[extropy-chat] Reply to Joseph in message 2 of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 37, Issue 2

Mon Oct 2 10:52:41 UTC 2006

"of Islamists inspired by their ridiculous faith (as all faiths are 
ridiculous) to impose their vision of their faith on every single human 
being on this planet by deadly force, and being willing to kill 
themselves to advance that goal."

Can you please provide some citations to back up this claim?

All of my research so far indicates that Islamic terrorism (and indeed
terrorism in general) is a tactic used to achieve an outcome (such as
troop withdrawal) in response to a particular stimulus (such as the
occupation of a homeland). 
Certainly this is the case with Al-Qaeda, who spare no lengths to
broadcast there grievances (Troops on the Arabian peninsular, troops in
Iraq, the persecution of Palestinians etc.) although the Western media
pays little attention to it. 

I am yet to find significant evidence to suggest that they want to
"Islamicise" us as your statement suggests.

Luke

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of
extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org
Sent: 02 October 2006 11:28
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 37, Issue 2

Send extropy-chat mailing list submissions to
	extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	extropy-chat-owner at lists.extropy.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of extropy-chat digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Uses of Religion (Robert Bradbury)
   2. Re: Tyranny in place (Joseph Bloch)
   3. Re: Uses of Religion (Olga Bourlin)
   4. Oct 30 - Richard Dawkins In conversation with Roy	Eisenhardt
      (Fred C. Moulton)
   5. Re: Islamic morons win yet again (Damien Broderick)
   6. Re: Islamic morons win yet again Resend 2 (Keith Henson)
   7. Re: Islamic morons win yet again (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
   8. Re: Islamic morons win yet again (resend 2) (Keith Henson)
   9. Re: Tyranny in place (Samantha Atkins)
  10. Re: Tyranny in place (Samantha Atkins)
  11. Re: Tyranny in place (Russell Wallace)
  12. Re: Islamic morons win yet again. (Lee Corbin)
  13. Re: Uses of Religion (Lee Corbin)
  14. Re: Tyranny in place (Lee Corbin)
  15. Re: Tyranny in place (Russell Wallace)
  16. Re: Tyranny in place (Samantha Atkins)
  17. Re: Tyranny in place (Robert Bradbury)
  18. Re: Wireheading (Alex Ramonsky)
  19. Re: Wireheading (Alex Ramonsky)
  20. Re: Wireheading (Eugen Leitl)
  21. Re: Wireheading (BillK)
  22. Re: Wireheading / psychoactives (John)

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

Message: 1
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 17:35:06 -0400
From: "Robert Bradbury" <robert.bradbury at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Uses of Religion
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
	<deaa866a0610011435u76b2d56ch10af1d26a1399037 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On 10/1/06, Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
>
> > The important thing in the West---and now to the rest of the
world---is,
> > for the billion or so bystanders, whether the nightly news is
painful or
> > merely interesting.
>
> No.  It mattered then and it matters now.

If it really did matter then you would see much more on the nightly news
regarding the person in the U.S. that dies every 12 seconds (4.7 a
minute,
6700 a day) due to so called natural causes [1].

Those guilty of causing death due to acts of commission and those
causing
deaths due to acts of omission are only two letters apart.

Robert

1. They remain "natural" because we haven't chosen yet to really apply
ourselves to solving them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061001/540
1961f/attachment-0001.html 

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

Message: 2
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 17:55:17 -0400
From: Joseph Bloch <transhumanist at goldenfuture.net>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <45203945.1030206 at goldenfuture.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Samantha  Atkins wrote:

>> Talk to me about true tyranny when George W. Bush is still in the 
>> White House on January 21st, 2009. Until then, I see nothing more 
>> than a possibly over-zealous (and only possibly so), but still 
>> well-intentioned, attept to protect the United States from an enemy 
>> which is determined to eradicate our way of life and in the process 
>> stifle forever the Transhumanist dream, if only 
>
>
> How about when the election of 2004 was quite possibly stolen?  Bush
ossibly over-zealous but nothing more?  I am rendered speechless.   We
are destroying our own way of life with our apparent willingness to
dismantle our own freedom and protections in order to stop a few nutcase
terrorist groups.  If you care about preserving our way of life, as I
do, then you must be on guard against this clear danger also.
>

Don't be ridiculous. Stolen elections? Dismantling freedoms? You sound 
like the worst posters on dailykos...

>> incidentally as a part of its attempt to drag the world back to the 
>> 13th Century.
>>
>
> Sheesh.  All the Jihadists and Islamists (whatever that is) in the
world haven't a tiny part of the power required to do any such thing.
But rampant fear-mongering plus our own heavy increasing influence of
religion based politics may destroy our way of life.

I am appalled at your ignorance as to what an Islamist is. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism will provide a starting point. 
http://www.jihadwatch.org will yield a wealth of further information. 
And as far as their having no power to attain their ends, I direct your 
attention to their successful usurpation of a sovereign nation 
(Afghanistan), and their ongoing attempts to repeat that feat in other 
nations (Afghanistan again, Iraq, Somalia, Indonesia, Pakistan, et al). 
If they can take over one nation, and have a credible shot at taking 
over others, then they are a threat that must be addressed. And if you 
don't think Iran's ongoing attempts to secure the ability to produce 
nuclear weapons are part of this threat, then I must conclude that you 
are simply so blinded by your partisanship that you will not see the 
threat until you are faced with a law requiring the burqa in California 
(if then).

>
>> The goal of the Islamists; a global Caliphate which places all of 
>> humanity under strict Islamic law, is a scenario which must be 
>> avoided at all costs.
>>
>
>
> What a silly fantasy this is.  Besides, in this most powerful nation
on earth there are far more in positions of great power who want all to
live under Old Testament law.    
>

I hope, I truly hope, that you wake up from your Republican-hating ways 
to realize that this nation really does face an external threat of 
hitherto-unseen proportions. It's not about people in power in the U.S. 
And, for the record, I am well aware of, and highly concerned about, the

Dominionist movement, but I daresay that a handful of well-connected 
Dominionists don't quite rise to the level of threat posted by millions 
of Islamists inspired by their ridiculous faith (as all faiths are 
ridiculous) to impose their vision of their faith on every single human 
being on this planet by deadly force, and being willing to kill 
themselves to advance that goal.

Unless I have somehow missed the hordes of Baptist suicide bombers 
publically calling for the use of nuclear weapons against Democrats...

Joseph

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

Message: 3
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 16:25:20 -0700
From: "Olga Bourlin" <fauxever at sprynet.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Uses of Religion
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <001901c6e5b0$dd5221f0$6600a8c0 at brainiac>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

From: Robert Bradbury
Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 2:35 PM

>On 10/1/06, Olga Bourlin <fauxever at sprynet.com> wrote:
>  > > The important thing in the West---and now to the rest of the
world---is, for the billion or so bystanders, whether the nightly news
is painful or merely interesting.

>> No.  It mattered then and it matters now.

> If it really did matter then you would see much more on the nightly
news regarding the person in the U.S. that dies every 12 seconds ( 4.7 a
minute, 6700 a day) due to so called natural causes [1].  [1. They
remain "natural" because we haven't chosen yet to really apply ourselves
to solving them.]

> Those guilty of causing death due to acts of commission and those
causing deaths due to acts of omission are only two letters apart.

So, do you mean there is no such thing as murder?  

Olga

I understand what you mean by "natural" death - and there are people
working on 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061001/964
24a1c/attachment-0001.html 

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

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 19:08:37 -0700
From: "Fred C. Moulton" <moulton at moulton.com>
Subject: [extropy-chat] Oct 30 - Richard Dawkins In conversation with
	Roy	Eisenhardt
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <1159754917.4895.275.camel at localhost.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain

I have already bought my ticket and it appears to be more that half sold
so if people want to attend they should get their tickets ASAP.

Richard Dawkins - 10/30/2006, 8:00 pm 
Special Event
Richard Dawkins In conversation with Roy Eisenhardt
Monday, October 30, 2006
at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco, CA.

I expect that the discussion will focus on The God Delusion which is the
most recent book by Richard Dawkins.  The talk is part of the City Arts
http://www.cityarts.net/ program.

I have just received a copy of The God Delusion and have read the first
chapter.  I expect the arguments which Dawkins makes about the nature of
religion and for atheism will be in general familiar to every one on
this list.  However in the first chapter I think Dawkins does a really
good job of discussing the term "religion" and how it is often misused.
Also Dawkins does an excellent job of explaining Einstein's use of the
term and how many theists misquote or selectively quote Einstein in an
effort to make him appear to be a theist.

If you can not make the event in San Francisco then you might be able to
hear a rebroadcast on radio http://www.cityarts.net/radio.html.

Dawkins will also be at Keplers in Menlo Park on Oct 29 see:
http://www.keplers.com/?sec=programs-events&subsec=calendar

Fred

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

Message: 5
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:27:15 -0500
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Islamic morons win yet again
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20061001212625.02282fd8 at satx.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 12:14 PM 9/30/2006 -0700, Eliezer wrote:

>+1 insightful:
>http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1700/
>"Iraq: the world's first Suicide State"

A learned friend writes:

Damien Broderick

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

Message: 6
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 22:37:02 -0400
From: Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Islamic morons win yet again Resend 2
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:

<5.1.0.14.0.20061001222218.04549908 at pop.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 03:17 PM 10/1/2006 +0100, you wrote:

> >
> > I am sure they are.  But the model predicts that as long as the
future
> > prospects are good, the IRA or some other terrorist organization
will not
> > get popular support.
> >
>That is why I am saying that NI is a bad example for you to use. The
>NI troubles were not a 'war' and killed a tiny percentage of the
>population.

Agreed, but I don't distinguish between war, terror, riots and other
such 
social disruptions.

>The same falling birth rates applied in many places where
>there were no 'troubles'.

The causal arrow is that the falling birth rates and economic growth 
contributed to a rising income per capita and *that's* what pulled the 
motivation.  Obviously if there are no terror groups, then rising income

per capita isn't going to shut off support for them.

>So NI is not an example that supports your theory that nations go into
>'war' mode and fight until they have killed sufficient people that the
>survivors can live better

The theory is not at all about nations and modern wars.  The theory is 
about human psychological traits that evolved during the long time that 
human ancestors lived in hunter-gatherer groups.  It happens that those 
traits still exist in humans and contribute causally to modern wars and 
related social disruptions.

>. Even though the war itself will destroy
>resources that support people. Think 'scorched earth'. Terrorism never
>kills in sufficient numbers to fit into your theory.

Agree on all your points.  See the corn farmer example in the EP, Memes
and 
the origin of war paper for an example of how war can be ill adapted to 
societies more advanced than hunter gathers.

>I don't think you really want to weaken your claim to say that
>sometimes small groups of people start killing when they feel a bit
>miserable and stop killing when they cheer up. But that seems to be
>the direction you are heading. That claim is correct, of course, but
>not of great significance.

It seems to me that a predictive theory of when and where wars are
likely 
to start would be of considerable significance.  If for no other reason 
than being able to get out of the way.

Keith Henson

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

Message: 7
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 19:45:55 -0700
From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Islamic morons win yet again
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <45207D63.5070005 at pobox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Damien Broderick wrote:
> At 12:14 PM 9/30/2006 -0700, Eliezer wrote:
> 
>>+1 insightful:
>>http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1700/
>>"Iraq: the world's first Suicide State"
> 
> A learned friend writes:
> 
> <What utter crap.  Violence motivated by the desire to expel foreign
invaders
> or colonizers, to restore the historical dominance of one ethnic or
> religious group or to establish a new structure of dominance, or to
impose a
> particular set of religious rules--goals which are held by the various
> indigenous factions who are killing people in Iraq--is hardly
"fighting for
> nothing in particular."  There isn't one manifesto that fits everybody
> toting a gun or a bomb--there are a number of contending factions--but
the
> fact that it can't all be summed up easily in this guy's PowerPoint
> presentation doesn't make it "aimless."  Different participants have
> different aims.  This is far from unusual--consider the various
factions
> involved in the South African resistance.>

Fair enough.

  - E

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

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

Message: 8
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:08:56 -0400
From: Keith Henson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Islamic morons win yet again (resend 2)
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:

<5.1.0.14.0.20061001224012.04548038 at pop.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 11:41 AM 10/1/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>"Keith Henson" <hkhenson at rogers.com>
>
> > It is useless to denounce religion
>
>I do not believe it is useless to denounce evil, in fact I believe it
is
>rather despicable not to.

It is like denouncing a fever.

Xenophobic memes simple arise when they are called for by the 
situation.  Think Pol Pot's version of communism, Nazi memes, Rwanda.

> > and it is *not* the root cause of human  misery.
>
>I would never be so foolish as to say religion is the cause of all
human
>misery, but I would say that with the exception of death itself
religion has
>caused more misery than any other single thing.

It is just distracting to denounce something which is caused by
something 
else.  You are never going to understand what is the correct action to
take 
that way.

> > Human reproduction in excess of what the ecosystem/economy can
support
> > *is* the cause of misery.
>
>Human reproduction has never been in a higher gear than it is right
now, so
>if you were right we would expect the average standard of living to be
lower
>than its ever been. However the exact opposite is true, human beings
have
>never had it so good.

You are dead wrong about human reproduction.  Over the entire developed 
populations it is at near replacement rates.  But read what I said, "in 
excess of what the ecosystem/economy can support."

>Despite what the tree huggers say the
>ecosystem/economy is doing quite well thank you very much.

I have no problem with a solar system population of trillions of people,
in 
fact, I think it would be a good idea.  The earth could support the
current 
and even the projected population with considerable advances in
technology.

But if you look at the places where the problems come from they are
parts 
of the world with high birth rates and stagnant economies.

> >Easter Island was a case where war a few generations earlier would
have
> >been much better.
>
>You don't need anything as drastic as war. If the Easter Islander's
religion
>hadn't caused them to use all their time energy recourses and
imagination
>making  all those incredibly stupid statues they would have been one
hell
>of a lot better off.

Well, please tell me what they could have done with the "time energy 
resources and imagination"?  I have played this game a number of times
and 
even with full scale modern knowledge I don't see how Easter Island
would 
have played out any better.

> > It is truly bizarre, but I make the case that there are times when
the
> > interest of a person and the interest of  their genes diverge.
>
>I don't think it's bizarre to say that the genes interests and the
>individual's are not identical, I think it's a keen grasp of the
obvious.
>After all, if it were not true the condom would never have been
invented.

A more spectacular example was that stand of the Spartans at
Thermopylae.

> >what situations in the stone age made those who could be infested
with
> >religion more likely to survive (in the gene centered inclusive
fitness
> >sense) than those who were not?
>
>I'm not at all sure that the religious meme got started because it
conveyed
>some survival advantage, rather it may just be the result of being
mortal
>and being intelligent.

The psychological trait of being able to be "captured" by a religious
class 
meme has to be either something that was directly selected or a side
effect 
of something what was directly selected.  That's your choice in EP
theory.

>Contemplating death, especially your own death, is
>unpleasant. So people try to think of ways to fool themselves to reduce
that
>unpleasantness (maybe death isn't really the end). Given that the
religious
>meme is likely to be present, at least to some degree, in any
population, an
>individual who knows how to exploit that meme (God speaks through me!)
>would have a huge reproductive advantage. And it's still true, the
religious
>cult leader Warren Jeffs who was just arrested had 80 wives and 250
>children.

Interesting speculation backed up by some data is that descendents of
the 
early Mormons are more susceptible than the rest of the population to
cult 
class memes.  What you would expect with a big genetic contribution.

Keith Henson

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

Message: 9
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:51:30 -0700
From: Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <45209AD2.2080002 at mac.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Joseph Bloch wrote:
> Samantha  Atkins wrote:
>
>   
>>> Talk to me about true tyranny when George W. Bush is still in the 
>>> White House on January 21st, 2009. Until then, I see nothing more 
>>> than a possibly over-zealous (and only possibly so), but still 
>>> well-intentioned, attept to protect the United States from an enemy 
>>> which is determined to eradicate our way of life and in the process 
>>> stifle forever the Transhumanist dream, if only 
>>>       
>> How about when the election of 2004 was quite possibly stolen?  Bush
ossibly over-zealous but nothing more?  I am rendered speechless.   We
are destroying our own way of life with our apparent willingness to
dismantle our own freedom and protections in order to stop a few nutcase
terrorist groups.  If you care about preserving our way of life, as I
do, then you must be on guard against this clear danger also.
>>
>>     
>
> Don't be ridiculous. Stolen elections? Dismantling freedoms? You sound

> like the worst posters on dailykos...
>
>
>   
Sigh.  Now who is ignorant?

>>> incidentally as a part of its attempt to drag the world back to the 
>>> 13th Century.
>>>
>>>       
>> Sheesh.  All the Jihadists and Islamists (whatever that is) in the
world haven't a tiny part of the power required to do any such thing.
But rampant fear-mongering plus our own heavy increasing influence of
religion based politics may destroy our way of life.
>>     
>
>
> I am appalled at your ignorance as to what an Islamist is. 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism will provide a starting point. 
> http://www.jihadwatch.org will yield a wealth of further information. 
>   

I am not ignorant at all.  Just bemused about "Islamists" being the
demons in every woodshed that "commies" once were.  I am not at all
bemused or amused by this country destroying itself through
fear-mongering.   I am not amused by an administration that lies
shamelessly to the people, spends us to oblivion in unending war and
seems bent on removing freedoms from the people and any and all checks
on its power.  I am not amused it takes it upon itself to largely ignore
science, teach abstinence only as "sex education" and sexually
transmitted disease prevention and nearly stops dead what is arguably
the most important medical innovation of our generation.  It does not
matter that they are Republicans.  I have little use for either of the
major parties.  It does matter to me and matter very much that they are
a real danger to what I hold dear. 

> And as far as their having no power to attain their ends, I direct
your 
> attention to their successful usurpation of a sovereign nation 
> (Afghanistan), and their ongoing attempts to repeat that feat in other

> nations (Afghanistan again, Iraq, Somalia, Indonesia, Pakistan, et
al). 
> If they can take over one nation, and have a credible shot at taking 
> over others, then they are a threat that must be addressed. And if you

> don't think Iran's ongoing attempts to secure the ability to produce 
> nuclear weapons are part of this threat, then I must conclude that you

> are simply so blinded by your partisanship that you will not see the 
> threat until you are faced with a law requiring the burqa in
California 
> (if then).
>
>   
Afghanistan?  I am quaking in my tennies.  One of the poorest, most
miserable and strife-torn nations on earth.  Iran by all respected
opinions can not produce its own nukes in less than 5-10 years ever if
the entire world simply paid no attention, which ain't going to happen. 
If that had them why would they be more likely to use them than Pakistan
who already has them?  How would they manage to bring the world to its
knees in front of Allah even if they had a few nukes and decent delivery
systems?  Are you using this to excuse what is happening in the most
powerful country on earth and arguably the most important for freedom
and continuing technological advance?

>>> The goal of the Islamists; a global Caliphate which places all of 
>>> humanity under strict Islamic law, is a scenario which must be 
>>> avoided at all costs.
>>>
>>>       
>> What a silly fantasy this is.  Besides, in this most powerful nation
on earth there are far more in positions of great power who want all to
live under Old Testament law.    
>>
>>     
>
>
> I hope, I truly hope, that you wake up from your Republican-hating
ways 
> to realize that this nation really does face an external threat of 
> hitherto-unseen proportions.
The threat of hitherto-unseen proportions is much nearer than you
think.  It is a common tactic in a country headed away from freedom to
focus all attention on an external enemy.  If the enemy is elusive,
everywhere and nowhere and can never really be defeated then all the
better for the smokescreen behind which unanswerable nearly unstoppable
power over its own people amasses.   I hope that you and others who
think likewise wake up before it is far too late.

>  It's not about people in power in the U.S. 
> And, for the record, I am well aware of, and highly concerned about,
the 
> Dominionist movement, but I daresay that a handful of well-connected 
> Dominionists don't quite rise to the level of threat posted by
millions 
> of Islamists inspired by their ridiculous faith (as all faiths are 
> ridiculous) to impose their vision of their faith on every single
human 
> being on this planet by deadly force, and being willing to kill 
> themselves to advance that goal.
>   
That handful has it hands on real power that those millions cannot
touch.  They are also far more than a handful.  

- s

Do you really believe there is nothing about the people in power in the
US to worry about?  Really?  Those millions of Islamists don't have a
decent armed forces among them and they don't run this country.  So I
don't consider them the most likely threat vector to what I care about.

> Unless I have somehow missed the hordes of Baptist suicide bombers 
> publically calling for the use of nuclear weapons against Democrats...
>
> Joseph
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>   

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

Message: 10
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 21:55:49 -0700
From: Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <45209BD5.6040403 at mac.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Joseph,

Before you dismiss the idea of a stolen election you might want to read
a bit, perhaps starting with the following.

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_st
olen

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

Message: 11
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 06:04:07 +0100
From: "Russell Wallace" <russell.wallace at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
	<8d71341e0610012204p203bbfb2gabd206c5fae84994 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On 10/1/06, Joseph Bloch <transhumanist at goldenfuture.net> wrote:
>
> I hope, I truly hope, that you wake up from your Republican-hating
ways
> to realize that this nation really does face an external threat of
> hitherto-unseen proportions. It's not about people in power in the
U.S.
>

But this sort of thing isn't hitherto-unseen at all. Hitler and
Mussolini
used the argument that they needed power to protect the people against
communism. Communism was a real threat (it killed tens of millions of
people, far more than the Islamic fundamentalists have) - but fascism
was
not the answer. It isn't the answer to Islamic fundamentalism today
either.

I think the threat of terrorism is greatly overstated, but I agree there
is
a threat and it has to be fought. It does not at all follow that we in
the
West should tolerate erosion of our civil liberties by our own
governments.
It's not just that it's not necessary - _it's also not helpful_. If you
have
a problem, and you try to solve it by surrendering your freedom, you now
have two problems.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061002/356
f5a91/attachment-0001.html 

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

Message: 12
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 22:36:22 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Islamic morons win yet again.
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <050501c6e5e4$ccb70b10$6701a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=response

John Clark writes

> > How do you know what history would have
> > been like in the absense of religion?
> 
> It rained an hour ago and now the street is wet. I deduce that if it
hadn't
> rained the street wouldn't be wet.

Surely you don't think that this is a satisfactory analogy. We know
the cause and effect in the case of wet streets from time immemorial.

> > So far as *I* know, we don't have a lot of data.
> 
> Unfortunately we have an avalanche of data, as terrifying as it is
> depressing.

Well, I wish that you'd mention some of it---in other words, for
every instance that you can find that religion *may* have added
extra suffering to the history of humanity, I believe that I can 
provide an example where just as much misery occurred with
religion playing no role.

For example, in Europe while the 16th and 17th centuries are
well know for their religious wars, the 18th and 19th centuries
for their nationalistic wars, and the 20th century for its
ideological wars.

Granted, on the whole there is an improvement per-capita,
but I suspect that the greater ferocity of the religious era
was simply due to it being further back in time. (One can
easily tell many stories about ancient Rome, Mesopotamia,
central Mexico, Japan, India, and China that prove the 
undeniable advance of the human race in this regard.)

>> The 20th century did seem to indicate that the fervently
anti-religious
>> socialist regimes of the Soviet Union and Red Chinese killed people
>> at at least the same rate if not much greater.
> 
> A good point I readily concede. But I never said religion was the root
of
> ALL evil. I would estimate that in general about 2/3 of all mortal
combat is
> religious based. Less than that in the 20th century in Europe because
Europe
> is the one place on Earth where nobody takes religion very seriously
> anymore.

It's possible.  But how do you explain, to pick a hemisphere at random
:-)
the wars of the western hemisphere?  The worst by far was the Lopez War,
fought entirely by Catholics and not at all for religious reasons. Next
comes
the U.S. Civil War that had only a little to do with religion.

Now, let's take a breath and note that we have replaced your original
claim about religion being the worst cause of humanity's trials and 
tribulations, with the claim that it's the cause of most of the wars. 
Maybe they're the same; maybe not.

> I think people just got tired of killing each other over  about
whether
> you should open an egg at the big end or the small.

I simply cannot believe that---rather, you really aren't really
explaining
anything here.  (Yes, I realize that it may have been a flippant
remark.)
Humanity has fewer and less ghastly wars (per capita and per century)
simply because, I assert, we are so much richer now, and it is now
easier
and more profitable to create wealth than to seize your neighbor's.

Lee

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

Message: 13
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 22:48:50 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Uses of Religion
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <050801c6e5e6$7b9c2fb0$6701a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

Olga writes the difference between Saddam killing Iraqis and Iraqi's
killing Iraqies.

> [Lee writes]
> > There are many differences.  But probably the most important is
indeed media
> > related[:]

meaning to say, as I did, that we seem to want not being upset by our
daily news more than we want fewer deaths and less suffering all around.

> IMO one of the crucial differences is that the blood used to be mainly
on 
> Saddam's hands.  Now it is on George Bush's hands

Why is it so important whose blood is on whose hands?  That is, if we
are
interested in less suffering, everything else being equal we should
applaud
actions that reduce casualties.  (Yes---I know that not everything else
is
equal.)

It reminds me of the chain of reasoning pacifists use.  They are
disturbed,
yes, by killings, but it's whether or not their own hands are clean that
is
to them what's crucial. 

> Another important difference is that the reputation of the USA has
sunk to
> a very low level (Abu Ghraib:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_prison)

Please find me a major conflict without incidents of this kind (or,
usually,
much worse) any time in human history.  Even when sociopaths are not
drawn into armies and police forces---and it's estimated that about four
percent of people are sociopaths---wars invariably coarsen all involved.

Lee

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

Message: 14
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 22:58:51 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <051501c6e5e8$2c5243c0$6701a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
	reply-type=original

Russell writes

> I think the threat of terrorism is greatly overstated, but I agree
there is a threat and it has to be fought. It does not at all 
> follow that we in the West should tolerate erosion of our civil
liberties by our own governments. It's not just that it's not 
> necessary - _it's also not helpful_. If you have a problem, and you
try to solve it by surrendering your freedom, you now have two 
> problems.
<

That could be true, but I believe it depends on future events. Do you
almost
daily think about what your reactions would be if a terrorist nuke was
to go
off in a large American city?

Do you think that your feelings and intuitions would change at all?

The glorious thing about democracy is that it seems to periodically
adjust itself
in terms of mood just the way that a person does.  Right after 9-11,
"America"
as an entity behaved angrily, just as natural selection made people so
act.
There is less cause for anger now.  There may be more cause later.

Whatever happens, the choices made will be strongly criticized---which,
up to
a point, is exactly what should happen.

Lee

P.S.  My apologies if you aren't an American;  please pretend that you
are for
the sake of the questions. 

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

Message: 15
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 07:26:05 +0100
From: "Russell Wallace" <russell.wallace at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
	<8d71341e0610012326y66fde0f3h3795e07362235e64 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On 10/2/06, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> That could be true, but I believe it depends on future events. Do you
> almost
> daily think about what your reactions would be if a terrorist nuke was
to
> go
> off in a large American city?
>
> Do you think that your feelings and intuitions would change at all?

My feelings and intuitions, like yours, say anything that hints of enemy
action should be assigned the highest priority.

I know exactly why they say that. They evolved in conditions where
intraspecies violence was the main cause of death that we could do
something
about.

That circumstance no longer obtains, and our feelings and intuitions
therefore give completely the wrong answer when we evaluate today's
problems. Since we _know_ they give the wrong answer, and we know why,
we
should use reason instead. Look at the cold numbers: how many people
worldwide have been killed by terrorists from 2001 to today? Some
thousands,
maybe into five digits. How many lives have been lost from all causes in
that same time? Nearly _three hundred million_. Even a nuclear explosion
in
a major city would be a drop in the ocean on that scale.

Note also that you only answered the lesser half of my argument. My
primary
point was that however small or large the external threat, compromising
our
most basic civil liberties - allowing our governments to turn inward
against
ourselves, not outward against the enemy - is _not effective_ as a
response.
It adds a second problem _without doing anything to solve the first_.

Whatever happens, the choices made will be strongly criticized---which,
up
> to
> a point, is exactly what should happen.

But it is very dangerous to allow a situation to arise where criticism
of
certain policies is no longer permitted.

P.S.  My apologies if you aren't an American;  please pretend that you
are
> for
> the sake of the questions.
>

No apology needed; I'm not, but I am a member of Western civilization,
and I
believe it matters greatly - quite possibly unto the entire future of
our
visible universe - how well our civilization and the values it
represents
endure this century.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061002/a73
2a588/attachment-0001.html 

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

Message: 16
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 23:32:15 -0700
From: Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com>,	ExI chat list
	<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <1159770735.13119.4.camel at localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain

On Sun, 2006-10-01 at 22:58 -0700, Lee Corbin wrote:
> Russell writes
> 
> > I think the threat of terrorism is greatly overstated, but I agree
there is a threat and it has to be fought. It does not at all 
> > follow that we in the West should tolerate erosion of our civil
liberties by our own governments. It's not just that it's not 
> > necessary - _it's also not helpful_. If you have a problem, and you
try to solve it by surrendering your freedom, you now have two 
> > problems.
> <
> 
> That could be true, but I believe it depends on future events. Do you
almost
> daily think about what your reactions would be if a terrorist nuke was
to go
> off in a large American city?
> 

Of course not.  Do you?  What for?  Seems like a terrible waste of
emotional energy.  There are much more immediate problems and much more
likely dangers.

> Do you think that your feelings and intuitions would change at all?
> 

Such hypotheticals are utterly useless to the issues at hand.

> The glorious thing about democracy is that it seems to periodically
adjust itself
> in terms of mood just the way that a person does.  Right after 9-11,
"America"
> as an entity behaved angrily, just as natural selection made people so
act.
> There is less cause for anger now.  There may be more cause later.
> 

Civil rights will be every bit as important as now.  Let's deal with
now, shall we?

> Whatever happens, the choices made will be strongly
criticized---which, up to
> a point, is exactly what should happen.
> 

What do you mean "up to a point"?  Criticism is always in order in a
free country.

- samantha

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

Message: 17
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 05:17:47 -0400
From: "Robert Bradbury" <robert.bradbury at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Tyranny in place
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
	<deaa866a0610020217m5d7ff00fy4d34faabfdc55e0e at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

On 10/1/06, Samantha  Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

> How about when the election of 2004 was quite possibly stolen?
>

I was puzzled by this statement as well but not enough to go
investigating.
As it so happened I ran across some sources for this [1,2] and it would
appear there is some merit to the argument.

It is interesting that this is getting to the level of discussion that
there
is speculation (fact?) that computerized voting machines are being
"rigged"
to allow back door tampering [3].  After all we *know* that software
which
is supposed to be secure is never faulty.

When I, who probably reads more news than the average person, isn't
aware of
this I would suspect is a problem which the general public is clueless
about
[4].

Kudos to Samantha for pointing this out.

Robert

1.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_st
olen

2. http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/17/1845248

3. http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/01/2141222

4. One does of course have to be careful that the primary source is a
prominent Democrat.  It remains to be seen whether anyone (TV news
channel,
the Washington Post, etc.) will be diligent enough to verify the
accuracy of
an article citing 208 references and determine whether it is "biased".
But
the fact that the references are cited does make a reasonably strong
case.
There is also the three books cited in [5] which make this appear that
it is
a reasonably well researched topic.

5.
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10463875/was_the_2004_election_st
olen_sources_and_commentary
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061002/67d
4cad6/attachment-0001.html 

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

Message: 18
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 11:02:20 +0100
From: Alex Ramonsky <alex at ramonsky.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Wireheading
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <4520E3AC.1030607 at ramonsky.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Yo Eugen  :  )
I did LSD for an average of four days per week from 1983-84. [Despite 
heroic attempts, we couldn't get it to work more often than that]. I 
personally felt pretty blissed out in very much the same way I have on 
heroin. Maybe other people don't.
I've only ever done heroin a couple of times, and that orally; so that 
may make a difference too.
Drugs have very different effects on different people. I can only say 
what it was like for me. I do have colleagues who have done both and 
claim a similar experience, but perhaps the real answer here lies in 
one's personal semantics for the meaning of "blissed out". To me it 
means "Totally anxiety-free". Or these days, perhaps I should say,
"Normal".
Best,
AR
************

Eugen Leitl wrote:

>On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 12:11:54PM +0100, Alex Ramonsky wrote:
>
>  
>
>>   totally blissed out and getting  nothing done whatsoever, as I'm
sure
>>   many LSD or Heroin fans would agree...but it's not as enjoyable
>>    
>>
>
>From your comments, it seems that you have never tried LSD.
>Calling an acid experience "blissed out" (especially, the assumption
>that you could drop one hit after another for days and weeks) and 
>putting hallucinogens with the opiates into the same bin doesn't 
>strike me as informed.
>
>  
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>  
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061002/b2b
5d982/attachment-0001.html 

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

Message: 19
Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 11:15:18 +0100
From: Alex Ramonsky <alex at ramonsky.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Wireheading
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <4520E6B6.8020901 at ramonsky.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed

If I understand you correctly, how do you prevent eventual downgrading 
of dopaminergic receptors? I used to get a tedious anhedonic period 
after a long creative squawk. I did one month's worth of selegiline, and

it stopped being a problem. I'm still trying to figure out why. :  )
Best,
AR
**********

Anders Sandberg wrote:

>Life in dopaminergic overdrive is far more fun. I still remember the
very
>enjoyable experience of being blissed out on opiates and some
>tranquilizers before going in for surgery many years ago, but it
doesn't
>compare to the feeling of flow when you are up at 2 in the morning
writing
>your academic masterpiece using every part of your mind.
Flow/eudaimonia
>beats plain pleasure.
>
>Of course, we should be able to get that more if we can just stimulate
the
>right motivation subsystems. Panksepp's SEEKING and PLAY systems look
like
>a good place to start.
>http://www.thinkbody.co.uk/papers/Panic%20Seeking%20%20play.htm
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&do
pt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15766890&query_hl=1&itool=pubmed_docsum
>
>
>And I feel fantastic
>And I never felt as good as how I do right now
>Except for maybe when I think of how I felt that day
>When I felt the way that I do right now, right now, right now.
>
>(Jonathan Coulton, I Feel Fantastic,
>http://www.jonathancoulton.com/lyrics/i-feel-fantastic )
>
>  
>

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

Message: 20
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 12:11:11 +0200
From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Wireheading
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <20061002101111.GK21640 at leitl.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

On Mon, Oct 02, 2006 at 11:02:20AM +0100, Alex Ramonsky wrote:
> 
>    Yo Eugen  :  )

Allright, I take back that uninformed. You're definitely more
informed than I.

>    I did LSD for an average of four days per week from 1983-84.
[Despite
>    heroic attempts, we couldn't get it to work more often than that].
I

It's amazing you could get it to work 4 days out of 7. It's
more 2 days out of 7 for most people. 

>    personally felt pretty blissed out in very much the same way I have
on
>    heroin. Maybe other people don't.

I'm hazarding that most other people don't. How's for a poll, here?
Would you call it blissed out, or something else? (If yes, how would
you describe it?).

>    I've only ever done heroin a couple of times, and that orally; so
that
>    may make a difference too.
>    Drugs have very different effects on different people. I can only
say
>    what it was like for me. I do have colleagues who have done both
and
>    claim a similar experience, but perhaps the real answer here lies
in
>    one's personal semantics for the meaning of "blissed out". To me it
>    means "Totally anxiety-free". Or these days, perhaps I should say,

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820            http://www.ativel.com
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url :
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061002/0ae
5baad/attachment-0001.bin 

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

Message: 21
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 11:16:15 +0100
From: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Wireheading
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
	<ee50357e0610020316m7d00b3f3s54ed43bb61f20d4e at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

On 10/2/06, Alex Ramonsky <alex at ramonsky.com> wrote:
<snip>

You do realise that anything significant that you post on extropy-chat
(or anywhere on the internet) is likely to immediately update your
Homeland Security Profile?

Unencrypted emails probably go there as well.

We live in interesting times.

BillK

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

Message: 22
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 11:27:41 +0100
From: "John" <john.heritage at v21.me.uk>
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Wireheading / psychoactives
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <00b501c6e60d$69a40cc0$6d010751 at heritagekd9czj>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Four days a week, I'm quite impressed you haven't been sectioned by now.

Magic mushroom tend to require quite a lot of recovery time afterwards
to reach full potential again, most people leave it weeks before they
eat anymore. I've not tried LSD, so I'm not sure just how long the
recovery time on that is.

One of the first things Hoffmann noted about LSD was that the day after
he woke up feeling particularly sensitive to the world.

This, combined with knowing that these molecules are metabolised out of
the synapses and that immediately afterwards their potential for effect
decreases suggests to me that they trigger an increase in the 'esterase
metabolic pathways in the synapses. E.g. you take LSD, your body senses
that it's become lodged in the post-synaptic boutons (atropine does this
I believe, and is used to treat nerve agent exposure by 'clogging' the
synapses to prevent spasmodic firing) and increases the levels of
esterase to break it down. Afterwards, those level likely remain
elevated for a while, allowing the synapse to carry a higher bandwidth
of signals, allowing for a greater level of sensitivity.

This is all pure speculation, but it seems like the most likely way
these effects would emerge to me.

I've noticed something similar after trying psilocybin mushrooms. Just
out of interest, do you get a headache the morning after with LSD?

I've often wondered about the possibility of mixing psychoactives to
achieve greater effects. As you pointed out, sooner or later you reach a
peak that's difficult to go beyond due to pathways being saturated /
metabolism wiping out the active material etc. However, if multiple
actives where used, one might expect the experience to be orders of
magnitude more diverse - mescaline, psilocybin and salvinorin say, which
all work on different receptor sites (off the top of my head, I think
it's mainly... muscarine, serotonin and kappa opoid respectively). And
finish it off with a monoamine oxidase inhibitor.

Never tried Heroin. I tend not to believe too much of the anti-drugs
stuff I read but there certainly does seem to be a correlation between
Heroin and bin diving.

In light of Bill's note, I live in the UK, where magic mushrooms were
legal fodder until recently.

John

BullGuard Anti-virus has scanned this e-mail and found it clean.
Try BullGuard for free: www.bullguard.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20061002/a74
e30b1/attachment.html 

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

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

End of extropy-chat Digest, Vol 37, Issue 2
*******************************************

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

Music from EMI 

This e-mail including any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received it in error please advise the sender immediately by return email and then delete it from your system. The unauthorised use, distribution, copying or alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. If you need assistance please contact us on +44 20 7795 7000. 

This email is from a unit or subsidiary of EMI Group plc. 

Registered Office: 27 Wrights Lane, London W8 5SW 

Registered in England No 229231.

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