lorrey
> Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
> "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.
> It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
>                                       -William Pitt (1759-1806)
> Blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Jul 11 11:20:48 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 04:20:48 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
Message-ID: <874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>


On Jul 10, 2005, at 5:58 PM, Joseph Bloch wrote:

> David Brin, who has written on the subject of the changing  
> (disappearing) notion of privacy, covered this explicitly in his  
> novel "Earth".
>
> He posits a future in which private surveilance (by cameras  
> embedded in sunglasses, which transmit in realtime to secure data  
> archives) causes a drastic drop in violent crime. If every  
> potential mugging victim is recording everything he sees, muggers  
> become a lot less numerous.
>
> The classic response to questions of "what happened to my right to  
> privacy?" in Brin's world, is "What do you have to hide?"

I have to hide anything that the powers that be decide to make a  
crime that real should never have been one.  I have to be able to  
hide as long as some people wish to legally run everyone else's  
life.  I have to hide if I am not a perfect shmoo or perfectly  
willing be targeted by one of thousands of laws that exist for no  
other purpose at some politician or cop's discretion.   Lastly I have  
a need to be able to hide as long as the government is the biggest  
danger to life and liberty.   How would you propose to have a chance  
to change or at least avoid a turly corrupt and non-responsive  
government or to avoid their clutches somewhat with on privacy  
whatsoever?

Really people, please think it through before you propose that Big  
Brother knows all.  Whit do I have to hide?  Worng question.  What  
gives you and the government the right to stick your nose into every  
aspect of my life?

- samantha



From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Jul 11 11:23:35 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 04:23:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>
	<42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
Message-ID: <F07FE2E9-0652-4D18-96D4-C41EF850FE0E@mac.com>

I am less trusting.  The timing was too useful.  I am too suspicious  
after 911, the "Patriot Act" and the rest.   I very much doubt the  
real perps will ever be found.

- samantha

On Jul 10, 2005, at 6:55 PM, Dan Clemmensen wrote:

> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>
>
>> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To increase pre-explosion coverage, the public should be  
>>> encouraged to make random pictures in public places, more or less  
>>> continuously. If nothing  interesting happens, most of these  
>>> digital pictures will never even be stored. If something bad  
>>> happens, the pictures from prior to the event would become  
>>> available for analysis.
>>>
>>> Privacy? Sorry, These are pictures taken by individuals, in  
>>> public places. There is no right to privacy in this venue.
>>>
>>> I live in the Washington DC area. I thought of this  concept  
>>> during the ugly "sniper attack" situation last year.
>>>
>>
>>
>> An average Londoner will be picked up on hundreds of cameras on a  
>> normal day.
>> The security services have had the City cameras connected to  
>> computer syatems that tracks every car entering and leaving that  
>> area for years, due to IRA attacks. I also recall that they were  
>> trialling a system in the 90s where the face of every person  
>> caught on camera was compared to a database of wanted people.
>>
>> The bombers will undoubtedly have been caught on camera and even  
>> now extremely powerful computersystems will be running pattern  
>> matching and people-tracing algorithms on all captured video for  
>> hours before and hours after the attack. I suspect that by now  
>> they may well have pictures of some of those responsible.
>>
>> It's how the last London bomber was caught.
>>
>>
> Yes, Dick. The authorities do have a lot of video coverage,  
> garnered at great expense, and they are working hard at analyzing  
> it. The authorities have (in the last six hours or so) broadcast a  
> request to the public for any video or other pictures that the  
> public may have.
>
> This request conveys two facts:
> 1) the "official" record is incomplete.
> 2) the "official analysts have not yet found the perpetrators.
>
> I do not contend that "official"cameras and analysts are  
> inadequate. Rather, I contend that society need not depend on the  
> official infrastructure. As individuals, we can instead fine the  
> perpetrators ourselves. Ten thousand amateurs are at least as  
> effective as a hundred professionals. This is the "cathedral"  
> versus the "bazaar" with a vengence (using the term advisedly.)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Jul 11 11:32:09 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 04:32:09 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
	<874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
Message-ID: <5EFB6009-0F0F-40A0-A443-2A70CEF5C7F5@mac.com>

Apologies for typos.  Time for bed.

On Jul 11, 2005, at 4:20 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote:

>
> On Jul 10, 2005, at 5:58 PM, Joseph Bloch wrote:
>
>
>> David Brin, who has written on the subject of the changing  
>> (disappearing) notion of privacy, covered this explicitly in his  
>> novel "Earth".
>>
>> He posits a future in which private surveilance (by cameras  
>> embedded in sunglasses, which transmit in realtime to secure data  
>> archives) causes a drastic drop in violent crime. If every  
>> potential mugging victim is recording everything he sees, muggers  
>> become a lot less numerous.
>>
>> The classic response to questions of "what happened to my right to  
>> privacy?" in Brin's world, is "What do you have to hide?"
>>
>
> I have to hide anything that the powers that be decide to make a  
> crime that real should never have been one.  I have to
real -> really
>  be able to hide as long as some people wish to legally run  
> everyone else's life.  I have to hide if I am not a perfect shmoo  
> or perfectly willing be targeted by one of thousands of laws that  
> exist for no other purpose at some politician or cop's  
> discretion.   Lastly I have a need to be able to hide as long as  
> the government is the biggest danger to life and liberty.   How  
> would you propose to have a chance to change or at least avoid a  
> turly corrupt and non-
turly-> truly
> responsive government or to avoid their clutches somewhat with on  
> privacy whatsoever?

on -> no

> Really people, please think it through before you propose that Big  
> Brother knows all.  What do I have to hide?  Wrong question.  What  
> gives you and the government the right to stick your nose into  
> every aspect of my life?
>
> - samantha
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Mon Jul 11 13:09:58 2005
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 09:09:58 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1D9E1.3030900@neopax.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com> <42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net>
	<42D1D9E1.3030900@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <EAD8A752-3F34-49A8-98C6-2A227FD507CD@bonfireproductions.com>




I would like to posit that we view the lives as equal in value, or we  
wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place.


I think we need to consider the origins of what we believe as a  
group, where it came from, how it came about. What do we need to do  
for it to thrive, aside from popular acceptance. Will Iraq and the  
people of Iraq be better off in 100 years for this having happened or  
not?


Let's change scale. Tomorrow doesn't matter. It is too immediate.  
Give me a year as a hundred. It is not the day to day dealings and  
beliefs that will carry us, it is the results. Results don't come  
from rehashing arguments, obviously, but a stalwart commitment to the  
positive. Maintenance of this requires more courage than the offering  
of any opinion, more time than the average person is allowed.



]3


On Jul 10, 2005, at 10:30 PM, Dirk Bruere wrote:

> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
>
>> Dirk Bruere wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> The loss of 50 lives in London is horrible.
>>>>
>>>> In today's news, insurgents killed at least 20 Iraqis.  
>>>> Yesterday, 20 Iraqis were killed by insurgents. So far this  
>>>> year, on average, at least 50 Iraqis per week have been killed  
>>>> by insurgents, and some number of insurgents and/or Iraqi non- 
>>>> combatants have been killed by American and/or Alliance troops.
>>>>
>>>> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the  
>>>> loss of lives in Iraq?
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Because London is not supposed to be a major war zone.
>>> Iraq is.
>>>
>>>
>> According to the US Government, major war operations ceased in  
>> Iraq in mid 2004. Why is an Iraqi life less important than the  
>> life of a Londoner? The US Government contends that Iraq is NOT a  
>> "major war zone."
>>
>>
> The US government can content what it likes.
> Maybe all its troops are being shot and blown up by muggers.
>
> As for why an Iraqi life seems less important than a London one,  
> there are many reasons, not least the fact that I spend half my  
> time in London rather than Iraq. I suspect that Iraqis feel that  
> what has happened in London is nothing special. Works both ways.
>
> -- 
> Dirk
>
> The Consensus:-
> The political party for the new millenium
> http://www.theconsensus.org
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.11/45 - Release Date:  
> 09/07/2005
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>



From megao at sasktel.net  Mon Jul 11 12:16:08 2005
From: megao at sasktel.net (Lifespan Pharma Inc.)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 07:16:08 -0500
Subject: [extropy-chat] eyes 4U
Message-ID: <42D26308.7000500@sasktel.net>

If gates and the medical industry quickly perfect the wireless delivery 
of audio and video  directly to
the consciousness in a manner safe enough for  implantation into those 
with hearing and sight
diabilities then the reverse, a back door which jacks imagery and audio 
back into the net would be
available. Add to the list of those carrying these devices persons 
convicted of medium level
criminal offences then one has quite a numerous  force of public eyes 
and ears for security.

Expand the sensory input range from ordinary light to IR, UV, and add 
higher than natural resolution as well as add
360degrees vision field to create a dome wide vsual field.

Create a monetary trade-off to enable all the above to afford the costs 
of implantation and maintenenace of these devices.

Like GPS the data channeled to the user might be reduced to that close 
to normal vision and hearing while the data
uploaded to security services would be as detailed as the technology can 
deliver.


From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Mon Jul 11 13:30:16 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 06:30:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <EAD8A752-3F34-49A8-98C6-2A227FD507CD@bonfireproductions.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net> <42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>
	<42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net> <42D1D9E1.3030900@neopax.com>
	<EAD8A752-3F34-49A8-98C6-2A227FD507CD@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <20050711133016.GA9401@ofb.net>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 09:09:58AM -0400, Bret Kulakovich wrote:
> 
> I would like to posit that we view the lives as equal in value, or we  
> wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place.

No, the war was sold largely on the grounds of Iraq having WMDs, e.g. on the
grounds of Iraq being a threat to us.  If we really cared about lives we'd be
intervening in the Sudan and in Zimbabwe, and funding a lot more foreign aid
in clean water and health care.

> for it to thrive, aside from popular acceptance. Will Iraq and the  
> people of Iraq be better off in 100 years for this having happened or  
> not?

This seems like "the ends justify the means", beloved of violent
revolutionaries everywhere.

We can't see 10 years ahead very well, let alone 100.  The people who planned
the invasion couldn't even see 1 year ahead, to see the resistance.

> Let's change scale. Tomorrow doesn't matter. It is too immediate.  
> Give me a year as a hundred. It is not the day to day dealings and  

People die in the tomorrow, in the day to day.

> beliefs that will carry us, it is the results. Results don't come  
> from rehashing arguments, obviously, but a stalwart commitment to the  
> positive. Maintenance of this requires more courage than the offering  

Our civilization is centered largely on stalwart committment to following good
means, not good ends.  

-xx- Damien X-) 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 14:36:28 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 07:36:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] tolerant?
In-Reply-To: <000b01c585f7$f4d7d910$6600a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <20050711143629.24228.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Right on both counts, Olga. Unfortunately they often
are instructed to attempt to convert nonbelievers in a
very tedious (after you've heard their sales pitch
100x) hardsell manner. In fact those who try to hide
their zeal to convert are the worst because you don't
see where they are coming from until they have wasted
too much of your time. 
 No doubt there are many exceptions, but when a Jew,
Xian or Muslim comes in my direction I turn and go the
other way. Same goes for Republicans, Communists, and
the socialists who are pushy, no matter how much they
all add to diversity and the marketplace of ideas.

 
> 1) Islam is not monolithic (same goes for Jews and
> Christians). 
> 2) Intolerance and mutual exclusivity (often even
> within their own 
> religions) makes religions thrive - it is their main
> "product."



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 14:53:57 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 07:53:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <631DA022-E02B-4038-9722-D97E726E7E6D@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20050711145357.54469.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Well, I really don't care if the FBI from time to time
violates the rights of ANSWER or WWP or whomever. No
it is not legal or ethically right to violate anyone's
rights, but with all the rights of relatively innocent
persons being violated in America, the undeserved
punishment of  those who operate on the border of
treason will stir little reaction from some of us. 
Samantha, you think I don't know what you are saying?
Wrong. You are correct that more ought to get off
their duffs and speak up against the war. And you will
kindly allow we who despise ANSWER and WWP to speak up
against them as well. Personally I'd rather see ANSWER
and WWP killed than Baathists-- and I have a first
amendment right to say so.

 
> I really don't care a lot if some of the groups
> organizing protesters  
> are not very nice folks if the people themselves
> will get off their  
> duff and speak up.
> 
> The FBI considers people who take the Constitution
> seriously as  
> likely terrorists so excuse me if I am not too
> impressed with a claim  
> that they consider the WWP to be terrorists.
> 
> There are no scare quotes around anti-war protest.
> 
> Look at the thugs you are pandering for Mike.
> 
> - samantha
> 
> On Jul 10, 2005, at 11:09 AM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
> 
> >
> >
> > --- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Mike Lorrey wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>> WWP and several of these other groups accepted,
> prior to the Iraq
> >>>
> >> war,
> >>
> >>> significant sums from Saddam Hussein, according
> to records captured
> >>>
> >> in
> >>
> >>> Bagdad. Whether they continue to receive funds
> from the Baathist
> >>>
> >> Party
> >>
> >>> in Syria, as is suspected, has not yet been
> confirmed.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> Well, better just ask the CIA who can be relied
> upon to provide
> >> truthful answers to all such question. NOT.
> >> Would these be the same records that smeared
> George Galloway?
> >> Your naivete is touching.
> >>
> >
> > Your excuse making for stalinists and baathists is
> revealing. It also
> > displays ignorance and naivete of the
> international left and its
> > agenda. Domestic revolutionary and insurgency
> groups come under the
> > surveillance of the FBI's Department 5, not the
> CIA.
> >
> >
>
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=370660
> >
> > http://caosblog.com/archives/803
> >
> > "The FBI considers the WWP a terrorist
> organization. On May 10, 2001,
> > FBI Director Louis Freeh stated that ?Anarchists
> and extremist
> > socialist groups ? many of which, such as the
> Workers World Party,  
> > have
> > an international presence and, at times, also
> represent a potential
> > threat in the United States.? Imagine that; the
> mainstream media
> > somehow missed the fact that the most ubiquitous
> organizer of
> > ?anti-war? protests is directed by a terrorist
> support group.  
> > Shouldn?t
> > a question on this front be aimed directly at
> Ramsey Clark at one of
> > his regular press conferences?
> >
> > The Korean Truth Commission and Pastors for Peace
> are staunch  
> > allies of
> > Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro, respectively, and
> both groups  
> > continue to
> > support these murderous regimes? violation of
> International law. In
> > addition to its role as a front for the support of
> > totalitarian/communist governments in North Korea
> and Cuba, members of
> > ANSWER?s steering committee such as the Muslim
> Student Association and
> > the Free Palestine Alliance continue to provide
> ideological,  
> > logistical
> > and financial support for organizations devoted to
> the destruction of
> > the state of Israel, including the terrorist
> group, Hamas. A
> > comprehensive investigation of the members of
> ANSWER?s steering
> > committee make it clear that the organization is
> in actuality one of
> > Peace?s greatest enemies. "
> >
> > This isn't the first time the WWP has pandered for
> overseas thugs.  
> > They
> > also accepted funds and lobbied for former
> Yugoslav President Slobodan
> > Milosevich. Ramsey Clark served as legal counsel
> in the US for Saddam
> > Hussein. The WWP also runs the KTC, the Korea
> Truth Commission, a  
> > front
> > for North Korean thug-in-chief Kim Jong Il.
> >
> > http://www.brookesnews.com/031502peacerally.html
> > http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?ID=2592
> >
>
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/02/310163.shtml
> > http://www.infoshop.org/texts/wwp.html
> >
>
http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=5734
> >
>
http://www.leftwatch.com/archives/years/2005/000001.html
> >
>
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=370637
> >
> > "The IAC has felt the sting. In a statement it
> blasted those who
> > "dishonestly claim that ANSWER is a 'front' group
> in order to diminish
> > the coalition," though it acknowledges "the
> presence of socialists and
> > Marxists, in particular members of the Workers
> World Party." Their
> > critics, IAC says, are racists: "Those who claim
> that ANSWER is a
> > 'front' organization demonstrate their own racist
> and elitist
> > perception of reality."
> >
> > And ANSWER has ripped what it calls "a repugnant
> red-baiting campaign
> > against the ANSWER coalition because of its role
> as a principal
> > organizer of the mass grass-roots movement of
> opposition to war
> > throughout the United States."
> >
> > The WWP is nothing if not consistent. According to
> a 1974  
> > congressional
> > report, it split from the Socialist Workers Party
> in 1959 in a dispute
> > over the Soviet invasion of Hungary three years
> before. The Socialist
> > Workers opposed the invasion, while Workers World
> partisans supported
> > it. "In 1968, the Workers World Party supported
> the invasion of
> > Czechoslovakia by the communist Warsaw Pact
> armies," the report
> > continued. The party, which never numbered more
> than a few hundred
> > people, supported the Viet Cong and North
> Vietnamese army against the
> > United States during the Vietnam War, according to
> the congressional
> > report. Some of its activities were coordinated
> with enemy military
> > actions. An April 8, 1972, internal letter "To All
> Branches" of the
> > party urged participation in "antiwar"
> demonstrations in support of a
> > Viet Cong offensive in South Vietnam. The letter's
> author, John
> > Catalinotto, remains in the party as managing
> editor of its weekly
> > Workers World "newspaper," and occasionally
> represents the IAC.
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 15:07:15 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:07:15 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <20050711145357.54469.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711145357.54469.qmail@web34402.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D28B23.1010708@neopax.com>

c c wrote:

>Well, I really don't care if the FBI from time to time
>violates the rights of ANSWER or WWP or whomever. No
>it is not legal or ethically right to violate anyone's
>rights, but with all the rights of relatively innocent
>persons being violated in America, the undeserved
>punishment of  those who operate on the border of
>treason will stir little reaction from some of us. 
>Samantha, you think I don't know what you are saying?
>Wrong. You are correct that more ought to get off
>their duffs and speak up against the war. And you will
>kindly allow we who despise ANSWER and WWP to speak up
>against them as well. Personally I'd rather see ANSWER
>and WWP killed than Baathists-- and I have a first
>amendment right to say so.
>  
>
The borders of treason have an ugly habit of shifting ever closer to 
home due to such sentiments.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 15:15:37 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 08:15:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] WWP
In-Reply-To: <42D28B23.1010708@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050711151538.10318.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Oh, do they? Well then I wont get off my duff to speak
up. I'll meditate at a buddhist retreat instead. Who
needs the ugly habits of temporal politics? You so
inclined can fight the Empire. Tally Ho.

> The borders of treason have an ugly habit of
> shifting ever closer to 
> home due to such sentiments.


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From bret at bonfireproductions.com  Mon Jul 11 16:56:53 2005
From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:56:53 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll/and not merely a great ethicist with
	lengthy hands-on Defense background 
In-Reply-To: <20050711133016.GA9401@ofb.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net> <42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>
	<42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net> <42D1D9E1.3030900@neopax.com>
	<EAD8A752-3F34-49A8-98C6-2A227FD507CD@bonfireproductions.com>
	<20050711133016.GA9401@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <C89806E8-85AC-47E4-942E-98A372D06963@bonfireproductions.com>


On Jul 11, 2005, at 9:30 AM, Damien Sullivan wrote:

> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 09:09:58AM -0400, Bret Kulakovich wrote:
>
>>
>> I would like to posit that we view the lives as equal in value, or we
>> wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place.
>>
>
> No, the war was sold largely on the grounds of Iraq having WMDs,  
> e.g. on the
> grounds of Iraq being a threat to us.  If we really cared about  
> lives we'd be
> intervening in the Sudan and in Zimbabwe, and funding a lot more  
> foreign aid
> in clean water and health care.

and

On Jul 9, 2005, at 7:24 PM, Mike Lorrey wrote:
>
> The distinction between the cold war and the present is that trade  
> with
> the states sponsoring or otherwise supporting terrorism is too
> lucrative for a cold war strategy of economic embargo, as we employed
> against the Soviets and the Warsaw Pact. Seing how the coalition
> against Iraq unravelled through the 90's as the UN, nations and
> individuals were bribed to corrupt the system, doing the same to Saudi
> Arabia, Iran, Syria, and others would not last long, not unless the
> terrorists really get agressive and attack France, Germany, and Russia
> as well.


Lets look at this as a history lesson, like talking about the crash  
of the German mark in the early 20th century. It may hurt less if we  
do it that way. I am trying not to blur any of this. To keep the NPOV  
as it were.

This isn't about WMD, and it is not about Oil. It is about social  
infection. Break out a world map and look at the countries involved.  
There is a belt tightening from both ends of the Middle East/Persia.  
What motivates it? Consider - If you project forward 20 years, when  
there is technological parody between the west and rulers who  
currently take quiet offense to western civilization, what would  
happen next? If these rulers are answering directly to God, then they  
rule without question or consequence, and the people will follow. If  
those people had freedom of choice and a better quality of life,  
would they decide not to fight?

I am not trying to propagate anything here, I'm not even saying I am  
convinced of the above. Just look at the situation, the maps, the  
parties involved. Is it based in fear? Well sure, to some degree. But  
saying an insurgence was unexpected? Unadmitted, perhaps, because it  
would be unpopular. The long road was taken in this instance, from  
the beginning. People have been wondering why the US didn't plop down  
the 350k+ from the Gulf War. It's not because we don't have them. It  
isn't because of Afghanistan. It is long term resource rotation, to  
season as many soldiers as possible for the future, and to remain  
capable of having a go at perhaps a 3rd or 4th instance as well.

There are models that that have 'worked'. Japan, South Korea. Others.  
Exposure to the west makes western culture propagate. As Mike Lorrey  
stated in a previous post - no, the west cannot embargo the countries  
involved because the west is over a barrel both literally and  
figuratively. But where the west cannot bankrupt these countries  
financially, they can bankrupt them morally.

The easiest answers just arent the best in this case. Plenty of  
people want to bang the drum of 'he (Bush) did it for his father'  
while others say Bush isn't really  in control. Others want to  
comfort themselves with the simplicity of 'no blood for oil' - which  
appeals to anyone who has ever played Risk or Age of Empires as well.  
We are an opportunity seeking species regardless of theological  
inclination. When presented, we will leverage anything we can. We can  
take your resources, so we will. What these ideas have in common is  
an immediate horizon, and a simple enough plot for the average R- 
rated moviegoer. What they lack is projection, rationale and accuracy.

Thoughts? It's Bret with one 't' if its going in your killfile. =)


]3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/05c96904/attachment.html>

From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 17:17:09 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:17:09 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll/and not merely a great ethicist with
	lengthy hands-on Defense background
In-Reply-To: <C89806E8-85AC-47E4-942E-98A372D06963@bonfireproductions.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
	<42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com>	<42D1D2C6.9070906@cox.net>
	<42D1D9E1.3030900@neopax.com>	<EAD8A752-3F34-49A8-98C6-2A227FD507CD@bonfireproductions.com>	<20050711133016.GA9401@ofb.net>
	<C89806E8-85AC-47E4-942E-98A372D06963@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <42D2A995.1060203@neopax.com>

Bret Kulakovich wrote:

>
> This isn't about WMD, and it is not about Oil. It is about social 
> infection. Break out a world map and look at the countries involved. 
> There is a belt tightening from both ends of the Middle East/Persia. 
> What motivates it? Consider - If you project forward 20 years, when 
> there is technological parody between the west and rulers who 
> currently take quiet offense to western civilization, what would 
> happen next? If these rulers are answering directly to God, then they 
> rule without question or consequence, and the people will follow. If 
> those people had freedom of choice and a better quality of life, would 
> they decide not to fight?
>
Any analysis that ignores the west's support for secular tyrannies in 
the ME is doomed to fail.
Who do you turn to when the biggest mouth ranting on about 'human rights 
and democracy' not only suports the local dictator but often as not 
helped kill the nascent democracy in order to put him there?

If I lived in the ME (outside of Israel) I sure as Hel wouldn't trust or 
support the West, let alone the US.
Ten times bitten, twice shy to mangle an old saying.
It's called 'blowback' if you are on the receiving end, or 'payback' if 
you're AQ handing it out.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 18:07:40 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:07:40 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D2A995.1060203@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050711180740.56000.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Whatever the case may be, America will push the game as far as possible-- that is how Empires/Superpowers do their thing. If only we could elect a libertarian syndico-socialist extropian transhumanist government to power then might we make deep changes in how America does its foreign policy in a world of nations operated by landsharks. And if only my grandmother were a man then she would be my grandfather.

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail
 Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/b56ec088/attachment.html>

From john.h.calvin at gmail.com  Mon Jul 11 18:21:51 2005
From: john.h.calvin at gmail.com (John Calvin)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:21:51 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
	<874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
Message-ID: <5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>

<quote>
I have to hide anything that the powers that be decide to make a
crime that real should never have been one.  I have to be able to
hide as long as some people wish to legally run everyone else's
life.
</quote>

I agree with Samantha on this point.  I for one am not opposed to a
Transparent Society, I just don't happen to believe that our society
is quite ready to be transparent.  I don't care if there are cameras
in every nook and cranny, I have "Nothing to Hide".  What I do care
about is the fact that many feel that they have the right to comment,
be concerned with, or regulate my life when the choices I make do not
harm anyone else.  I do not care if the world can see me sitting in my
home enjoying the First Season DVD's of Invader Zim, but would find
the first comment as to the appropriateness of that behavior to not
only be annoying, but a veritable call to arms.

Society is simply not ready to be transparent.  It will be ready to be
transparent only when the people in it no longer feel the need to be
concerned about others behavior, as long as that behavior does not
pose a direct threat to others (I at this time limit the idea of
"threat" to murder, rape, assault etc.)

A step before the "Transparent Society" will be eliminating all of the
laws that proscribe behavior which ought to be left to personal
choice.  Anyone remember the case in Texas a few years back of a
couple charged with Sodomy, and the evidence was a video tape taken by
a neighbour through the bedroom window of the couple in question?  Was
that couple really doing anything wrong?  Certainly they were breaking
the law, but were they wrong?  I for one think that the neighbor was
definately wrong.  In light of that case if you were to ask me did I
do anything wrong that I needed to hide I would certainly say no.  If
you were to ask me if I did anything illegal that I needed to hide I
would have to say that I don't know for there are too many laws to
keep track of and likely my wife and I have broken many with out ever
realizing that someone would bother making such a law in the first
place.


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 18:27:19 2005
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:27:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050710205030.01cc6e40@pop-server.satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20050711182719.59049.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> At 08:52 PM 7/10/2005 -0400, Dan wrote:
> 
> >Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in
> London than by the loss of 
> >lives in Iraq?
> 
> Because we are tribal animals.
> 
> If 50 Iraqi scientists were being `executed' by
> fanatics every day or week, 
> I think we'd* be more angstish.
> 
> *those on this list
 
Succinctly put.  Tells the whole story.  Tribalism is
all.  The Rosetta stone of human behavior.  Axiom One.

Us vs the Other trumps all.  It trumps Truth vs Myth
(when the truth speaks against the interest of the
tribe, truth is discarded and replaced by a
self-serving myth), it trumps lawful vs criminal, and
without missing a beat, it trumps right vs wrong.

The only thing it cannot trump is the up close and
personal, kiss-your-sorry-ass-goodbye prospect of
imminent annhilation.

Training oneself to escape the instinct-mediated
"trap" of tribal loyalty is arguably Transhuman
Enhancement One.

Best, Jeff Davis

"We're a band of higher primates stuck on the surface
of an atmosphere-hazed dirtball. I can associate with
that. I certainly can't identify with which patch of
the dirtball I currently happen to be on, and which
monkey tribe happens to reside therein.

Only by taking the big view we can make it a common
dream, and then a reality. It's worth it."
                               Eugen Leitl



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile 
Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone. 
http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail 


From robgobblin at aol.com  Mon Jul 11 18:36:39 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 08:36:39 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050709195504.94897.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050709195504.94897.qmail@web34413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D2BC37.8070102@aol.com>

After a year away, I'm happy to see progressive thinking people still 
debating the morality of this issue.

Few people have claimed that Al Quaeda or Bin Laden or Saddam Hussein 
are great people.  Although the tendency to confuse the three has tended 
to justify quite a lot of pundit-bullshit.  But few people will claim 
that GW Bush is a great person either.   The question is whether or not  
we should be going out bombing all the bad people and whoever happens to 
be standing within 20 miles of them.  As this policy is obviously 
ridiculous, and the policy of pre-emptive war is now obviously not such 
a good idea, I think it's time to announce that history has in fact 
judged as our own moral sensitivities should have before we started 
shocking and awing in downtown Baghdad.

If there are secret aspects of this war, we will likely only -really- 
find them out 40-years later (since we refuse to believe the things we 
already know, like the Downing Street Memo and Downing Street Minutes 
and the untimely death of weapons inspector David Kelly, etc.), as we 
did with Pearl Harbor.  No conspiracy-theory is needed to understand 
what is going on now, though.  In America, a conservative revolution is 
taking place - a war on personal liberty, economic prosperity and 
anything else we can give a name is scourging the US for its decadence 
(we get the leaders we deserve, in some ways).  Control of economic 
interests so tightly held in small groups of bankers amounts to a class 
war and as we learned in Malachi, if you've read it, no justice, no 
peace.  Welcome to the world without justice.  If you want peace, 
provide justice.

What qualifies one as a conspiracy theorist is that one is suspicious of 
the established power-order of one's own country (like Jefferson, 
Lincoln, Washington, MLK, et. al.).  One is not a conspiracy theorist if 
one is suspicious of the established power orders of a different country 
- especially if we can think of some good other reason to be at war with 
them (say, if they have lots of oil or something).  The belief, in fact, 
in Al Quaeda is just a classic conspiracy theory (vaguely identified 
people and groups of people secretly conspiring to destroy our country) 
targeted at the current "them" of our nationalistic hatred - the 
Conservative (oil owning) Muslim.

If you wish to characterize someone as a "religious thug" I suggest Mr. 
Bush is the world's most dangerous religious thug, persecuting his 
"apparently religious" war (for the sake of the poor Christian 
sucker-soldiers who go to kill off the infidels in this new crusade for 
the oily-land  cf. the Mayberry Machiavelli on whether you should invoke 
the name of God when going to war) on apparently defenseless countries 
worldwide.  "The only new thing in this world is the history you don't 
know."

Consequently, your contempt for intellectual pursuit stated so nicely in 
the language of among the most ruthless imperial killers in the history 
of the Western World has its obvious roots in your own psyche.  A 
universal solution to every puzzle - smash it, burn it, then throw it 
away.  Unfortunately, if the puzzle is alive and has cousins, as we've 
found out, this isn't a good idea.  Don't underestimate your enemies.  
Had you taken the time to think this through ahead of time, you may have 
realized that.  But with a policy of refusing to think, it's hard to see 
how any language could help the situation.  Pugilistic thugs rule the 
world, this we know.  In the few occasions where intellectuals have 
attempted to take over the world with their idealism in the modern era 
(China, Russia) we've had bad times.  In fact even the American 
Experiment is showing itself to be a failure - here we are dominating 
the world through economic and both over and covert military imperialism 
riding on an "elected" government selected by the top 1/400,000,000th of 
our population (Scalia).  But simply aquiescing to this as "human 
nature" I would think is against extropian principles, certainly against 
the Christian principles of justice, mercy and faithfulness.

With kind regards,

Robbie Lindauer


beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:

> Samantha, I dont know how to communicate with you as we both speak the 
> same language but I cannot express my difference of opinion with you 
> at all. It is as if I came from another planet. You write as if I have 
> taken a definite position on the war. Such is not the case, I don't 
> know what is going on, and every time I ask a dissident or conspiracy 
> theorist for info on the secret aspects of the allied war the 
> inevitable reply is forthcoming, "do your own research". It is so 
> predictable, thereafter the personal attacks start. But though I have 
> severe doubts concerning the allies, I have no respect for al qaeda or 
> bin Laden whatsoever. I see no intrinsic difference between the 
> 'Werewolves' terrorists of 1945-6 Germany and al qaeda, bin Laden is 
> just a religious thug. BTW if you don't like the designation 
> 'terrorist' then substitute 'freedom fighter', the name 
> Islamo-militants call themselves or are called means nothing. For 
> starters you would have t! o fill me in on grave allied secrets, which 
> you can't do. We could start with a morals discussion of the Hiroshima 
> and Nagasaki bombings of 60 years ago, but we would go nowhere, being 
> intellectuals. Morality aside, /soldiers do; intellectuals perseverate/.
>  
> >If I were to express my abhorrence in a similar way then I would wish
> >that you and those who agree with you would be at ground zero if such
> >a thing was done. But since I understand what you apparently miss I
> >would not wish that on you. What you are missing is that all "those.
> >people" are all potential immortals. Exactly why do they deserve to
> >miss eternity for some real or imagined stupidities of their
> >(relatively) *very* early childhood? We who have not learned yet to
> >truly understand indefinitely long life or understand its requisites
> >are willing to kill all too easily.
>
> - samantha
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions 
> <http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTE0bG4ybmRjBF9TAzk1OTQ5NjM2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFnBHNsawNhdWN0aW9ucw--/SIG=10vb8ief1/**http%3a//auctions.yahoo.com/> 
> - No fees. Bid on great items.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 18:45:54 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 11:45:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <20050711182719.59049.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050711184554.43779.qmail@web34401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

We can make it a common dream, but we don't want to. The bearded lady can work in a nightclub, bur she doesn't want to. 

Only by taking the big view we can make it a common
dream, and then a reality. It's worth it."
Eugen Leitl




		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/cc2cd674/attachment.html>

From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Mon Jul 11 19:02:07 2005
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:02:07 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
	<874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
	<5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507111456550.-210905@pentium.mb.willtown.net>




On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, John Calvin wrote:

> <quote>
> I have to hide anything that the powers that be decide to make a
> crime that real should never have been one.  I have to be able to
> hide as long as some people wish to legally run everyone else's
> life.
> </quote>
>
> I agree with Samantha on this point.  I for one am not opposed to a
> Transparent Society, I just don't happen to believe that our society
> is quite ready to be transparent.

[...]

I agree here also. And who is to know when some different group will
decide to outlaw something that *was* legal - and make it retroactive?

Who is watching the watchers?

I am not ready to live in a fishbowl. Yet I work in a place where
everything is videorecorded.

What recourse would we have when our private lives are made public for
public entertainment or ridicule or legal action? None?

Some folks don't have enough to do.

Regards,
MB


From robgobblin at aol.com  Mon Jul 11 19:06:04 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 09:06:04 -1000
Subject: Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] learning to appreciate pessimists
In-Reply-To: <20050710110146.43208.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050710110146.43208.qmail@web60513.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D2C31C.7090309@aol.com>

avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com wrote:

>--- Claribel <claribel at intermessage.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Claribel: This is my position exactly. I am both New
>>Age and 
>>ranshumanist  -- yes, some people do exist who
>>embrace both metaphysics and 
>>advanced science. I do not regard them as
>>incompatible, if each is kept in 
>>its proper sphere. I wonder if anyone here is
>>familiar with the Integral 
>>approach of Ken Wilber?
>>(http://wilber.shambhala.com/)
>>    
>>
>In my opinion the relationship of metaphysics to
>science is that metaphysics encompasses science and as
>science grows, metaphysics shrinks. Perhaps someday
>science will understand all and there will be no more
>metaphysics left, but then again - maybe not.
>  
>

If you mean by "metaphysics" merely "not science" then the whether or 
not something is science is just a question of what you call science.  
In modern science, science is understood as technique - control of the 
environment.  Metaphysics is also sometimes called ontology - the theory 
of being-in-general.  The likelihood that it would become 'merely a 
science' has been debated at length by competent and sometimes honest 
people for centuries.  I suggest that the problem is significantly 
solved by post-modernism which regards ontological decisions as policy 
statements and therefore not techniques except in an extended sense of 
"technique" and that Levinas' desire to inject morality in our decision 
process for high-level policy decisions is the right one.

Best wishes,

Robbie Lindauer



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 19:13:16 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:13:16 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <42D2BC37.8070102@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20050711191316.71191.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

So now i'm an anti-intellectual who does not think things through (a policy) before doing a post? In my town I'm a protester-pinko fag who thinks too much and has not enough respect for God and conservative authorities. And pray tell who might this 'among the most ruthless imperial killers in the history of the Western World' be? 


 

Consequently, your contempt for intellectual pursuit stated so nicely in 
the language of among the most ruthless imperial killers in the history 
of the Western World has its obvious roots in your own psyche. A 
universal solution to every puzzle - smash it, burn it, then throw it 
away. Unfortunately, if the puzzle is alive and has cousins, as we've 
found out, this isn't a good idea. Don't underestimate your enemies. 
Had you taken the time to think this through ahead of time, you may have 
realized that. But with a policy of refusing to think, it's hard to see 
how any language could help the situation. Pugilistic thugs rule the 
world, this we know. In the few occasions where intellectuals have 
attempted to take over the world with their idealism in the modern era 
(China, Russia) we've had bad times. In fact even the American 
Experiment is showing itself to be a failure - here we are dominating 
the world through economic and both over and covert military imperialism 
riding on an "elected" government selected by the top 1/400,000,000th of 
our population (Scalia). But simply aquiescing to this as "human 
nature" I would think is against extropian principles, certainly against 
the Christian principles of justice, mercy and faithfulness.

With kind regards,

Robbie Lindauer


		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
 Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/27713fee/attachment.html>

From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 19:46:07 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:46:07 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>	<874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
	<5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <42D2CC7F.6040705@neopax.com>

John Calvin wrote:

><quote>
>I have to hide anything that the powers that be decide to make a
>crime that real should never have been one.  I have to be able to
>hide as long as some people wish to legally run everyone else's
>life.
></quote>
>
>I agree with Samantha on this point.  I for one am not opposed to a
>Transparent Society, I just don't happen to believe that our society
>is quite ready to be transparent.  I don't care if there are cameras
>in every nook and cranny, I have "Nothing to Hide".  What I do care
>about is the fact that many feel that they have the right to comment,
>be concerned with, or regulate my life when the choices I make do not
>harm anyone else.  I do not care if the world can see me sitting in my
>home enjoying the First Season DVD's of Invader Zim, but would find
>the first comment as to the appropriateness of that behavior to not
>only be annoying, but a veritable call to arms.
>
>  
>
Ultimately we must have a transparent society.
However our current leaders seem to take a dual approach - transparency 
coupled with restricting freedom.
I will not accept or condone that package.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005



From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jul 11 19:46:35 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:46:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net>
Message-ID: <20050711194635.89763.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dan Clemmensen <dgc at cox.net> wrote:
> Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in London than by the loss
> of 
> lives in Iraq?

Because we knew there was ongoing violence in Iraq, while the deaths
in London - minor even compared to accidental deaths in London - were
unexpected.

It's an emotional reaction: shock, pure and simple.  Emotions often
have causes that are not solidly connected to logic and rationality.


From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 19:48:01 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:48:01 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <20050711182719.59049.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711182719.59049.qmail@web60024.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D2CCF1.9020409@neopax.com>

Jeff Davis wrote:

>--- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>At 08:52 PM 7/10/2005 -0400, Dan wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Why are we more upset by the loss of lives in
>>>      
>>>
>>London than by the loss of 
>>    
>>
>>>lives in Iraq?
>>>      
>>>
>>Because we are tribal animals.
>>
>>If 50 Iraqi scientists were being `executed' by
>>fanatics every day or week, 
>>I think we'd* be more angstish.
>>
>>*those on this list
>>    
>>
> 
>Succinctly put.  Tells the whole story.  Tribalism is
>all.  The Rosetta stone of human behavior.  Axiom One.
>
>Us vs the Other trumps all.  It trumps Truth vs Myth
>(when the truth speaks against the interest of the
>tribe, truth is discarded and replaced by a
>self-serving myth), it trumps lawful vs criminal, and
>without missing a beat, it trumps right vs wrong.
>
>The only thing it cannot trump is the up close and
>personal, kiss-your-sorry-ass-goodbye prospect of
>imminent annhilation.
>
>Training oneself to escape the instinct-mediated
>"trap" of tribal loyalty is arguably Transhuman
>Enhancement One.
>
>  
>
IMO less to do with 'instinct' and more to do with defending those who 
share common values.
Transhumanists, and indeed PostHumans will not 'escape' this tribalism 
and survive.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 20:15:56 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:15:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D2CC7F.6040705@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050711201556.43228.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Right, and I don't care if cameras pick up my naked image in the bathroom to broadcast it out at the four corners of the globe. Why? because I'm fat, middle-aged & plain. And let them comment however they wish on such behavior, by the time you get to a certain age you've heard just about everything anyway.

Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote: I do not care if the world can see me sitting in my
>home enjoying the First Season DVD's of Invader Zim, but would find
>the first comment as to the appropriateness of that behavior to not
>only be annoying, but a veritable call to arms.


		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/ce5c74fb/attachment.html>

From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jul 11 20:18:22 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:18:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] NPOV
In-Reply-To: <C89806E8-85AC-47E4-942E-98A372D06963@bonfireproductions.com>
Message-ID: <20050711201822.35331.qmail@web81608.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Bret Kulakovich <bret at bonfireproductions.com> wrote:
> To keep the NPOV
> as it were.

I am slightly amused, and slightly concerned, to see the term "NPOV"
popping up on this list, after I posted a definition of it here not too
long ago.  :)

NPOV is something that the Wikipedia project has defined as a subgoal,
to help its goal of being an online encyclopedia.  Is there a call for
its use in stating facts here, at least as a guideline and in certain
types of debates (i.e., in efforts to first establish mutually
acceptable sets of facts, given as one of the problems of debate is
often that both sides use good logic but reason from completely
different and somewhat contradictory sets of facts)?

Mostly just curious here.


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jul 11 20:47:52 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Webcast of the First Workshop on Geoethical
	Nanotechnology
In-Reply-To: <87pstr9vk2.fsf@snark.piermont.com>
Message-ID: <20050711204752.37974.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>

I think I agree with Perry's statement, but restating it in clearer
terms (or, at least, in my terms):

--- "Perry E. Metzger" <perry at piermont.com> wrote:
> > Geoethical nanotechnology is the development and implementation
> under a
> > global regulatory framework of machines capable of assembling
> molecules
> 
> Unless I see evidence to the contrary, I'm afraid I'll be rather
> suspicious that the word "Geoethical" and the phrase "global
> regulatory framework" are not biocompatible with my lunch, so tuning
> in to this "webcast" might cause me to lose it.

Most or all recent proposals for global regulatory frameworks have been
thinly-disguised proposals to postpone or permanently outlaw the
technological research that is one of the main tenets of transhuman
philosophy.  X-ethics - i.e., geoethics, bioethics, and similar types
of "ethics" - have turned out to be mostly just restatements of luddite
and religious beliefs, many of them (like the Precautionary Principle,
as it is applied in practice rather than the ideals it tries to
achieve) demonstrably more dangerous than the dangers they seek to
address.

It does not overstate things to say that these delays equal death.  The
sooner we can develop and distribute the technologies that will
significantly enhance quality of life, the more people will live longer
and more productive (as well as happier and more fulfilling) lives.
True, there are risks that must be addressed on this path, but at this
time we do not even know enough about the possible risks to reliably
legislate against them.  Indeed, much of the basic research being
conducted on nanotechnology at this time is just starting to get a
glimpse of what is possible and what is not; recall the scare about
"grey goo", until new research (which would almost certainly be
impossible, or practically impossible, under a ban) discovered quite
recently that grey goo is actually impossible, at least on any large
and self-perpetuating scale.

It has been the case in related industries that significant legislation
- aside from that which also applies to older, more well-studied
threats, like pollution - generally just stops the research from being
done to clarify and classify the threats, thus actually preventing
reasonable legislation from ever being drafted.  Efforts are ongoing,
in legislatures which passed said laws and have come to realize the
consequences, to oveturn them despite the political climate of fear
they have set up - and thus at potential risk to the legislators' own
political careers.  (The uneducated public sees a law against
something, and comes to the usually quite reasonable conclusion that
their legislators, having adequately studied the topic, found the
dangers outweighed the risks.  So, when a legislator proposes removing
said laws, the public's trust in the legislator understandably slips,
even if the legislator is in fact doing the right thing.)

> It is sad to see people who once wrote eloquently about libertarian
> approaches to the world giving even lip service to words like "global
> regulatory framework".

Given the above, it is disturbing - to say the least* - that advocates
of transhumanism would lend any degree of credibility to new attempts
to impose said regulatory frameworks, or to any new "X-ethical"
arguments.

It is, perhaps, possible to attempt to subvert and recast these
regulations and ethics, by demonstrating the ethics of things like the
Proactionary Principle and the damage - "horrors" is perhaps not too
strong a term - inevitably caused by things like the Precautionary
Principle.  But if this is the true intent of ExI's presence, then
given as this is drastically different from the common proposals for
global regulatory frameworks and X-ethics, this should be explicitly
stated.  It was not.  Ergo, this gives the appearance of ExI endorsing
things like the Precautionary Principle - and even giving the
appearance of doing so goes against ExI's interests.

* To the degree that, like Perry, I shall most certainly not listen to
this Webcast - so as to avoid purging my most recent meal, among other
reasons.


From john.h.calvin at gmail.com  Mon Jul 11 21:02:17 2005
From: john.h.calvin at gmail.com (John Calvin)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:02:17 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <20050711201556.43228.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <42D2CC7F.6040705@neopax.com>
	<20050711201556.43228.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5d74f9c7050711140248e9da57@mail.gmail.com>

"Ultimately we must have a transparent society."

"Must" is a strong word, though I would ceertainly agree that
Ultimately it is in our best interest to have a transparent society,
though we have many other issues to take care of in getting there.

There are benefits of a truly wired and trasparent society.   One or
two times in my life, I have said something that was absolutley
brilliant.  Unfortunately for the lack of ubiquitous cameras there is
no evidence that I have ever shown a spark of brilliance.

Yet here too is the another downside to the transparent society.  What
if our memories of an event are better than the actual event itself? 
Would it be a let down to be able to go look at the footage of an
event in your life and discover that it was not nearly as cool or
poignant as your memory would have it, or would you discard truth in
favor of your personal myth.  I must admit that there may be times
when I would choose personal myth.


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 21:15:12 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] communication issues
In-Reply-To: <20050711204752.37974.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050711211512.50561.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Of all the posters here, the one I have the least in common with is Mike Lorrey yet he is the easiest to communicate with because he is so direct.
Samantha on the other hand is far too slippery i.e. a few weeks ago she said she would join the resistance in Iraq if she knew what was occurring there on the ground. However she has no intention of joining in any part of any resistance in Iraq, and if she did she would be captured, taken to a tent, and violated. How can you take someone's posts seriously when they are so evasive?



		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/9727cba4/attachment.html>

From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Mon Jul 11 21:27:35 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:27:35 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Webcast of the First Workshop on Geoethical
	Nanotechnology
In-Reply-To: <20050711204752.37974.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <87pstr9vk2.fsf@snark.piermont.com>
	<20050711204752.37974.qmail@web81601.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050711212735.GA14900@ofb.net>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:47:52PM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:

> "grey goo", until new research (which would almost certainly be
> impossible, or practically impossible, under a ban) discovered quite
> recently that grey goo is actually impossible, at least on any large
> and self-perpetuating scale.

Can you say more about that research?

-xx- Damien X-) 


From jrd1415 at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 21:56:17 2005
From: jrd1415 at yahoo.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:56:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <42D2CCF1.9020409@neopax.com>
Message-ID: <20050711215617.62102.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:

> Jeff Davis wrote:
...
> >Training oneself to escape the instinct-mediated
> >"trap" of tribal loyalty is arguably Transhuman
> >Enhancement One.

> IMO less to do with 'instinct' and more to do with
> defending those who share common values.

In a tribal context values are arbitrary except
insofar as they are identifiers of tribal membership. 
If their values compel tribal members go over the
cliff, then over the cliff they go.  Instinct--tribal
instinct adhered to--all the way to the sudden stop. 

> Transhumanists, and indeed PostHumans will not
> 'escape' this tribalism and survive.

No.  If survival is the goal, then you get there by
rational behavior.  If multiple individuals with
similar values act in concert, their survival ***as a
group*** may be enhanced, but the similarity to
tribalism is merely coincidental.   

An occasional correlation in the outcomes of rational
and instinctive behavior cannot make instinctive
behavior more than "seemingly" rational.  A case might
be made that instinctive behaviors dispassionately
evolved in the wild, on the basis of gene "selection",
are "rational" by virtue of the correlation of
survival and environmental conditions.  However,
virtually by definition, human, transhuman, and
post-human "environments" are/will be "engineered", in
contrast to the "wild" environments of proto- and
early humans.

Best, Jeff Davis
 
"I know it is a weakness of human nature to become
emotionally invested in inconsequential tribal spats,
but people who want to be transhumanists need to be
able to get past that almost as a prerequisite.  In
fact, a good portion of the transhumanist ideals are
all about shedding this behavior."
                       j. andrew rogers
 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 


From wingcat at pacbell.net  Mon Jul 11 22:02:34 2005
From: wingcat at pacbell.net (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:02:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Webcast of the First Workshop on Geoethical
	Nanotechnology
In-Reply-To: <20050711212735.GA14900@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <20050711220234.27972.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>

--- Damien Sullivan <phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:47:52PM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > "grey goo", until new research (which would almost certainly be
> > impossible, or practically impossible, under a ban) discovered
> quite
> > recently that grey goo is actually impossible, at least on any
> large
> > and self-perpetuating scale.
> 
> Can you say more about that research?

It was posted to this list - last year, I think - partly in reaction
to Michael Chricton's "Prey".  I recall a few different threads -
though I'm not 100% sure I'm stating any of them completely correctly:

* Even if you had self-replicating, all-consuming nanites, they'd soon
  form a skin-and-interior system much like a growing cancer cell.
  Unfortunately, only the "skin" would be receiving new energy and new
  nutrients; for the interior to survive, you'd need so much heat that
  it would eventually disrupt the structures of the nanites.
  Otherwise, the skin's area would go up with the cube of the volume it
  covered, but it would need some method of obtaining power with which
  to break up matter (most matter is not explosive or otherwise
  contains easy-to-tap energy); solar power would, at best, go up with
  the square of the volume...and eventually, the nanites would run out.
  (Or at least slow down enough to allow countermeasures.  The world
  would not sit by indefinitely if something like this happened.)

* Unless you programmed it to avoid going down (for which you'd first
  need a way to measure gravity on the device), the mass would
  eventually break through the Earth's crust...and it seems highly
  unlikely that any nanites could survive the resulting magma flow.
  (Although, since this would disrupt an area for miles around, this
  could be counted as "large scale".)

* Nanotechnology in general requires knowing what atoms you're
  operating with.  A silicon atom can't do all the things a carbon atom
  can, and both have different properties from an oxygen atom.  Yet the
  very nature of an "all-consuming" nanite assumes that just any atom
  will do - which is not the case.  (Even if you just had it select
  favorable atoms from its environment, it would most likely come to
  some barrier - different types of rock, barren areas, et cetera -
  where its food completely ran out.  Although this isn't a barrier to
  large-scale disruption either - there's probably a continual-enough
  chain of carbon atoms in any large city, for example.)

Google around if you want more.


From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Mon Jul 11 22:13:55 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:13:55 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Re: Webcast of the First Workshop on Geoethical
	Nanotechnology
In-Reply-To: <20050711220234.27972.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711212735.GA14900@ofb.net>
	<20050711220234.27972.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20050711221355.GA20966@ofb.net>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 03:02:34PM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> --- Damien Sullivan <phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:47:52PM -0700, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > > "grey goo", until new research (which would almost certainly be
> > > impossible, or practically impossible, under a ban) discovered
> > quite
> > > recently that grey goo is actually impossible, at least on any
> > large
> > > and self-perpetuating scale.

> * Even if you had self-replicating, all-consuming nanites, they'd soon
>   form a skin-and-interior system much like a growing cancer cell.

>   favorable atoms from its environment, it would most likely come to
>   some barrier - different types of rock, barren areas, et cetera -
>   where its food completely ran out.  Although this isn't a barrier to

Oh.  I used arguments like these, along with "diamondoid nanites in oxygen
bring to mind the word 'flammable'", some years ago on the onld list.  I
thought there was more behind "research".

-xx- Damien X-) 


From robgobblin at aol.com  Mon Jul 11 22:24:55 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 12:24:55 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050711191316.71191.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711191316.71191.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D2F1B7.6060408@aol.com>

I didn't put the words in your mouth.  If the shoe fits, wear it.  If 
you would like to be a protester pinko-fag, stop saying nice things 
about war-mongers.

Robbie

PS - answer to your question - Rome.


beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:

> So now i'm an anti-intellectual who does not think things through (a 
> policy) before doing a post? In my town I'm a protester-pinko fag who 
> thinks too much and has not enough respect for God and conservative 
> authorities. And pray tell who might this 'among the most ruthless 
> imperial killers in the history of the Western World' be?
>
>
>  
>
>
>     Consequently, your contempt for intellectual pursuit stated so
>     nicely in
>     the language of among the most ruthless imperial killers in the
>     history
>     of the Western World has its obvious roots in your own psyche. A
>     universal solution to every puzzle - smash it, burn it, then throw it
>     away. Unfortunately, if the puzzle is alive and has cousins, as we've
>     found out, this isn't a good idea. Don't underestimate your enemies.
>     Had you taken the time to think this through ahead of time, you
>     may have
>     realized that. But with a policy of refusing to think, it's hard
>     to see
>     how any language could help the situation. Pugilistic thugs rule the
>     world, this we know. In the few occasions where intellectuals have
>     attempted to take over the world with their idealism in the modern
>     era
>     (China, Russia) we've had bad times. In fact even the American
>     Ex! periment is showing itself to be a failure - here we are
>     dominating
>     the world through economic and both over and covert military
>     imperialism
>     riding on an "elected" government selected by the top
>     1/400,000,000th of
>     our population (Scalia). But simply aquiescing to this as "human
>     nature" I would think is against extropian principles, certainly
>     against
>     the Christian principles of justice, mercy and faithfulness.
>
>     With kind regards,
>
>     Robbie Lindauer
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Yahoo! Mail for Mobile
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! 
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=31132/*http://mobile.yahoo.com/learn/mail> 
> Check email on your mobile phone.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From dirk at neopax.com  Mon Jul 11 22:30:56 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:30:56 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
In-Reply-To: <20050711215617.62102.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711215617.62102.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D2F320.6060206@neopax.com>

Jeff Davis wrote:

>--- Dirk Bruere <dirk at neopax.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>Jeff Davis wrote:
>>    
>>
>...
>  
>
>>>Training oneself to escape the instinct-mediated
>>>"trap" of tribal loyalty is arguably Transhuman
>>>Enhancement One.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>IMO less to do with 'instinct' and more to do with
>>defending those who share common values.
>>    
>>
>
>In a tribal context values are arbitrary except
>insofar as they are identifiers of tribal membership. 
>If their values compel tribal members go over the
>cliff, then over the cliff they go.  Instinct--tribal
>instinct adhered to--all the way to the sudden stop. 
>
>  
>
>>Transhumanists, and indeed PostHumans will not
>>'escape' this tribalism and survive.
>>    
>>
>
>No.  If survival is the goal, then you get there by
>rational behavior.  If multiple individuals with
>similar values act in concert, their survival ***as a
>group*** may be enhanced, but the similarity to
>tribalism is merely coincidental.   
>
>An occasional correlation in the outcomes of rational
>and instinctive behavior cannot make instinctive
>behavior more than "seemingly" rational.  A case might
>be made that instinctive behaviors dispassionately
>evolved in the wild, on the basis of gene "selection",
>are "rational" by virtue of the correlation of
>survival and environmental conditions.  However,
>virtually by definition, human, transhuman, and
>post-human "environments" are/will be "engineered", in
>contrast to the "wild" environments of proto- and
>early humans.
>
>  
>
I would say that the critical environment variable that cannot be 
engineered is competition.
Me and my gang will always beat the lone idealist, unless he has his 
gang back him up.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 22:51:13 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <42D2F1B7.6060408@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20050711225113.71574.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Rome? I write like a Roman? that's a new one.. okay it's a tiny thing. 
Main beef is a sense the opponents of the war are being as disingenuous as the hawks. When I protested the Vietnam War the feeling back then was "what does our side have to hide? They were childish, yes, but the info was more or less accurate. All sorts of rumors in the past 46 months have been circulating, the administration was active in the attacks or complicit. Now there's something else. And how can you trust mere memos without knowing 100% the source of those memos?
  Sure the administration lied, truth is the first casualty even before the shooting starts. What else is new? What definitive evidence can you furnish showing the war was not only snaked into but is undeniably wrong?

Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:
I didn't put the words in your mouth. If the shoe fits, wear it. If 
you would like to be a protester pinko-fag, stop saying nice things 
about war-mongers.

Robbie

PS - answer to your question - Rome.



		
---------------------------------
 Sell on Yahoo! Auctions  - No fees. Bid on great items.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/5a4e1d94/attachment.html>

From robgobblin at aol.com  Mon Jul 11 23:13:46 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:13:46 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] feeling more better
In-Reply-To: <20050711225113.71574.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711225113.71574.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D2FD2A.3070104@aol.com>

Yes, you write like a roman "intellectuals pontificate, soldiers act".  
Sloganeering replacing critical thought.

Rumors are irrelevant, facts in evidence stand.  The definitive evidence 
that the war was wrong is the giant pile of dead bodies and the now 
obvious (well, then-obvious too) fact (by your own admission) that it 
was over weapons of mass deception, not destruction.

Robbie


beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:

> Rome? I write like a Roman? that's a new one.. okay it's a tiny thing. 
> Main beef is a sense the opponents of the war are being as 
> disingenuous as the hawks. When I protested the Vietnam War the 
> feeling back then was "what does our side have to hide? They were 
> childish, yes, but the info was more or less accurate. All sorts of 
> rumors in the past 46 months have been circulating, the administration 
> was active in the attacks or complicit. Now there's something else. 
> And how can you trust mere memos without knowing 100% the source of 
> those memos?
>   Sure the administration lied, truth is the first casualty even 
> before the shooting starts. What else is new? What definitive evidence 
> can you furnish showing the war was not only snaked into but is 
> undeniably wrong?
>
> */Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com>/* wrote:
>
>     I didn't put the words in your mouth. If the shoe fits, wear it. If
>     you would like to be a protester pinko-fag, stop saying nice things
>     about war-mongers.
>
>     Robbie
>
>     PS - answer to your question - Rome.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions 
> <http://us.lrd.yahoo.com/_ylc=X3oDMTE0bG4ybmRjBF9TAzk1OTQ5NjM2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFnBHNsawNhdWN0aW9ucw--/SIG=10vb8ief1/**http%3a//auctions.yahoo.com/> 
> - No fees. Bid on great items.
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Mon Jul 11 23:28:22 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:28:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
Message-ID: <20050711232822.10200.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I overreacted, got nervous after the London attacks.
A childish remnant from the Vietnam era where if you were young enough you saw the war in terms of black & white, from both sides. Now I don't trust anyone. With age, info from abroad appears less trustworthy-- there is no true international law or reliable information from overseas, is there? We don't even receive reliable information domestically.You chose your stance on this war thanks to the sum total of all you were told, didn't you? What I've been told is inconclusive, so I err on the side of the nation I live in. 
Can you direct us to the url of a smoking gun that can't be denied? Can you provide overwhelming evidence?

__________________________________________________
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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/819af71b/attachment.html>

From robgobblin at aol.com  Mon Jul 11 23:31:20 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:31:20 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <20050711232822.10200.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711232822.10200.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D30148.7020409@aol.com>

What evidence of wrongness are you looking for other than piles of dead 
bodies?  Why aren't they sufficient?



beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:

> I overreacted, got nervous after the London attacks.
> A childish remnant from the Vietnam era where if you were young enough 
> you saw the war in terms of black & white, from both sides. Now I 
> don't trust anyone. With age, info from abroad appears less 
> trustworthy-- there is no true international law or reliable 
> information from overseas, is there? We don't even receive reliable 
> information domestically.You chose your stance on this war thanks 
> to the sum total of all you were told, didn't you? What I've been 
> told is inconclusive, so I err on the side of the nation I live in.
> Can you direct us to the url of a smoking gun that can't be denied? 
> Can you provide overwhelming evidence?
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 23:37:58 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:37:58 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <20050710230613.M89964@kozubik.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<20050710230613.M89964@kozubik.com>
Message-ID: <42D302D6.1090307@cox.net>

John Kozubik wrote:

>Dan,
>
>On Sun, 10 Jul 2005, Dan Clemmensen wrote:
>
>  
>
>>If every Londoner with a cell-phone camera had taken a 10-shot panorama
>>at the time of the bombing, we would almost certainly have a picture of
>>at least one of the bombers.
>>
>>To speed the analysis, we should also add a volunteer analytic
>>infrastructure. If every relevant Londoner made panoramic pictures,
>>there would be far more pictures than police analysts could process
>>quickly. But each photographer could add the pictures to a distributed
>>database, and each photographer (plus innumerable volunteers) could do a
>>preliminary analysis.
>>    
>>
>
>
>Ok.  But how do you distinguish fake data and analysis from real data and
>analysis ?  What if the criminals involved created hundreds or thousands
>of CGI photos of real and/or fake persons at the scene and submitted them
>as part of the broader public response ?
>
>Such a barrage of misleading information could hamper the investigation at
>best, and falsely redirect it at worse.
>
>Comments ?
>
>  
>
MD5 signatures. Each photographer can either join a pre-existing chain 
of trust. No need to
actually divulge the photographer's name to all, but the police can find 
it if an analyst
decides something is wrong.

Similarly, analysts are identifiable if necessary, and analysis is 
overlapped, so many analysts
will cross-check each other.


From dgc at cox.net  Mon Jul 11 23:54:15 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:54:15 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <F07FE2E9-0652-4D18-96D4-C41EF850FE0E@mac.com>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1CD5C.3090204@neopax.com>	<42D1D18A.7060404@cox.net>
	<F07FE2E9-0652-4D18-96D4-C41EF850FE0E@mac.com>
Message-ID: <42D306A7.1000805@cox.net>

Samantha Atkins wrote:

> I am less trusting.  The timing was too useful.  I am too suspicious  
> after 911, the "Patriot Act" and the rest.   I very much doubt the  
> real perps will ever be found.
>
> - samantha
>
But this is a compelling argument in favor of a grass-roots surviellance 
and analysis effort. If any incident is a hoax perpetrated by the 
authorities, then fully-distributed grass-roots surveillance and 
analysis is a very strong deterrent.

I personally do not think that "authorities" deliberately planned or 
desired any of these horrific events, with the exception of the Iraq 
war. Yes, many "authorities" did in fact react to 9-11 by pushing their 
totalitarian agendas. but I don't think they actually planned 9-11 or 
even  wanted such an event to occur.




From robgobblin at aol.com  Tue Jul 12 00:38:33 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 14:38:33 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <42D30148.7020409@aol.com>
References: <20050711232822.10200.qmail@web34408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<42D30148.7020409@aol.com>
Message-ID: <42D31109.9030905@aol.com>

robgobblin at aol.com wrote:

One last thing - sufficient for what?  Sufficient for impeachment?  
Certainly - an impeachment proceeding proceeds on the basis of a trial - 
if there is an impeachable offense alleged and some reason - any reason 
- to suspect malfeasance the accused can be tried where their guilt must 
be proved.  But there is no need to provide the proof beforehand 
obviating the legal process of discovery.

Robbie

> beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Can you direct us to the url of a smoking gun that can't be denied? 
>> Can you provide overwhelming evidence?
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> http://mail.yahoo.com
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>>  
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat




From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Jul 12 01:25:16 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:25:16 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <5d74f9c7050711140248e9da57@mail.gmail.com>
References: <42D2CC7F.6040705@neopax.com>
	<20050711201556.43228.qmail@web34414.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<5d74f9c7050711140248e9da57@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <131D97C0-9559-4599-B126-F88F24269E85@mac.com>


On Jul 11, 2005, at 2:02 PM, John Calvin wrote:

> "Ultimately we must have a transparent society."
>
> "Must" is a strong word, though I would ceertainly agree that
> Ultimately it is in our best interest to have a transparent society,
> though we have many other issues to take care of in getting there.
>
> There are benefits of a truly wired and trasparent society.   One or
> two times in my life, I have said something that was absolutley
> brilliant.  Unfortunately for the lack of ubiquitous cameras there is
> no evidence that I have ever shown a spark of brilliance.

Controllable persistence of one's own perceptions and thoughts does  
not require a transparent society.

- samantha


From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Jul 12 01:27:00 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:27:00 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] communication issues
In-Reply-To: <20050711211512.50561.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050711211512.50561.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <E2D79046-AD84-4F8B-99F5-FE882A4FA502@mac.com>

I cannot be held wholly or even primarily responsible for your  
seeming failure to understand me.

- s

On Jul 11, 2005, at 2:15 PM, c c wrote:

> Of all the posters here, the one I have the least in common with is  
> Mike Lorrey yet he is the easiest to communicate with because he is  
> so direct.
> Samantha on the other hand is far too slippery i.e. a few weeks ago  
> she said she would join the resistance in Iraq if she knew what was  
> occurring there on the ground. However she has no intention of  
> joining in any part of any resistance in Iraq, and if she did she  
> would be captured, taken to a tent, and violated. How can you take  
> someone's posts seriously when they are so evasive?
>
>
> Sell on Yahoo! Auctions - No fees. Bid on great items.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050711/3f1d77d8/attachment.html>

From dgc at cox.net  Tue Jul 12 01:31:44 2005
From: dgc at cox.net (Dan Clemmensen)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:31:44 -0400
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <Pine.WNT.4.55.0507111456550.-210905@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net>
	<42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>	<874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>	<5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507111456550.-210905@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
Message-ID: <42D31D80.3040009@cox.net>

MB wrote:

>On Mon, 11 Jul 2005, John Calvin wrote:
>  
>
>><quote>
>>I have to hide anything that the powers that be decide to make a
>>crime that real should never have been one.  I have to be able to
>>hide as long as some people wish to legally run everyone else's
>>life.
>></quote>
>>
>>I agree with Samantha on this point.  I for one am not opposed to a
>>Transparent Society, I just don't happen to believe that our society
>>is quite ready to be transparent.
>>    
>>
>
>[...]
>
>I agree here also. And who is to know when some different group will
>decide to outlaw something that *was* legal - and make it retroactive?
>
>Who is watching the watchers?
>
>I am not ready to live in a fishbowl. Yet I work in a place where
>everything is videorecorded.
>
>What recourse would we have when our private lives are made public for
>public entertainment or ridicule or legal action? None?
>
>Some folks don't have enough to do.
>
>  
>
I think we have argued this point ad nauseum in years past.

Brin's "Transparent society" argues that we cannot put the toothpaste
back in the tube: existing technological trends will inevitably permit
constant monitoring of everybody. Brin argues that the only feasible
response is to explicitly enable anybody to monitor anybody else: If the 
cops can
monitor you, then you can monitor the cops. They can monitor you at home or
at work: You can monitor them at home or at work.

Brin does not argue that universal monitoring is "good." He argues that it
is inevitable, and then tries to determine the best ways to deal with the
technology.

Personally, I am neutral on privacy: I prefer to maintain my own 
privacy, but
I understand that I will not be able to do so in the future. I accept 
Brin's solution:
If I must forgo privacy, then so must everybody else, including all 
government officials,
church officials, and other arbiters of "moral behavior."

Please do not waste my time with arguments that transparency is "wrong."
Transparency is inevitable. You may as well argue against the laws of 
physics.


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 12 01:46:49 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 18:46:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <42D30148.7020409@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20050712014649.55373.qmail@web34407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Being there is no clear international law isn't proof
of undeniably malicious intent needed in the case of
war crimes?  Since technically Iraq was in violation
of agreements made previously with the UN, it would
have to be shown America invaded to entirely subjugate
Iraq and commit war crimes. If you look backwards to
2003 so you can say, "now that we know America
couldn't win the peace, then overthrowing the Baathist
regime was futile, and the administration had to know
a sustained resistance to occupation was inevitable &
unbeatable", that is to say you are attempting to
prove the course of the war was inevitable and America
knew so in advance. If you can demonstrate this you
have a solid case.


--- Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:
> What evidence of wrongness are you looking for other
> than piles of dead 
> bodies?  Why aren't they sufficient?



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From robgobblin at aol.com  Tue Jul 12 02:08:17 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:08:17 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <20050712014649.55373.qmail@web34407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050712014649.55373.qmail@web34407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D32611.1040607@aol.com>

beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:

>Being there is no clear international law isn't proof
>of undeniably malicious intent needed in the case of
>war crimes?
>

Impeachment, not war crimes. There is a very different standard of law 
well established here.

>  Since technically Iraq was in violation
>of agreements made previously with the UN, it would
>have to be shown America invaded to entirely subjugate
>Iraq and commit war crimes.
>

It hasn't been determined by the UN security council that Iraq was 
definitively in violation. In fact, we invaded over the objections of 
the security council and the UN weapons inspectors. It turns out they 
were right and we were lying, apparently intentionally.

> If you look backwards to
>2003 so you can say, "now that we know America
>couldn't win the peace, then overthrowing the Baathist
>regime was futile, and the administration had to know
>a sustained resistance to occupation was inevitable &
>unbeatable", that is to say you are attempting to
>prove the course of the war was inevitable and America
>knew so in advance. If you can demonstrate this you
>have a solid case.
>  
>

No, I'm claiming it was obvious then as now that war is bad and that 
there were other options and that the American Presidential group 
decided to go to war over the objections of the CIA, the UN and many, 
many, many citizens apparently on trumped up "evidence" of Iraq's 
capability of delivering weapons of mass destruction (such as having 
rockets or nuclear or biological or chemical weapons ability). As a 
result, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died (baathists and 
non-bathists INDISCRIMINATELY) and more than a few thousand americans 
have been killed or maimed. That there were other options was obvious 
and continues to be obvious. That this was a bad choice was obvious then 
and continues to be obvious now.

This point was made at length, even in this forum, BEFORE the war 
attempt. It was made strongly in the UN, strongly by military advisors 
to Bush who were subsequently fired, and strongly by American 
Intelligence agents who were subsequently illegally "outed" by someone 
in the White House apparently as retalliation.

How is any of this controversial in the slightest?

Robbie

>
>--- Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>What evidence of wrongness are you looking for other
>>than piles of dead 
>>bodies?  Why aren't they sufficient?
>>    
>>
>
>
>
>        
>____________________________________________________
>Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 12 02:40:24 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 19:40:24 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <42D32611.1040607@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20050712024024.66476.qmail@web34407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Yes, there were certainly options other than the war,
on humanitarian grounds, but no better way to scatter
the Iraq regime. That line in court, along with no
evidence of deliberate malice beforehand in killing
civilians, would be enough to acquit the
administration.



> Impeachment, not war crimes. There is a very
> different standard of law 
> well established here.
> 
> >  Since technically Iraq was in violation
> >of agreements made previously with the UN, it would
> >have to be shown America invaded to entirely
> subjugate
> >Iraq and commit war crimes.
> >
> 
> It hasn't been determined by the UN security council
> that Iraq was 
> definitively in violation. In fact, we invaded over
> the objections of 
> the security council and the UN weapons inspectors.
> It turns out they 
> were right and we were lying, apparently
> intentionally.
> 
> > If you look backwards to
> >2003 so you can say, "now that we know America
> >couldn't win the peace, then overthrowing the
> Baathist
> >regime was futile, and the administration had to
> know
> >a sustained resistance to occupation was inevitable
> &
> >unbeatable", that is to say you are attempting to
> >prove the course of the war was inevitable and
> America
> >knew so in advance. If you can demonstrate this you
> >have a solid case.
> >  
> >
> 
> No, I'm claiming it was obvious then as now that war
> is bad and that 
> there were other options and that the American
> Presidential group 
> decided to go to war over the objections of the CIA,
> the UN and many, 
> many, many citizens apparently on trumped up
> "evidence" of Iraq's 
> capability of delivering weapons of mass destruction
> (such as having 
> rockets or nuclear or biological or chemical weapons
> ability). As a 
> result, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died
> (baathists and 
> non-bathists INDISCRIMINATELY) and more than a few
> thousand americans 
> have been killed or maimed. That there were other
> options was obvious 
> and continues to be obvious. That this was a bad
> choice was obvious then 
> and continues to be obvious now.
> 
> This point was made at length, even in this forum,
> BEFORE the war 
> attempt. It was made strongly in the UN, strongly by
> military advisors 
> to Bush who were subsequently fired, and strongly by
> American 
> Intelligence agents who were subsequently illegally
> "outed" by someone 
> in the White House apparently as retalliation.
> 
> How is any of this controversial in the slightest?
> 
> Robbie
> 
> >
> >--- Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>What evidence of wrongness are you looking for
> other
> >>than piles of dead 
> >>bodies?  Why aren't they sufficient?
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >        
>
>____________________________________________________
> >Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great
> items.  
> >http://auctions.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
> 



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Jul 12 02:43:44 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 12:43:44 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
Message-ID: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>

I've only had time to dip into some ongoing threads but I notice that both Robert Lindauer and Dan Clemmensen have
stated that they think that "we", meaning the US, or the Bush administration, (I'm not part of any of those "we") deliberately lied or misrepresented the reasons for invading Iraq. 

Whilst I do tend to that view, I am not utterly convinced of it yet. And yet it is an important fact, or otherwise, to establish or not surely? One thing that I suspect most extropian or transhumanist list posters might agree on, is that the Iraq and terrorism business has grabbed a big chunk of the worlds attention. Attention that might have been directed far more profitably (to the net human good) elsewhere. 

I wonder on what basis those that are convinced of it, are
so convinced? Please, give only opinions based on hard facts.

We all know that we can make up nonsense for ourselves we don't need to do it for each other.

Brett Paatsch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20050712/501f3196/attachment.html>

From sentience at pobox.com  Tue Jul 12 03:09:11 2005
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:09:11 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
References: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
Message-ID: <42D33457.9030203@pobox.com>

Brett Paatsch wrote:
> I've only had time to dip into some ongoing threads but I notice that 
> both Robert Lindauer and Dan Clemmensen have
> stated that they think that "we", meaning the US, or the Bush 
> administration, (I'm not part of any of those "we") deliberately lied or 
> misrepresented the reasons for invading Iraq.
>  
> Whilst I do tend to that view, I am not utterly convinced of it yet. And 
> yet it is an important fact, or otherwise, to establish or not surely? 
> One thing that I suspect most extropian or transhumanist list posters 
> might agree on, is that the Iraq and terrorism business has grabbed a 
> big chunk of the worlds attention. Attention that might have been 
> directed far more profitably (to the net human good) elsewhere.

The term "lie" only applies to social systems or individuals whose 
(collective) minds are sufficiently directed to finding truth that there 
exists knowledge inverted to create a lie.  If you're mired down in a 
political system devoted to finding evidence for particular theories, 
selectively passing on arguments for particular theories, not contradicting 
the boss, etc., the boundary between dishonest lies and honest mistakes is too 
fuzzy to be worth pursuing.  If Bush were a scientist publishing a paper on 
WMD we'd call it a lie.  But I think it very probable that Bush believed Iraq 
had WMD.  Practically everyone did, including me.  You can say we were all, 
including Bush, fooled by a self-deceiving intelligence system for which Bush 
was partially responsible; but the fact remains, we believed it at the time.

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


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 12 03:20:37 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:20:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <42D33457.9030203@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <20050712032037.30091.qmail@web34410.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

After what happened in London, many are worried that
other allied nations are going to be targeted and also
that Britain- the main ally- will be hit again.


> One thing that I suspect most extropian or
> transhumanist list posters 
> > might agree on, is that the Iraq and terrorism
> business has grabbed a 
> > big chunk of the worlds attention. 


		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From robgobblin at aol.com  Tue Jul 12 03:22:32 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:22:32 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <20050712024024.66476.qmail@web34407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <20050712024024.66476.qmail@web34407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <42D33778.9090800@aol.com>

In american courts, points of fact are found out in court.

That's why we have discovery.

On the moral point, it's not clear that "scattering the iraqi regime" is 
a justifiable pretense for slaughtering civilians wholesale and 
launching two or more countries into an extended military quagmire with 
daily deaths and mayhem ensuing.

Robbie


beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:

>Yes, there were certainly options other than the war,
>on humanitarian grounds, but no better way to scatter
>the Iraq regime. That line in court, along with no
>evidence of deliberate malice beforehand in killing
>civilians, would be enough to acquit the
>administration.
>
>
>
>  
>
>>Impeachment, not war crimes. There is a very
>>different standard of law 
>>well established here.
>>
>>    
>>
>>> Since technically Iraq was in violation
>>>of agreements made previously with the UN, it would
>>>have to be shown America invaded to entirely
>>>      
>>>
>>subjugate
>>    
>>
>>>Iraq and commit war crimes.
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>It hasn't been determined by the UN security council
>>that Iraq was 
>>definitively in violation. In fact, we invaded over
>>the objections of 
>>the security council and the UN weapons inspectors.
>>It turns out they 
>>were right and we were lying, apparently
>>intentionally.
>>
>>    
>>
>>>If you look backwards to
>>>2003 so you can say, "now that we know America
>>>couldn't win the peace, then overthrowing the
>>>      
>>>
>>Baathist
>>    
>>
>>>regime was futile, and the administration had to
>>>      
>>>
>>know
>>    
>>
>>>a sustained resistance to occupation was inevitable
>>>      
>>>
>>&
>>    
>>
>>>unbeatable", that is to say you are attempting to
>>>prove the course of the war was inevitable and
>>>      
>>>
>>America
>>    
>>
>>>knew so in advance. If you can demonstrate this you
>>>have a solid case.
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>No, I'm claiming it was obvious then as now that war
>>is bad and that 
>>there were other options and that the American
>>Presidential group 
>>decided to go to war over the objections of the CIA,
>>the UN and many, 
>>many, many citizens apparently on trumped up
>>"evidence" of Iraq's 
>>capability of delivering weapons of mass destruction
>>(such as having 
>>rockets or nuclear or biological or chemical weapons
>>ability). As a 
>>result, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died
>>(baathists and 
>>non-bathists INDISCRIMINATELY) and more than a few
>>thousand americans 
>>have been killed or maimed. That there were other
>>options was obvious 
>>and continues to be obvious. That this was a bad
>>choice was obvious then 
>>and continues to be obvious now.
>>
>>This point was made at length, even in this forum,
>>BEFORE the war 
>>attempt. It was made strongly in the UN, strongly by
>>military advisors 
>>to Bush who were subsequently fired, and strongly by
>>American 
>>Intelligence agents who were subsequently illegally
>>"outed" by someone 
>>in the White House apparently as retalliation.
>>
>>How is any of this controversial in the slightest?
>>
>>Robbie
>>
>>    
>>
>>>--- Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>What evidence of wrongness are you looking for
>>>>        
>>>>
>>other
>>    
>>
>>>>than piles of dead 
>>>>bodies?  Why aren't they sufficient?
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>      
>>>
>>____________________________________________________
>>    
>>
>>>Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great
>>>      
>>>
>>items.  
>>    
>>
>>>http://auctions.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
>  
>
>
>
>
>        
>____________________________________________________
>Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
>http://auctions.yahoo.com/
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From dirk at neopax.com  Tue Jul 12 03:28:16 2005
From: dirk at neopax.com (Dirk Bruere)
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 04:28:16 +0100
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
References: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
Message-ID: <42D338D0.7090404@neopax.com>

Brett Paatsch wrote:

> I've only had time to dip into some ongoing threads but I notice that 
> both Robert Lindauer and Dan Clemmensen have
> stated that they think that "we", meaning the US, or the Bush 
> administration, (I'm not part of any of those "we") deliberately lied 
> or misrepresented the reasons for invading Iraq.
>  
> Whilst I do tend to that view, I am not utterly convinced of it yet. 
> And yet it is an important fact, or otherwise, to establish or not 
> surely? One thing that I suspect most extropian or transhumanist list 
> posters might agree on, is that the Iraq and terrorism business has 
> grabbed a big chunk of the worlds attention. Attention that might have 
> been directed far more profitably (to the net human good) elsewhere.
>  
> I wonder on what basis those that are convinced of it, are
> so convinced? Please, give only opinions based on hard facts.

Well, in that case we better exonerate Hitler for the Holocaust since 
there are no *hard facts* that show he ordered it.
Just a lot of circumstantial evidence.

-- 
Dirk

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



-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.12/46 - Release Date: 11/07/2005



From robgobblin at aol.com  Tue Jul 12 03:32:50 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:32:50 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
References: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
Message-ID: <42D339E2.4030000@aol.com>

bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au wrote:

> I've only had time to dip into some ongoing threads but I notice that 
> both Robert Lindauer and Dan Clemmensen have
> stated that they think that "we", meaning the US, or the Bush 
> administration, (I'm not part of any of those "we") deliberately lied 
> or misrepresented the reasons for invading Iraq.
>  
> Whilst I do tend to that view, I am not utterly convinced of it yet. 
> And yet it is an important fact, or otherwise, to establish or not 
> surely? One thing that I suspect most extropian or transhumanist list 
> posters might agree on, is that the Iraq and terrorism business has 
> grabbed a big chunk of the worlds attention. Attention that might have 
> been directed far more profitably (to the net human good) elsewhere.


$200,000,000,000 last count (in US spending, nevermind everywhere else) 
that easily could have built plenty of supercomputers into which we 
could have downloaded our minds :)  Hindsight is always 20/20 with 
investment opportunities though :(


> I wonder on what basis those that are convinced of it, are
> so convinced? Please, give only opinions based on hard facts.


The claim was that "we KNOW there are wmd's in Iraq" - this is what Mr. 
Powell said to the UN and Bush said to the American Public.  He (powell) 
is later quoted as having said in a briefing "I'm not reading this 
bulshit".  The question is why, if he KNEW it was bullshit, did he go on 
reading given that we obviously didn't know that there were weapons of 
the relevant kind there (otherwise, they'd be there, right?)  Or did he 
have further intelligence revealed to him.  If so, where is it?   I 
mean, if we KNEW where there were, we'd have found them.

Second, we KNOW that David Kelly was an active Iraq weapons inspector 
working for the UN and he said he KNEW they didn't have the weapons of 
the relevant kind, he "died mysteriously" for his say-so.  But we do 
know that he said so.

Third, we KNOW that the American CIA had briefed the president and had 
said they'd found no such evidence.

Fourth, we know that in fact Iraq didn't attempt to acquire any nuclear 
material in Niger, Bush blatantly lied to the public in the matter.  
Both the British and Americans knew that the intelligence on the matter 
was flatly false.

Fifth we know that the the British understood Bush's war effort as a 
trumped-up case from the Downing Street Memo and Downing Street Minutes 
the sources of which are not in question.

Sixth, we know that some of the President's and Vice President's very 
close friends are mysteriously making quite a lot of money in this 
effort, in particular Haliburton and Carlyle (through UDI) are doing well..

In sum, you can INSIST that this all adds up to conspiracy-theory 
bullshit because obviously anyone who opposed or opposes the 
administration's position in the matter is a 
nutso-commie-conspiracy-theorist OR you could say "well, there appears 
to be a significant amount of evidence that Bush really wanted to go to 
war and trumped up the reasons to do so."  But this wouldn't be a 
critical attitude but more of a dumb-ass attitude.  If you like this, I 
also sell land in southeast asia in my spare time.  It's normally valued 
at $50,000 but I could get it for you for $30,000 cash.

>  
> We all know that we can make up nonsense for ourselves we don't need 
> to do it for each other.
>  
> Brett Paatsch
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>  
>



From robgobblin at aol.com  Tue Jul 12 03:34:37 2005
From: robgobblin at aol.com (Robert Lindauer)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 17:34:37 -1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <42D33457.9030203@pobox.com>
References: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
	<42D33457.9030203@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <42D33A4D.5030108@aol.com>

sentience at pobox.com wrote:

> .  You can say we were all, including Bush, fooled by a self-deceiving 
> intelligence system for which Bush was partially responsible; but the 
> fact remains, we believed it at the time.
>

Speak for yourself, I wasn't fooled for 10 seconds.

Robbie



From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 12 03:48:23 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:48:23 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] what can you show us?
In-Reply-To: <42D33778.9090800@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20050712034823.2255.qmail@web34415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

This is all true yet still it appears international
law is too undefined to do much with. Even domestic
legal process is vague-- few get a jury of their
actual peers, as they are supposed to. Judges aren't
usually impartial, they are chosen to uphold very
conservative community standards.

By 'scatter' I meant innucleate; enough of the regime
remains to pose a threat.



--- Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:

> In american courts, points of fact are found out in
> court.
> 
> That's why we have discovery.
> 
> On the moral point, it's not clear that "scattering
> the iraqi regime" is 
> a justifiable pretense for slaughtering civilians
> wholesale and 
> launching two or more countries into an extended
> military quagmire with 
> daily deaths and mayhem ensuing.
> 
> Robbie
> 
> 
> beb_cc at yahoo.com wrote:
> 
> >Yes, there were certainly options other than the
> war,
> >on humanitarian grounds, but no better way to
> scatter
> >the Iraq regime. That line in court, along with no
> >evidence of deliberate malice beforehand in killing
> >civilians, would be enough to acquit the
> >administration.
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Impeachment, not war crimes. There is a very
> >>different standard of law 
> >>well established here.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>> Since technically Iraq was in violation
> >>>of agreements made previously with the UN, it
> would
> >>>have to be shown America invaded to entirely
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>subjugate
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Iraq and commit war crimes.
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>It hasn't been determined by the UN security
> council
> >>that Iraq was 
> >>definitively in violation. In fact, we invaded
> over
> >>the objections of 
> >>the security council and the UN weapons
> inspectors.
> >>It turns out they 
> >>were right and we were lying, apparently
> >>intentionally.
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>If you look backwards to
> >>>2003 so you can say, "now that we know America
> >>>couldn't win the peace, then overthrowing the
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Baathist
> >>    
> >>
> >>>regime was futile, and the administration had to
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>know
> >>    
> >>
> >>>a sustained resistance to occupation was
> inevitable
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>&
> >>    
> >>
> >>>unbeatable", that is to say you are attempting to
> >>>prove the course of the war was inevitable and
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>America
> >>    
> >>
> >>>knew so in advance. If you can demonstrate this
> you
> >>>have a solid case.
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>No, I'm claiming it was obvious then as now that
> war
> >>is bad and that 
> >>there were other options and that the American
> >>Presidential group 
> >>decided to go to war over the objections of the
> CIA,
> >>the UN and many, 
> >>many, many citizens apparently on trumped up
> >>"evidence" of Iraq's 
> >>capability of delivering weapons of mass
> destruction
> >>(such as having 
> >>rockets or nuclear or biological or chemical
> weapons
> >>ability). As a 
> >>result, hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's died
> >>(baathists and 
> >>non-bathists INDISCRIMINATELY) and more than a few
> >>thousand americans 
> >>have been killed or maimed. That there were other
> >>options was obvious 
> >>and continues to be obvious. That this was a bad
> >>choice was obvious then 
> >>and continues to be obvious now.
> >>
> >>This point was made at length, even in this forum,
> >>BEFORE the war 
> >>attempt. It was made strongly in the UN, strongly
> by
> >>military advisors 
> >>to Bush who were subsequently fired, and strongly
> by
> >>American 
> >>Intelligence agents who were subsequently
> illegally
> >>"outed" by someone 
> >>in the White House apparently as retalliation.
> >>
> >>How is any of this controversial in the slightest?
> >>
> >>Robbie
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>--- Robert Lindauer <robgobblin at aol.com> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>What evidence of wrongness are you looking for
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>other
> >>    
> >>
> >>>>than piles of dead 
> >>>>bodies?  Why aren't they sufficient?
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>       
> >>>      
> >>>
>
>>____________________________________________________
> >>    
> >>
> >>>Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>items.  
> >>    
> >>
> >>>http://auctions.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
> >  
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >        
>
>____________________________________________________
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
____________________________________________________
Sell on Yahoo! Auctions ? no fees. Bid on great items.  
http://auctions.yahoo.com/


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 12 03:51:36 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:51:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <42D33A4D.5030108@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20050712035136.84334.qmail@web34405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Everyone senses that governments lie all the time, but
plausible deniability is always held in reserve- and
it works.


> Speak for yourself, I wasn't fooled for 10 seconds.
> 
> Robbie
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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 fauxever at sprynet.com  Tue Jul 12 04:06:11 2005
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:06:11 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Death Toll
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com><42D1C2C1.8050206@cox.net><42D1CD96.8020808@neopax.com><002001c585ba$c2ca8270$6600a8c0@brainiac>
	<00ff01c585c9$3d919940$9a893cd1@pavilion>
Message-ID: <018601c58697$0a562a90$6600a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Technotranscendence" <neptune at superlink.net>
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2005 8:33 PM

> On Sunday, July 10, 2005 9:49 PM Olga Bourlin fauxever at sprynet.com wrote:
 >> I will jump to a hunch, and say that IMO something like what is imputed 
in the article below cannot be discounted:

>> "JonBenet Ramsey, Laci Peterson, Elizabeth Smart... all household
names right? Well then how about Alexis Patterson, Georgia Moses, or even 
Evelyn Hernandez? Chances are you've never heard of them. Yet all of these 
women were victims of brutal kidnappings. The difference is that Patterson, 
Moses, and Hernandez were women of color and the reality is that nobody 
cares. "

> I think it can be discounted for one reason alone:  they become household 
> names partly because of other people.  For instance, someone else might 
> not be racist, either implicitly or explicitly, but unless they closely 
> follow non-mainstream news closely, she or he will hear more about the 
> former set and much less about the latter.

Forgive me, I'm unclear what you meant by "... it can be discounted[?]" 
(*what* "can be discounted[?]").  Maybe it's because I don't  exactly 
understood what you wrote ... but no matter how I try to interpret it, it 
looks to me like you are contradicting yourself.

Just what is "non-mainstream" news?  Are the young women in that paragraph 
(and link I posted previously) "non-mainstream" (even though they are 
Americans?), and is that why you think that kind of racism can be 
discounted?  (It seems like what you are intimating is that it isn't the 
innie-mainstream people's fault - and, therefore, the innie-mainstream 
*people* cannot justifiably be called racists - because, with its 
designations of mainstream and non-mainstream news, it is in fact our 
amorphous media - and/or our society - that is racist?)

While we've been discussing this issue several people here have given their 
thoughts about the possible reasons for the seemingly different reactions of 
the London deaths v. Iraqi deaths.  I think racism (societal or otherwise) 
*is* one of those reasons, as well.  Do you disagree?

Olga

In your post (unless I misunderstood it) - 




From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Tue Jul 12 04:27:12 2005
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:27:12 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On what
	basis?
In-Reply-To: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
References: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc>
Message-ID: <20050712042712.GA17971@ofb.net>

On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 12:43:44PM +1000, Brett Paatsch wrote:

> meaning the US, or the Bush administration, (I'm not part of any of those
> "we") deliberately lied or misrepresented the reasons for invading Iraq. 

There's also wilful delusion, misrepresentation to self.  And choosing to
listen to the Defense Dept. instead of the State when Defense says "we'll be
welcomed" and State says "uh, maybe not".

As for Bush's intentions, this might be disturbing:
http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761

-xx- Damien X-) 


From beb_cc at yahoo.com  Tue Jul 12 04:51:50 2005
From: beb_cc at yahoo.com (c c)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 21:51:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [extropy-chat] OPW
Message-ID: <20050712045151.42428.qmail@web34403.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I feel better after discussing Iraq, and now temporary
impressions from last week's bombing are already
fading. Plus the odds of being harmed in an attack are
negligible, 

 It's easy to get caught up in OPW, Other People's
Worries. 


		
__________________________________ 
Discover Yahoo! 
Have fun online with music videos, cool games, IM and more. Check it out! 
http://discover.yahoo.com/online.html


From bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au  Tue Jul 12 05:18:03 2005
From: bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au (Brett Paatsch)
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 15:18:03 +1000
Subject: [extropy-chat] Who thinks the Bush admin lied over Iraq? On
	whatbasis?
References: <045501c5868b$859aad90$0d98e03c@homepc> <42D339E2.4030000@aol.com>
Message-ID: <049f01c586a1$142cbca0$0d98e03c@homepc>

Robert Lindauer wrote:

> bpaatsch at bigpond.net.au wrote:
>
>> I've only had time to dip into some ongoing threads but I notice that 
>> both Robert Lindauer and Dan Clemmensen have
>> stated that they think that "we", meaning the US, or the Bush 
>> administration, (I'm not part of any of those "we") deliberately lied or 
>> misrepresented the reasons for invading Iraq.
>>  Whilst I do tend to that view, I am not utterly convinced of it yet. And 
>> yet it is an important fact, or otherwise, to establish or not surely? 
>> One thing that I suspect most extropian or transhumanist list posters 
>> might agree on, is that the Iraq and terrorism business has grabbed a big 
>> chunk of the worlds attention. Attention that might have been directed 
>> far more profitably (to the net human good) elsewhere.
>
>
> $200,000,000,000 last count (in US spending, nevermind everywhere else) 
> that easily could have built plenty of supercomputers into which we could 
> have downloaded our minds :)  Hindsight is always 20/20 with investment 
> opportunities though :(
>
>
>> I wonder on what basis those that are convinced of it, are
>> so convinced? Please, give only opinions based on hard facts.
>
>
> The claim was that "we KNOW there are wmd's in Iraq" - this is what Mr. 
> Powell said to the UN and Bush said to the American Public.  He (powell) 
> is later quoted as having said in a briefing "I'm not reading this 
> bulshit".

Can you personally provide evidence that Bush said that to the American
Public, evidence that would convince an impartial person?  I suspect that
I could find that evidence but why should I try to if you won't get it for
me?  What's your responsibility as a citizen in your political system? And
if I won't make the effort and you won't make the effort what does that
mean?

Do you know *when* he said it, in what context, can you provide a link to
a transcript or a mp3 file etc?

What I am hoping you will see is that in a country of millions of opinions
there are very few that are taking the trouble to put their opinions 
together
in such a way that they might really have a chance to persuade impartial
people willing to make up their minds on the facts.

I think there is very likely to be good grounds for impeaching President
George W Bush. But it is not going to happen even if there are good
grounds if those that would want it to happen do not get their shit together
enough to make a persuasive case when a persuasive case is a case that
would be able to convince an impartial but interested person.

> The question is why, if he KNEW it was bullshit, did he go on reading 
> given that we obviously didn't know that there were weapons of the 
> relevant kind there (otherwise, they'd be there, right?)  Or did he have 
> further intelligence revealed to him.  If so, where is it?   I mean, if we 
> KNEW where there were, we'd have found them.

That's not a question I am asking that's a diversion you are throwing up.

The question I am asking is: when to *your* knowledge did George W
Bush personally say to the American people that there *are* weapons
of mass destuction in Iraq, and can you prove it?

If you can then that would lead on to a second point:  What evidence is
there that that statement was known to be untrue by him when he said it.

Prove the second (probably on the balance of probabilities would be
enough) and you've grounds for impeachment.

Its already clear that George W Bush took a presdiential oath under
the US Constitution to uphold the constitution. Its already clear that
international law duly ratified by congress (which includes the UN
Charter) is also US law and that that US Supreme Court has
jurisidiction over US law.

It is already clear that there is nothing within the UN Charter which
permits a pre-emptive war without a Security Council Resolution
and therefore also within US law. Its already clear that the Security
Council did not authorise the Invasion of Iraq. Even if they (the
Security Council) did it retrospectively that would not change that
it was illegal under US law at the time for the US President to
break the UN Charter which is part of US law and a part of the
hardwon birthright of all US citizens, not just the one that happens
to be President.

Seems to me that all that remains to be proven is that George W
Bush was acting in active bad faith rather than mere run of the mill
incompetence for the clearest possible case for impeachment to
be made.

If President George W Bush deliberately took the US to war on
a lie or a misrepresentation AND THAT CAN BE SHOWN then
you will have grounds for impeachment and as a US citizen you
should expect impeachment to happen.

> Second, we KNOW that David Kelly was an active Iraq weapons
> inspector working for the UN and he said he KNEW they didn't have the 
> weapons of  the relevant kind, he "died mysteriously" for
> his say-so.  But we do know that he said so.

"died mysteriously" is irrelevant.

If what Kelly says is relevant to what Bush believed then you have
to establish that connection with evidence.  The clearer, the more
concisely the case is put together then more likely it is to succeed,
the more likely it is to be persuasive.

> Third, we KNOW that the American CIA had briefed the president and had 
> said they'd found no such evidence.

How do *you* know? If you know then you will be able to tell me when
they did it?

> Fourth, we know that in fact Iraq didn't attempt to acquire any nuclear 
> material in Niger, Bush blatantly lied to the public in the matter.

Again, can you prove, to an impartial person, that Bush lied (not that he 
was
not just mistaken or deceived) on that matter using evidence?

> Both the British and Americans knew that the intelligence on the matter 
> was flatly false.
>
> Fifth we know that the the British understood Bush's war effort as a 
> trumped-up case from the Downing Street Memo and Downing Street Minutes 
> the sources of which are not in question.

I reckon if I had a parrot he'd be able to say "Downing Street Memo" by
now. So what? What is it about the Downing Steet Memo that is important
in your view? What if anything do the Downing Street Minutes prove to am
impartial person?

> Sixth, we know that some of the President's and Vice President's very 
> close friends are mysteriously making quite a lot of money in this effort, 
> in particular Haliburton and Carlyle (through UDI) are doing well..

"mysteriously". Bollocks.

> In sum, you can INSIST that this all adds up to conspiracy-theory bullshit 
> because obviously anyone who opposed or opposes the administration's 
> position in the matter is a nutso-commie-conspiracy-theorist OR you could 
> say "well, there appears to be a significant amount of evidence that Bush 
> really wanted to go to war and trumped up the reasons to do so."  But this 
> wouldn't be a critical attitude but more of a dumb-ass attitude.  If you 
> like this, I also sell land in southeast asia in my spare time.  It's 
> normally valued at $50,000 but I could get it for you for $30,000 cash.

You miss the point. There is a perfectly good mechanism for impeaching
a President in the Constitution. *If* there is grounds for doing it.

But a million flapping traps don't add up to a case. Some *one* or some
*ones* have to put the case together. Once the case is put together the
million flapping traps can help create the political will to make sure that 
it is
considered but it will not and should not succeed in impeaching a President
unless the case is made.

If you think that there is no-one that will make up their minds on the facts
then you have already lost.

Nothing is more likely to further empower a scoundrel President (and I
am not saying that Bush is a scoundrel President that would turn on the
facts) then a populace and an opposition that hasn't got a clue about
how to bring him to account.

Brett Paatsch 




From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Jul 12 05:33:19 2005
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 22:33:19 -0700
Subject: [extropy-chat] Many eyes
In-Reply-To: <42D31D80.3040009@cox.net>
References: <20050710234319.68842.qmail@web60516.mail.yahoo.com>
	<42D1C092.5010307@cox.net> <42D1C428.1020602@humanenhancement.com>
	<874D26A4-40BC-4167-9BDC-231297EC1717@mac.com>
	<5d74f9c7050711112171e75620@mail.gmail.com>
	<Pine.WNT.4.55.0507111456550.-210905@pentium.mb.willtown.net>
	<42D31D80.3040009@cox.net>
Message-ID: <9E82146A-4A58-475A-9600-3BADA0983C8F@mac.com>


On Jul 11, 2005, at 6:31 PM, Dan Clemmensen wrote:
> I think we have argued this point ad nauseum in years past.
>

No.  Usually the good of a transparent society and/or its universal  
implementation is largely assumed.   I always find this highly  
disturbing and quite dangerous.

> Brin's "Transparent society" argues that we cannot put the toothpaste
> back in the tube: existing technological trends will inevitably permit
> constant monitoring of everybody. Brin argues that the only feasible
> response is to explicitly enable anybody to monitor anybody else:  
> If the cops can
> monitor you, then you can monitor the cops. They can monitor you at  
> home or
> at work: You can monitor them at home or at work.
>

We live in a time where federal government is increasingly  
secretive.  I see no indication th