From sentience at pobox.com  Wed Aug  1 21:54:18 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 14:54:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Max More: Which books?
Message-ID: <46B1010A.9060104@pobox.com>

Max, at Transvision 2007 you referenced some books you'd found useful 
on evidence-based management.  What were they?

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


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Aug  5 04:07:56 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 23:07:56 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Yikes, what's up with the list?
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070804230641.02269020@satx.rr.com>

I see a sudden small burst of activity that people evidently sent off 
a week back, just now getting posted up. Is the sky falling?

Damien Broderick



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Sun Aug  5 04:24:26 2007
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2007 21:24:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Australian Aborigine Communities Awash in Abuse
References: <21f701c7d38f$9c61aee0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <003401c7d718$82c6c4c0$6401a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 31, 2007 9:26 AM

> Traditionally it was the families that decided what children did, not 
> governments.

Two comments:

1)  Historically speaking, "traditional" and "family" have not been linked 
consistently to humans until quite recently;

2)   Families don't always make the best decisions, and governments don't 
always make bad ones.

Olga




From emerson at singinst.org  Wed Aug  1 00:21:28 2007
From: emerson at singinst.org (Tyler Emerson)
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:21:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] SIAI: Why We Exist and Our Short-Term Research Program
Message-ID: <632d2cda0707311721w5f03c969le2821c0123979f8f@mail.gmail.com>

Dear all:

Here is a new overview of SIAI, focusing on why we think our mission
is an important one, and where we're looking to focus research efforts
in the short-term.

http://www.singinst.org/blog/2007/07/31/siai-why-we-exist-and-our-short-term-research-program/

Let me know what you think: emerson at singinst.org. I look forward to
any thoughts you have.

I hope you enjoy it!

Best regards,

--
Tyler Emerson
Executive Director
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
P.O . Box 50182, Palo Alto, CA 94303 USA
650-353-6063 | emerson at singinst.org |  singinst.org

***

SIAI: Why We Exist and Our Short-Term Research Program

Why SIAI Exists

As the 21st century progresses, an increasing number of
forward-thinking scientists and technologists are coming to the
conclusion that this will be the century of AI: the century when human
inventions exceed human beings in general intelligence. When exactly
this will happen, no one knows for sure; Ray Kurzweil, for example,
has estimated 2029.

Of course, where the future is concerned, nothing is certain except
surprise; but the mere fact that so many knowledgeable people (such as
Stephen Hawking, Douglas Hofstadter, Bill Joy, and Martin Rees) take
the near advent of advanced AI as a plausible possibility, should
serve as a "wake-up call" to anyone seriously concerned about the
future of humanity.

The potential of advanced AI, for good or evil, has been amply
explored in science fiction literature and cinema. In the early 90's,
Vernor Vinge coined the term "technological singularity" to refer to
the difficulty of predicting or understanding what will happen after
the point at which humans are no longer the most intelligent and
capable minds on Earth.

It's easy to be passive about this issue. Technology is advancing, and
none of us have the power to stop it. There are also plenty of more
pressing issues around us, so there may seem no clear need to worry
about something that may happen in 2029, or 2020, or 2050.

Everyone involved with SIAI, however, believes that this kind of
passivity is both shortsighted and dangerous. As a starting point,
futuristic predictions are not always overoptimistic ? sometimes they
wind up overpessimistic instead. Jetsons-style spacecraft aren't here
yet, but the Internet is, and hardly anyone foresaw that until it came
about. It's important to also note that the 22 years until Kurzweil's
2029 prediction is not very long at all. Advanced AI is a big thing to
understand, and it's also something that can be done either safely or
unsafely. The time to start thinking very, very hard about how to do
it safely is this year, not next year, or five years from now. The
potential dangers of creating advanced AI the wrong way are very
severe; and the potential rewards of creating it the right way are at
least equally tremendous.

Our core, long-term mission at the Singularity Institute is to figure
out how to develop advanced AI safely to help bring about a world in
which the vast potential benefits of this technology can be enjoyed by
all of humanity. We want to create a rigorous scientific,
mathematical, and engineering framework to guide the development of
safe advanced AI.

In our view, this is the most critical issue facing humanity. We are
on the verge of creating minds exceeding our own. Unfortunately, the
amount of societal resources presently going into figuring out how to
do this right is absurdly tiny. SIAI is the only organization on the
planet right now that's squarely focused on this incredibly important
problem. By reading this, you are among the .01% who have even heard
about this issue; and that estimate may be high.

The Most Important Question Facing Humanity

There are many ways to work toward figuring out how to develop
advanced AI. Engineering specific AI systems is valuable, as it helps
us gain experimental knowledge of semi-advanced AI systems, while
they're still at an infra-human level. Studying human brain and
cognition is valuable, since after all, at the present time, the human
mind is the only highly generally intelligent system we have at our
disposal to study. Other disciplines like ethical philosophy and
mathematical decisions theory also have a lot to contribute.

However, there is one question we feel is absolutely critical to the
goal of figuring out how to develop advanced AI the right way, which
remains essentially unexplored within academia and industry. SIAI's
short-term research mission is to resolve this one question as
thoroughly as possible. Compactly stated, the question is this:

How can one make an AI system that modifies and improves itself, yet
does not lose track of the top-level goals with which it was
originally supplied?

This question is simple to state but devilishly difficult to resolve ?
it's not even an easy thing to formalize in the language of modern
mathematics and AI.

To understand the significance of this question, think about this:
What is the most likely way for humans to create an AI system that's a
lot smarter than humans? The answer is: To create an AI system that's
a little smarter than humans ? and ask it to figure out how to make
itself a little bit smarter; and so on, and so on.

This is not an original idea, it's been around since at least the
1930's, in various forms. However, we are approaching a time when it
can actually happen. The pressing question is, then: If we embody the
initial "a little smarter than humans" AI system with some nice goals
(including helping humans rather than harming them), how do we know
the subsequent systems it creates, and the ones its creations create,
etc., will still embody these goals?

The current focus of SIAI's Research Program is to move toward a
rigorous understanding and hopefully a clear resolution of this
question.

SIAI's Short-Term Research Program

We aim to resolve this crucial question by simultaneously proceeding
on two fronts:

1. Experimentation with practical, contemporary AI systems that modify
and improve their own source code.
 2. Extension and refinement of mathematical tools to enable rigorous
formal analysis of advanced self-improving AI's.

These directions are not disjoint; they have great potential to
cross-pollinate each other, just as theoretical and empirical science
have done throughout the ages. On a technical level, part of the
cross-pollination will occur because both our experimental and our
theoretical work is grounded in probability theory: probabilistic AI
and probabilistic mathematics.

A Practical Project in Self-Modifying AI

For the practical aspect of the SIAI Research Program, we intend to
take the MOSES probabilistic evolutionary learning system, which
exists in the public domain and was developed by Dr. Moshe Looks in
his PhD work at Washington University in 2006, and deploy it
self-referentially, in a manner that allows MOSES to improve its own
learning methodology.

MOSES is currently implemented in C++, and is configured to learn
software programs that are expressed in a simple language called
Combo. Deploying MOSES self-referentially will require the
re-implementation of MOSES in Combo, and then the improvement of
several aspects of MOSES's internal learning algorithms.

Hitherto MOSES has proved useful for data mining, biological data
analysis, and the control of simple embodied agents in virtual worlds.
In a current project, Novamente LLC and Electric Sheep Company are
using it to control a simple virtual agent acting in Second Life.
Learning to improve MOSES will be the most difficult task yet posed to
MOSES, but also the most interesting.

Applying MOSES self-referentially will give us a fascinating concrete
example of self-modifying AI software ? far short of human-level
general intelligence initially, but nevertheless with many lessons to
teach us about the more ambitious self-modifying AI's that may be
possible.

Toward a Rigorous Theory of Self-Modifying AI

Studying self-modification in the context of a particular contemporary
AI algorithm such as MOSEs is important, but ultimately it only takes
you so far. One of the values of mathematics is that it lets you
explore important issues in advance of actually observing them
empirically. For instance, using mathematics, Einstein understood the
nature of black holes long before they were ever empirically observed.
Similarly, we may use mathematics to understand things about advanced
self-modifying probabilistic AI systems, even before we have worked
out the details of how to create them (and before we have sufficient
hardware to run them).

Theoretical computer scientists such as Marcus Hutter and Juergen
Schmidhuber, in recent years, have developed a rigorous mathematical
theory of artificial general intelligence (AGI). While this work is
revolutionary, it has its limitations. Most of its conclusions apply
only to AI systems that use a truly massive amount of computational
resources ? more than we could ever assemble in physical reality.

What needs to be done, in order to create a mathematical theory that
is useful for studying the self-modifying AI systems we will build in
the future, is to scale Hutter and Schmidhuber's theory down to deal
with AI systems involving more plausible amounts of computational
resources. This is far from an easy task, but it is a concrete
mathematical task, and we have specific conjectures regarding how to
approach it. The self-referential MOSES implementation, mentioned
above, may serve as an important test case here: if a scaled-down
mathematical theory of AGI is any good, it should be able to tell us
something about self-referential MOSES.

This sort of work is difficult, and the time required for success is
hard to predict. However, we feel very strongly that this sort of
foundational work ? inspired by close collaboration with computational
experiment ? is the most likely route to achieving true understanding
of the fundamental question posed above: How can one make an AI system
that modifies and improves itself, yet does not lose track of the
top-level goals with which it was originally supplied?

Hiring Plan

SIAI is currently a small organization, with one full-time Research
Fellow (Eliezer Yudkowsky) and part-time involvement by a number of AI
researchers, including Director of Research Dr. Ben Goertzel. We are
seeking additional funding so as to enable, initially, the hiring of
two doctoral or post-doctoral Research Fellows to focus on the above
two areas (practical and theoretical exploration of self-modifying
AI).

These two Fellows would work under the supervision of Dr. Ben
Goertzel; and in collaboration with Eliezer Yudkowsky as well. They
would also benefit from interaction with the group of AI luminaries
who are involved with SIAI, including SIAI Director Ray Kurzweil and
SIAI Advisors Neil Jacobstein and Dr. Stephen Omohundro.

Two Research Fellows, of course, represent a rather small allocation
of society's overall resources ? one could argue that, in fact, a
substantial percentage of our collective resources should be allocated
to exploring issues such as those that concern SIAI, given their
potentially extreme importance to the future of humankind. But many
great things start from small initiatives, and we believe that the
right two researchers, focused squarely on these issues, can make a
huge difference in advancing knowledge and better directing AI R&D in
the right direction.

Part of our goal is to make progress on these issues ourselves,
in-house within SIAI; and part of our goal is to, by demonstrating
this progress, interest the wider AI R&D community in these
foundational issues. Either way: the goal is to move toward a deeper
understanding of these incredibly important issues.

Toward a Positive Singularity

Advanced self-modifying AI is almost sure to happen in this century ?
as Ray Kurzweil, Bill Joy, and others have foreseen. The big question
is whether we succeed in creating it with rigor, care, and foresight.

SIAI doesn't claim to have the answers ? not yet, anyway. What we do
have is a systematic, well-defined research program, aimed at focusing
on the most essential questions. With sustained effort, maybe a little
brilliance and luck, and a lot of help, we may well create an
understanding that will help the human race navigate its way in the
coming decades to a positive Singularity. If you are aligned with this
vision, we hope you will help us.

Why is it advantageous to invest in SIAI now rather later? There's a
clear, rational answer to this question: If you invest now, you will
increase the probability that we can scale SIAI and its community of
friends and supporters to a level where there's a sufficiently-sized
body of capable researchers who can work full-time on these critical
issues. SIAI is the only organization focused on these problems right
now, thus we are a nucleus around which a certain amount of talent has
already accrued, and around which additional talent can be accrued
over time. If you invest later, you will likely have reduced the
probability that SIAI will be able to reach a sufficient critical mass
to effectively confront these issues before it's way too late. SIAI
must boot-strap into existence a scientific field and research
community for the study of safe, recursively self-improving systems;
this field and community doesn't exist yet. This is going to be hard;
it's going to take time, but the sooner SIAI can grow, the greater the
chance we'll have of being able to catalyze a critical mass in-time to
deal with these problems before we're in a nose-dive situation that we
can't reverse.

One of the best ways to support SIAI is by contributing to the
Singularity Challenge, which will allow us to grow the organization.
If you donate or email us a pledge by August 6th, we can ensure your
gift is matched. We hope many of you reading will do this; and thank
you!

http://www.singinst.org/challenge/

If you want to get involved with SIAI, or if you have resources to
share (such as expertise, talent, promotion, or contacts), then please
email us: institute at singinst.org.



From scerir at libero.it  Sun Aug  5 06:03:00 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 08:03:00 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Aharonov-Bohm Effect
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070308114540.023a9958@satx.rr.com><7.0.1.0.2.20070309174315.024b6500@satx.rr.com><4249F7D5E13BF24C9BA37E6ACC55B8B61E0928@webmail.sensetech.no><f7bfe5740703151411x77d4cc74oc276d15037536734@mail.gmail.com><7.0.1.0.2.20070315172201.022a3ea8@satx.rr.com><7.0.1.0.2.20070315175649.022ec7e8@satx.rr.com><003801c7698d$54548940$53961f97@archimede><7.0.1.0.2.20070318140758.0236d6c8@satx.rr.com><002b01c76a51$5dbfbad0$0fba1f97@archimede><0aa301c7c695$8165d5f0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><000301c7c70d$dca19df0$33921f97@archimede><213b01c7d138$5344f3b0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><000301c7d214$4331e230$a1961f97@archimede>
	<219901c7d22a$440c3aa0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <001e01c7d726$47e04e40$f7911f97@archimede>

Lee:
> You're not a believer in MWI?

I think that one real world is enough :-)
 
> Now, may I visualize one of the two paths (of one 
> particle) emanating from one slit and, as it nears the
> solenoid, penetrating one after the other of the
> cylindrical surfaces and then un-penetrating them
> in turn as the electron goes further away?  Or is
> that the wrong idea?

Something like that yes. And something like that
also for the other path (amplitude) coming from the other
slit. Since the vector potential field is rotating
(say) anticlockwise, its radial components affect 
differently the upper and the lower paths (amplitudes) 
of the same electron.

> In principle it sounds simple:  just lower a gravitating
> field inside the two paths of an interstellar split beam
> experiment. (Wheeler loved to describe such a large
> "apparatus" wherein the two possibilities interfere
> after traveling many light years.)  So I would think
> that this latter experiment would not involve EM,
> but rather gravitation, and might show just the same
> thing.

Yes, Wheeler and his 'dragon'. Within neutron 
interferometry it is possible to show anomalies
in the interference pattern, due to the different
distance of the paths (amplitudes) from the source
of gravitation (Earth). At least that is what I remember.
But I may be wrong.
 



From scerir at libero.it  Sun Aug  5 06:09:45 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 08:09:45 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Yikes, what's up with the list?
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070804230641.02269020@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <003f01c7d727$39276d10$f7911f97@archimede>

> Is the sky falling? 
> Damien Broderick

The Vatican is studying exactly that.
(Fear of MWI?)
http://counterbalance.net/ctns-vo/index-frame.html

s.

'The theory yields a lot, 
but it hardly brings us any closer 
to the secret of the Old One.'
-Einstein, to Max Born, 
       4 December 1926.



From amara at amara.com  Sun Aug  5 06:45:56 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 08:45:56 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
Message-ID: <p06230901c2db2242799e@[23.237.66.13]>

Silly me, I should have checked here first to see the full story
(since the 90s)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Xanadu

Amara


-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From amara at amara.com  Sun Aug  5 06:39:10 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 08:39:10 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
Message-ID: <p06230900c2db205706ae@[23.237.66.13]>

whoa!

Xanadu revived?

http://transliterature.org/

Very interesting...! The original Xanadu architects have moved on (I think),
so with the exception of Ted Nelson, is this a new generation of
Xanadu-ans?


Amara

P.S. I like Ted's scribbled diagrams. :-)
-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From scerir at libero.it  Sun Aug  5 06:49:00 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 08:49:00 +0200
Subject: [ExI]  dynamics, attractors, knots
References: <24f36f410707231400v2392ffeep6b3377d86b5f822@mail.gmail.com><20070724064330.GJ20274@leitl.org><203a01c7ce89$e9ca9e40$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><46A99169.2060603@mac.com><20c201c7d020$12953e10$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><46AA271D.7070300@mac.com><20f701c7d0a3$2d4e6eb0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><46ABC1E1.2080607@mac.com>
	<217f01c7d1a3$ca76b480$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <000301c7d72c$b4e64070$f7911f97@archimede>

?tienne Ghys http://www.umpa.ens-lyon.fr/~ghys/
wrote an interesting (and difficult) paper
http://www.umpa.ens-lyon.fr/~ghys/articles/ghys-icm.pdf
showing that the Lorenz 'attractor' have 'periodic'
orbits which are 'knots'. A beautiful presentation
(pdf) with many interesting images is here
http://www.umpa.ens-lyon.fr/%7Eghys/articles/icm.pdf
with many interesting and difficult animations
http://www.josleys.com/show_gallery.php?galid=303
by http://www.josleys.com/

s.

A different subject, but see also
Planet Earth: 'extropic' shapes.
http://www.josleys.com/show_gallery.php?galid=313
and the 'FormaTerre' conference
http://www.formaterre.fr/archives/2006/conferences-2006/index.htm





From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Aug  5 09:01:38 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:01:38 +0200
Subject: [ExI] massive "green" industrial transformation of the landscape
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40707292104o6e3aa4eeg5807b7f76943bb39@mail.gmail.com>
References: <200707281428.l6SESGol007774@ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com>
	<20070728173546.GE20274@leitl.org>
	<a6a17bd40707292104o6e3aa4eeg5807b7f76943bb39@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20070805090138.GX20274@leitl.org>

On Sun, Jul 29, 2007 at 09:04:56PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote:

> Just because you haven't heard of him doesn't mean that Jesse Ausebel,
> isn't "a leading scientist" and top drawer.  I've known of his work

Readily admit to that. As you say, it was a rant. At times going
overboard to try bringing a point across.

> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/biblio.php
> Renewable and nuclear heresies
> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/docs/HeresiesFinal.pdf
> Elektron: Electrical Systems in Retrospect and Prospect
> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/Daedalus/Elektron/
> The Evolution of Transport
> http://phe.rockefeller.edu/TIP_transport/transport.pdf

Thanks for those, have begun reading them.
 
> And don't we all agree that nuclear power is surpassingly green, and

Not at all. There are many diverse beefs to have with nuclear power
today: it is centralistic, has a powerful lobby, is heavily subsidized,
relies on scarce ores, has a bad security story, dumps low-level radiactivity
across life cycle, is intensely polarizing, etc. 

In contrast to these, wind today generates 9% of electricity in Germany,
and for the first time this year was visible enough to stabilize electricity
prices on the large-scale realtime electricity market. If you remember, it was
last year that photovoltaics achieved a break-even, albeit briefly, and in
the same market. 

I would put aeolean, passive solar and photovoltaics in the exceedingly
green cathegory. They have almost no additional footprint to the residential
structures they supply.  Especially, if integrated into the structures at
design time, and not added posthaste.

> that the political opposition to same over the past ~3 decades is
> decidedly non-rational?  One doesn't therefor have to be a shill for

Ignoring non-rational components of a feasibility landscape is also
not exceedingly rational. People are afraid of large-scale energy
production, especially from nuclear sources. They readily embrace
small-scale facilities though, especially those they own privately.
Speaking about non-rational (okay, brownouts), feeling in control 
is a very non-rational, and very powerful factor.

(Btw, I've outlawed incandescents in this household (first 3 W
LED spots, now metal halide lamps for the living room), and will
be buying a wood/coal oven next year. I'm thinking about adding
passive solar, though roof alignment, inclination and shading
by trees is suboptimal. A low-voltage PV-charged power supply for
home network and electronics is on the drawing boards, too).

> the nuclear industry to hold and espouse such a position.  In fact,
> considering the anti-nuke pop culture, doesn't professor Ausebel, as
> Director of the Program for the Human Environment, at the liberal
> Rockefeller University, New York, NY, qualify as a scholar with
> intellectual integrity and even a bit of courage?

I might have mispigeonholed the man. He sounded very much like a nuclear
shill, and his comparision was awfully skewed. He was doing precisely what
one would try if one would want to discredit the renewables, and shine
golden light upon the nuclear industry.
 
> Despite the harshness of your earlier "critique", I have every
> confidence you will give the good professor a fair and judicious
> assessment when you've had an opportunity to look at his actual body
> of work.

Possible, but since I'm usually well-informed on renewables it's
unlikely I've overlooked something so critical to require a 
reassessment.
 
> Life is good here, as I hope it is with all of you.

Good for you! I personally can't complain, though the likely impending 
Great Depression has really started to worry me. It's been looming in 
the background for many years, but this year could be it. 

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Sun Aug  5 09:09:32 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:09:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
In-Reply-To: <p06230901c2db2242799e@23.237.66.13>
References: <p06230901c2db2242799e@23.237.66.13>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708050209s3acf7b7cne76ca587812a2186@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/4/07, Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> Silly me, I should have checked here first to see the full story

Well, to see _a_ story. It's Wikipedia. I counted six factual errors
and stopped reading.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
time.  --J Thomas


From pgptag at gmail.com  Sun Aug  5 09:23:15 2007
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:23:15 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708050209s3acf7b7cne76ca587812a2186@mail.gmail.com>
References: <p06230901c2db2242799e@23.237.66.13>
	<7d79ed890708050209s3acf7b7cne76ca587812a2186@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c520708050223i2d67e8e4i7d9d76841e2cc739@mail.gmail.com>

So please let us know. What is _the_ story? I thought Xanadu was dead
like the dinosaurs.
G.

On 8/5/07, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/4/07, Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> > Silly me, I should have checked here first to see the full story
>
> Well, to see _a_ story. It's Wikipedia. I counted six factual errors
> and stopped reading.
>
> --
>          Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
> I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
> time.  --J Thomas
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From amara at amara.com  Sun Aug  5 09:27:36 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:27:36 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
Message-ID: <p06230902c2db473d2483@[23.237.66.13]>

Michael M. Butler mmbutler at gmail.com :

>Well, to see _a_ story. It's Wikipedia. I counted six factual errors

which are?

>and stopped reading.

yes, it was short. :-/

I am curious what happened to the project post-Autodesk. I could ask
some of the people involved, but that would involve email and phone,
and my now time right now is limited.

Wikipedia links to this:

http://www.latrobe.edu.au/screeningthepast/firstrelease/fr_18/BBfr18a.html

which looks much more complete. Only skimmed it though, and I have
no idea if errors exist.

Amara
-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From dagonweb at gmail.com  Sun Aug  5 11:11:52 2007
From: dagonweb at gmail.com (Dagon Gmail)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 13:11:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] "Up against the warming zealots"...hmmm
In-Reply-To: <f3afeba0707290157i742e96f7w54e0caf1e0b4a49b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <61c8738e0707210843x544df471ja6482c1fae2c6f6e@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0707230512s1672af0dg36eede1411c321c9@mail.gmail.com>
	<f3afeba0707290157i742e96f7w54e0caf1e0b4a49b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bf3acbfc0708050411w6e6fa18fuc2136a7bdee4d11a@mail.gmail.com>

Lets give a cynical reply

Ecologically minded or "green" folks are of a particular memeset that
has links (not always but quite commonly) to the left, anarchy,
PETA, greenpeace, spirituality, wicca, shamanism, etc. This demographic
is quite visible in the Netherlands and has come under close scrutiny
after an extremist animal rights activist shot the to-be-next-prime minster
in the head. Google "volkert van der graaf" en "pim fortuyn" for details.

These are people traditionally left out in the cold by big business. They
have absolutely no empathy, and lots of resentment for big business - and
often academic society. They have some sort of vague love for Mother
Earth, more as a metaphor for simple biological lifestyle, and even though
in any other context their arguments would have merit, they don't in a world
with 6+ billion humans. Their resentment of modern industrial society
is incompatible with current global populations.

If you come across as some sort of creature of academia, hightech
nerdlyness or the company scene, you will instantly be targetted for
suspicion; I have experienced that problem several times when discussing
transhumanism in my peer group.

This democraphic scene will become more militant as government and the
corporate sector will increase in relevance, and as their effective income (more
than the average composed of welfare as many of them simply do not have
an alternative) decreases.

By understanding the greens and by stressing green solutions, it would be
fairly easy to sway ecologically minded groups in favor of transhumanism.


From dagonweb at gmail.com  Sun Aug  5 11:15:29 2007
From: dagonweb at gmail.com (Dagon Gmail)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 13:15:29 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Full Colour 3D Printing - the next big thing?
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0707291810l6d4acaf5r9d625acc100d3f1e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0707291810l6d4acaf5r9d625acc100d3f1e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bf3acbfc0708050415t6eb92f9bsf05d6903621110d8@mail.gmail.com>

Anyone ever played wargames here? Warhammer 40K?
*giggles*

3D printing will kill that scene overnight - unless they are
smart and start selling the 3D models.


From max at maxmore.com  Sun Aug  5 16:12:47 2007
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 11:12:47 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Max More: Which books?
In-Reply-To: <46B1010A.9060104@pobox.com>
References: <46B1010A.9060104@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <200708051612.l75GCmQc006966@ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com>

Eli, here's the info:

Evidence-Based Management
by Jeffrey Pfeffer, Robert I.  Sutton
Harvard Business School Press, published on 01/01/2006
My commentary/review is here:
http://www.manyworlds.com/exploreCO.aspx?coid=CO1230051617356

You'll also find links to my reviews of other relevant pieces, such 
as "Management Science: What Does it Have to Do with Management or 
Science?", "Selection Bias and the Perils of Benchmarking", and "Why 
Hard-Nosed Executives Should Care About Management Theory"

The book-length version of the first paper above is here:
Hard Facts, Dangerous Half-Truths And Total Nonsense: Profiting From 
Evidence-Based Management by Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert I. Sutton 
(Hardcover - Mar 1, 2006)
http://www.amazon.com/Facts-Dangerous-Half-Truths-Total-Nonsense/dp/1591398622/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-4558742-8615969?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186329962&sr=1-1

Also relevant, but more specifically focused on typical reasoning errors:
The Halo Effect: ... and the Eight Other Business Delusions That 
Deceive Managers
by Phil Rosenzweig (Hardcover - Feb 6, 2007)
http://www.amazon.com/Halo-Effect-Business-Delusions-Managers/dp/0743291255/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-4558742-8615969?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1186329991&sr=1-1

Onward!

Max


At 04:54 PM 8/1/2007, you wrote:
>Max, at Transvision 2007 you referenced some books you'd found useful
>on evidence-based management.  What were they?
>
>--
>Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
>Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat



From hibbert at mydruthers.com  Sun Aug  5 16:34:10 2007
From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert)
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 09:34:10 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
In-Reply-To: <p06230902c2db473d2483@[23.237.66.13]>
References: <p06230902c2db473d2483@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <46B5FC02.8040307@mydruthers.com>


Michael M. Butler wrote:
 >> >Well, to see _a_ story. It's Wikipedia. I counted six factual errors

And Amara responded:
 > which are?

Michael's experience covers a period that partially overlaps mine, so I 
notice different errors.

In this paragraph, I detect the point of view of one of the "factions", 
and a mischaracterization of the divestiture and history of the factions.

   "Then a newer group of programmers, hired from Xerox PARC, used
   the problems with this software as justification to rewrite the
   software in Smalltalk. This effectively split the group into
   two factions, and the decision to rewrite put a deadline
   imposed by Autodesk out of the team's reach. In August 1992,
   Autodesk divested the Xanadu group, which became the Xanadu
   Operating Company, which struggled due to internal conflicts
   and lack of investment."

The "newer group" was led by Mark Miller, who'd been a part of the 
project from the Swarthmore days.

"Justification" is pejorative.  Since the "problems" are admitted here, 
it seems more like a "reason".  I worked at XOC from mid-1991 to early 
1993.  It was XOC the entire time, as I recall.

I was the Manager of Software Development for most of the time I was 
there before the divestiture, and there was no deadline imposed by 
Autodesk that I ever heard of.  We announced deadlines we set for 
ourselves, and delivered software to customers at Autodesk and elsewhere 
on-time or within a few weeks of target dates.

I was in Europe (watching the Olympics in Barcelona) when the 
divestiture happened.  Autodesk divested all of its external 
subsidiaries at the same time in an effort to put more attention into 
their revenue-producing products.  It's hard to see why anyone familiar 
with the situation would say that Xanadu was singled out for failing to 
meet commitments when the divestiture was general.

The part about internal conflicts is true, though the intervention of 
Memex (mentioned in the following paragraph) addressed the lack of 
investment.

Chris
-- 
It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so
easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium.
-- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy.

Chris Hibbert
hibbert at mydruthers.com
http://mydruthers.com



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Sun Aug  5 17:38:16 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 10:38:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520708050223i2d67e8e4i7d9d76841e2cc739@mail.gmail.com>
References: <p06230901c2db2242799e@23.237.66.13>
	<7d79ed890708050209s3acf7b7cne76ca587812a2186@mail.gmail.com>
	<470a3c520708050223i2d67e8e4i7d9d76841e2cc739@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708051038v3d4429pde7c6f2c5ae1f34b@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/5/07, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com> wrote:
> So please let us know. What is _the_ story? I thought Xanadu was dead
> like the dinosaurs.
> G.
>
> On 8/5/07, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/4/07, Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> > > Silly me, I should have checked here first to see the full story
> >
> > Well, to see _a_ story. It's Wikipedia. I counted six factual errors
> > and stopped reading.
> >

Giulio (and Amara):

If you ask five different (ex-)Xanies, you'll likely get more than
five answers. People presume that there _is_ "a" "the story" but even
modulo Wikipedia's faults there are many stories. I'm not being
postmodern here, I an acknowledging difficulties in determining fact.
I know at least one person on this list who could wipe the floor with
me on probably-accurate Xanadu lore.

Giulio:

"Dead like the dinosaurs?" I wouldn't say that. But that wasn't my
main irritation with the Wikipedia article.

Ted is still chasing the dream, and on his birthday this year he and
his current coder released a demo that illustrates in 3D one kind of
representation of transclusion he drew on paper decades ago. I have no
idea how much of that Xanalogical stuff actually is working "under the
hood" because the demo seems to be locked.

That's the XanaduSpace 1.0 demo pointed to at the bottom of the
Wikipedia article.

There's a few other worthies out there professing to be diddling with
the Udanax Gold and Green code, about whom I know virtually nothing.

Amara:

[Sidebar: Wkipedia sucks a large fraction of the time because jerks
with misinformation or axes to grind (and no life) get the final say.
Google Jaron Lanier's article on Wikipedia (or see Encyclopedia
Dramatica's not-very-safe-for-work parody/criticism site) for some
further insights.]

Their Xanadu article isn't totally broken, though cites are largely lacking.

Since I did actually technically "work on" Xanadu and at Memex (not
that I accomplished much), by the editorial policies of Wikipedia I am
not permitted to correct factual errors there. Terrific, huh?

I know for a fact that the description of events after 1979 contain
errors and anachronisms.

And the description of tumblers is brain dead and will leave the
reader wondering what the big deal is.

And there are other problems.

So I stopped reading before I noticed the link to Ted's latest
offering, with a bad taste in my mouth.

But... so what? :) Ted's still cranking away, and bless him for that.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
time.  --J Thomas


From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Sun Aug  5 19:07:13 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 20:07:13 +0100
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
In-Reply-To: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com>
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com>

On 7/31/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

> What bothers me is the implicit notion rational decision making requires
> maximal extension of hypotheticals.   None of us have any real idea whether
> humanity or its descendants have a future beyond this planet, solar system
> or local galactic neighborhood.  That we might perhaps become or create
> near-gods that touch the entire galaxy eventually can surely be said of
> every reasonably sapient species in the universe.   But is it really
> rational to judge risk to humanity as equating to a major risk to the entire
> universe?   I don't see how this is justified.   Do we judge a human being
> not just on his own character and likely potential but on the potential of
> all those myriad of beings he might possibly be an ancestor to plus all
> those artificial beings that he might create or have some small part in
> creating and all their works as well?  Surely this throws reasonable
> context, likelihood analysis and any basis for rational decision making into
> disarray.
>
> So what is the proper means of cleaning this up?  How is it properly
> delimited to something actually useful?  Am I missing something?
>

I can see the philosophical justification for it, but I agree with you that
it's not useful. In practice, following that train of thought just leads us
into a state of mind where we're not thinking straight; we end up letting
fear and despair make our decisions for us, and in that condition we flinch
away from (not rationally guard against, but flinch away from) that which
_appears_ dangerous - and likely as not, right into the jaws of that which
truly _is_ dangerous.

I can't speak for everyone, but for myself I've decided the best approach
is:

1) I acknowledge I cannot know what will happen in the distant future.

2) That doesn't mean I can't hope. The hope of future wonders can't provide
detailed guidance for the here and now, but it can provide inspiration.

3) My scope for action extends over the next few years, maybe couple of
decades, and that is the timescale on which I make plans.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070805/b7d83a3d/attachment.html>

From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug  5 19:36:27 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 12:36:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] massive "green" industrial transformation of the landscape
References: <200707281428.l6SESGol007774@ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com><20070728173546.GE20274@leitl.org><a6a17bd40707292104o6e3aa4eeg5807b7f76943bb39@mail.gmail.com>
	<20070805090138.GX20274@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <013501c7d798$080e1550$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Eugen writes


> (Btw, I've outlawed incandescents in this household (first 3 W
> LED spots, now metal halide lamps for the living room), and will
> be buying a wood/coal oven next year.

What if everyone did that?

Lee

> I'm thinking about adding
> passive solar, though roof alignment, inclination and shading
> by trees is suboptimal. A low-voltage PV-charged power supply for
> home network and electronics is on the drawing boards, too).



From hibbert at mydruthers.com  Sun Aug  5 18:32:15 2007
From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert)
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 11:32:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708051038v3d4429pde7c6f2c5ae1f34b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <p06230901c2db2242799e@23.237.66.13>	<7d79ed890708050209s3acf7b7cne76ca587812a2186@mail.gmail.com>	<470a3c520708050223i2d67e8e4i7d9d76841e2cc739@mail.gmail.com>
	<7d79ed890708051038v3d4429pde7c6f2c5ae1f34b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <46B617AF.7070101@mydruthers.com>

When I want to add more light about what went on at Xanadu, or what the 
interesting technological details are, I contribute something to 
http://www.sunless-sea.net/, a site dedicated to reviving and 
understanding the details.  I recently uploaded some info I found in two 
afternoons I spent poring over Stanford's collection of Keith Henson's 
papers (http://www.sunless-sea.net/wiki2/Main/KeithHensonsPapers).

There are several papers from that archive that I think are worth 
digitizing and explaining. 
(http://www.sunless-sea.net/wiki2/Main/WorthCopying)  Unfortunately, 
this is back burner for me.  I actually have a couple of customers 
asking for my attention at the moment, and we're remodeling our house 
(see my blog for a few details.)

Chris
-- 
Currently reading:
    Sunny Auyang, How is Quantum Field Theory Possible?;
    Greg Mortenson and David Relin, Three Cups of Tea;

Chris Hibbert
hibbert at mydruthers.com
http://mydruthers.com



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug  5 19:59:16 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 12:59:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com>
	<8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Russell writes

> Samantha wrote
> 
> > What bothers me is the implicit notion rational decision making requires
> > maximal extension of hypotheticals.

This is a fine point to always bring up---even if just as a reminder.
And I really commend your phrasing.

> > None of us have any real idea whether humanity or its descendants
> > have a future beyond this planet, solar system or local galactic
> > neighborhood.  That we might perhaps become or create near-gods...
> > But is it really rational to judge risk to humanity as equating to a major
> > risk to the entire universe?

First, just to be clear.  We're talking about a finite portion of the
visible universe, because with the acceleration of expansion, most
of what we see can't and won't be within reach of our civilization.

In principle, I do consider it rational to so judge. Unless it benefits
someone, there isn't much use to the universe (a truism). The
*real* question is pursued further by you and Russell later.

> > Do we judge a human being not just on his own character and
> > likely potential but on the potential of all those myriad of beings
> > he might possibly be an ancestor to plus all those artificial beings...

To be precise, again, "judge" probably isn't the word you need, because
blame and punishment still must be accorded to individuals as their
capacities and actions call for. But in my opinion, yes indeed,
their *value* must include the contribution they'll make towards
converting dead matter into living matter in the long run, multiplied
by the probability, of course, that they'll actually do so.

> > So what is the proper means of cleaning this up?  How is it
> > properly delimited to something actually useful?  Am I missing
> >something? 

Missing something?  No, I think that caution is commendable.
But I do suspect that there may lurk here real differences in
*values* between you and Russell, on the one hand, and me,
Bostrum, Yudkowsky, and the usual suspects on the other.
Or it may be simply reducible to our necessary tendencies to 
assign different probabilities from one another to different
possibilities.

Russell then answers

> I can see the philosophical justification for it, but I agree with you
> that it's not useful. In practice, following that train of thought just
> leads us into a state of mind where we're not thinking straight; [!]
> we end up letting fear and despair make our decisions for us,

Oh, come now  :-)

> and in that condition we flinch away from (not rationally guard against,
> but flinch away from) that which _appears_ dangerous - and likely
> as not, right into the jaws of that which truly _is_ dangerous. 

If you think, for example, that global warming is a dire threat,
and I don't, it' doesn't follow that you aren't thinking straight
or are "letting fear and despair make our decisions for us".
(Well, yes, probably that's true of *some* people, but it is
downright un-Christian to assume that it's true for all.)

> I can't speak for everyone, but for myself I've decided the best approach is:

> 1) I acknowledge I cannot know what will happen in the distant future.

Good.  Applies, as ready examples, both to a deadly and fast
AI takeoff (which I fear) and to catastrophic global warming
(which I don't).

> 2) That doesn't mean I can't hope. The hope of future wonders
> can't provide detailed guidance for the here and now, but it can
> provide inspiration. 

Quite so.

> 3) My scope for action extends over the next few years, maybe
> couple of decades, and that is the timescale on which I make plans.

I guess I have to agree with you, here, and pull back a little on
my own enthusiasm for worrying too much, say, about "the
Singularity".   While yes, I'm very glad that there are some people
worrying about it as their professions, it has also occurred to me
recently that everything is just too unpredictable.

(I read a few pages of "The Black Swan", I think it's called, which
has some very telling anecdotes about making overly detailed plans
concerning a too uncertain future.  And reading prognostications
that are even four years old, e.g. "Robotic Nation", causes one to
see how very quickly our guesses become outdated.)

Can't some agreement be reached here simply by each of us
assigning different probabilities to various risks?  In other words,
is anything really new here?

Lee



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Aug  5 20:23:27 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 22:23:27 +0200
Subject: [ExI] massive "green" industrial transformation of the landscape
In-Reply-To: <013501c7d798$080e1550$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <20070805090138.GX20274@leitl.org>
	<013501c7d798$080e1550$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <20070805202327.GH20274@leitl.org>

On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 12:36:27PM -0700, Lee Corbin wrote:
> Eugen writes
> 
> 
> > (Btw, I've outlawed incandescents in this household (first 3 W
> > LED spots, now metal halide lamps for the living room), and will
> > be buying a wood/coal oven next year.
> 
> What if everyone did that?

I hereby encourage everybody to pick up fluorescents, LEDs and metal
halides instead of old incandescents -- the wood oven part is however
a pure insurance on my part. I expect to things become somewhat
nasty during impending economic turmoil, and methane to become
scarce and/or expensive for the duration. Wood and especially coal
wouldn't work for dense industrial centers, mostly for emission
reasons.

You should be clean with a modern fuel pellet oven, though. All of this
is short-term, in 15-30 years suburbia should be net energy
producer. 

Of course the usual other suggestions do apply: house insulation,
energy-efficient home appliances, solar thermal, heat pump, etc.
 
-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 02:28:16 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2007 19:28:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Xanadu Revived?!
In-Reply-To: <46B617AF.7070101@mydruthers.com>
References: <p06230901c2db2242799e@23.237.66.13>
	<7d79ed890708050209s3acf7b7cne76ca587812a2186@mail.gmail.com>
	<470a3c520708050223i2d67e8e4i7d9d76841e2cc739@mail.gmail.com>
	<7d79ed890708051038v3d4429pde7c6f2c5ae1f34b@mail.gmail.com>
	<46B617AF.7070101@mydruthers.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708051928t1d53ade1x10d9187ca52d2ad4@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/5/07, Chris Hibbert <hibbert at mydruthers.com> wrote:
> When I want to add more light about what went on at Xanadu, or what the
> interesting technological details are, I contribute something to
> http://www.sunless-sea.net/, a site dedicated to reviving and
> understanding the details.

Interesting, and thanks. It's back-burner for me, also, but I just
turned up an old videotape of some Xanadu chalk talks from back in the
1987-1991 timeframe. If they're at all salvage-able, I'll try to
convert them and upload them there.


-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
time.  --J Thomas


From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 06:49:11 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 07:49:11 +0100
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
In-Reply-To: <013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com>
	<8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com>
	<013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708052349qf883e95lebbfa75987ab4023@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/5/07, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> If you think, for example, that global warming is a dire threat,
> and I don't, it' doesn't follow that you aren't thinking straight
> or are "letting fear and despair make our decisions for us".
> (Well, yes, probably that's true of *some* people, but it is
> downright un-Christian to assume that it's true for all.)


Different kinds of hypothetical danger generate different responses in
people - we are not Bayesian agents, after all (more on that below). I agree
of course that it would be un-Christian to simply make such assumptions,
which is why I am not doing so - my claims regarding the pitfalls here are
based on first-hand experience; I spent awhile in this trap myself.

(I read a few pages of "The Black Swan", I think it's called, which
> has some very telling anecdotes about making overly detailed plans
> concerning a too uncertain future.  And reading prognostications
> that are even four years old, e.g. "Robotic Nation", causes one to
> see how very quickly our guesses become outdated.)


*nods* The Black Swan is good reading - some of the polemics are skippable,
but Taleb also makes some very good points.

Can't some agreement be reached here simply by each of us
> assigning different probabilities to various risks?  In other words,
> is anything really new here?
>

Partly. I don't think we're disagreeing on values - maybe not everyone here
has exactly the same values, but I would guess close enough to the same for
these purposes. Part of it is different probabilities, but I wince at using
that word, because part of it is also a difference in philosophical
approach. I am not a Bayesian. Oh don't get me wrong, Bayesian reasoning is
normative _where applicable_. But for human beings in the real world (as
opposed to mathematically abstracted agents in a closed-world toy universe),
it usually is not applicable. In the absence of hard statistical data,
"probability" assignments are nothing of the sort, and the kind of errors
Bayes will help you with are on the whole not the kind people actually make.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070806/3e9160bc/attachment.html>

From femmechakra at yahoo.ca  Mon Aug  6 06:23:00 2007
From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 02:23:00 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ExI] Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
In-Reply-To: <p06230904c2d1d5559f8c@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <960539.49135.qm@web30407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hi Amara,

One of my friends mentioned today that on August 27,
2007, Mars will be closest to the Earth than X amount
of years. (I'm not really sure that he knew all the
details about it but I thought that maybe there was
something based on the history).
As I haven't kept up with my sky watching (I'm rather
busy during the summer), I thought that maybe I could
witness something that I haven't seen before. Can you
describe what I should look for, what time this event
should occur if there really is an event?  

Any heads up or is this just a bogus claim?
Just curious and hope your not too busy to answer.
Thanks
Anna   

   



      Get a sneak peak at messages with a handy reading pane with All new Yahoo! Mail: http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Aug  6 06:59:54 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 01:59:54 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
In-Reply-To: <960539.49135.qm@web30407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <p06230904c2d1d5559f8c@[23.237.66.13]>
	<960539.49135.qm@web30407.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070806015847.0215f598@satx.rr.com>

At 02:23 AM 8/6/2007 -0400, Anna wrote:

>One of my friends mentioned today that on August 27,
>2007, Mars will be closest to the Earth than X amount
>of years.

Go straight to Snopes:

http://www.snopes.com/science/mars.asp




From femmechakra at yahoo.ca  Mon Aug  6 07:34:29 2007
From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 03:34:29 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ExI] Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070806015847.0215f598@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <80600.71837.qm@web30409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

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

> 
> Go straight to Snopes:
> 
> http://www.snopes.com/science/mars.asp

What makes you think I don't know how to Google? 
I was refering to a post I wrote a while back to Amara
regarding how she frequently posted noted events
within astronomy (my sky-watching). 

My apology if I don't get your point.
Anna






      Get news delivered with the All new Yahoo! Mail.  Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page. Start today at http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca


From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Mon Aug  6 08:47:09 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 01:47:09 -0700
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com><8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com><013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<8d71341e0708052349qf883e95lebbfa75987ab4023@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <01a101c7d806$67f68100$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Russell writes

> Different kinds of hypothetical danger generate different responses in people - we are not Bayesian agents, after all (more on 
> that below). I agree of course that it would be un-Christian to simply make such assumptions, which is why I am not doing so - my 
> claims regarding the pitfalls here are based on first-hand experience; I spent awhile in this trap myself.<

Your passage wasn't very clear to me.  Mind elaborating on
the "trap" you were in; e.g., the circumstances or examples?


> > (I read a few pages of "The Black Swan", I think it's called, which
> > has some very telling anecdotes about making overly detailed plans
> > concerning a too uncertain future.  And reading prognostications
> > that are even four years old, e.g. "Robotic Nation", causes one to

Argh.  I do *not* recommend that particular, extremely economically
ignorant story, or Marshall  Brain's silly essays---hope no one thought I did.

> > see how very quickly our guesses become outdated.)

> *nods* The Black Swan is good reading - some of the polemics are
> skippable, but Taleb also makes some very good points.

> > Can't some agreement be reached here simply by each of us
> > assigning different probabilities to various risks?  In other words,
> > is anything really new here?

> Partly. I don't think we're disagreeing on values - maybe not everyone here has exactly the same values, but I would guess close 
> enough to the same for these purposes. Part of it is different probabilities, but I wince at using that word, because part of it 
> is also a difference in philosophical approach. I am not a Bayesian. Oh don't get me wrong, Bayesian reasoning is normative _where 
> applicable_. But for human beings in the real world (as opposed to mathematically abstracted agents in a closed-world toy 
> universe), it usually is not applicable. In the absence of hard statistical data, "probability" assignments are nothing of the 
> sort, and the kind of errors Bayes will help you with are on the whole not the kind people actually make.
<

Well, it's been a while since we've discussed Bayesianity.  My
own views have shifted a bit.  Would you mind elaborating
on your disagreement with Bayesianism, or providing some
links?  (Preferably in a new thread.)

Thanks,
Lee





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



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Mon Aug  6 08:53:38 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 01:53:38 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
References: <80600.71837.qm@web30409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01af01c7d807$4b0025a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Anna writes

> What makes you think I don't know how to Google?

There was no implication of that in Damien's post.

> I was refering to a post I wrote a while back to Amara
> regarding how she frequently posted noted events
> within astronomy (my sky-watching).

Well, you wrote in "Myth or Factual",

> I thought that maybe I could
> witness something that I haven't seen before. Can you
> describe what I should look for, what time this event
> should occur if there really is an event?

Damien was merely pointing to a web site that debunks
claims.  I didn't know about that site.  If I had been you,
I would have interpreted that as a direct answer to my
question of whether this was "Myth or Factual".  That
web site directly calls this an urban legend.  Hence your
friend was wrong.  That's all.

Lee


> --- Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Go straight to Snopes:
>>
>> http://www.snopes.com/science/mars.asp
>
> What makes you think I don't know how to Google?
> I was refering to a post I wrote a while back to Amara
> regarding how she frequently posted noted events
> within astronomy (my sky-watching).
>
> My apology if I don't get your point.
> Anna
>
>
>
>
>
>
>      Get news delivered with the All new Yahoo! Mail.  Enjoy RSS feeds right on your Mail page. Start today at 
> http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> 



From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 11:12:03 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 12:12:03 +0100
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
In-Reply-To: <01a101c7d806$67f68100$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com>
	<8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com>
	<013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<8d71341e0708052349qf883e95lebbfa75987ab4023@mail.gmail.com>
	<01a101c7d806$67f68100$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708060412m4a67eec1g590871acea512d4a@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
> Your passage wasn't very clear to me.  Mind elaborating on
> the "trap" you were in; e.g., the circumstances or examples?

I elaborated awhile ago over on SL4:
http://sl4.org/archive/0608/15606.html

> Argh.  I do *not* recommend that particular, extremely economically
> ignorant story, or Marshall  Brain's silly essays---hope no one thought I did.

The Black Swan is economically ignorant? I thought some parts were
skippable, but there were also some useful insights.


From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 11:32:32 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 12:32:32 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>

Lee Corbin wrote in another thread:
> Well, it's been a while since we've discussed Bayesianity.  My
> own views have shifted a bit.  Would you mind elaborating
> on your disagreement with Bayesianism, or providing some
> links?  (Preferably in a new thread.)

Sure. Like I said, I think Bayesianism is normative _where
applicable_, but that's not nearly as much of the time as one might
wish. The problematic ideas are:

1) All statements have a probability.

There are lots of statements for which the concept is extremely dubious, e.g.

The Tegmark multiverse exists. (I'm not even going to get into the
quagmire of probability assignment to "God exists".)
Theft is immoral.
Roses are pretty.
The Continuum Hypothesis is true.

2) All probabilities are in the range (0, 1) exclusive.

The probability that 2 + 2 = 4 (given the usual definitions of the
terms) is 1. The probability that Goldbach's conjecture is true is
either 0 or 1, though I don't know which. The probability that P = NP
is either 0 or 1; it's not proven yet, but I'm confident it's 0.

3) We should express uncertainty by making up numbers and calling them
probabilities.

There are situations where this is the right thing to do. What's the
probability that a fair coin will come up heads? 0.5. What's the
probability that I will die this year? I don't know, but life
insurance companies have tables that could be consulted for a number,
which could reasonably be interpreted as a probability _because it is
based on statistical data_.

But Bayesianism encourages us to make up numbers where there is no
such data. Not only do we not have any basis for calling these numbers
probabilities, but we have excellent reason to refrain from doing so.
One study showed that statements to which people attached "90%
confidence" were right about 30% of the time; nor is this at all
atypical.


From neptune at superlink.net  Mon Aug  6 11:53:07 2007
From: neptune at superlink.net (Technotranscendence)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 07:53:07 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <004201c7d820$5b11e140$4d893cd1@pavilion>

On Monday, August 06, 2007 7:32 AM Russell Wallace
russell.wallace at gmail.com wrote:
> 3) We should express uncertainty by making up numbers and calling them
> probabilities.
>
> There are situations where this is the right thing to do. What's the
> probability that a fair coin will come up heads? 0.5. What's the
> probability that I will die this year? I don't know, but life
> insurance companies have tables that could be consulted for a number,
> which could reasonably be interpreted as a probability _because it is
> based on statistical data_.
>
> But Bayesianism encourages us to make up numbers where there is no
> such data. Not only do we not have any basis for calling these numbers
> probabilities, but we have excellent reason to refrain from doing so.
> One study showed that statements to which people attached "90%
> confidence" were right about 30% of the time; nor is this at all
> atypical.

I think the problem matches up with the difference, in economics,
between risk and uncertainty (Knight) as well as between plain vanilla
ignorance and sheer ignorance (Lachmann).  On the former dyad, risk is
quantifiable unknowns while uncertainty is not quantifiable.  On the
latter, an example might be I don't know how many symphonies Mozart
wrote, but I _know_ I don't know that, while there are many things I'm
not even aware that I _don't know_ I don't know.

Regards,

Dan



From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 12:24:39 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 13:24:39 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <004201c7d820$5b11e140$4d893cd1@pavilion>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<004201c7d820$5b11e140$4d893cd1@pavilion>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708060524sdf66832pcb2be115d653e511@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Technotranscendence <neptune at superlink.net> wrote:
> I think the problem matches up with the difference, in economics,
> between risk and uncertainty (Knight) as well as between plain vanilla
> ignorance and sheer ignorance (Lachmann).  On the former dyad, risk is
> quantifiable unknowns while uncertainty is not quantifiable.  On the
> latter, an example might be I don't know how many symphonies Mozart
> wrote, but I _know_ I don't know that, while there are many things I'm
> not even aware that I _don't know_ I don't know.

*nods* That's certainly an aspect of the reason why a single number
isn't sufficient to express uncertainty.


From jef at jefallbright.net  Mon Aug  6 15:35:44 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 08:35:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sure. Like I said, I think Bayesianism is normative _where
> applicable_, but that's not nearly as much of the time as one might
> wish.

Bayesianism?  Apparently you're framing this in regard to the
religion, evidenced by your top-level emphasis on "normative, where
applicable".  It took me a moment to grasp your "...ianism" frame --
at first I kept thinking you meant "effective, where applicable", but
that would be nearly tautological.  It seemed you were somehow denying
the elegance, power,  and nearly universal applicability of the
principle known as Bayes' Rule.

However, your post seems to continually blur this distinction.



> The problematic ideas are:
>
> 1) All statements have a probability.

Presuming you mean by "statements", "all statements about the
(observed) actuality of some state", then how could there not be a
probability?  Essentially, any such statement asserts the accuracy of
some aspects of an observer's model of reality, and any model is
necessarily ultimately incomplete.


> There are lots of statements for which the concept is extremely dubious, e.g.
>
> The Tegmark multiverse exists. (I'm not even going to get into the
> quagmire of probability assignment to "God exists".)

These particular topics are difficult due to lack of relatively direct
evidence, but Bayes remains applicable since the aggregate of all your
evidence (and all evidence is indirect to some extent) contributes to
what approaches a necessarily single, unified model.


> Theft is immoral.

> Roses are pretty.

These assertions suffer not from lack of evidence, but from inadequate
specification.


> The Continuum Hypothesis is true.

This assertion too suffers from inadequate specification.  This may be
more difficult for some people to grasp, as here it is the
mathematical context that is inadequately specified.  As G?del
famously showed, even mathematics can never be fully specified.

Heed ye, the Importance of Context!


> 2) All probabilities are in the range (0, 1) exclusive.

Well yes, because every statement of probability refers to some aspect
of the difference between a model and putative reality.  Note that
while the model is highly dimensional, the difference (however
defined) can always be reduced to a scalar.


> The probability that 2 + 2 = 4 (given the usual definitions of the
> terms) is 1. The probability that Goldbach's conjecture is true is
> either 0 or 1, though I don't know which. The probability that P = NP
> is either 0 or 1; it's not proven yet, but I'm confident it's 0.


These aren't statements of probability.  You're not turning Platonist
are you? ;-)


> 3) We should express uncertainty by making up numbers and calling them
> probabilities.
>
> There are situations where this is the right thing to do. What's the
> probability that a fair coin will come up heads? 0.5. What's the
> probability that I will die this year? I don't know, but life
> insurance companies have tables that could be consulted for a number,
> which could reasonably be interpreted as a probability _because it is
> based on statistical data_.


It appears you may be unclear about the distinction between
probability and likelihood.



> But Bayesianism encourages us to make up numbers where there is no
> such data. Not only do we not have any basis for calling these numbers
> probabilities, but we have excellent reason to refrain from doing so.
> One study showed that statements to which people attached "90%
> confidence" were right about 30% of the time; nor is this at all
> atypical.

Your statements here demonstrate that you don't really understand
Bayesian reasoning. It appears we lack sufficient mutual background
here to  go much further.  It might be useful to point out though,
that even to frame a question necessarily entails some relevant prior
knowledge.

As for "Bayesianism", I'm not much of a joiner and tend to avoid
"isms" in general.

- Jef



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 16:11:02 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:11:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
In-Reply-To: <01af01c7d807$4b0025a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <80600.71837.qm@web30409.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<01af01c7d807$4b0025a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708060911i704017c4scb70e755d2023173@mail.gmail.com>

Anna, your friend has the right month and day, but the wrong year.
What your friend is talking about actually already happened, in 2003.

At 5:51 a.m. EDT on Aug. 27, 2003, Mars was reportedly within
34,646,418 miles (55,758,006 kilometers) of Earth. This was the
closest that Mars has come to our planet in nearly 60,000 years.

Sorry to disappoint.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
time.  --J Thomas


From jef at jefallbright.net  Mon Aug  6 16:11:15 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:11:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI]  Resend: Bayesian epistemology
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708060911u63aef196ncd6daed4896ca165@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sure. Like I said, I think Bayesianism is normative _where
> applicable_, but that's not nearly as much of the time as one might
> wish.

Bayesianism?  Apparently you're framing this in regard to the
religion, evidenced by your top-level emphasis on "normative, where
applicable".  It took me a moment to grasp your "...ianism" frame --
at first I kept thinking you meant "effective, where applicable", but
that would be nearly tautological.  It seemed you were somehow denying
the elegance, power,  and nearly universal applicability of the
principle known as Bayes' Rule.

However, your post seems to continually blur this distinction.



> The problematic ideas are:
>
> 1) All statements have a probability.

Presuming you mean by "statements", "all statements about future
observations of some state", then how could there not be a
probability?  Essentially, any such statement asserts the accuracy of
some aspects of an observer's model of reality, and any model is
necessarily ultimately incomplete.


> There are lots of statements for which the concept is extremely dubious, e.g.
>
> The Tegmark multiverse exists. (I'm not even going to get into the
> quagmire of probability assignment to "God exists".)

These particular topics are difficult due to lack of relatively direct
evidence, but Bayes remains applicable since the aggregate of all your
evidence (and all evidence is indirect to some extent) contributes to
what approaches a necessarily single, unified model.


> Theft is immoral.

> Roses are pretty.

These assertions suffer not from lack of evidence, but from inadequate
specification.


> The Continuum Hypothesis is true.

This assertion too suffers from inadequate specification.  This may be
more difficult for some people to grasp, as here it is the
mathematical context that is inadequately specified.  As G?del
famously showed, even mathematics can never be fully specified.

Heed ye, the Importance of Context!


> 2) All probabilities are in the range (0, 1) exclusive.

Well yes, because every statement of probability refers to some aspect
of the difference between a model and putative reality.  Note that
while the model is highly dimensional, the difference (however
defined) can always be reduced to a scalar.


> The probability that 2 + 2 = 4 (given the usual definitions of the
> terms) is 1. The probability that Goldbach's conjecture is true is
> either 0 or 1, though I don't know which. The probability that P = NP
> is either 0 or 1; it's not proven yet, but I'm confident it's 0.


These aren't statements of probability.  You're not turning Platonist
are you? ;-)


> 3) We should express uncertainty by making up numbers and calling them
> probabilities.
>
> There are situations where this is the right thing to do. What's the
> probability that a fair coin will come up heads? 0.5. What's the
> probability that I will die this year? I don't know, but life
> insurance companies have tables that could be consulted for a number,
> which could reasonably be interpreted as a probability _because it is
> based on statistical data_.


It appears you may be unclear about the distinction between
probability and likelihood.



> But Bayesianism encourages us to make up numbers where there is no
> such data. Not only do we not have any basis for calling these numbers
> probabilities, but we have excellent reason to refrain from doing so.
> One study showed that statements to which people attached "90%
> confidence" were right about 30% of the time; nor is this at all
> atypical.

It appears we lack sufficient mutual background
here to  go much further.  It might be useful to point out though,
that even to frame a question necessarily entails some relevant prior
knowledge.

As for "Bayesianism", I'm not much of a joiner and tend to avoid
"isms" in general.

- Jef



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 16:46:29 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 09:46:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>

> It appears you may be unclear about the distinction between
> probability and likelihood.

1) It's been a while since I've cracked open my E. T. Jaynes
(_Probability Theory As Extended Logic_) and I seem to have packed it
prior to my recent move. Can you point me (us) to someone on teh
Intarweb who does a good concise job of making this distinction clear
in a Bayesian (but not Bayesianismistic) context?

2) The other thing that is confusing me about the (0,1) range Russell
Wallace used is that a huge part of that book (even unto the title!)
was about propounding the view that probability theory starting with
Laplace generalizes Aristotelian logic. Which, it sems to me, means
that it reduces to deductive logic when hypotheses are T/F. And a true
"reduction", it seems to me, would be that the interval dealt with is
actually [0,1].

Now, is that a limit case that can only be approached, as the "open
interval" notation used by Russell W. indicates? Is it factually the
case that can only speak of the results of Bayesian/Jaynesian analyses
terms of zillions of dB rather than 0 or 1? And if so, is that an
indictment of any kind, or merely a description of fact--that
Aristotelian logic works fine at the limit, and Bayesian stuff works
all the way up to just outside that?

3) I agree with Russell W. that plucking numbers from the air seems
odd and prone to misestimation, but I also think that (empirically) if
someone claims to be 90% confident and reality shows them they "ought
to have been" only 30% confident, the problem is with their bias, not
with Bayes per se.

Robin Hanson has (as many on the list must know) been running the
Overcoming Bias website for some time now, and it's worth at least
peeking in from time to time.

In the case mentioned above, I think Jaynes would say that after you
got a negative outcome it would behoove you to include that in your
priors for your next estimate and revise your confidence rating.
Iteration and refinement are part of the deal. Am I right?

Sorry for the tyro questions.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
time.  --J Thomas


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 17:35:43 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 10:35:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>
	<7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708061035v62a99fb9k36879935ec421513@mail.gmail.com>

Apologies for my scrambled syntax. Corrigenda:

> 2) The other thing

s/b "Something"

> Is it factually the
> case that [one] can only speak of the results of Bayesian/Jaynesian analyses
> [in] terms of zillions of dB rather than 0 or 1?

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
I've pulled birdshot out of ducks that didn't teleport at the right
time.  --J Thomas


From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Aug  6 17:36:32 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 10:36:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>

On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 12:32 +0100, Russell Wallace wrote:
> Lee Corbin wrote in another thread:
> > Well, it's been a while since we've discussed Bayesianity.  My
> > own views have shifted a bit.  Would you mind elaborating
> > on your disagreement with Bayesianism, or providing some
> > links?  (Preferably in a new thread.)
> 
> Sure. Like I said, I think Bayesianism is normative _where
> applicable_, but that's not nearly as much of the time as one might
> wish. The problematic ideas are:
> 
> 1) All statements have a probability.

Useless if there is no way of ascertaining the probability if there is
one.  Does this meta statement have a probability and is it < 1?


> But Bayesianism encourages us to make up numbers where there is no
> such data. Not only do we not have any basis for calling these numbers
> probabilities, but we have excellent reason to refrain from doing so.
> One study showed that statements to which people attached "90%
> confidence" were right about 30% of the time; nor is this at all
> atypical.

If a mathematical method useful in decision making has become an -ism
then we are surely lost.

- samantha



From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 17:50:21 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 18:50:21 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708061050h646a1c9dra7cc28c277d18c03@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> If a mathematical method useful in decision making has become an -ism
> then we are surely lost.

Well it's been floating around as an -ism (or I think Eliezer called
it something like "Bayesutsu", only partly tongue in cheek) for awhile
now, so while the conclusion that we're surely lost is a little on the
pessimistic side even for me :), I figured there was no harm in
discussing the reasons why, while the mathematical method is great
stuff as far as it goes, the -ism aspect takes things too far.


From jef at jefallbright.net  Mon Aug  6 19:08:35 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 12:08:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0708061050h646a1c9dra7cc28c277d18c03@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
	<8d71341e0708061050h646a1c9dra7cc28c277d18c03@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708061208i2566c35he3e191e4726ef823@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/6/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> > If a mathematical method useful in decision making has become an -ism
> > then we are surely lost.
>
> Well it's been floating around as an -ism (or I think Eliezer called
> it something like "Bayesutsu", only partly tongue in cheek) for awhile
> now, so while the conclusion that we're surely lost is a little on the
> pessimistic side even for me :), I figured there was no harm in
> discussing the reasons why, while the mathematical method is great
> stuff as far as it goes, the -ism aspect takes things too far.

Russell, I'm sorry if you felt an implication of harm in my response
to your initiation of this thread.  I've been deep in software
engineering for the last several weeks and it tends to bring out my
analytical side, parsing **everything** literally and logically and
critically.  You and Lee and Gordon wind up being the unhappy
recipients of my "gifts" of criticism, perhaps unaware that if I
didn't respect you I wouldn't have even bothered to engage.

I strongly agree with your point that the Bayesian suffers when it
becomes the Bayesianistic.  Bayes theorem is elegant in its power and
applicability, but it's by no means the right tool for every job. That
would be like applying the elegant but abstract principles of
trigonometry or Newtonian physics to the task of catching a tossed
ball.

- Jef


From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 20:16:03 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 21:16:03 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <f7bfe5740708061208i2566c35he3e191e4726ef823@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
	<8d71341e0708061050h646a1c9dra7cc28c277d18c03@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708061208i2566c35he3e191e4726ef823@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708061316l3e9aa968oebc6383e81c2dfa3@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
> Russell, I'm sorry if you felt an implication of harm in my response
> to your initiation of this thread.  I've been deep in software
> engineering for the last several weeks and it tends to bring out my
> analytical side, parsing **everything** literally and logically and
> critically.  You and Lee and Gordon wind up being the unhappy
> recipients of my "gifts" of criticism, perhaps unaware that if I
> didn't respect you I wouldn't have even bothered to engage.

No problem, I know how that goes!

> I strongly agree with your point that the Bayesian suffers when it
> becomes the Bayesianistic.

Right, I wasn't sure from your earlier reply, which seemed to be
expressing disagreement in general terms but then making a number of
specific comments that were consistent with mine, so I figured I'd
come back to it later, seems we're in agreement then ^.^


From jef at jefallbright.net  Mon Aug  6 20:28:06 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 13:28:06 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <8d71341e0708061316l3e9aa968oebc6383e81c2dfa3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
	<8d71341e0708061050h646a1c9dra7cc28c277d18c03@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708061208i2566c35he3e191e4726ef823@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d71341e0708061316l3e9aa968oebc6383e81c2dfa3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708061328i299e0aa0h7a16b36672240849@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Russell Wallace <russell.wallace at gmail.com> wrote:
> I wasn't sure from your earlier reply, which seemed to be
> expressing disagreement in general terms but then making a number of
> specific comments that were consistent with mine, so I figured I'd
> come back to it later, seems we're in agreement then ^.^

Strange.  I thought I disagreed with several of your specifics.

But you can rest assured that all else considered, we certainly do
agree more than not.

- Jef


From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug  6 21:38:04 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 22:38:04 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <f7bfe5740708061328i299e0aa0h7a16b36672240849@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
	<8d71341e0708061050h646a1c9dra7cc28c277d18c03@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708061208i2566c35he3e191e4726ef823@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d71341e0708061316l3e9aa968oebc6383e81c2dfa3@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708061328i299e0aa0h7a16b36672240849@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708061438y6530afefh1f792e9fe50a77d4@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
> Strange.  I thought I disagreed with several of your specifics.

That's why I used the phrase "consistent with" - I didn't reply line
by line because it seemed to me that would be likely to miss the
point, but there were a few cases where I would have said "er yes, you
have (given a reasonable interpretation of the terms) correctly
pointed out _why_ such and such isn't a matter of probability" etc :)


From jef at jefallbright.net  Mon Aug  6 18:41:33 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 11:41:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>
	<7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com> wrote:
> > It appears you may be unclear about the distinction between
> > probability and likelihood.
>
> 1) It's been a while since I've cracked open my E. T. Jaynes
> (_Probability Theory As Extended Logic_) and I seem to have packed it
> prior to my recent move. Can you point me (us) to someone on teh
> Intarweb who does a good concise job of making this distinction clear
> in a Bayesian (but not Bayesianismistic) context?


I did a quick "Intarweb search" for helpful references and found a
great deal of misinformation on this simple fundamental point.  So
here's my attempt to convey it in simple terms:

Again it's very much about context, meaning necessarily partial information.

We can think of likelihood as the function (in "reality") that
determines the distribution of outcomes.  Probability, or better,
posterior probability, is the product of our prior and the likelihood
function and reflects our uncertain (i.e. incomplete) knowledge of the
parameters of the likelihood function.

>From Jaynes' _Probability Theory - The Logic of Science, section 8.5:

<quote>
In applying Bayes' theorem, the posterior pdf for a parameter [theta]
is always a product of a prior p(theta | l) and a likelihood function
[mathematical function]; the only place where the data is in the
latter. Therefore it is manifest that

"Within the context of the specified model, the likelihood function
L(theta) from data D
contains all the information about [theta] that is contained in D."

For us, this is an immediate and mathematically trivial consequence of
the product rule of probability theory, and is no more to be
questioned than the multiplication table.  Put differently, two data
sets D, D' that lead to the same likelihood function to within a
normalization: [mathematical equation], where `a' is a constant
independent of [theta], have just the same import for any inferences
about [theta], whether it be point estimation, interval estimation, or
hypothesis testing. But for those who think of a probability
distribution as a physical phenomenon arising from n`randomness'
rather than a carrier of incomplete information, the above quoted
statement -- since it involves only the sampling distribution - has a
meaning independent of the product rule and Bayes' theorem. They call
it the `likelihood principle', and its status as a principle of
inference has been the subject of long controversy, still continuing
today.
</quote>

Sorry, too busy with work to continue here, but I think understanding
the foregoing is key.

- Jef


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Aug  6 23:32:58 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2007 16:32:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>
	<7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <46B7AFAA.8000703@pobox.com>

Michael M. Butler wrote:
>>It appears you may be unclear about the distinction between
>>probability and likelihood.
> 
> 
> 1) It's been a while since I've cracked open my E. T. Jaynes
> (_Probability Theory As Extended Logic_) and I seem to have packed it
> prior to my recent move. Can you point me (us) to someone on teh
> Intarweb who does a good concise job of making this distinction clear
> in a Bayesian (but not Bayesianismistic) context?

http://yudkowsky.net/bayes/bayes.html
(albeit it's quite Bayesianitarian)

In simple terms, "likelihood" is the probability of seeing evidence E 
if a hypothesis H is true; it refers to p(E|H).  It is not to be 
confused with p(H) or p(H|E), respectively the probability of the 
hypothesis, and the posterior probability of the hypothesis after 
taking into account the evidence.  If that confused you see the above 
website.

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


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Aug  7 00:11:00 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 17:11:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Book covers
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com><7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano>

Okay so I've finished a book project I have been working on. With images for the stories completed I recently finalized the book cover, front and back. Find out more here: http://www.nanogirl.com/personal/elocbookcovers.htm

I also recently had one of my older images used for a different book cover:
http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2007/07/new-book-cover.html

Kind regards, 

Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/
Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
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/20070806/199f5152/attachment.html>

From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 00:44:54 2007
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:14:54 +0930
Subject: [ExI] Full Colour 3D Printing - the next big thing?
In-Reply-To: <bf3acbfc0708050415t6eb92f9bsf05d6903621110d8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0707291810l6d4acaf5r9d625acc100d3f1e@mail.gmail.com>
	<bf3acbfc0708050415t6eb92f9bsf05d6903621110d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0708061744o14f15383lace147e5786d3032@mail.gmail.com>

I thought that too; miniatures for all!

Here's a thought...

When people talk about 3D printing for the masses, the assumption is
we'd move to a model where people sell blueprints rather than hardware
(3d models that you can download and print). I think this misses
something much more interesting.

When I imagine how it'll play out, I think of how people use paper
printers. What do they print? Do they download and print documents
made by others? Sometimes. But not so much. People tend to print stuff
they write/put together themselves.

I think it'll be the same with 3d printing. There'll be some static
models that people might want to download and print, sure, but often
(for a while anyway) it'll probably be cheaper to buy a mass produced
and distributed version than print your own one-off.

OTOH, 3d modeling is kinda complex... I can't see people installing 3d
studio max next to Word on all the consumer machines out there.

What I see is a lot of custom software which can do some restricted
customisations on a basic model or models. For example, with gaming
miniatures, downloading and printing the existing miniatures would be
ok, but downloading software that lets you choose colours, hairstyles,
weapons, stuff like that, showing you the result onscreen as you play
with the parameters, then lets you print out the result... now that
has legs.

Or for World of Warcraft players, imagine the ability to 3d print your
character. Or a mug with your character on it. etc...

Consumer electronics - what's cooler than an iPod? Perhaps an mp3
player where you buy a kit with internals and a CD with software that
lets you heavily customise the colours and shape of the external case
(in simple ways - select a shape, size, colour scheme, etc etc), then
print out the result and clip it all together. The models used by the
software would be designed by the same industrial designers that
currently design the iPod  et al, so you wouldn't lose the excellence
of those designs, just add choice.

Thoughts?

Emlyn

On 05/08/07, Dagon Gmail <dagonweb at gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyone ever played wargames here? Warhammer 40K?
> *giggles*
>
> 3D printing will kill that scene overnight - unless they are
> smart and start selling the 3D models.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Aug  7 00:57:39 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 17:57:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures- You all need to check
	for your own!
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com><7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com>
	<00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano>
Message-ID: <017401c7d88e$8cb6bbd0$0200a8c0@Nano>

I found this out from cryonet that this was happening. I am forwarding you my response to his "announcement". If you are an artist, photographer, author, graph maker etc. and/or might have an image, artwork or photo available online, you might want to check the link below to make sure it is not being sold illegally at the webpage made by Jonano (also known as Jon Despre, desp, Jonano Despres, nanoaging, Jon, John, Johnathan, Desp, Despre, Futurismboy):
-----------------------

I went to the Jonano's webpage (http://futurism.fotki.com/nanorobots/) and found my work, for sale, for a dollar. Jonano you did not ask my permission (to download, upload or sell) my artwork, please remove all of my images from all of your webpages. It is illegal to sell someone else's work without their permission. 
I make business transactions for publication of my work, I can assure you it is not for a dollar, by you selling it for as much, you very well may have taken work away from me. Please also tell me if you have "sold" my work to anyone, who they are and what their email is. They will need to be informed that they have been sold copyrighted material. 
I clearly state on each one of my artworks webpages that permission must be asked for any use of my work. You did not ask me and for future reference, no matter what your next big idea is, I do not want to be involved, in any way, no matter what it is. 
I also suggest that you have the permission of the other artists and photographers you have on your site, you should do this before you put it up, not after. Please remove all of my images immediately. 


Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/
Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
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/20070806/365bdb5b/attachment.html>

From tyleremerson at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 01:15:51 2007
From: tyleremerson at gmail.com (Tyler Emerson)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 18:15:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The Singularity Challenge - Final Deadline at Midnight
	Tonight Pacific Time
Message-ID: <632d2cda0708061815m6ab389b4w95c02ac6df0e3e3d@mail.gmail.com>

The $400,000 challenge fund offered by Peter Thiel and Rob Zahra in
support of the Singularity Institute will no longer be available to
match after midnight tonight. If you support the Singularity
Institute's mission and goals, then please make a gift at this time so
that we can match as much as possible before the deadline. You can
also send a written pledge to institute at singinst.org, which will be
matched dollar-for-dollar as long as your pledge is received by
December 31st. Thank you!

Give to the Challenge:
http://www.singinst.org/challenge

Best regards,

Tyler

--
Tyler Emerson
Executive Director
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
P.O . Box 50182, Palo Alto, CA 94303 USA
650-353-6063 | emerson at singinst.org | singinst.org


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Aug  7 02:03:29 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 19:03:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures- Your pictures are
	for sale here!
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com><7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com><00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<017401c7d88e$8cb6bbd0$0200a8c0@Nano>
Message-ID: <023501c7d897$b5649e40$0200a8c0@Nano>

Just some examples of the photos here that are being sold for between a dollar to 25 dollars depending on what type of prints you want:

Natasha:
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/natasha1.html

Eliezer photo:
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/eliezeryudkowsky.html

Singularity Institute logo: 
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/5658.html

Bradbury photo:
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/bradburybw.html

Chris Phoenix:
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/chrisphoenix.html

Treder:
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/treder.html

Nick Bostrom:
http://futurism.fotki.com/blog/nickbostrom.html

Wowk:
http://futurism.fotki.com/cryonics/drbrianwowk.html

Fahy:
http://futurism.fotki.com/cryonics/drgregfahy.html

Looks like most of the nanomedicine gallery is on there (from the Foresight webpage). Also logos, book covers, cartoons, movie covers and graphs. 

Gina
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070806/c4a48f7f/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 02:08:35 2007
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 22:08:35 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Full Colour 3D Printing - the next big thing?
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0708061744o14f15383lace147e5786d3032@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0707291810l6d4acaf5r9d625acc100d3f1e@mail.gmail.com>
	<bf3acbfc0708050415t6eb92f9bsf05d6903621110d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0708061744o14f15383lace147e5786d3032@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <62c14240708061908s3a2e75dagfc19d40b238ab966@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/6/07, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> When I imagine how it'll play out, I think of how people use paper


The print / consume / dispose in a very short time.  Hopefully the 3d
printouts will be more recyclable than paper.

customisations on a basic model or models. For example, with gaming
> miniatures, downloading and printing the existing miniatures would be
> ok, but downloading software that lets you choose colours, hairstyles,
> weapons, stuff like that, showing you the result onscreen as you play
> with the parameters, then lets you print out the result... now that
> has legs.


And if the IP laws are not brought within reason before then, you will have
to purchase a license for the basic model, subscribe to the software to
customize and lease the derivative works for the duration of their
existance.

Or for World of Warcraft players, imagine the ability to 3d print your
> character. Or a mug with your character on it. etc...


Why would a Word of Warcraft player need any physically real objects?  Sure,
they might want the blueprints for the sake of owning them, but what good is
an object if you can't show it off in-game to your friends?

Consumer electronics - what's cooler than an iPod? Perhaps an mp3
> player where you buy a kit with internals and a CD with software that
> lets you heavily customise the colours and shape of the external case
> (in simple ways - select a shape, size, colour scheme, etc etc), then
> print out the result and clip it all together. The models used by the
> software would be designed by the same industrial designers that
> currently design the iPod  et al, so you wouldn't lose the excellence
> of those designs, just add choice.


Of the American consumers I know, they'd more likely pay the 0.01% of the
population (who think like you suggest) to do the work for them and just
give them the product.  This is exactly why, despite CafePress' ease of use,
people still purchase items from existing sellers rather than set up their
own store.

Is there a widespread use for 3d printing?  It will probably require
creating a market, similar to how the cell phone went from a tool employed
only by doctors (and drug dealers) to every soccer mom and mallrat.

I wonder if these "printers" will be capable of producing all the parts
required to build one.  :)  You could purchase the hardware once and
subscribe to an update service.  Every (exponentially shorter time interval)
the device produces it's successor which then produces a more efficient
recycler into which it places both it's predecessor and the previous
recycler.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070806/310c3bc3/attachment.html>

From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Tue Aug  7 03:27:00 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 20:27:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Bayesian epistemology
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<1186421792.1488.34.camel@ub2>
Message-ID: <020201c7d8a2$d8ab1220$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Samantha writes

> If a mathematical method useful in decision making has become an -ism
> then we are surely lost.

Unfortunately, methods do differ between frequentists, Bayesians,
proponents of Popper's propensity view, and the "chance" view.
Well, at least I know that methods do differ between the first two
schools mentioned.  For example, the frequentists (and classical
statisticians) can become embarrassed over applications of the
stopping rule, whereas Bayesians (so I am informed by Peter Lee's
book "Bayesian Statistics") likewise can become embarrassed 
over "Jeffreys' rule for finding reference priors, [which is] 
incompatible wit the likelihood principle" (p. 210).

Has statistics gone irreversibly down the route of dismality in the
wake of economics?   :-)

Now I was taught the use of confidence intervals when I first
took statistics, and it came as a shock that Bayesians never use
them. I did convert to Bayesianism, however, but still can't help
but lapse into non-Bayesian concepts often.  Currently I
am taking more and more seriously what seemed for me---but
I am a total amateur---a possible Achilles' Heel:  we know of
one area in which objective probability is very manifest: QM
and Quantum Field Theory.  What's worse, (in my opinion) is
that if you take MWI very seriously, which I do, then you are
stuck with a definite fraction of worlds in which one thing happens
a certain way.

For a concrete example, let's suppose that George Bush is about
to give a scheduled speech on a certain day at a certain time.
What is the probability that he will read the speech exactly as
written by his speechwriter and as it appears on the teleprompter?
More precisely, what is the distribution of when he'll digress, or
stumble, or deviate from that exact sequence of words?

David Deutsch would remind us that we want to start with a 
particular "group of identical universes" at a particular time (say,
just before the speech begins).  Then that particular group of
identical universes (see Fabric of Reality where the phrase is
used over and over again and is meant quite literally) will begin
to fray at once.  (There will be meteor strikes, insects, or 
whatever that can immediately cause branching to occur, as
well as the harder to conceive of but equally real build-up of
neuronal quantum events---all of which cause George to 
deviate.)

Now on this reading, given a particular group of identical universes,
Barbara Bush's knowledge and his speechwriter's knowledge of
Bush do not---unlike in Bayesianism---play any role!  Jaynes brilliantly
(it seemed to me, though again I am no expert and may have mis-
understood his motivation) strongly emphasized the concept of a
*robot* and what the robot *knows*.  I surmise that he did this
to make the reader aware that he was talking about something
quite objective and real, namely, the state of the robot's
knowledge.  I liked that.  Maybe it even helped explain why
Jaynes belongs to the school of "objective Bayesians", which,
I readily confess, had a pleasing sound to me.

I don't know how to reconcile the preceding two paragraphs.

Here is how the whole mess started for me.  At first, it was
simplicity itself.  At age 18 I took my first course in probability,
and actually felt insulted that somebody's name (Bayes') was
attached to what seemed then to be a very obvious formula
of elementary probability. I was unaware of how some problems
are pretty tricky, but I still would not have been impressed, because
it still was nothing more than relative weights of cases.  What
*would* have impressed me would have been if I had known
exactly what problem Bayes was struggling with, and for which
he obtained a solution:

  "Given that the number of times in which an unknown event has
  happened and failed: *Required* [is] the chance that the
  probability of its happening in a single trial lies somewhere
  between any two degres of probability that can be named."

----Reverend Bayes in 1764, Philosophical Transactions of
the Royal Society (as I quote from my book "Against the Gods,
the Remarkable Story of Risk" by Peter Bernstein).

Now that's a hard problem!  Suppose you remain just outside
a betting parlor and your friend enters and begins to play some 
game (but you have no idea what).  All you hear is him cry out
in his unmistakable voice "Damnation!", "Oh yes!", "Damnation!",
"Damnation!", "Oh yes!", e.g., he's had two successes in five 
tries.  What probability of winning are you to assign to that game?
It's not so simple.  One calculation, for example, yields Laplace's
Rule of Succession, in which the correct probability is not one's
first guess 2/5, but rather is (2 + 1)/(2 + 3 + 1 + 1), or 3/7.
(This assumes a uniform prior distribution---in other words,
as you decide you know nothing about what is going on, you
assign as equally probable the true probability lying anywhere
between 0 and 1, as Laplace, I suppose, would advise, and
then "update" that information with your friend's results. I did
the calculus a few years ago and I think I got Laplace's Rule to
come out.

Anyway, as I understand it, this is only the tip of the iceberg.
I think that I read that one definition of a Bayesian is if he or
she swears by MaxEnt, the principle of Maximum Entropy.
Jaynes certainly does, and makes it a cornerstone of his big
2003 book (unfortunately, Jaynes did not live to see the
publication). 

Believe it or not---and I'm sure you won't have any trouble
believing this---this also relates (in my opinion) to the 
philosophical problem of personal identity, about which
we have spoken so much.  As
one takes MWI more and more seriously, and if one agrees
entirely with the patternist (state) notion of identity, then the
frequencies I mentioned above become correspondingly 
more important. As I contend that many people fail to appreciate
MWI *precisely* because they cannot believe that there are
other versions of themselves in adjacent universes, and that
they themselves already *are* all their duplicates in identical
and nearly identical universes, the horrid thought has occurred
to me that failure to agree with the state view of identity could
even be playing a role in the Great Statistical debate!

So it's high time I reviewed the reasons for my 2003 conversion
to Bayesianism.

Lee



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 03:39:42 2007
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 13:09:42 +0930
Subject: [ExI] Full Colour 3D Printing - the next big thing?
In-Reply-To: <62c14240708061908s3a2e75dagfc19d40b238ab966@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0707291810l6d4acaf5r9d625acc100d3f1e@mail.gmail.com>
	<bf3acbfc0708050415t6eb92f9bsf05d6903621110d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0708061744o14f15383lace147e5786d3032@mail.gmail.com>
	<62c14240708061908s3a2e75dagfc19d40b238ab966@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0708062039w1fa491f9nf1749306c3ae8cf9@mail.gmail.com>

> I wonder if these "printers" will be capable of producing all the parts
> required to build one.  :)  You could purchase the hardware once and
> subscribe to an update service.  Every (exponentially shorter time interval)
> the device produces it's successor which then produces a more efficient
> recycler into which it places both it's predecessor and the previous
> recycler.
>

The one I posted wont - that's not the objective.

OTOH, reprap aims to do just that:

http://reprap.org/

Emlyn


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Aug  7 03:40:52 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 20:40:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures- Your pictures
	arefor sale here!
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com><7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com><00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano><017401c7d88e$8cb6bbd0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<023501c7d897$b5649e40$0200a8c0@Nano>
Message-ID: <039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano>

Someone just informed me of a complaint form available here:
http://about.fotki.com/complaint/

Gina 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070806/fdaf10dc/attachment.html>

From dagonweb at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 04:25:59 2007
From: dagonweb at gmail.com (Dagon Gmail)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 06:25:59 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Full Colour 3D Printing - the next big thing?
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0708061744o14f15383lace147e5786d3032@mail.gmail.com>
References: <710b78fc0707291810l6d4acaf5r9d625acc100d3f1e@mail.gmail.com>
	<bf3acbfc0708050415t6eb92f9bsf05d6903621110d8@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0708061744o14f15383lace147e5786d3032@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <bf3acbfc0708062125h829fd26mdc4dade5fcc5265@mail.gmail.com>

I'll rather thing the nett effect, especially when combined,
will be a lot like with the MP3/downloading revolution


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Aug  7 05:37:02 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 00:37:02 -0500
Subject: [ExI] wtf? Casimir reversed??
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807003331.021d21c0@satx.rr.com>

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/06/nlevitate106.xml

"Now, using a special lens of a kind that has already been built, 
Prof Ulf Leonhardt and Dr Thomas Philbin report in the New Journal of 
Physics they can engineer the Casimir force to repel, rather than att[r]act."

Of course, the "New Journal of Physics" is published from a roadhouse 
by truckdrivers.

http://www.iop.org/EJ/njp



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Tue Aug  7 06:14:29 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 23:14:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com><8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com><013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><8d71341e0708052349qf883e95lebbfa75987ab4023@mail.gmail.com><01a101c7d806$67f68100$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<8d71341e0708060412m4a67eec1g590871acea512d4a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <023301c7d8ba$eb9314b0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Russell wrote


> On 8/6/07, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>> Your passage wasn't very clear to me.  Mind elaborating on
>> the "trap" you were in; e.g., the circumstances or examples?
> 
> I elaborated awhile ago over on SL4:
> http://sl4.org/archive/0608/15606.html
> 
>> Argh.  I do *not* recommend that particular, extremely economically
>> ignorant story, or Marshall  Brain's silly essays---hope no one thought I did.
> 
> The Black Swan is economically ignorant? I thought some parts were
> skippable, but there were also some useful insights.

No, I meant "Robotic Nation", a story by Marshall Brain.  On the 
contrary, what I read of Taleb's "Black Swan" looked very good.

Lee



From scerir at libero.it  Tue Aug  7 08:13:31 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 10:13:31 +0200
Subject: [ExI] wtf? Casimir reversed??
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807003331.021d21c0@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <001701c7d8ca$d8f50c40$74911f97@archimede>

a short review is here
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/30670

'Quantum levitation by left-handed metamaterials'
Ulf Leonhardt, Thomas Philbin
is scheduled for NJP, August 2007 edition

but you can read it at
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0608115

they also published
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/0707.3686  and
http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/1367-2630/8/10/247

(no idea about these invisibility devices,
optical Aharonov-Bohm effects, negative
refraction space-time transformations, etc.) 


From amara at amara.com  Tue Aug  7 12:03:28 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 14:03:28 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
Message-ID: <p06230901c2de0f5043a1@[23.237.66.13]>

Another in Sabine's ("Bee") Inspiration series on backreaction: Garrett Lisi

http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2007/08/garrett-lisis-inspiration.html


-------
Extract:

B: Okay, so among all the possibilities to show off, why physics and surfing?

       G: Because they're the hardest? No, actually, physics and surfing
       aren't about showing off. I've always been intrigued by the
       relationship between mathematics and nature. In school, we learn
       the math first, then later we learn some physics and see that the
       math relates to what happens in the world. Then we learn more
       complicated math -- calculus, group theory, differential geometry,
       and so on -- and see how this all connects up and describes how
       the universe works; it's quite wonderful. I got hooked. And the
       surfing... surfing really nice waves is simply the most fun one
       can have on this planet.

       We have these big brains, and a limited amount of time. So what to
       do? A lot of people spend their time making money, sometimes with
       the hope that they'll be able to do what they want after they make
       it. But you never get that time back. Theoretical physics is the
       most abstractly beautiful and challenging pursuit there is. It's
       what I want to spend my time thinking about, so that's what I do.

       But all thinking and no action would make for a dull life. So I
       surf.

  A lot.


-------

Enjoy!

Amara

-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 12:32:57 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 13:32:57 +0100
Subject: [ExI] on inflation in long term thinking
In-Reply-To: <023301c7d8ba$eb9314b0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <38613567-68BF-4398-9733-F458B0384701@mac.com>
	<8d71341e0708051207t3fb5ba1dt71121edde30bbf56@mail.gmail.com>
	<013b01c7d79b$1c407ec0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<8d71341e0708052349qf883e95lebbfa75987ab4023@mail.gmail.com>
	<01a101c7d806$67f68100$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<8d71341e0708060412m4a67eec1g590871acea512d4a@mail.gmail.com>
	<023301c7d8ba$eb9314b0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708070532o675604a0vf19f45389387629e@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/7/07, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
> No, I meant "Robotic Nation", a story by Marshall Brain.

Ah! Fair enough, I haven't read that one; thanks for the warning, I'll
leave it off my to-read list.


From scerir at libero.it  Tue Aug  7 16:09:09 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 18:09:09 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
References: <p06230901c2de0f5043a1@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <000701c7d90d$4a808f50$17be1f97@archimede>

>        And the surfing... surfing really nice waves 
>        is simply the most fun one can have on this planet.

that reminds me of the song 
'Onda su Onda', by Paolo Conte
http://www.italianissima.net/testi/ondasu.htm


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 18:02:29 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 11:02:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
In-Reply-To: <000701c7d90d$4a808f50$17be1f97@archimede>
References: <p06230901c2de0f5043a1@23.237.66.13>
	<000701c7d90d$4a808f50$17be1f97@archimede>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708071102o21862feai6603a79f9ddde6e6@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/7/07, scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:
> >        And the surfing... surfing really nice waves
> >        is simply the most fun one can have on this planet.
>
> that reminds me of the song
> 'Onda su Onda', by Paolo Conte
> http://www.italianissima.net/testi/ondasu.htm

Umm, I'm not fluent, but isn't that song about the guy falling off a
ship into freezing water and thinking about his shallow girlfriend,
then deciding he doesn't care about how superficial she is, and then
his hallucinating about a beautiful island as he dies of hypothermia?

Memory truly is a funny thing. :)
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From scerir at libero.it  Tue Aug  7 18:47:37 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 20:47:37 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
References: <p06230901c2de0f5043a1@23.237.66.13><000701c7d90d$4a808f50$17be1f97@archimede>
	<7d79ed890708071102o21862feai6603a79f9ddde6e6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000601c7d923$6f230fc0$b3971f97@archimede>

Michael:
> isn't that song about the guy falling off a ship 

yes

> into freezing water and thinking about his 
> shallow girlfriend, then deciding he doesn't care 
> about how superficial she is, 

someting like that, yes

> and then his hallucinating about a beautiful 
> island as he dies of hypothermia?

Not exactly.
He really discovers a true paradise ...
made of waves, music, songs, bananas, etc.

> Memory truly is a funny thing. :)

Happiness is .. bad memory?

BTW, the song seems to be here
http://www.mp3fiesta.com/album_di_paolo_conte_cd1_album89185/
oh my pc-audio is broken again.


From amara at amara.com  Tue Aug  7 19:25:12 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 21:25:12 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
Message-ID: <p06230900c2de6bfffcb3@[23.237.66.13]>


Michael, I think it could be a common phenomena for Latin singers to
sound incredibly happy while they are describing their distraught
hearts. Conte's piece (Onda su Onda) sounds almost like a ragtime.

The Mediterranean doesn't have waves, unfortunately. This might come
the closest, though. ;-)

http://www.amara.com/current/lakeofthewavelets.html


Amara

-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From amara at amara.com  Tue Aug  7 19:28:17 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 21:28:17 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
Message-ID: <p06230901c2de7803cd91@[23.237.66.13]>


>Michael, I think it could be a common phenomena for Latin singers to
>sound incredibly happy while they are describing their distraught
>hearts. Conte's piece (Onda su Onda) sounds almost like a ragtime.

Or if you really want to sing your soul, "Onda su Onda ",
you could  be a dog.

http://www.inklingmagazine.com/inkycircus/detail/francis-ford-coppolas-best-friend/


Amara

-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 19:58:42 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 12:58:42 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
In-Reply-To: <p06230901c2de7803cd91@23.237.66.13>
References: <p06230901c2de7803cd91@23.237.66.13>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708071258p4bf98d59qe4214aee9835f41b@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/7/07, Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
>
> >Michael, I think it could be a common phenomena for Latin singers to
> >sound incredibly happy while they are describing their distraught
> >hearts. Conte's piece (Onda su Onda) sounds almost like a ragtime.

Yes. Randy Newman, Harry Nilsson and a lot of my favorite songwriters
play with paradoxical moods and (possibly-)unreliable narrators.

 It's just a pop song, after all, and interpreting song lyrics is a
time honored tradition.

Sure. I like it just fine, I figured that he's on his way out, he
might as well dream about a nice island where all the girls understand
him, unlike "Sara", etc. It seems to me that if he really fell into
freezing water, the odds are pretty good he's not in drifting range of
a tropical island. And adrift in tropical waters the odds of meeting a
shark go up.

NONE of which should happen to Bee, I hasten to add. :)

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Aug  7 20:38:52 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 21:38:52 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
In-Reply-To: <p06230900c2de6bfffcb3@23.237.66.13>
References: <p06230900c2de6bfffcb3@23.237.66.13>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708071338v54e7b3d6x918ff0a9f72fb19a@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/7/07, Amara Graps wrote:
<snip>
> The Mediterranean doesn't have waves, unfortunately. This might come
> the closest, though. ;-)
>

Hey, that's news to me!   :)
When the wind blows, you get waves.

All those holidays in the Med I had where I imagined waves.

And all these people surfing in the Med:
<http://www.wannasurf.com/spot/Europe/index.html>

Surfing in Italy here:  (with photos)
<http://www.wannasurf.com/spot/Europe/Italy/index.html>

And, of course, St Paul was shipwrecked in a storm on the Med.


BillK


From femmechakra at yahoo.ca  Wed Aug  8 00:34:49 2007
From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 20:34:49 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ExI]  Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
Message-ID: <588797.83390.qm@web30415.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Anna wrote: 
>>What makes you think I don't know how to Google? 

Lee Corbin wrote:
>There was no implication of that in Damien's post. 

Yes, that was clearly an emotional response, my
apology.  I assumed that he thought I was smart enough
as to have already thought to Google to find out if it
was a myth or factual (guess not :) and that there was
something other than the simple obvious question that
I asked.  I have a tendency to drop thoughts without
fully explaining my direction, I am working on that.

>>I was referring to a post I wrote a while back to
>>Amara regarding how she frequently posted noted
>>events within astronomy (my sky-watching). 

>Well, you wrote in "Myth or Factual".

This is probably where my lack of clarity caused
confusion.  

The actual scenario was that a friend drove me home
the other night and I was commenting on the clear
night sky and how clearly you could see the stars.  He
mentioned that he heard that on August 27, 2007, Mars
will be closest to the Earth than X amount of years. 
As I have a passion for sketching stars,
constellations and moon phases (I clearly wouldn't
disrespect Amara and her profession by calling my
hobby anything more than sky watching) and I haven't
had time to enjoy my hobby lately, I figured I would
check it out to see if it was a true claim.  As Damien
mentioned, I discovered it wasn't, it was a myth.  

This is where the confusion comes in: 
I still didn't believe that there wasn't any point to
the comment.  
I figured I would ask Amara as she is clearly the most
knowledgeable in that domain.  I figured she would
respond with something like "No, it's a myth, yes,
there is something going on that particular day or
that on August 28, 2007 there is a lunar eclipse
(which I should have just looked up myself and instead
got lazy) that you might want to check out" (as she
usually gives a head ups when events occur). 

I titled the post myth or factual because in my mind I
was associating the myth with the fact that some
Internet site tells me it's so, which is not a
guarantee that it is a myth to getting the answer from
someone who clearly has the expertise to dispute it. 
The thought that the myth might lead me to learn about
a factual event that will lead me to my actual goal
was the whole point of the title.  

>Damien was merely pointing to a web site that
>debunks claims. I didn't know about that site. If I
>had been you, I would have interpreted that as a
>direct answer to my question of whether this >was
"Myth or Factual". That web site directly calls >this
an urban legend. Hence your friend was wrong. >That's
all. 

I wasn't going to respond because I shouldn't have
posted it in the first place. It really had nothing to
do with Extropy issues and probably bored many.  I
didn't want to leave the post as is, as I clearly seem
to have exhibited harsh behaviour when in fact that
was not my intention in the least.  Au contraire, I
probably got too comfortable.  I'll try and stop
posting those off the wall thoughts as I am clearly
not explaining them properly. 

Thanks for the responses
Anna








      Be smarter than spam. See how smart SpamGuard is at giving junk email the boot with the All-new Yahoo! Mail at http://mrd.mail.yahoo.com/try_beta?.intl=ca



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Wed Aug  8 07:32:59 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 00:32:59 -0700
Subject: [ExI] [Alcor-north] Wall Street Journal on RAH
In-Reply-To: <8d0785d00708072224s65bbb217m388e071e2c580332@mail.gmail.com>
References: <7d79ed890708072022o6b1d1075kbae3beb618ca05ee@mail.gmail.com>
	<8d0785d00708072224s65bbb217m388e071e2c580332@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708080032x2c89afach43c9b059cac55d13@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/7/07, Russell Whitaker <russell.whitaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> My thanks to Michael Butler for passing this along.
>
> R

You're welcome. One small matter: Near the top of the article,
Heinlein's name is bracketed. That's not an attribution of the
preceding text to him, it's an artifact of the way I scraped the
text--it's a placeholder for their illustration (a sort of character
sketch/caricature of Heinlein).


From pjmanney at gmail.com  Wed Aug  8 02:11:33 2007
From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 19:11:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] LA Times: Aliens Kill Weekly World News!
Message-ID: <29666bf30708071911l3b513d21habf2e7ada69f464@mail.gmail.com>

[See my comments below - PJ]

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-op-weeklyworldnews05aug05,0,2793234.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions

>From the Los Angeles Times
Aliens kill Weekly World News!
The funniest, most outlandish headlines from the mock-tabloid's 28-year run.

August 5, 2007

After 28 years, the last print edition of the Weekly World News will
appear Aug. 27. The paper's coverage combined the flat-out strange
(mer-people, space aliens, deities) with a touch of politics (as in
"Mother Nature Endorses Al Gore for President"). It provided endless
fodder for UFO abductees, readers who believe JFK and Elvis are still
alive and every fan of weird. Below, Opinion selects a few of its
favorite Weekly World News headlines.

-- Swati Pandey

Amelia Earhart's Barf Bag Found in South Pacific

One Month After Their Gay Wedding Shocked the World, Saddam and Osama
Adopt Shaved Ape Baby

Garden of Eden Found; Original Apple Recovered

Mental Supermen Lock in ESP Duel, then, Famed Psychic's Head Explodes

Grossed-Out Surgeon Throws Up Inside Patient

12 Members of Congress are Space Aliens

Abraham Lincoln Was a Woman (Shocking Pix Found in White House)

Man Hatches from Egg

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now, I have had my suspicions for some time that these items were
planted by none other than our own Exlers.  I put my suspects' names
in [brackets].

Amelia Earhart's Barf Bag Found in South Pacific -- [Natasha with
technical confirmation from Spike]

One Month After Their Gay Wedding Shocked the World, Saddam and Osama
Adopt Shaved Ape Baby -- [Lee, without a doubt]

Garden of Eden Found; Original Apple Recovered -- [Keith]

Mental Supermen Lock in ESP Duel, then, Famed Psychic's Head Explodes
-- [Has to be Damien!  I've had a vision about it!]

Grossed-Out Surgeon Throws Up Inside Patient -- [It was brain surgery
-- J'accuse Anders!]

12 Members of Congress are Space Aliens -- [Amara, and NASA has the proof.]

Abraham Lincoln Was a Woman (Shocking Pix Found in White House) --
[Frank Forman]

Man Hatches from Egg -- [This story is a vast conspiracy between Lee,
Jef, Stathis, Stefano, Russell, Heartland, Eugen, and everyone else
compelled to repeatedly ask which came first, the man or the egg and
does it determine whether the poor creature has the right to claim the
identity of a man... or a chicken.  And whether the story is actually
true, or just a simulation.  Wait!  That's it!  Neo-Man Hatches from
Matrix-Egg!  That's the REAL story... and it's a government cover-up!]

;-),

PJ


From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug  8 07:14:22 2007
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 00:14:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] wtf? Casimir reversed??
In-Reply-To: <001701c7d8ca$d8f50c40$74911f97@archimede>
Message-ID: <757646.41376.qm@web60514.mail.yahoo.com>


--- scerir <scerir at libero.it> wrote:

> (no idea about these invisibility devices,
> optical Aharonov-Bohm effects, negative
> refraction space-time transformations, etc.) 

Here is some info on invisibility devices:
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/24975

Here are the experiments that demonstrate negative refractive index
meta-materials and faster than c light:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/292/5514/77

They are mostly in Science so even John would be hard pressed to
consider them "bullshit". :-)




Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu

"Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." - Ralph Waldo Emerson


       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Aug  8 03:50:25 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 22:50:25 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>

I've been using this dictation software for several years, mainly 
with good results (after I've spent enough time training the 
allegedly Australian version to make sense of my accent). But every 
now and then the damned thing just can't find all the modifications 
I've made to a given User and tells me that "The vocabulary you have 
chosen 'General-Medium' is incompatible or invalid". So far this 
bullshit has occurred at least 4 times, and even though the user name 
remains visible (and presumably the associated file is still on the 
computer), the vile thing can't find it. (I suspect a recent Restore 
back several weeks under Windows XP might have moved something 
somewhere it can't put its stupid finger on.)

I went looking for help from Nuance, who currently own, sell and 
purportedly support the program, and after going through tedious 
hoops to get a PIN (entering the serial number, all my personal 
details, rights to the life of my first-born, you know how it is), 
the motherfuckers cheerfully told me to send them $9.95 and they'd 
have an email conversation with me about my problem. Since there's no 
proof that they'd bother to find and resolve the problem, I cursed 
angrily and went away. I might give in to this extortionate demand if 
there's no other way to find an answer, but in the meanwhile--

--if anyone here knows a nifty way for me to get my mojo back, please 
let me know, either on the list or off. I've searched for online user 
groups, of course, haven't found anything more recent than about 
1999, all links dead and gone.

Thanks, folks!

Damien Broderick



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Wed Aug  8 03:22:51 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 20:22:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Wall Street Journal on RAH
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708072022o6b1d1075kbae3beb618ca05ee@mail.gmail.com>

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118541376285478493.html

Robert A. Heinlein's Legacy
By TAYLOR DINERMAN
July 26, 2007; Page D7

Science fiction at one time was despised as vulgar and "populist" by
university English departments. Today, it is just another cultural
artifact to be deconstructed, along with cartoons and People magazine
articles. Yet one could argue that science fiction has had a greater
impact on the way we all live than any other literary genre of the
20th century.
[Robert A. Heinlein]

When one looks at the great technological revolutions that have shaped
our lives over the past 50 years, more often than not one finds that
the men and women behind them were avid consumers of what used to be
considered no more than adolescent trash. As Arthur C. Clarke put it:
"Almost every good scientist I know has read science fiction." And the
greatest writer who produced them was Robert Anson Heinlein, born in
Butler, Mo., 100 years ago this month.

The list of technologies, concepts and events that he anticipated in
his fiction is long and varied. In his 1951 juvenile novel, "Between
Planets," he described cellphones. In 1940, even before the Manhattan
Project had begun, he chronicled, in the short story "Blowups Happen,"
the destruction of a graphite-regulated nuclear reactor similar to the
one at Chernobyl. And in his 1961 masterpiece, "Stranger in a Strange
Land," Heinlein -- decades before Ronald and Nancy Reagan moved to the
White House -- introduced the idea that a president's wife might try
to guide his actions based on the advice of her astrologer. One of
Heinlein's best known "inventions" is the water bed, though he never
took out a patent.

Heinlein brought to his work a unique combination of technical savvy
-- based largely on the engineering training he'd received at the U.S.
Naval Academy and a career in the Navy cut short by tuberculosis in
1934 -- and a broad knowledge of history and foreign languages.
Bemoaning the state of U.S. education in the 1970s, he wrote that "the
three-legged stool of understanding is held up by history, languages
and mathematics . . . if you lack any one of them you are just another
ignorant peasant with dung on your boots." Heinlein was certainly no
ignorant peasant.

Though he later became well known for his anticommunism, Heinlein in
the late 1930s indulged in both leftist and isolationist politics. He
sold his first science-fiction story in 1939 for $70, "and there was
never a chance that I would ever again look for honest work." After
Pearl Harbor, to his great disappointment, he was not called back into
uniformed service. He ended the war at the Philadelphia Naval Aircraft
Factory, working with fellow writers L. Sprague de Camp and Isaac
Asimov.

>From the late '40s to the late '50s, Heinlein mostly wrote adventure
stories aimed at boys. Some, such as "Citizen of the Galaxy" (1957)
and "Starman Jones" (1953), examine social and economic status with as
jaundiced an eye as Tom Wolfe's. Others are comedies like the
delightful "The Rolling Stones" (1952), which helped inspire the
famous Star Trek episode "The Trouble With Tribbles."

In 1958, in response to what he saw as a liberal effort to weaken
America's military, he set aside the "Sex and God" book on which he
had been working and wrote "Starship Troopers." This was probably his
most controversial book. In it he imagines a future society in which
the right to vote must be earned by volunteering for service,
including service in the military. In response to claims that the book
glorifies the military, he wrote: "It does indeed. Specifically, the
P.B.I., the Poor Bloody Infantry, the mudfoot who puts his frail body
between his loved home and the war's desolation -- but is rarely
appreciated."

Afterward, he finished the work he had set aside, and it became his
second and possibly greatest masterpiece, "Stranger in a Strange
Land." The book tells the story of a human child raised by Martians
who is brought to Earth and discovers religion, lust and love, as well
as politics, interplanetary diplomacy, legal shenanigans and life in a
traveling carnival. The novel introduced the word "grok" into the
vocabulary of the 1960s counterculture and seduced many of its members
into reading some of Heinlein's other works -- writings that, in some
cases, helped them to rethink the assumptions of hippiedom.

His next book was "Glory Road," another novel on the subject of duty,
heroism and love. The first chapter not only sets up the story but
includes one of the most eloquent and witty denunciations of military
conscription ever written. In "Glory Road," his protagonist is
magically transported from Earth, where he had been fighting
"pragmatic Marxists in the jungle," to a fantasy universe where, armed
only with sword and bow, he would rescue a priceless treasure. His
guide and mentor is a woman of "ageless perfect beauty" who later
turns out to be the Empress of the Twenty Universes. She explains to
the hero that "so far as I know, your culture is the only
semicivilized one in which love is not recognized as the highest art
and given the serious study it deserves."

Heinlein's political beliefs were moving more and more toward the
libertarian side of the spectrum. He supported Barry Goldwater in
1964, and in 1966 he published what many considered his greatest book,
"The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress," the tale of how penal colonists and
their descendants on the Moon successfully revolt against their
Earthly masters. The core of this book, which keeps it near the top of
the libertarians' reading lists, is the speech by an old professor,
Bernardo de la Paz, to the rebels' constitutional convention: "...like
fire and fusion, government is a dangerous servant and a terrible
master. You now have your freedom -- if you can keep it. But do
remember that you can lose this freedom more quickly to yourselves
than to any other tyrant."

The professor explains: "The power to tax, once conceded, has no
limits; it contains until it destroys. I was not joking when I told
them to dig into their own pouches. It may not be possible to do away
with government -- sometimes I think that it is an inescapable disease
of human beings. But it may be possible to keep it small and starved
and inoffensive -- and can you think of a better way than by requiring
the governors themselves to pay the costs of their antisocial hobby."
As they say on the Moon, "TANSTAAFL!": "There Ain't No Such Thing as a
Free Lunch!"

Heinlein's later novels were overshadowed by his failing health, and
he often wrote on medical themes such as brain transplants and
cloning. He was a strong supporter of blood drives and a big supporter
of NASA's medical research projects. In the '70s, in a speech to the
midshipmen at the Naval Academy, he said he thought that "patriotism
has lost its grip on a large percentage of our population. . . . But
there is no way to force patriotism on anyone. Passing a law will not
create it, nor can we buy it by appropriating so many billions of
dollars."

Robert A. Heinlein, who died in 1988, lived a life inspired by two
great loves. One was America and its promise of freedom. As one of his
characters put it: "Your country has a system free enough to let
heroes work at their trade. It should last a long time -- unless its
looseness is destroyed from the inside." And he loved and admired
women -- not just his wife, Virginia, who provided the model for the
many strong-minded and highly competent females who populate his
stories, but all of womankind. "Some people disparage the female form
divine, sex is too good for them; they should have been oysters."

In another hundred years, it will be interesting to see if the
nuclear-powered spaceships and other technological marvels he
predicted are with us. But nothing in his legacy will be more
important than the spirit of liberty he championed and his belief that
"this hairless embryo with the aching oversized brain case and the
opposable thumb, this animal barely up from the apes will endure. Will
endure and spread out to the stars and beyond, carrying with him his
honesty and his insatiable curiosity, his unlimited courage and his
noble essential decency."

Mr. Dinerman writes a weekly column for the Space Review.


-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Thu Aug  9 01:25:12 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 18:25:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures- Your
	picturesarefor sale here!
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com><7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com><00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano><017401c7d88e$8cb6bbd0$0200a8c0@Nano><023501c7d897$b5649e40$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano>
Message-ID: <01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>

  
Yesterday he said he was taking them down and it did look like the front pages were gone (the indices) but the individual images were still on the server. Today the website asked for a log in, so I signed up for a free account just to check the status. When I put in the individual image url's it now says "permission denied". 
I don't see the index galleries for the photos but he does have three videos up (although they don't appear to be for sale). One called "nanotechnology: the age of convergence", the second has a copyright of '2007 A. Tla' (there's more letters but I can't see it under the Youtube logo in the corner), now the third video, "nanoworld"  appears to be used in a similar fashion as the images. If you can't see these videos at fotki http://video.fotki.com/futurism/ with out a log in (and you don't want to) you won't be able to see the first two, but you can see the third at his account at youtube, it's a compilation of other people's nanotech pictures with out credits made into a video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rf0PljUVE-I

This last youtube video while not for sale, may very well have copyright infringements, although none of mine, so I'll leave that up to others. Youtube complaint: http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?answer=55774&topic=10554

So that's that, hopefully! 


Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/
Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
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/20070808/fbd1b92d/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Thu Aug  9 06:22:34 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 08:22:34 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
Message-ID: <p06230900c2e06259b593@[23.237.66.13]>

BillK
>Hey, that's news to me!   :)
>When the wind blows, you get waves.

>All those holidays in the Med I had where I imagined waves.

BillK:
Probably I'm unfair in scaling waves to Haleiwa and Waimea, but that's
the environment I grew up. People don't travel to Italy to tube the
waves because Mediterranean (at least the Italian) waves are
inconsistent and often angle-high or nonexistent. I think one can have
more fun windsurfing/sailboarding, as the conditions are much more
suitable for that.

Amara

-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From pgptag at gmail.com  Thu Aug  9 07:37:48 2007
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:37:48 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
In-Reply-To: <p06230900c2e06259b593@23.237.66.13>
References: <p06230900c2e06259b593@23.237.66.13>
Message-ID: <470a3c520708090037y57f7f4ci9df900962626c37a@mail.gmail.com>

Ahh, I really wish I were born in California or Hawaii. I would
certainly have started surfing at 3, (but perhaps I would have done
nothing else but surfing all my life).

Instead, I tried to learn surfing when I was almost 30, the first time
I went to California. The friends who tried to teach me said that I
had a very good feel for waves (that, you can learn also as a child on
Mediterranean beaches when the sea is rough), but was far too old to
learn how to do it properly. What i can do, and enjoy very much, is
the kind of surfing you do laying on the table.

There are no surfing beaches in Italy. The best places in Europe are:
Biarritz and Hossegor on the French Atlantic coast
Mundaka and many places on the Spanish basque coast
Some places like Peniche on the Portuguese Atlantic coast

On 8/9/07, Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:
> BillK
> >Hey, that's news to me!   :)
> >When the wind blows, you get waves.
>
> >All those holidays in the Med I had where I imagined waves.
>
> BillK:
> Probably I'm unfair in scaling waves to Haleiwa and Waimea, but that's
> the environment I grew up. People don't travel to Italy to tube the
> waves because Mediterranean (at least the Italian) waves are
> inconsistent and often angle-high or nonexistent. I think one can have
> more fun windsurfing/sailboarding, as the conditions are much more
> suitable for that.
>
> Amara
>
> --
>
> Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
> Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
> INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Aug  9 08:59:47 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:59:47 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520708090037y57f7f4ci9df900962626c37a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <p06230900c2e06259b593@23.237.66.13>
	<470a3c520708090037y57f7f4ci9df900962626c37a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708090159k53053440t7dde6b0f05af8cdf@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/9/07, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 wrote:
<snip>
> There are no surfing beaches in Italy. The best places in Europe are:
> Biarritz and Hossegor on the French Atlantic coast
> Mundaka and many places on the Spanish basque coast
> Some places like Peniche on the Portuguese Atlantic coast
>


Hi

I'm not a surfer, but the surfing websites say you can surf in Italy.
Only average quality waves, though. But if you are not experienced, I
doubt that you want the 15 to 20 foot high waves.  :)

Apparently, one of the best sites is 50 kms north of Rome in the Banzai area.

See photos here:
<http://www.wannasurf.com/spot/Europe/Italy/Mainland/banzai/photo/index.html?wdaction=lib.WDPagePhoto.show&page=4>

Get your board out of the cupboard!


BillK


From sm at vreedom.com  Thu Aug  9 09:01:37 2007
From: sm at vreedom.com (Stephan Magnus)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 10:01:37 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Physics and Searching for the Perfect Wave
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520708090037y57f7f4ci9df900962626c37a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <PNENJAKEPDGILBHELFBHKEIFDDAA.sm@vreedom.com>

>Some places like Peniche on the Portuguese Atlantic coast

The whole westcoast of the Portuguese Algarve like Carrapateira, 15 min from
here.
Have a look:

http://beachwizard.com/beach.asp?country=Portugal&beachid=4090
http://magicseaweed.com/Carrapateira-Surf-Report/130/
http://www.algarve-property-beach-house.com/carrapateira-beach-pictures.htm

But windsurfing has strong competition now in kite-surfing because of the
strong wind here.


Stephan Magnus
Consulting und Training

Sitio Pincho, 8600-090 Bensafrim, Portugal
Telefon: 00351-282969161
Fax: 00351-282969162
Mail sm at vreedom.com
http://www.vreedom.com

Mein Podcast "Das Abenteuer Zukunft"

Moderator Simulation & Gaming auf XING







From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Thu Aug  9 10:45:05 2007
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 06:45:05 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures- Your
 picturesarefor sale here!
In-Reply-To: <01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com><7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com><f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com><00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano><017401c7d88e$8cb6bbd0$0200a8c0@Nano><023501c7d897$b5649e40$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>
Message-ID: <38552.72.236.103.175.1186656305.squirrel@main.nc.us>


> This last youtube video while not for sale, may very well have copyright
> infringements, although none of mine, so I'll leave that up to others. Youtube
> complaint:
> http://www.google.com/support/youtube/bin/answer.py?answer=55774&topic=10554
>
> So that's that, hopefully!
>

Gina, this whole thing is so depressing. You'd think a person might have more class
than to try such thievery but I guess not.  Glad you got your stuff down. Your stuff
is for *you* to sell or to give away, not somebody else without your blessing.

Regards,
MB



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Aug  9 11:38:54 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 13:38:54 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures- Your
	picturesarefor sale here!
In-Reply-To: <38552.72.236.103.175.1186656305.squirrel@main.nc.us>
References: <039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<38552.72.236.103.175.1186656305.squirrel@main.nc.us>
Message-ID: <20070809113854.GL20274@leitl.org>

On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:45:05AM -0400, MB wrote:

> Gina, this whole thing is so depressing. You'd think a person might have more class
> than to try such thievery but I guess not.  Glad you got your stuff down. Your stuff

Despres is probably legally insane. You don't expect reasonable behavior
from full-blown nutcases, do you?

> is for *you* to sell or to give away, not somebody else without your blessing.

Rules are only for small, nice people.

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE


From natasha at natasha.cc  Thu Aug  9 16:06:55 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 11:06:55 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Pirated nano/cryo artwork and pictures-
 Your	picturesarefor sale here!
In-Reply-To: <01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>
References: <8d71341e0708060432y690f6200lfa3f7a711b3858b1@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708060835m4713e39dv95da84229038d99f@mail.gmail.com>
	<7d79ed890708060946t6c1fd929pf2ca6eefa75b68fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<f7bfe5740708061141s643f13ebm5867f029d31d42c8@mail.gmail.com>
	<00fc01c7d888$097a9990$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<017401c7d88e$8cb6bbd0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<023501c7d897$b5649e40$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>
Message-ID: <200708091607.l79G70l0003471@ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com>

At 08:25 PM 8/8/2007, Gina wrote:
>
>Yesterday he said he was taking them down and it did look like the 
>front pages were gone (the indices) but the individual images were 
>still on the server.

Many images from the nano showing at 
http://www.transhumanist.biz/showing.htm were used and a personal 
picture of me on his website.  The YouTube clip is so unprofessional 
that it is a joke.  There is no storyboard, no direction, and it is 
out of focus.  It is merely a slide show.

Best,
Natasha


<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070809/8e5cab88/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Thu Aug  9 16:18:17 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 11:18:17 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Column:  "Nanotechnology Now"
Message-ID: <200708091618.l79GIOPR012669@ms-smtp-01.texas.rr.com>


My current column's article at "Nanotechnology Now" is now up if 
anyone would like to read it.

http://www.nanotech-now.com/columns/?article=090

Best,
Natasha


<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070809/3dab6328/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Thu Aug  9 16:42:26 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Samantha=A0_Atkins?=)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 09:42:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com>

Which program is this?  I did not see it below.  Since it is Nuance I  
presume Dragon Naturally Speaking.  Is there a similar program that  
has a more vibrant and up-to-date user community?  Might be time to  
switch if so.

- samantha

On Aug 7, 2007, at 8:50 PM, Damien Broderick wrote:

> I've been using this dictation software for several years, mainly
> with good results (after I've spent enough time training the
> allegedly Australian version to make sense of my accent). But every
> now and then the damned thing just can't find all the modifications
> I've made to a given User and tells me that "The vocabulary you have
> chosen 'General-Medium' is incompatible or invalid". So far this
> bullshit has occurred at least 4 times, and even though the user name
> remains visible (and presumably the associated file is still on the
> computer), the vile thing can't find it. (I suspect a recent Restore
> back several weeks under Windows XP might have moved something
> somewhere it can't put its stupid finger on.)
>
> I went looking for help from Nuance, who currently own, sell and
> purportedly support the program, and after going through tedious
> hoops to get a PIN (entering the serial number, all my personal
> details, rights to the life of my first-born, you know how it is),
> the motherfuckers cheerfully told me to send them $9.95 and they'd
> have an email conversation with me about my problem. Since there's no
> proof that they'd bother to find and resolve the problem, I cursed
> angrily and went away. I might give in to this extortionate demand if
> there's no other way to find an answer, but in the meanwhile--
>
> --if anyone here knows a nifty way for me to get my mojo back, please
> let me know, either on the list or off. I've searched for online user
> groups, of course, haven't found anything more recent than about
> 1999, all links dead and gone.
>
> Thanks, folks!
>
> Damien Broderick
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Aug  9 17:13:36 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 12:13:36 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
In-Reply-To: <C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>
	<C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070809120209.024d59b8@satx.rr.com>

At 09:42 AM 8/9/2007 -0700, samantha wrote:

>Which program is this?  I did not see it below.  Since it is Nuance I
>presume Dragon Naturally Speaking.

Erm, look above rather than below. The subject line is "Help 
needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8"...

I'm happy to report that several kindly extropes contacted me offlist 
with helpful hints and pointers. Seems clear that the damned thing 
got munged whenever I did a System Restore, something I'd have 
noticed earlier if I'd tried to use the program immediately after the restore.

>  Is there a similar program that
>has a more vibrant and up-to-date user community?  Might be time to
>switch if so.

I gather that Vista has speech recognition bundled.# If so, anyone 
had any luck with it? I have to say that after training it I found 
DNS quite accurate--part of the training being of *me*, as the 
program shapes my enunciation toward crisper clarity.

[# http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/06/01/speechinWindowsVista/ ]

I once had the unnerving but entertaining experience, halfway through 
a book, of saying in conversation to my wife something like, "Do you 
think we'll be able to get there in time question mark."

Damien Broderick 



From scerir at libero.it  Thu Aug  9 19:51:25 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:51:25 +0200
Subject: [ExI]  Fermi paradox, a solution
References: <039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano><01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano><38552.72.236.103.175.1186656305.squirrel@main.nc.us>
	<20070809113854.GL20274@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <000301c7dabe$abb5d390$35901f97@archimede>

a solution (not the solution)
http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_9.html#miller

also, on http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_6.html 
-Gerald Holton on longevity
-Carlo Rovelli on 'too soon'
-Leonard Susskind on landscape (of possibilities)
-Brian Greene contra a landscape (of possibilities)
-Lee Smolin on Darwinist math & meta-laws 


From dagonweb at gmail.com  Thu Aug  9 21:40:42 2007
From: dagonweb at gmail.com (Dagon Gmail)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 23:40:42 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi paradox, a solution
In-Reply-To: <000301c7dabe$abb5d390$35901f97@archimede>
References: <039401c7d8a4$e46e79b0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<01c701c7da24$2ab373f0$0200a8c0@Nano>
	<38552.72.236.103.175.1186656305.squirrel@main.nc.us>
	<20070809113854.GL20274@leitl.org>
	<000301c7dabe$abb5d390$35901f97@archimede>
Message-ID: <bf3acbfc0708091440k482acb91y5a331e54d76d7492@mail.gmail.com>

Old story yet not a very good solution. Imagine this experiment:
you kidnap ten million humans, somewhere 2500 years ago
from all over the world, in consistent batches of 10.000 of
the same ethnic and cultural background. Then you'd drop them
with plants and animals on suitable terrestrial worlds, scattered
over the galaxy, and let them consolidate their planet.

Some colonies would fail, for a variety of reasons. Yet from a
sampling of a 1000 colonies quite a few would stumble on to an
industrial civilization, probably within 10.000 years. If you'd give
a small number of members a comparably higher education,
chances would shoot up sharply.

You can easily visualise batches of colonies with a starting
technology of, say, the late industrial-age revolution, established on
hospitable worlds and most of those would move into varied
forms of information age, internet, consumer society and
consequently the consumerist trap you suppose.

How many of the 1000 colonies audited would fail? I think more
than half would stumble through, one way or another, especially
if you wait 10.000, 20.000 years.


From neilh at caltech.edu  Fri Aug 10 01:41:41 2007
From: neilh at caltech.edu (Neil Halelamien)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 18:41:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Blogger Finds Y2K Bug in NASA Climate Data
Message-ID: <e88b73ce0708091841u6294604vaca95bd4a2eaac57@mail.gmail.com>

Hm... this is interesting. I'm not quite sure what to make of it yet:

http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm

Years of bad data corrected; 1998 no longer the warmest year on record
... While
inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange
discontinuity, or "jump" in many locations, all occurring around the time of
January, 2000.

These graphs were created by NASA's Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to
fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on
climate change). Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used
to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result
appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.

McKintyre notified the pair of the bug; Ruedy
replied<http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1868>and acknowledged the
problem as an "oversight" that would be fixed in the
next data refresh.

NASA has now silently released corrected
figures<http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.D.txt>,
and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now
1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second
place.  1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now *all
occur before World War II*.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070809/7633df07/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Aug 10 04:09:32 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 23:09:32 -0500
Subject: [ExI] evo emo
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070809230546.021b4dc8@satx.rr.com>

Some of you might find some small entertainment in posting a comment 
on Ron Cote's blithering:

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1527

No requirement to sign or buy anything first...



From naogrist at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 10 09:50:19 2007
From: naogrist at yahoo.com (Daniel Wolfson)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 02:50:19 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Fermi paradox, a solution
In-Reply-To: <bf3acbfc0708091440k482acb91y5a331e54d76d7492@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <567912.1529.qm@web35305.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I would imagine that far more than half would fail.
Largely in the first few years. I'm not sure how a
society that small could support the infrastructure
for late industrial revolution technology, and hunter
gatherer skills are highly lacking in this day and
age. I'd hope your small group(s) of highly educated
people is made up predominantly of archaeologists who
know important skills like flint knapping, how to make
and wield a spear thrower, and how to get the most out
of an animal carcass.


--- Dagon Gmail <dagonweb at gmail.com> wrote:

> Old story yet not a very good solution. Imagine this
> experiment:
> you kidnap ten million humans, somewhere 2500 years
> ago
> from all over the world, in consistent batches of
> 10.000 of
> the same ethnic and cultural background. Then you'd
> drop them
> with plants and animals on suitable terrestrial
> worlds, scattered
> over the galaxy, and let them consolidate their
> planet.
> 
> Some colonies would fail, for a variety of reasons.
> Yet from a
> sampling of a 1000 colonies quite a few would
> stumble on to an
> industrial civilization, probably within 10.000
> years. If you'd give
> a small number of members a comparably higher
> education,
> chances would shoot up sharply.
> 
> You can easily visualise batches of colonies with a
> starting
> technology of, say, the late industrial-age
> revolution, established on
> hospitable worlds and most of those would move into
> varied
> forms of information age, internet, consumer society
> and
> consequently the consumerist trap you suppose.
> 
> How many of the 1000 colonies audited would fail? I
> think more
> than half would stumble through, one way or another,
> especially
> if you wait 10.000, 20.000 years.
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> 



       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sick sense of humor? Visit Yahoo! TV's 
Comedy with an Edge to see what's on, when. 
http://tv.yahoo.com/collections/222


From desertpaths2003 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 10 16:05:38 2007
From: desertpaths2003 at yahoo.com (John)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:05:38 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Column:  "Nanotechnology Now"
In-Reply-To: <200708091618.l79GIOPR012669@ms-smtp-01.texas.rr.com>
Message-ID: <112968.8338.qm@web35610.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

        From Natasha Vita-More's article:
  Lastly both Hayles and Fukuyama do not focus on nanomedicine, which is an essential constituent in bringing about a posthuman state of being. And neither considers the yearning of humans today who want to live longer than 70 in a healthy, vital body and with a healthy, vital mind and as these desires relate to the concept of continued existence, which is pivotal to the future human.

There will be more theories on what the posthuman could be but they will have to be a lot more focused on the needs of humanity rather than a metaphorical assumption or a slap in the face of human dignity. And they will have to research, understand and include the emergent technologies that are crucial in bringing about the type of changes that can and will affect all of humanity in order to bring about a future human, continued existence, and a better quality of life for all (which no doubt will include nanotechnology).
  >
   
  This article by Natasha caused the Proactionary Principle to come to mind for me as what we need to deal with rapidly developing technologies as compared to the timid and potentially damaging Precautionary Principle.  
   
  The human societal desire for economic and military power and the natural competitiveness of nation-states and corporations will greatly aid our cause.  Fukuyama and others may fume and sermonize all they want but these ancient drives will without doubt in my mind propel forward the inevitable progress of AI, nanotech and biotechnology.  Those nations which for whatever reason slow or stop their development of these technologies will find themselves left in the dust of the nations that chose to wholeheartedly pour their R & D resources into their advancement.  In the "holy name" of national security we will see nations plunge forward to stay competitive and remain/become a force to be reckoned with.
   
  Human competitiveness and tribalism just might come to our rescue.  I'm very glad we don't have a docile one world government with Fukuyama and other like-minded people running things.  :  )  
   
  John Grigg   
                          Sponsor: 
   -->     
            

         

                                                                                                         





 

 



              

Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:  
My current column's article at "Nanotechnology Now" is now up if anyone would like to read it.

http://www.nanotech-now.com/columns/?article=090

Best,
Natasha

      
   Natasha Vita-More   
   PhD Candidate, Planetary Collegium   
   Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, Communications and Electronics,   
   University of Plymouth, England   
   Transhumanist Arts & Culture   
   Extropy Institute

  
   If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


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


       
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally,  mobile search that gives answers, not web links. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070810/ba3f7c2f/attachment.html>

From pgptag at gmail.com  Fri Aug 10 17:49:21 2007
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:49:21 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Life 2.0: augmentationists in Second Life and beyond
Message-ID: <470a3c520708101049x3a0144c4wa3357faf00fcac27@mail.gmail.com>

I have written a little essay about the strong ongoing debate between
"Augmentationists" and "Immersionists" in Second Life, where I
establish some analogies with the coming, and stronger, debate over
transhumanism and human enhancement.

http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/life_20_augmentationists_in_second_life_and_beyond/


From benboc at lineone.net  Fri Aug 10 18:37:31 2007
From: benboc at lineone.net (ben)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:37:31 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Myth or Factual for Aug 27?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.251.1186614031.10213.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.251.1186614031.10213.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <46BCB06B.4060103@lineone.net>

Anna Taylor <femmechakra at yahoo.ca> wrote:

> ... I shouldn't have posted it in the first place. It really had
> nothing to do with Extropy issues and probably bored many. ...


Hah. I wouldn't worry about that.
You're hardly the only one to post here on 'non-extropic' topics (i used 
to refer to this as the "american politics list", and astronomy, maths, 
metaphysics, superstition, obscure puzzles, jokes, and plain daftness 
show up regularly. Either you just shrug and accept it, or you broaden 
your definition of 'extropy' to include these things).

ben z


From benboc at lineone.net  Fri Aug 10 18:43:19 2007
From: benboc at lineone.net (ben)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:43:19 +0100
Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 47, Issue 4
In-Reply-To: <mailman.251.1186614031.10213.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.251.1186614031.10213.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <46BCB1C7.4060809@lineone.net>

[ExI]  Myth or Factual for Aug 27?

Anna Taylor <femmechakra at yahoo.ca> wrote:

>> ... I shouldn't have posted it in the first place. It really had 
>> nothing to do with Extropy issues and probably bored many. ...
> 
> 
> Hah. I wouldn't worry about that. You're hardly the only one to post
> here on 'non-extropic' topics (i used to refer to this as the 
> "american politics list", and astronomy, maths, metaphysics, 
> superstition, obscure puzzles, jokes, and plain daftness show up
> regularly. Either you just shrug and accept it, or you broaden your
> definition of 'extropy' to include these things).


Oh, and art. I forgot to mention art.
Maybe it's just me, but i never understood the concept of 
'transhumanist/extropian art'. I mean, art is art. It can have a 
subject, it can feature ideas, but it can't be 'x art', ffs. It's all art.

ben z


From allicat138 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 10 19:22:29 2007
From: allicat138 at yahoo.com (alicia hamilton)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
Message-ID: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories and the human condition, both past and present. Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?
       
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally,  mobile search that gives answers, not web links. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070810/310811a9/attachment.html>

From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 10 02:23:56 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 19:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Blogger Finds Y2K Bug in NASA Climate Data
In-Reply-To: <e88b73ce0708091841u6294604vaca95bd4a2eaac57@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <723449.88649.qm@web45207.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

What to make of this? was it a researcher trying to grab a headline?
 http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/wc042398.htm






Years of bad data corrected; 1998 no longer the warmest year on record ... While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or "jump" in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000.  

 These graphs were created by NASA's Reto Ruedy and James Hansen (who shot to fame when he accused the administration of trying to censor his views on climate change). Hansen refused to provide McKintyre with the algorithm used to generate graph data, so McKintyre reverse-engineered it. The result appeared to be a Y2K bug in the handling of the raw data.

McKintyre notified the pair of the bug; Ruedy replied and acknowledged the problem as an "oversight" that would be fixed in the next data refresh. 

 NASA has now silently released corrected figures, and the changes are truly astounding. The warmest year on record is now 1934. 1998 (long trumpeted by the media as record-breaking) moves to second place.  1921 takes third. In fact, 5 of the 10 warmest years on record now all occur before World War II. 
 _______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


       
---------------------------------
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles.
Visit the Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070809/6c2c6a8d/attachment.html>

From jef at jefallbright.net  Fri Aug 10 20:31:06 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:31:06 -0700
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
In-Reply-To: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708101331jb840c61g34bc1022aacffd52@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/10/07, alicia hamilton <allicat138 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in
> over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been
> conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I
> guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read
> everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories
> and the human condition, both past and present.

Welcome Alicia!  Your interests appear to be in excellent alignment
with the extropy list.

> Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a
> sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?

Well, can you name some projects that you've been passionate about in
the past?  Maybe we can help you to apply an extropian perspective.

My own key interest here is the evolution of increasingly effective
systems of cooperation.

- Jef


From kanzure at gmail.com  Fri Aug 10 20:36:34 2007
From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:36:34 -0500
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
In-Reply-To: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200708101536.34694.kanzure@gmail.com>

On Friday 10 August 2007 14:22, alicia hamilton wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the
> recent posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon
> this group during an internet search that I have been
> conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways
> to better myself and, well I guess... the world. I used to
> exceed in school and positively loved college. I read
> everything on could get my hands on pertaining to
> religions, science, physics, theories and the human
> condition, both past and present. Now, as a working single
> mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking
> for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?

Two humble suggestions:

1) Read widely (and madly?). I usually do this over the 
internet to help hunt down like minded individuals.

2) Journaling and 'minutes' of your thoughts, activities, 
events. I have even begun the construction of my own device 
to keep track of my (flood of) thoughts through my days- a 
portable keyboard hooked up to an eight gigabyte flash card. 
This helps me keep track of what's going on and remembering 
the collective output of my brain from day to day, week to 
week, etc. to etc.

I look forward to seeing what the extropians have to say on 
this subject. Welcome to the list.

http://www.extropy.org/faq.htm

And a reading list I found with a quick search:
http://www.etext.org/Politics/Extropy.Institute/johnson.091792 

- Bryan

http://heybryan.org/


From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Fri Aug 10 22:01:59 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:01:59 -0700
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
References: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <006601c7db9a$2df69610$0200a8c0@Nano>

Welcome to the group Alicia we are glad to have you here. 


Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/
Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: alicia hamilton 
  To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
  Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 12:22 PM
  Subject: [ExI] (no subject)


  Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories and the human condition, both past and present. Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. 


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


  _______________________________________________
  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/20070810/5eafd4d6/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Sat Aug 11 08:59:31 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:59:31 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070809120209.024d59b8@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>
	<C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070809120209.024d59b8@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708110159s7f07ce9akb9350d1aebc053b0@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/9/07, Damien Broderick wrote:
<snip>
> I gather that Vista has speech recognition bundled.# If so, anyone
> had any luck with it? I have to say that after training it I found
> DNS quite accurate--part of the training being of *me*, as the
> program shapes my enunciation toward crisper clarity.
>

NY Times review says Dragon Naturally Speaking v9 is better.
<http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/telling-your-computer-what-to-do/>

LifeHacker seems to agree.
<http://lifehacker.com/software/speech-recognition/using-windows-vista-speech-recognition-240730.php>

The user comments below both articles are interesting to read also.

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

Footnote:
Please don't think about upgrading to Vista.  You will enter a world
of computer pain. The web is full of reports about Vista problems.

This new article gives a good overall summary.
<http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/broken_windows.html>

Quotes:
The Vista experience is broken. It's long past time to fix it.
Not since Windows ME or Mac OS X 10.0 have I observed a more troubled
consumer operating system.
etc.

BillK


From scerir at libero.it  Sat Aug 11 16:16:57 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:16:57 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com><C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com><7.0.1.0.2.20070809120209.024d59b8@satx.rr.com>
	<ee50357e0708110159s7f07ce9akb9350d1aebc053b0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002601c7dc33$0aa38580$b0bb1f97@archimede>

> NY Times review says Dragon Naturally Speaking v9 is better.
>
<http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/telling-your-computer-what-to-do/
>

Dragon improves speech-recognition software - USATODAY.com
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2007-08-08-dragon-software
_N.htm



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sat Aug 11 17:08:37 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:08:37 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
In-Reply-To: <002601c7dc33$0aa38580$b0bb1f97@archimede>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>
	<C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070809120209.024d59b8@satx.rr.com>
	<ee50357e0708110159s7f07ce9akb9350d1aebc053b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<002601c7dc33$0aa38580$b0bb1f97@archimede>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070811120303.0224be40@satx.rr.com>

At 06:16 PM 8/11/2007 +0200, Serafino wrote:

>Dragon improves speech-recognition software - USATODAY.com
><http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2007-08-08-dragon-software_N.htm>

Hmm--a link or 2 took me to

<https://www.knowbrainer.com/storefront/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=55>

where an upgrade from 8 to 9 can be had for $50 after rebate.

My problem is not with dictating, but with User profiles becoming 
inaccessible after I ran Win System Restore. As BillK and others 
confirmed, this is known to kill something crucial, and recovering is 
a long and winding road. Since in my experience it's inevitable that 
sometime I *will* need to Restore again, this is dire news. I don't 
get the impression that DNS 9 or 9.5 has fixed this. Sigh.

Damien Broderick



From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 11 21:29:50 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 14:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
In-Reply-To: <f7bfe5740708101331jb840c61g34bc1022aacffd52@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <151974.18962.qm@web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Alicia, many have started their interest in that which is future-oriented by reading about and practicing life extension; but caveat emptor, read the signature at the bottom.

 On 8/10/07, alicia hamilton  wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in
> over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been
> conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I
> guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read
> everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories
> and the human condition, both past and present.

       
---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070811/81aad0bb/attachment.html>

From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 12 00:11:20 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:11:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] to paraphrase Mark Twain
Message-ID: <293730.22030.qm@web45208.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>




to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented books are like diet tomes-- you might die of a misprint

       
---------------------------------
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070811/e32078d4/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Aug 12 06:35:33 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 01:35:33 -0500
Subject: [ExI] OUTSIDE THE GATES OF SCIENCE
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070812013223.0228b298@satx.rr.com>

I see that Publisher's Weekly has run a review on 
my book about psi. I'm quite happy with their 
assessment. Any of the (other) skeptics here had 
a chance to read it yet? (Of course, I do regard 
myself as a skeptic, even if a persuaded one in this case.)

Damien Broderick

============
Editorial Reviews
 From Publishers Weekly
Broderick, best known as a science-fiction 
writer, returns to nonfiction (after 2001's The 
Spike) to evaluate various research programs 
investigating "psi phenomena." Divided into two 
branches, psi phenomena cover anomalous 
cognition, which includes telepathy, remote 
viewing and other forms of "non-material" 
communication; and anomalous perturbation, 
psi-mediated action or psycho-kinetics. Broderick 
remains analytical and objective throughout, 
reviewing the work of such laboratory programs as 
the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research 
group, the Science Applications Incorporated 
Corporation and the CIA-backed Stargate; 
recounting their experiments' designs, methods 
and procedures, Broderick then goes on to examine 
rigorously the resulting data. He concludes that 
while the evidence for various kinds of psi 
phenomena is strong, there are unknown (and 
possibly unknowable) factors that make classical, 
reductionist methods of testing it unpredictable 
and irreproducible (the reason, he suspects, that 
the CIA gave up on such research in 1995). 
Gratifyingly, Broderick connects the search for 
psi phenomena to larger philosophical questions 
while remaining skeptical and delightfully rational throughout.
Copyright ? Reed Business Information, a division 
of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.




From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Sun Aug 12 07:43:36 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 00:43:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>

Is this old news?

Stanford researchers find culprit in aging muscles that heal poorly

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/sumc-srf080607.php

-- 
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


From dharris234 at mindspring.com  Sun Aug 12 02:59:49 2007
From: dharris234 at mindspring.com (David C. Harris)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 19:59:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <46BE77A5.2040606@mindspring.com>

Executive summary:  young blood contains something that makes at least 
some tissues act younger.


I don't know for sure if it's old news (see Jeff's message below), but I 
didn't know this observation, even though I have graduate training in 
biochemistry/molecular biology/health services administration, and 
follow stem cell issues relevant to my investment in Geron.

Did others recognize the implications of this pair of quotes?:

> "The work was done with live mice whose circulatory systems were 
> joined, and in lab dishes with young cells immersed in serum from old 
> blood."
and
> "... confirmed their earlier research showing that the ability of 
> muscle stem cells to regenerate tissue depends on the age of the 
> cells' environment (including the age of the blood supplying the 
> tissue), not the age of the stem cell.
>
> Although Rando's research focused on the repair of acute trauma to 
> muscles, he suspects that the same sort of problem arises on a lesser 
> scale in repairing damage that results from the normal wear and tear 
> of aging."
>
As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests 
vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than 
DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young 
blood!    ;-) 

Putting on my health care hat (I'm trained as a biochemist and health 
administrator) to say it directly, those two quotes suggest that aging 
might be slowed by getting transfusions of young blood (or a factor that 
might be extracted or synthesized by genetic engineering methods), 
perhaps available at a high price NOW.  The FDA couldn't stop an 
underground trade in young blood. 

As a research endeavor, I wonder if the blood bank records allow one to 
track the age of blood donors, and the subsequent speed of recovery of 
transfusion recipients.

Obviously we could do some original work with purebred mice (so no 
problem of transfusion rejection) of various ages.  And I wonder if 
umbilical cord blood, which is rarely harvested now, might have enhanced 
effect per volume.

In the general search for regeneration and enhanced longevity, this 
discovery suggests a flood of productive searches for factors that 
activate regeneration of human tissues.  Blood is easy to isolate and 
infuse.  And as a matter of policy, I think it's time to allow the open 
and well regulated sale of blood, and later other tissues and organs.  
With a radio frequency ID (RFID) chip going along with each 
well-characterized blood unit, healthy donors can ask for higher 
payments, and the "blood shortages" will disappear as supply comes up to 
meet demand.

  - David Harris, Palo Alto, California.

Jeff Davis wrote:
> Is this old news?
>
> Stanford researchers find culprit in aging muscles that heal poorly
>
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/sumc-srf080607.php
>
>   



From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Aug 12 10:19:52 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 11:19:52 +0100
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <46BE77A5.2040606@mindspring.com>
References: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>
	<46BE77A5.2040606@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708120319q4ed93e6ds76a39f28390f6f7e@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/12/07, David C. Harris wrote:
> As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests
> vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than
> DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young
> blood!    ;-)
>
> Putting on my health care hat (I'm trained as a biochemist and health
> administrator) to say it directly, those two quotes suggest that aging
> might be slowed by getting transfusions of young blood (or a factor that
> might be extracted or synthesized by genetic engineering methods),
> perhaps available at a high price NOW.  The FDA couldn't stop an
> underground trade in young blood.
>


That's a great marketing image!

Transhumanists as withered old vampires draining the blood of young virgins.

We'll be swamped with join applications.

Can't you bring sex into it somewhere as well?

BillK   ;)


From dharris234 at mindspring.com  Sun Aug 12 04:10:11 2007
From: dharris234 at mindspring.com (David C. Harris)
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 21:10:11 -0700
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0708120319q4ed93e6ds76a39f28390f6f7e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>	<46BE77A5.2040606@mindspring.com>
	<ee50357e0708120319q4ed93e6ds76a39f28390f6f7e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <46BE8823.7090007@mindspring.com>

I'm probably going to regret this, but I thought of the old slogan 
"Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do".     ;-)

Much better, think of it as purchasing blood donations from willing 
sellers at a price that might even help them pay for college!  It 
wouldn't be radically different from the "donate blood to get money to 
buy whiskey" tradition of the impoverished people of large cities (once 
impolitely called "bums").  But in an orderly legal market, living a 
healthy life would be rewarded by higher prices for one's blood, 
improving the life quality of both seller and buyer.

BTW: Virgins would not be necessary.  Condom use would be sufficient.  
But all those conservative Christians who perpetuate illness by 
discouraging stem cell research could make up for it by doing something 
beneficial, like donating life-extending blood while "waiting until 
marriage".

Just a couple thoughts.

  - David

BillK wrote:
> On 8/12/07, David C. Harris wrote:
>   
>> As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests
>> vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than
>> DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young
>> blood!    ;-)
>>     
> ...
> That's a great marketing image!
>
> Transhumanists as withered old vampires draining the blood of young virgins.
>
> We'll be swamped with join applications.
>
> Can't you bring sex into it somewhere as well?
>
> BillK   ;)
>   



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Sun Aug 12 19:23:35 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:23:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Defy/Deny the Data
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708121223g6583d6ddp6343284c27257849@mail.gmail.com>

Eliezer Yudkowsky promotes occasional provocative assertions in
research contexts:

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/08/i-defy-the-data.html

Some of the comments are quite good, too.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Sun Aug 12 19:27:07 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:27:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070811120303.0224be40@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070807223903.0214e3f8@satx.rr.com>
	<C87A74D3-85E8-4E10-A28C-8063330FF2FD@mac.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070809120209.024d59b8@satx.rr.com>
	<ee50357e0708110159s7f07ce9akb9350d1aebc053b0@mail.gmail.com>
	<002601c7dc33$0aa38580$b0bb1f97@archimede>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070811120303.0224be40@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708121227j16558862q70a17a29f1fd7964@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/11/07, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> Since in my experience it's inevitable that
> sometime I *will* need to Restore again, this is dire news. I don't
> get the impression that DNS 9 or 9.5 has fixed this. Sigh.

Scylla and Charybdis, mate. You are aware, are you not, that System
Restore is abused by some clever malware, and more than one antivirus
maven recommends disabling it?

Just sayin'.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Sun Aug 12 19:44:27 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:44:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708121244r242008fau2ebf6cf30df4f704@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/12/07, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is this old news?
>
> Stanford researchers find culprit in aging muscles that heal poorly
>
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/sumc-srf080607.php


In posting the link, I restrained myself from saying more.  I was
tempted, but thought to avoid embarrassing myself.

It seemed to me that a modest extrapolation of the salient point --
the effect of Wnt  becomes destructive with age -- leads to a rather
dramatic notion/tentative implication:  Hooray! Yippee! (Jumping
around wildly, waving arms, vocalizing uncontrollably (laughing,
chirping, and gibbering while intermittantly drooling and broadcasting
spittle with a degree of  radial symmetry) We've  found it!  We've
found it!  The fountain of youth!  The secret to eternal life!!
Immortality is ours!!

Suppress the Wnt signal.

Quoting from the article:

"...one could envision this becoming a therapeutic."

How very discreet that.

Rando said many drugs can block Wnt signaling. "Theoretically, given
the number of ways to block Wnt and Wnt signaling, one could envision
this becoming a therapeutic," he said. "You could potentially enhance
the healing of aged tissues by reducing this effect of Wnt signaling
on the resident stem cells."

"Enhance."  Yeah, that's the ticket.  Enhance me.  Please.

-- 
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Sun Aug 12 20:02:47 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 15:02:47 -0500
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0708120319q4ed93e6ds76a39f28390f6f7e@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164@mail.gmail.com>
	<46BE77A5.2040606@mindspring.com>
	<ee50357e0708120319q4ed93e6ds76a39f28390f6f7e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070812145425.021ec7f8@satx.rr.com>

The odd thing is that this idea (sans the wnt element) has been a 
commonplace of sf for at least half a century, and very probably much 
longer. It's the basis of James Gunn's THE IMMORTALS [1958] (I think 
his mutant on the run has a hematopoietic SNP), and of Norman 
Spinrad's once notorious BUG JACK BARRON, also infamous for its many 
scenes of fellatio (a sort of vitalistic vampiric subtext, doncha 
know). And I seem to recall that the non-Howard family humans in 
Heinlein's Future History eventually gain equal longevity by sprucing 
up their blood.

Damien Broderick



From emerson at singinst.org  Sun Aug 12 20:12:12 2007
From: emerson at singinst.org (Tyler Emerson)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 13:12:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The Singularity Summit 2007, September 8th-9th, San Francisco,
	CA - $50 to Attend
Message-ID: <632d2cda0708121312o1fdd981k2c4cdc9b3d74f0ae@mail.gmail.com>

The Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence is thrilled to invite
you to the Singularity Summit 2007, to be held Saturday and Sunday,
September 8th and 9th, at the beautiful Palace of Fine Arts in San
Francisco, California. The theme is "Artificial Intelligence and the Future
of Humanity."

http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/

We've organized the Summit to be low cost (only $50) to bring in a large
number of attendees to raise awareness and understanding of an important
21st century issue. Normally this kind of event would cost hundreds of
dollars to attend.

A ticket can be purchased online at the Summit website, which includes your
reserved seating for both days, two lunches, and the Saturday night
reception.

We hope you will join us!

-Tyler

--

NEWS RELEASE

August 13, 2007

Contact:
Tyler Emerson, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence:
650-353-6063, emerson at singinst.org

Press Pass:
Contact Tyler Emerson for a press pass

Online:
http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/

 <http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/>The Singularity Summit to address
promise and peril of advanced AI to future of humanity

What are the major challenges to achieving advanced AI? What are the
benefits and dangers? How far are we from self-improving AI? How should we
prepare for this potentially powerful innovation?

These are among the questions that 17 outstanding thinkers will explore and
debate at the Singularity Summit, to be held Saturday and Sunday, September
8-9, at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco, California. The summit is
organized by the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence, a
501(c)(3) not-for-profit institute in Silicon Valley for the study of safe
advanced AI.

"Advanced AI has the potential to impact every aspect of human life. We are
in a crucial window of opportunity where we have temporary but powerful
leverage to influence the outcome," said Tyler Emerson, chair of the summit
and executive director of the Singularity Institute for Artificial
Intelligence. "Only a small group of scientists are aware of the central
issues. It is essential to expand discussion of this critical 21st century
issue, which is why I have created the summit."

Tickets can be purchased online for $50 at
http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/tickets/.

Peter Thiel, PayPal Cofounder, Clarium Capital President, and Facebook's
initial investor, will MC the summit and present his new ideas on financial
markets and the Singularity. "It's clear that the term 'AI' means a lot of
different things," said Thiel. "It's one of these terms that has been
bandied about a great deal, and has been misused a lot. It has been
predicted for a long time that AI is right around the corner, and it's
taking longer than many people thought it would, with many disappointments
along the way. However, it's clear that there's a massive set of issues
happening, and people who don't think there's something important going on
are living in a fantasy, and need to wake up."

Confirmed Summit speakers include:

* Dr. Rodney Brooks, famous MIT roboticist and founder of iRobot
* Dr. Peter Norvig, director of research at Google
* Paul Saffo, Stanford, leading technology forecaster
* Sam Adams, distinguished engineer within IBM's Research Division
* Jamais Cascio, cofounder of World Changing and creator of Open the Future
* Dr. Ben Goertzel, director of research at SIAI and founder of Novamente
* Dr. J. Storrs Hall, author of Beyond AI: Creating the Conscience of the
Machine
* Dr. Charles L. Harper, Jr., senior VP at John Templeton Foundation
* Dr. James Hughes, executive director of Institute for Ethics and Emerging
Technologies
* Neil Jacobstein, prominent AI expert and CEO of Teknowledge
* Dr. Stephen Omohundro, founder of Self-Aware Systems
* Dr. Barney Pell, founder and CEO of Powerset
* Christine Peterson, cofounder of Foresight Nanotech Institute
* Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal and founder of Clarium Capital
* Wendell Wallach, author of Machine Morality: From Aristotle to Asimov and
Beyond
* Eliezer Yudkowsky, Friendly AI pioneer and cofounder of SIAI
* Peter Voss, founder and CEO of Adaptive Artificial Intelligence

"To any thoughtful person, the Singularity idea, even if it seems wild,
raises a gigantic, swirling cloud of profound and vital questions about
humanity and the powerful technologies it is producing," said Douglas R.
Hofstadter at last year's Singularity Summit at Stanford, author of G?del,
Escher, Bach, which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1980. "Given this mysterious and
rapidly approaching cloud, there can be no doubt that the time has come for
the scientific and technological community to seriously try to figure out
what is on humanity's collective horizon. Not to do so would be hugely
irresponsible."

About the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (SIAI):
SIAI is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit institute in Palo Alto, California, with
three long-term goals: furthering the nascent science of safe advanced AI
(self-improving cognitive systems) through research and development,
research fellowships, research grants, and science education; furthering the
understanding of its implications to society through educational outreach,
such as the annual Singularity Summit; and furthering education among
students to foster an interdisciplinary field for the study of safe advanced
AI. Learn more by visiting SIAI at http://www.singinst.org.

--
Tyler Emerson
Executive Director
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
P.O . Box 50182, Palo Alto, CA 94303 USA
650-353-6063 | emerson at singinst.org | singinst.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/8d01caf4/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Aug 12 21:19:55 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 16:19:55 -0500
Subject: [ExI] ExI (no subject)
In-Reply-To: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <680024.75967.qm@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <200708122120.l7CLK1wY025234@ms-smtp-05.texas.rr.com>

At 02:22 PM 8/10/2007, Alicia wrote:

>Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent 
>posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon this group during 
>an internet search that I have been conducting for the past few 
>months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I guess... 
>the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. 
>I read everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, 
>science, physics, theories and the human condition, both past and 
>present. Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has 
>atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. 
>Again. Any ideas?

Hi Alicia, welcome.  My suggestion is to simply read the Principles 
of Extropy at http://www.extropy.org and some of the articles written 
by transhumanists.

There are many women who you can read about and whose works have been 
meaningful to the development of transhumanism.  Many post to the 
list.  Amara Graps, Barbara Lamar, Gina Miller, PJ Manning, Sky 
Marsen, Tanya Jones, Christine Peterson, Samantha Atkins, Fiorella 
Terenzi, and Anna Taylor are just a few of who have been involved in 
transhumanism for just a few years to well over a decade.

One way to better ourselves is to remember that the more 
interconnected we are, and the more compassionate we are toward each 
other, the more hope we can instill in ourselves and our 
children.  Essential to this is being able to offer and accept 
constructive criticism.

I think that transhumanism can take a bigger step and longer stride 
in making a strong presence concerning the issues that affect all of us.

Best wishes,
Natasha

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/5b54d93b/attachment.html>

From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 12 21:24:05 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 14:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
Message-ID: <161658.48128.qm@web45210.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

There's another side to this, business encourages a do your own thing mentality, when the losers get sick the Bad ol' Guvmint will pay for it.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2005.htm



"David C. Harris" <dharris234 at mindspring.com> wrote:[...]But all those conservative Christians who perpetuate illness by discouraging stem cell research could make up for it by doing something 
beneficial, like donating life-extending blood while "waiting until 
marriage".


to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented tomes are like diet books: you might die of a misprint

       
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/e471a30d/attachment.html>

From ben at goertzel.org  Sun Aug 12 22:18:07 2007
From: ben at goertzel.org (Benjamin Goertzel)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 18:18:07 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Ben G's TransVision talk
Message-ID: <3cf171fe0708121518g352f59b1h65787ceb3496c5c4@mail.gmail.com>

Hi all,

A rough, partial transcript of my "AI in Second Life" talk at TransVision
2007 has been put online (along with some pretty amusing photos of me in
Second Life and AGISim ;-)

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/blog/?p=19

-- Ben

*

*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/c7670819/attachment.html>

From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 13 00:45:22 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 17:45:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
In-Reply-To: <200708122120.l7CLK1wY025234@ms-smtp-05.texas.rr.com>
Message-ID: <499242.31183.qm@web45208.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Alicia, you might call Alcor Life Extension Foundation at (877) GO ALCOR and ask for a few copies of their back issues. Anyone can learn something from them-- even me!




At 02:22 PM 8/10/2007, Alicia wrote: Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?



to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented tomes are like diet books: you might die of a misprint

       
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/0f8cd903/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Aug 13 06:47:32 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:47:32 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Ben G's TransVision talk
In-Reply-To: <3cf171fe0708121518g352f59b1h65787ceb3496c5c4@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <3cf171fe0708121518g352f59b1h65787ceb3496c5c4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070813014409.021a9450@satx.rr.com>

At 06:18 PM 8/12/2007 -0400, Ben G wrote:

><http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/blog/?p=19>http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/blog/?p=19

where I read:

<But the point I want to make is, as awesome as Google is, if you ask 
it, "How long is the gestation period of a zerbra?" It will tell you. 
But if you ask it, "How long is the gestation period of a dead 
zerba?" It won't tell you, because it doesn't understand anything.>

Good dog! This is terrible! Google can now tell you about zerbras? 
That's a horse of a different stripe! And yet it's stumped by a 
zerba? There's only one letter difference! Well, and it's dead, but I 
still want to know about the gestation period of a *live* zerba.

Damien Broderick
[I know. Too much time on my hands. And look--it's 1.47am, I should be asleep] 



From amara at amara.com  Mon Aug 13 08:30:11 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:30:11 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Exponentially unlikely fetishes
Message-ID: <p06230903c2e5c578eba1@[23.237.66.13]>

Did you ever consider descrambling an egg to be a fetish? No.. ?

Exponentially unlikely fetishes
http://cosmicvariance.com/2007/08/12/exponentially-unlikely-fetishes/#more-1354
(and yes, it is safe for work)

Imagine all of the other fantasies we could enjoy, if we allowed
thermodynamics a free reign.

(And imagine all of the fantasies we could enjoy if we follow the 
thermodynamics rules, too. :-)  )

Amara


-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Mon Aug 13 17:48:20 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:48:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Ben G's TransVision talk
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070813014409.021a9450@satx.rr.com>
References: <3cf171fe0708121518g352f59b1h65787ceb3496c5c4@mail.gmail.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070813014409.021a9450@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708131048k4dd9aebcn4d4584ddf3120921@mail.gmail.com>

It zerbas you right to suffer, Damien.

On 8/12/07, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Good dog! This is terrible! Google can now tell you about zerbras?

...snippage...

> Damien Broderick
> [I know. Too much time on my hands. And look--it's 1.47am, I should be asleep]

Poser. *I* was up 'til 5:30. Just because *I* know where they keep the
zerbas on Google. _And_ the zerbras (which zerbas wear to look nice
for their Myspace pictures).

And no, you can't have any. So don't ask. They're just for the _sophonts_.

But for the record (and it surprises me you evidently didn't know...)
one popular maker of Zerbras is named for an Australian state: NSW's
Secret. (Other readers: no, "Crocodile" is not an Australian state.)

/sleep_deprived_silliness=OFF

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From scerir at libero.it  Tue Aug 14 12:22:54 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:22:54 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Exponentially unlikely fetishes
References: <p06230903c2e5c578eba1@[23.237.66.13]>
Message-ID: <000801c7de6d$d7e2e040$19941f97@archimede>

> ( And imagine all of the fantasies we could enjoy 
> if we follow the thermodynamics rules, too. :-)  )
> Amara

Actually there are people whose credo
is the following thermodynamics principle,
called the entr-anthr-opic principle. 
http://resonaances.blogspot.com/2007/08/entropic-principle.html

s.

Btw, are there truly top-down phenomena,
or top-down effects, that is to say
something - on a lower level - that
emerges from something else - on an
upper level. In general top-down
effects are connected to evolutive
patterns, or not?


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Tue Aug 14 19:48:20 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 14:48:20 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Stross on alleged NP-complete solution
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>

This from Charlie Stross's blog:


August 7, 2007




Anyone know if this is for real?

<http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?id=140598>An 
Optical Solution For The Traveling Salesman Problem

They're claiming an O(NN) solution to a problem 
that is NP-complete. According to the abstract:
We introduce an optical method based on white 
light interferometry in order to solve the 
well-known NP?complete traveling salesman 
problem. To our knowledge it is the first time 
that a method for the reduction of non?polynomial 
time to quadratic time has been proposed. We will 
show that this achievement is limited by the 
number of available photons for solving the 
problem. It will turn out that this number of 
photons is proportional to NN for a traveling 
salesman problem with N cities and that for large 
numbers of cities the method in practice 
therefore is limited by the signal?to?noise 
ratio. The proposed method is meant purely as a gedankenexperiment.

This is either wrong, or (as Ken MacLeod put it) 
"we're all doomed". Anyone want to give it a 
read-through and tell me if it's plausible but 
impractical, implausible, or plausible and 
probably capable of being implemented?

[here are lots of comments:

<http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2007/08/anyone_know_if_this_is_for_rea.html#comments> 
] 




From kanzure at gmail.com  Tue Aug 14 20:29:00 2007
From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:29:00 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Stross on alleged NP-complete solution
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <200708141529.01388.kanzure@gmail.com>

On Tuesday 14 August 2007 14:48, Damien Broderick wrote:
> Anyone know if this is for real?
>
> <http://www.opticsexpress.org/abstract.cfm?id=140598>An
> Optical Solution For The Traveling Salesman Problem

Slashdot has some comments that are helpful/useful:
http://science.slashdot.org/science/07/08/09/1535231.shtml

- Bryan


From sentience at pobox.com  Tue Aug 14 22:10:16 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 15:10:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Stross on alleged NP-complete solution
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <46C22848.2000605@pobox.com>

It uses superexponential computing power, N^N photons.  There's no 
reason you can't solve an NP-complete problem with superexponential 
computing power.  It won't scale to factoring large composites because 
you'd need vastly more photons than the mass-energy of the visible 
universe.

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


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Wed Aug 15 04:18:51 2007
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:18:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy's Couch?
References: <ADEDJMLOBGPHJNIOMCHKGEKNIHAA.jjacobs@koyote.com>
Message-ID: <001901c7def3$62f17900$6401a8c0@brainiac>

... and Nick Bostrom weighs in, too:

 http://tinyurl.com/24v3pl 



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Wed Aug 15 04:48:54 2007
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 21:48:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy's Couch?
References: <ADEDJMLOBGPHJNIOMCHKGEKNIHAA.jjacobs@koyote.com>
	<001901c7def3$62f17900$6401a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <000701c7def7$95b1bbd0$6401a8c0@brainiac>

From: "Olga Bourlin" <fauxever at sprynet.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2007 9:18 PM


> ... and Nick Bostrom weighs in, too:

> http://tinyurl.com/24v3pl 

Whoops - Robin Hanson, also.


From kanzure at gmail.com  Wed Aug 15 04:56:23 2007
From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop)
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 23:56:23 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Our Lives, Controlled From Some Guy's Couch?
In-Reply-To: <001901c7def3$62f17900$6401a8c0@brainiac>
References: <ADEDJMLOBGPHJNIOMCHKGEKNIHAA.jjacobs@koyote.com>
	<001901c7def3$62f17900$6401a8c0@brainiac>
Message-ID: <200708142356.24390.kanzure@gmail.com>


Just some of my thoughts that might stimulate some extropian 
discussion. :)

On Tuesday 14 August 2007 23:18, Olga Bourlin wrote:
> ... and Nick Bostrom weighs in, too:

>From the article:
> It?s unsettling to think of the world being run by a
> futuristic computer geek, although we might at last dispose
> of that of classic theological question: How could God allow
> so much evil in the world? For the same reason there are
> plagues and earthquakes and battles in games like World of
> Warcraft. Peace is boring, Dude.     

That is very biased on the side of us humans- "peace"? 
Boredom? That adds to the lot of gunk to sort through. Though 
I suspect this might just be the style that Bostrom works 
with.

> A more practical question is how to behave in a computer
> simulation. 

My best answer so far: we do not know ... but this does not 
mean we should do nothing. Rather we should be doing as much 
as possible. This seems to follow from the fundamental 
structure of Pascal's wager (disregarding the religious 
components).

I seem to remember discovering Nick Bostrom back in 2005 with 
his paper re: the opportunity cost and astronomical waste due 
to our waiting to colonize space (lost possibilities, cosmic 
constraints, etc.). That spawned many, many hours of 
discussion with my friends. :)

By the way:
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&q=site%3Amindstalk.net+Bostrom

- Bryan



From scerir at libero.it  Wed Aug 15 06:11:36 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:11:36 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Stross on alleged NP-complete solution
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <002401c7df03$2cda52f0$c9911f97@archimede>

http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=261


From ka.aly at luxsci.net  Tue Aug 14 23:44:20 2007
From: ka.aly at luxsci.net (Khaled Aly)
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 02:44:20 +0300
Subject: [ExI] Stross on alleged NP-complete solution
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070814144620.021f3900@satx.rr.com>
	<46C22848.2000605@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <021c01c7decd$0b467fa0$5fa367d4@pcd>

I am neither a physicist nor a computer scientist. My degree is in Computer 
Engineering and I worked for several years on photonic interconnection 
networks for parallel processing: architecture & performance perspective 
(and scalability). I haven't read the referenced paper but I find it 
plausible, especially with your clarification. Can you provide an estimated 
value of a feasible N? And what is the proportional implementation cost in 
terms of the number of optical components and type of interconnects (if it's 
free space or integrated optics)?

Regards
Khaled Aly, Ph.D.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eliezer S. Yudkowsky" <sentience at pobox.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 1:10 AM
Subject: Re: [ExI] Stross on alleged NP-complete solution


> It uses superexponential computing power, N^N photons.  There's no
> reason you can't solve an NP-complete problem with superexponential
> computing power.  It won't scale to factoring large composites because
> you'd need vastly more photons than the mass-energy of the visible
> universe.
>
> -- 
> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
> Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
> 



From wsfdegroot at hetnet.nl  Wed Aug 15 15:53:20 2007
From: wsfdegroot at hetnet.nl (wsfdegroot at hetnet.nl)
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 17:53:20 +0200
Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 47, Issue 6
References: <mailman.484.1187027828.10213.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <C0DC5DA2131FA04181E8E9F13F15815B08C271C2@CPEXBE-EML06.kpnsp.local>

Probably I got lost in a wrong universe, my idea of transhumanism is that mankind wil transform in a better specie
a sort of human robot. My idea is not to be frozen in order to wait for that but to give my body to science or experiments by life. Hopefully some day our brains will be put in a perfect machine which can go to another planet. Another option has been suggested on discovery channel about being put in a deep sleep to survive and escape to another planet. Who has ideas that correspond with this? Respond to wsfdegroot at hetnet.nl or just on this site of course. Greetings, Wim.

________________________________

Van: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org namens extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org
Verzonden: ma 13-8-2007 19:57
Aan: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Onderwerp: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 47, Issue 6



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. (no subject) (alicia hamilton)
   2. Re: (no subject) (Jef Allbright)
   3. Re: (no subject) (Bryan Bishop)
   4. Re: (no subject) (Gina Miller)
   5. Re: Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8 (BillK)
   6. Re: Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8 (scerir)
   7. Re: Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
      (Damien Broderick)
   8. Re: (no subject) (Alan Brooks)
   9. to paraphrase Mark Twain (Alan Brooks)
  10. OUTSIDE THE GATES OF SCIENCE (Damien Broderick)
  11. you cn't always get what you wnt (Jeff Davis)
  12. Re: you cn't always get what you wnt (David C. Harris)
  13. Re: you cn't always get what you wnt (BillK)
  14. Re: you cn't always get what you wnt (David C. Harris)
  15. Defy/Deny the Data (Michael M. Butler)
  16. Re: Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
      (Michael M. Butler)
  17. Re: you cn't always get what you wnt (Jeff Davis)
  18. Re: you cn't always get what you wnt (Damien Broderick)
  19. The Singularity Summit 2007, September 8th-9th, San
      Francisco,        CA - $50 to Attend (Tyler Emerson)
  20. Re: ExI (no subject) (Natasha Vita-More)
  21. Re: you cn't always get what you wnt (Alan Brooks)
  22. Ben G's TransVision talk (Benjamin Goertzel)
  23. Re: (no subject) (Alan Brooks)
  24. Re: Ben G's TransVision talk (Damien Broderick)
  25. Exponentially unlikely fetishes (Amara Graps)
  26. Re: Ben G's TransVision talk (Michael M. Butler)


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

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: alicia hamilton <allicat138 at yahoo.com>
Subject: [ExI] (no subject)
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <680024.75967.qm at web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories and the human condition, both past and present. Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?
      
---------------------------------
Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally,  mobile search that gives answers, not web links.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070810/310811a9/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 13:31:06 -0700
From: "Jef Allbright" <jef at jefallbright.net>
Subject: Re: [ExI] (no subject)
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <f7bfe5740708101331jb840c61g34bc1022aacffd52 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On 8/10/07, alicia hamilton <allicat138 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in
> over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been
> conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I
> guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read
> everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories
> and the human condition, both past and present.

Welcome Alicia!  Your interests appear to be in excellent alignment
with the extropy list.

> Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a
> sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?

Well, can you name some projects that you've been passionate about in
the past?  Maybe we can help you to apply an extropian perspective.

My own key interest here is the evolution of increasingly effective
systems of cooperation.

- Jef


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

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:36:34 -0500
From: Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] (no subject)
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <200708101536.34694.kanzure at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="utf-8"

On Friday 10 August 2007 14:22, alicia hamilton wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the
> recent posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon
> this group during an internet search that I have been
> conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways
> to better myself and, well I guess... the world. I used to
> exceed in school and positively loved college. I read
> everything on could get my hands on pertaining to
> religions, science, physics, theories and the human
> condition, both past and present. Now, as a working single
> mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking
> for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?

Two humble suggestions:

1) Read widely (and madly?). I usually do this over the
internet to help hunt down like minded individuals.

2) Journaling and 'minutes' of your thoughts, activities,
events. I have even begun the construction of my own device
to keep track of my (flood of) thoughts through my days- a
portable keyboard hooked up to an eight gigabyte flash card.
This helps me keep track of what's going on and remembering
the collective output of my brain from day to day, week to
week, etc. to etc.

I look forward to seeing what the extropians have to say on
this subject. Welcome to the list.

http://www.extropy.org/faq.htm

And a reading list I found with a quick search:
http://www.etext.org/Politics/Extropy.Institute/johnson.091792

- Bryan

http://heybryan.org/


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

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 15:01:59 -0700
From: "Gina Miller" <nanogirl at halcyon.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] (no subject)
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <006601c7db9a$2df69610$0200a8c0 at Nano>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Welcome to the group Alicia we are glad to have you here.


Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com <http://www.nanoindustries.com/> 
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com <http://www.nanogirl.com/> 
Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/
Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org <http://www.foresight.org/> 
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org <http://www.extropy.org/> 
Email: nanogirl at halcyon.com
"Nanotechnology: Solutions for the future."
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: alicia hamilton
  To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
  Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 12:22 PM
  Subject: [ExI] (no subject)


  Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories and the human condition, both past and present. Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.


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


  _______________________________________________
  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/20070810/5eafd4d6/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 5
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 09:59:31 +0100
From: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <ee50357e0708110159s7f07ce9akb9350d1aebc053b0 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 8/9/07, Damien Broderick wrote:
<snip>
> I gather that Vista has speech recognition bundled.# If so, anyone
> had any luck with it? I have to say that after training it I found
> DNS quite accurate--part of the training being of *me*, as the
> program shapes my enunciation toward crisper clarity.
>

NY Times review says Dragon Naturally Speaking v9 is better.
<http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/telling-your-computer-what-to-do/>

LifeHacker seems to agree.
<http://lifehacker.com/software/speech-recognition/using-windows-vista-speech-recognition-240730.php>

The user comments below both articles are interesting to read also.

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

Footnote:
Please don't think about upgrading to Vista.  You will enter a world
of computer pain. The web is full of reports about Vista problems.

This new article gives a good overall summary.
<http://www.microsoft-watch.com/content/vista/broken_windows.html>

Quotes:
The Vista experience is broken. It's long past time to fix it.
Not since Windows ME or Mac OS X 10.0 have I observed a more troubled
consumer operating system.
etc.

BillK


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

Message: 6
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 18:16:57 +0200
From: "scerir" <scerir at libero.it>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <002601c7dc33$0aa38580$b0bb1f97 at archimede>
Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="iso-8859-1"

> NY Times review says Dragon Naturally Speaking v9 is better.
>
<http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/telling-your-computer-what-to-do/
>

Dragon improves speech-recognition software - USATODAY.com
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2007-08-08-dragon-software
_N.htm



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

Message: 7
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 12:08:37 -0500
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070811120303.0224be40 at satx.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 06:16 PM 8/11/2007 +0200, Serafino wrote:

>Dragon improves speech-recognition software - USATODAY.com
><http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/edwardbaig/2007-08-08-dragon-software_N.htm>

Hmm--a link or 2 took me to

<https://www.knowbrainer.com/storefront/index.cfm?fuseaction=product.display&Product_ID=55>

where an upgrade from 8 to 9 can be had for $50 after rebate.

My problem is not with dictating, but with User profiles becoming
inaccessible after I ran Win System Restore. As BillK and others
confirmed, this is known to kill something crucial, and recovering is
a long and winding road. Since in my experience it's inevitable that
sometime I *will* need to Restore again, this is dire news. I don't
get the impression that DNS 9 or 9.5 has fixed this. Sigh.

Damien Broderick



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

Message: 8
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 14:29:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Brooks <a_brooks7 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] (no subject)
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <151974.18962.qm at web45202.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Alicia, many have started their interest in that which is future-oriented by reading about and practicing life extension; but caveat emptor, read the signature at the bottom.

 On 8/10/07, alicia hamilton  wrote:
> Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent posts, perhaps a bit in
> over my head.  I came upon this group during an internet search that I have been
> conducting for the past few months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I
> guess... the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college. I read
> everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions, science, physics, theories
> and the human condition, both past and present.

      
---------------------------------
Be a better Heartthrob. Get better relationship answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070811/81aad0bb/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 9
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:11:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Brooks <a_brooks7 at yahoo.com>
Subject: [ExI] to paraphrase Mark Twain
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <293730.22030.qm at web45208.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"




to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented books are like diet tomes-- you might die of a misprint

      
---------------------------------
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070811/e32078d4/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 10
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 01:35:33 -0500
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
Subject: [ExI] OUTSIDE THE GATES OF SCIENCE
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070812013223.0228b298 at satx.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed

I see that Publisher's Weekly has run a review on
my book about psi. I'm quite happy with their
assessment. Any of the (other) skeptics here had
a chance to read it yet? (Of course, I do regard
myself as a skeptic, even if a persuaded one in this case.)

Damien Broderick

============
Editorial Reviews
 From Publishers Weekly
Broderick, best known as a science-fiction
writer, returns to nonfiction (after 2001's The
Spike) to evaluate various research programs
investigating "psi phenomena." Divided into two
branches, psi phenomena cover anomalous
cognition, which includes telepathy, remote
viewing and other forms of "non-material"
communication; and anomalous perturbation,
psi-mediated action or psycho-kinetics. Broderick
remains analytical and objective throughout,
reviewing the work of such laboratory programs as
the Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research
group, the Science Applications Incorporated
Corporation and the CIA-backed Stargate;
recounting their experiments' designs, methods
and procedures, Broderick then goes on to examine
rigorously the resulting data. He concludes that
while the evidence for various kinds of psi
phenomena is strong, there are unknown (and
possibly unknowable) factors that make classical,
reductionist methods of testing it unpredictable
and irreproducible (the reason, he suspects, that
the CIA gave up on such research in 1995).
Gratifyingly, Broderick connects the search for
psi phenomena to larger philosophical questions
while remaining skeptical and delightfully rational throughout.
Copyright ? Reed Business Information, a division
of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.




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

Message: 11
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 00:43:36 -0700
From: "Jeff Davis" <jrd1415 at gmail.com>
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <a6a17bd40708120043t2ceaac6ela9eba02c8abc5164 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Is this old news?

Stanford researchers find culprit in aging muscles that heal poorly

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/sumc-srf080607.php

--
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


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

Message: 12
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 19:59:49 -0700
From: "David C. Harris" <dharris234 at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <46BE77A5.2040606 at mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

Executive summary:  young blood contains something that makes at least
some tissues act younger.


I don't know for sure if it's old news (see Jeff's message below), but I
didn't know this observation, even though I have graduate training in
biochemistry/molecular biology/health services administration, and
follow stem cell issues relevant to my investment in Geron.

Did others recognize the implications of this pair of quotes?:

> "The work was done with live mice whose circulatory systems were
> joined, and in lab dishes with young cells immersed in serum from old
> blood."
and
> "... confirmed their earlier research showing that the ability of
> muscle stem cells to regenerate tissue depends on the age of the
> cells' environment (including the age of the blood supplying the
> tissue), not the age of the stem cell.
>
> Although Rando's research focused on the repair of acute trauma to
> muscles, he suspects that the same sort of problem arises on a lesser
> scale in repairing damage that results from the normal wear and tear
> of aging."
>
As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests
vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than
DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young
blood!    ;-)

Putting on my health care hat (I'm trained as a biochemist and health
administrator) to say it directly, those two quotes suggest that aging
might be slowed by getting transfusions of young blood (or a factor that
might be extracted or synthesized by genetic engineering methods),
perhaps available at a high price NOW.  The FDA couldn't stop an
underground trade in young blood.

As a research endeavor, I wonder if the blood bank records allow one to
track the age of blood donors, and the subsequent speed of recovery of
transfusion recipients.

Obviously we could do some original work with purebred mice (so no
problem of transfusion rejection) of various ages.  And I wonder if
umbilical cord blood, which is rarely harvested now, might have enhanced
effect per volume.

In the general search for regeneration and enhanced longevity, this
discovery suggests a flood of productive searches for factors that
activate regeneration of human tissues.  Blood is easy to isolate and
infuse.  And as a matter of policy, I think it's time to allow the open
and well regulated sale of blood, and later other tissues and organs. 
With a radio frequency ID (RFID) chip going along with each
well-characterized blood unit, healthy donors can ask for higher
payments, and the "blood shortages" will disappear as supply comes up to
meet demand.

  - David Harris, Palo Alto, California.

Jeff Davis wrote:
> Is this old news?
>
> Stanford researchers find culprit in aging muscles that heal poorly
>
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/sumc-srf080607.php
>
>  



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

Message: 13
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 11:19:52 +0100
From: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <ee50357e0708120319q4ed93e6ds76a39f28390f6f7e at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 8/12/07, David C. Harris wrote:
> As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests
> vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than
> DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young
> blood!    ;-)
>
> Putting on my health care hat (I'm trained as a biochemist and health
> administrator) to say it directly, those two quotes suggest that aging
> might be slowed by getting transfusions of young blood (or a factor that
> might be extracted or synthesized by genetic engineering methods),
> perhaps available at a high price NOW.  The FDA couldn't stop an
> underground trade in young blood.
>


That's a great marketing image!

Transhumanists as withered old vampires draining the blood of young virgins.

We'll be swamped with join applications.

Can't you bring sex into it somewhere as well?

BillK   ;)


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

Message: 14
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 21:10:11 -0700
From: "David C. Harris" <dharris234 at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <46BE8823.7090007 at mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

I'm probably going to regret this, but I thought of the old slogan
"Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do".     ;-)

Much better, think of it as purchasing blood donations from willing
sellers at a price that might even help them pay for college!  It
wouldn't be radically different from the "donate blood to get money to
buy whiskey" tradition of the impoverished people of large cities (once
impolitely called "bums").  But in an orderly legal market, living a
healthy life would be rewarded by higher prices for one's blood,
improving the life quality of both seller and buyer.

BTW: Virgins would not be necessary.  Condom use would be sufficient. 
But all those conservative Christians who perpetuate illness by
discouraging stem cell research could make up for it by doing something
beneficial, like donating life-extending blood while "waiting until
marriage".

Just a couple thoughts.

  - David

BillK wrote:
> On 8/12/07, David C. Harris wrote:
>  
>> As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests
>> vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than
>> DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young
>> blood!    ;-)
>>    
> ...
> That's a great marketing image!
>
> Transhumanists as withered old vampires draining the blood of young virgins.
>
> We'll be swamped with join applications.
>
> Can't you bring sex into it somewhere as well?
>
> BillK   ;)
>  



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

Message: 15
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:23:35 -0700
From: "Michael M. Butler" <mmbutler at gmail.com>
Subject: [ExI] Defy/Deny the Data
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <7d79ed890708121223g6583d6ddp6343284c27257849 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Eliezer Yudkowsky promotes occasional provocative assertions in
research contexts:

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/08/i-defy-the-data.html

Some of the comments are quite good, too.

--
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


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

Message: 16
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:27:07 -0700
From: "Michael M. Butler" <mmbutler at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Help needed--with Dragon NaturallySpeaking 8
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <7d79ed890708121227j16558862q70a17a29f1fd7964 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 8/11/07, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:

> Since in my experience it's inevitable that
> sometime I *will* need to Restore again, this is dire news. I don't
> get the impression that DNS 9 or 9.5 has fixed this. Sigh.

Scylla and Charybdis, mate. You are aware, are you not, that System
Restore is abused by some clever malware, and more than one antivirus
maven recommends disabling it?

Just sayin'.

--
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


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

Message: 17
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 12:44:27 -0700
From: "Jeff Davis" <jrd1415 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <a6a17bd40708121244r242008fau2ebf6cf30df4f704 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 8/12/07, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is this old news?
>
> Stanford researchers find culprit in aging muscles that heal poorly
>
> http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/sumc-srf080607.php


In posting the link, I restrained myself from saying more.  I was
tempted, but thought to avoid embarrassing myself.

It seemed to me that a modest extrapolation of the salient point --
the effect of Wnt  becomes destructive with age -- leads to a rather
dramatic notion/tentative implication:  Hooray! Yippee! (Jumping
around wildly, waving arms, vocalizing uncontrollably (laughing,
chirping, and gibbering while intermittantly drooling and broadcasting
spittle with a degree of  radial symmetry) We've  found it!  We've
found it!  The fountain of youth!  The secret to eternal life!!
Immortality is ours!!

Suppress the Wnt signal.

Quoting from the article:

"...one could envision this becoming a therapeutic."

How very discreet that.

Rando said many drugs can block Wnt signaling. "Theoretically, given
the number of ways to block Wnt and Wnt signaling, one could envision
this becoming a therapeutic," he said. "You could potentially enhance
the healing of aged tissues by reducing this effect of Wnt signaling
on the resident stem cells."

"Enhance."  Yeah, that's the ticket.  Enhance me.  Please.

--
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


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

Message: 18
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 15:02:47 -0500
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070812145425.021ec7f8 at satx.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

The odd thing is that this idea (sans the wnt element) has been a
commonplace of sf for at least half a century, and very probably much
longer. It's the basis of James Gunn's THE IMMORTALS [1958] (I think
his mutant on the run has a hematopoietic SNP), and of Norman
Spinrad's once notorious BUG JACK BARRON, also infamous for its many
scenes of fellatio (a sort of vitalistic vampiric subtext, doncha
know). And I seem to recall that the non-Howard family humans in
Heinlein's Future History eventually gain equal longevity by sprucing
up their blood.

Damien Broderick



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

Message: 19
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 13:12:12 -0700
From: "Tyler Emerson" <emerson at singinst.org>
Subject: [ExI] The Singularity Summit 2007, September 8th-9th, San
        Francisco,      CA - $50 to Attend
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID:
        <632d2cda0708121312o1fdd981k2c4cdc9b3d74f0ae at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

The Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence is thrilled to invite
you to the Singularity Summit 2007, to be held Saturday and Sunday,
September 8th and 9th, at the beautiful Palace of Fine Arts in San
Francisco, California. The theme is "Artificial Intelligence and the Future
of Humanity."

http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/

We've organized the Summit to be low cost (only $50) to bring in a large
number of attendees to raise awareness and understanding of an important
21st century issue. Normally this kind of event would cost hundreds of
dollars to attend.

A ticket can be purchased online at the Summit website, which includes your
reserved seating for both days, two lunches, and the Saturday night
reception.

We hope you will join us!

-Tyler

--

NEWS RELEASE

August 13, 2007

Contact:
Tyler Emerson, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence:
650-353-6063, emerson at singinst.org

Press Pass:
Contact Tyler Emerson for a press pass

Online:
http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/

 <http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/>The Singularity Summit to address
promise and peril of advanced AI to future of humanity

What are the major challenges to achieving advanced AI? What are the
benefits and dangers? How far are we from self-improving AI? How should we
prepare for this potentially powerful innovation?

These are among the questions that 17 outstanding thinkers will explore and
debate at the Singularity Summit, to be held Saturday and Sunday, September
8-9, at the Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco, California. The summit is
organized by the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence, a
501(c)(3) not-for-profit institute in Silicon Valley for the study of safe
advanced AI.

"Advanced AI has the potential to impact every aspect of human life. We are
in a crucial window of opportunity where we have temporary but powerful
leverage to influence the outcome," said Tyler Emerson, chair of the summit
and executive director of the Singularity Institute for Artificial
Intelligence. "Only a small group of scientists are aware of the central
issues. It is essential to expand discussion of this critical 21st century
issue, which is why I have created the summit."

Tickets can be purchased online for $50 at
http://www.singinst.org/summit2007/tickets/.

Peter Thiel, PayPal Cofounder, Clarium Capital President, and Facebook's
initial investor, will MC the summit and present his new ideas on financial
markets and the Singularity. "It's clear that the term 'AI' means a lot of
different things," said Thiel. "It's one of these terms that has been
bandied about a great deal, and has been misused a lot. It has been
predicted for a long time that AI is right around the corner, and it's
taking longer than many people thought it would, with many disappointments
along the way. However, it's clear that there's a massive set of issues
happening, and people who don't think there's something important going on
are living in a fantasy, and need to wake up."

Confirmed Summit speakers include:

* Dr. Rodney Brooks, famous MIT roboticist and founder of iRobot
* Dr. Peter Norvig, director of research at Google
* Paul Saffo, Stanford, leading technology forecaster
* Sam Adams, distinguished engineer within IBM's Research Division
* Jamais Cascio, cofounder of World Changing and creator of Open the Future
* Dr. Ben Goertzel, director of research at SIAI and founder of Novamente
* Dr. J. Storrs Hall, author of Beyond AI: Creating the Conscience of the
Machine
* Dr. Charles L. Harper, Jr., senior VP at John Templeton Foundation
* Dr. James Hughes, executive director of Institute for Ethics and Emerging
Technologies
* Neil Jacobstein, prominent AI expert and CEO of Teknowledge
* Dr. Stephen Omohundro, founder of Self-Aware Systems
* Dr. Barney Pell, founder and CEO of Powerset
* Christine Peterson, cofounder of Foresight Nanotech Institute
* Peter Thiel, cofounder of PayPal and founder of Clarium Capital
* Wendell Wallach, author of Machine Morality: From Aristotle to Asimov and
Beyond
* Eliezer Yudkowsky, Friendly AI pioneer and cofounder of SIAI
* Peter Voss, founder and CEO of Adaptive Artificial Intelligence

"To any thoughtful person, the Singularity idea, even if it seems wild,
raises a gigantic, swirling cloud of profound and vital questions about
humanity and the powerful technologies it is producing," said Douglas R.
Hofstadter at last year's Singularity Summit at Stanford, author of G?del,
Escher, Bach, which won a Pulitzer Prize in 1980. "Given this mysterious and
rapidly approaching cloud, there can be no doubt that the time has come for
the scientific and technological community to seriously try to figure out
what is on humanity's collective horizon. Not to do so would be hugely
irresponsible."

About the Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence (SIAI):
SIAI is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit institute in Palo Alto, California, with
three long-term goals: furthering the nascent science of safe advanced AI
(self-improving cognitive systems) through research and development,
research fellowships, research grants, and science education; furthering the
understanding of its implications to society through educational outreach,
such as the annual Singularity Summit; and furthering education among
students to foster an interdisciplinary field for the study of safe advanced
AI. Learn more by visiting SIAI at http://www.singinst.org <http://www.singinst.org/> .

--
Tyler Emerson
Executive Director
Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
P.O . Box 50182, Palo Alto, CA 94303 USA
650-353-6063 | emerson at singinst.org | singinst.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/8d01caf4/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 20
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 16:19:55 -0500
From: Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc>
Subject: Re: [ExI] ExI (no subject)
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <200708122120.l7CLK1wY025234 at ms-smtp-05.texas.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

At 02:22 PM 8/10/2007, Alicia wrote:

>Hi everyone. I am new to this group and, from reading the recent
>posts, perhaps a bit in over my head.  I came upon this group during
>an internet search that I have been conducting for the past few
>months. I am looking for ways to better myself and, well I guess...
>the world. I used to exceed in school and positively loved college.
>I read everything on could get my hands on pertaining to religions,
>science, physics, theories and the human condition, both past and
>present. Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has
>atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin.
>Again. Any ideas?

Hi Alicia, welcome.  My suggestion is to simply read the Principles
of Extropy at http://www.extropy.org <http://www.extropy.org/>  and some of the articles written
by transhumanists.

There are many women who you can read about and whose works have been
meaningful to the development of transhumanism.  Many post to the
list.  Amara Graps, Barbara Lamar, Gina Miller, PJ Manning, Sky
Marsen, Tanya Jones, Christine Peterson, Samantha Atkins, Fiorella
Terenzi, and Anna Taylor are just a few of who have been involved in
transhumanism for just a few years to well over a decade.

One way to better ourselves is to remember that the more
interconnected we are, and the more compassionate we are toward each
other, the more hope we can instill in ourselves and our
children.  Essential to this is being able to offer and accept
constructive criticism.

I think that transhumanism can take a bigger step and longer stride
in making a strong presence concerning the issues that affect all of us.

Best wishes,
Natasha

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing,
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/5b54d93b/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 21
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 14:24:05 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Brooks <a_brooks7 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <161658.48128.qm at web45210.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

There's another side to this, business encourages a do your own thing mentality, when the losers get sick the Bad ol' Guvmint will pay for it.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2005.htm



"David C. Harris" <dharris234 at mindspring.com> wrote:[...]But all those conservative Christians who perpetuate illness by discouraging stem cell research could make up for it by doing something
beneficial, like donating life-extending blood while "waiting until
marriage".


to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented tomes are like diet books: you might die of a misprint

      
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/e471a30d/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 22
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 18:18:07 -0400
From: "Benjamin Goertzel" <ben at goertzel.org>
Subject: [ExI] Ben G's TransVision talk
To: "Novamente at Vettalabs. Com" <novamente at vettalabs.com>,
        agi at v2.listbox.com,     agisim-general at lists.sourceforge.net,
        singularity at v2.listbox.com,     "ExI chat list"
        <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>,       "Sibley Verbeck"
        <sibley at electricsheepcompany.com>,      "Tristan Swadell"
        <tristan at electricsheepcompany.com>,     "Wendy Cornish"
        <wendy at electricsheepcompany.com>,       "Brian Friedlander"
        <brian at electricsheepcompany.com>
Message-ID:
        <3cf171fe0708121518g352f59b1h65787ceb3496c5c4 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Hi all,

A rough, partial transcript of my "AI in Second Life" talk at TransVision
2007 has been put online (along with some pretty amusing photos of me in
Second Life and AGISim ;-)

http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/blog/?p=19

-- Ben

*

*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/c7670819/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 23
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 17:45:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Alan Brooks <a_brooks7 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] (no subject)
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <499242.31183.qm at web45208.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Alicia, you might call Alcor Life Extension Foundation at (877) GO ALCOR and ask for a few copies of their back issues. Anyone can learn something from them-- even me!




At 02:22 PM 8/10/2007, Alicia wrote: Now, as a working single mother, I feel like my brain has atrophied.  I am looking for a sort of jumping off place to begin. Again. Any ideas?



to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented tomes are like diet books: you might die of a misprint

      
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070812/0f8cd903/attachment-0001.html

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

Message: 24
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:47:32 -0500
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Ben G's TransVision talk
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070813014409.021a9450 at satx.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 06:18 PM 8/12/2007 -0400, Ben G wrote:

><http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/blog/?p=19>http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/blog/?p=19

where I read:

<But the point I want to make is, as awesome as Google is, if you ask
it, "How long is the gestation period of a zerbra?" It will tell you.
But if you ask it, "How long is the gestation period of a dead
zerba?" It won't tell you, because it doesn't understand anything.>

Good dog! This is terrible! Google can now tell you about zerbras?
That's a horse of a different stripe! And yet it's stumped by a
zerba? There's only one letter difference! Well, and it's dead, but I
still want to know about the gestation period of a *live* zerba.

Damien Broderick
[I know. Too much time on my hands. And look--it's 1.47am, I should be asleep]



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

Message: 25
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:30:11 +0200
From: Amara Graps <amara at amara.com>
Subject: [ExI] Exponentially unlikely fetishes
To: wta-talk at transhumanism.org, extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <p06230903c2e5c578eba1@[23.237.66.13]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"

Did you ever consider descrambling an egg to be a fetish? No.. ?

Exponentially unlikely fetishes
http://cosmicvariance.com/2007/08/12/exponentially-unlikely-fetishes/#more-1354
(and yes, it is safe for work)

Imagine all of the other fantasies we could enjoy, if we allowed
thermodynamics a free reign.

(And imagine all of the fantasies we could enjoy if we follow the
thermodynamics rules, too. :-)  )

Amara


--

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


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

Message: 26
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 10:48:20 -0700
From: "Michael M. Butler" <mmbutler at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Ben G's TransVision talk
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
        <7d79ed890708131048k4dd9aebcn4d4584ddf3120921 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

It zerbas you right to suffer, Damien.

On 8/12/07, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Good dog! This is terrible! Google can now tell you about zerbras?

...snippage...

> Damien Broderick
> [I know. Too much time on my hands. And look--it's 1.47am, I should be asleep]

Poser. *I* was up 'til 5:30. Just because *I* know where they keep the
zerbas on Google. _And_ the zerbras (which zerbas wear to look nice
for their Myspace pictures).

And no, you can't have any. So don't ask. They're just for the _sophonts_.

But for the record (and it surprises me you evidently didn't know...)
one popular maker of Zerbras is named for an Australian state: NSW's
Secret. (Other readers: no, "Crocodile" is not an Australian state.)

/sleep_deprived_silliness=OFF

--
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


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

_______________________________________________
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 47, Issue 6
*******************************************


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070815/bc1c31d6/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Thu Aug 16 09:11:05 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:11:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <161658.48128.qm@web45210.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
References: <161658.48128.qm@web45210.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <FD7312A6-74A6-4344-BB7C-D3701F220D79@mac.com>

I don't see how this url in any way supports your opening statement.   
The bad old government can't even pay its own bills.

- s

On Aug 12, 2007, at 2:24 PM, Alan Brooks wrote:

> There's another side to this, business encourages a do your own  
> thing mentality, when the losers get sick the Bad ol' Guvmint will  
> pay for it.
> http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats/trends2005.htm
>
>
>
> "David C. Harris" <dharris234 at mindspring.com> wrote:[...]But all  
> those conservative Christians who perpetuate illness by discouraging  
> stem cell research could make up for it by doing something
> beneficial, like donating life-extending blood while "waiting until
> marriage".
>
>
>
> to paraphrase Mark Twain, future-oriented tomes are like diet books:  
> you might die of a misprint
>
> Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s  
> user panel and lay it on us.  
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20070816/f2875ba3/attachment.html>

From amara at amara.com  Thu Aug 16 12:06:51 2007
From: amara at amara.com (Amara Graps)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 14:06:51 +0200
Subject: [ExI] The Improved Man will be a king over you (and give women
 their dowries as appointed)
Message-ID: <p06230900c2e9ed77edc7@[23.237.66.13]>


Anders Sandberg, that eternally mischievous optimist, hacked together a
small Markov chain program that constructed a new medley text out of
another, based on its statistics, with inputs from the Quran, Genesis,
OT III, Ingersoll's _The Improved Man_, providing an equal insolent ear
to several religions and one nonreligion at the same time.

http://www.aleph.se/andart/archives/2007/08/the_improved_man_will_be_a_king_over_you_and_give_women_their_dowries_as_appointed.html

He says:
"What about a more constructive desecration, to _play_ with the
information itself?  I think indeed "overwrought sanctimony must be met
with disrespectful insolence" One might respect something and yet play
with it. It is when play and respect become mutually impossible one has
lost one's humanity. And this is especially true for textual
literalists."


Out of the medley text :
http://www.aleph.se/andart/archives/images/medley.txt

we find such gems as:

<<among whom I turn to you with somewhat of fear and hunger and loss of
it; most surely they are alone, they bite the ends of their Sabbath,
appearing on the day when Allah said: O Musa! surely there will come
again.>>

<<and he begat Arphaxad five hundred ninety and five years, in the
cities that were speckled and spotted among the goats: and of the
heavens and the souls that came up after them, poor and very ill
favoured and fat kine.>>

<<And God said unto him, Beware thou that thou hast taken my husband?>>

<<And the uncircumcised man child among you has not yet joined them,
that they were the isles of the Galactic Federation (76 planets around
larger stars visible from here) (founded 95,000,000 years ago, very
space opera) solved overpopulation (250 billion or so per planet - 178
billion on average) by mass implanting.. >>

<<The Improved Man will be a king over you  (and give women their
dowries as appointed)>>

(If you notice your blog hit rate spiking, Anders, it is because
I submitted this to boingboing. It's too good to let slip by.)

Amara

-- 

Amara Graps, PhD      www.amara.com
Associate Research Scientist, Planetary Science Institute (PSI), Tucson
INAF Istituto di Fisica dello Spazio Interplanetario (IFSI), Roma, Italia


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Thu Aug 16 16:58:49 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:58:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The Improved Man will be a king over you (and give women
	their dowries as appointed)
In-Reply-To: <p06230900c2e9ed77edc7@23.237.66.13>
References: <p06230900c2e9ed77edc7@23.237.66.13>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708160958s66408b35l97233f5d2870d095@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/16/07, Amara Graps <amara at amara.com> wrote:

> <<among whom I turn to you with somewhat of fear and hunger and loss of
> it; most surely they are alone, they bite the ends of their Sabbath,
> appearing on the day when Allah said: O Musa! surely there will come
> again.>>
....
> (If you notice your blog hit rate spiking, Anders, it is because
> I submitted this to boingboing. It's too good to let slip by.)


Most surely I am alone, and now I know why--I know *I* bite the ends
of *my* Sabbath. Not at you, Amara, but I do bite them.

(Apologies to Shakespeare) (Kudos to Anders) (But what, no Book of Mormon?)
..
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 16 17:46:20 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:46:20 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
Message-ID: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>

I've been thinking lately about crime and punishment...

As a compatibilist I define free-will, roughly, as the capacity to act
freely according to one's will or nature at any given moment.  We all have
free-will. But this does not mean the future, including one's future
choices and actions, cannot also be completely determined by the past. On
the compatibilist view, free-will is compatible with determinism.

The criminal chooses freely to commit the crime, but it does not follow
necessarily that he could have chosen otherwise. If we could re-wind the
clock to the moment before the crime, to the exact same circumstance, he
would certainly choose to commit the same crime again. His choice to offend
was a free choice (in that he was not forced) but it was also a
determined choice (in that it was in his nature at that moment to make
that choice).

There is no need then for any philosophical hoo-hah about that
quasi-religious mental construct we call 'moral agency', nor is there any
need for the associated idea that we should punish people as retribution
for having acted wrongly when they could have acted rightly. Such
considerations are just so much metaphysical baggage.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and no prosecutor can
produce evidence to prove that a defendant could have acted rightly. As
far as anyone knows, the criminal acted freely *but according to his
nature*.

So, in an enlightened society, the goal of a correctional facility should  
be
simply to correct the nature of the criminal (rehabilitation), and to  
correct
the natures of would-be criminals through his example (deterrence).

Retribution ought not figure into the equation.

At least that's my take on this subject. Comments?

-gts



From robotact at mail.ru  Thu Aug 16 20:02:21 2007
From: robotact at mail.ru (Vladimir Nesov)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 00:02:21 +0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <4243831025.20070817000221@mail.ru>

Thursday, August 16, 2007, gts wrote:

g> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.

Retribution/punishment IS a way to enforce lawful behaviour,
enforced correllation between negative utility
for a person and unlawful behaviour that leads to
diminishment of unlawful behaviour itself in utility and consequently
to smaller amount of crime. So it's all about preventing the crime.

Main idea is that person would, based on awareness of the law,
make different choices. System is effective for cases when choice is
changed significantly by its presence, and not effective for other
cases. It limits its applicability, and for example leaves out insane
people and self-defence. And this principle would be better to have
explicitly in the law, rather than just most frequent corollaries.

Correction is a separate issue, but isn't technically effective and in
case of hypothetical technology that would enable it would sometimes ammount
to significant change of personality, similar to death sentence.
Though such correction could have broader applicability,
for example enforcement of moral behavious that conflict
with personal utility, which doesn't seem like a nice thing to do. :)

-- 
 Vladimir Nesov                            mailto:robotact at mail.ru



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Aug 16 21:43:51 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 16:43:51 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Prof John Cramer on another kind of desktop fusion
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816164209.021a92e8@satx.rr.com>

http://www.analogsf.com/0710/altview.shtml

"in this column I want to report on a well-executed experiment 
performed by B. Naranjo, J. K. Gimzewski, and S. Putterman (NGP) of 
UCLA that demonstrates the successful production of the nuclear 
fusion of deuterium with a relatively simple tabletop experiment. It 
was reported in the April 28, 2005 issue of the science journal 
Nature. The announcement of this breakthrough produced hardly a blip 
in science-based news reports, perhaps because many science reporters 
had previously been burned by the overblown Pons and Fleischmann affair."  



From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Thu Aug 16 22:30:01 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:30:01 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Good news on the Alzheimer's front
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708161530j6a511c53t48ec3ceba25f68e6@mail.gmail.com>

Extropes,

Ordinarily, I'd let this pass, but the nature of  Azheimer's is so
ugly,... well, maybe some one of you with a personal Alzheimer's
concern can have a better day, hearing some good news.

Draining away brain's toxic protein to stop Alzheimer's
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/uorm-dab080907.php

The previously murky cause of the disease comes into clear view, and
an almost "silver bullet" therapeutic approach is not merely indicated
by the research, but actually demonstrated (in the mouse model) and
shown thoroughly effective.

Also google up: "Berislav Zlokovic University of Rochester Medical
Center" and read his bio.  What a guy.  Reminds me of Drexler, or
Anders.

Color me naive, my optimism premature, my conclusion unsubstantiated,
but I'm thinking "Jonas Salk Moment" and Nobel Prize in Medicine.

Ahhhhh, serotonin.

-- 
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Aug 16 23:22:24 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 18:22:24 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>

I wonder if this is new, or a rehash of very old Nimtz stuff (it's 
cropping up today in quite a few papers, but I can't find it on the NS site):

<http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/08/16/scispeed116.xml>



'We have broken speed of light'

By Nic Fleming, Science Correspondent
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 16/08/2007

A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light - 
an achievement that would undermine our entire understanding of space and time.

According to Einstein's special theory of relativity, it would 
require an infinite amount of energy to propel an object at more than 
186,000 miles per second.

However, Dr Gunter Nimtz and Dr Alfons Stahlhofen, of the University 
of Koblenz, say they may have breached a key tenet of that theory.
advertisement

The pair say they have conducted an experiment in which microwave 
photons - energetic packets of light - travelled "instantaneously" 
between a pair of prisms that had been moved up to 3ft apart.

Being able to travel faster than the speed of light would lead to a 
wide variety of bizarre consequences.

For instance, an astronaut moving faster than it would theoretically 
arrive at a destination before leaving.

The scientists were investigating a phenomenon called quantum 
tunnelling, which allows sub-atomic particles to break apparently 
unbreakable laws.

Dr Nimtz told New Scientist magazine: "For the time being, this is 
the only violation of special relativity that I know of."



From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Aug 17 00:11:22 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:11:22 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <46C4E7AA.8070606@pobox.com>

Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light

*snort*

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


From sentience at pobox.com  Fri Aug 17 00:12:55 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:12:55 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <46C4E807.8010203@pobox.com>

Damien Broderick wrote:
> 
> A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light

Also in the news, a pair of German biologists claim to have discovered 
unicorns.

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


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Aug 17 00:55:35 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 19:55:35 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
In-Reply-To: <46C4E807.8010203@pobox.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
	<46C4E807.8010203@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816195109.02322e70@satx.rr.com>

At 05:12 PM 8/16/2007 -0700, Eliezer S. Yudkowsky wrote:
>
> > A pair of German physicists claim to have broken the speed of light
>
>Also in the news, a pair of German biologists claim to have discovered
>unicorns.

That's a *terrible* example. The unicorns they found had been 
produced by Austrian genetic engineers.

Nimtz's new (?) claim apparently invokes entanglement and/or quantum 
tunneling. Nothing necessarily heretical there.

Damien Broderick 



From aiguy at comcast.net  Fri Aug 17 02:03:12 2007
From: aiguy at comcast.net (Gary Miller)
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:03:12 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Good news on the Alzheimer's front
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40708161530j6a511c53t48ec3ceba25f68e6@mail.gmail.com>
References: <a6a17bd40708161530j6a511c53t48ec3ceba25f68e6@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007301c7e072$c42e7120$6801a8c0@ZANDRA2>

 Very Exciting!!!   Without a cure Azheimer's will be a major drain on our
work force and economy now that the baby boomers are reaching retirement.

Is this protein sLRP (soluble low-density lipoprotein receptor-related
protein) naturally occurring in any foods or supplements.

If so would it make it into the bloodstream without being ripped into amino
acids?

Wikipedia says it's produced in the human body, but it could take another 10
years minimum for this to make it to market.

Most probably the mice were injected.

If they were able to synthesize a altered form in a short period of time the
structure must not be super complex.

It doesn't look like their company Socratech is public but they do have
patents in place so no way to get rich off the coming miracle drug if there
is one of course. 

Any other ideas on how to leverage this potential breakthrough sooner rather
than later?



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Davis
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 6:30 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: [ExI] Good news on the Alzheimer's front

Extropes,

Ordinarily, I'd let this pass, but the nature of  Azheimer's is so ugly,...
well, maybe some one of you with a personal Alzheimer's concern can have a
better day, hearing some good news.

Draining away brain's toxic protein to stop Alzheimer's
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/uorm-dab080907.php

The previously murky cause of the disease comes into clear view, and an
almost "silver bullet" therapeutic approach is not merely indicated by the
research, but actually demonstrated (in the mouse model) and shown
thoroughly effective.

Also google up: "Berislav Zlokovic University of Rochester Medical Center"
and read his bio.  What a guy.  Reminds me of Drexler, or Anders.

Color me naive, my optimism premature, my conclusion unsubstantiated, but
I'm thinking "Jonas Salk Moment" and Nobel Prize in Medicine.

Ahhhhh, serotonin.

--
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.0/957 - Release Date: 8/16/2007
1:46 PM
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.0/957 - Release Date: 8/16/2007
1:46 PM
 



From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Aug 17 07:04:04 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:04:04 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816195109.02322e70@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
	<46C4E807.8010203@pobox.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070816195109.02322e70@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708170004x715df4f2l373b0400b932e04e@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/17/07, Damien Broderick wrote:
>
> Nimtz's new (?) claim apparently invokes entanglement and/or quantum
> tunneling. Nothing necessarily heretical there.
>

Actual paper available here-
http://arxiv.org/abs/0708.0681
Download 2-page pdf file.

Arstechnica is critical-
<http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070816-faster-than-the-speed-of-light-no-i-dont-think-so.html>
Another problem that occurs in these experiments comes from
determining when the pulse actually arrived. If you analyze a pulse of
light, you find that it is made up of a huge number of frequencies
that, as you move away from the fundamental frequency, get lower and
lower in amplitude. Once you look at the experimental set up in
detail, you find that it is triggering on the pre-pulse noise
generated by these high frequency components.


Another critic here-
<http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/ns-lst081607.php>
Aephraim Steinberg, a quantum optics expert at the University of
Toronto, Canada, doesn't dispute Nimtz and Stahlhofen's results.
However, Einstein can rest easy, he says. The photons don't violate
relativity: it's just a question of interpretation.


BillK


From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Aug 17 07:21:36 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 02:21:36 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0708170004x715df4f2l373b0400b932e04e@mail.gmail.co
 m>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
	<46C4E807.8010203@pobox.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070816195109.02322e70@satx.rr.com>
	<ee50357e0708170004x715df4f2l373b0400b932e04e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070817022020.02350838@satx.rr.com>

At 08:04 AM 8/17/2007 +0100, BillK wrote:

>Another critic here-
><http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-08/ns-lst081607.php>
>Aephraim Steinberg, a quantum optics expert at the University of
>Toronto, Canada, doesn't dispute Nimtz and Stahlhofen's results.

*Snort*. What would *he* know? 



From scerir at libero.it  Fri Aug 17 07:24:28 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 09:24:28 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000301c7e09f$a64a2f50$87951f97@archimede>

The paper should be this one
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/0708.0681
They write: "The 'evanescent modes' and 'tunneling'
violate the theory of special relativity, obviously,
they represent the exception which proves the special
theory of relativity."

Papers below seem to be more interesting
about 'signal' vs 'group' superluminal
velocities. Especially the experiment
performed by R. Chiao.

s.

--------------
Tunneling Times and Superluminality: a Tutorial
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9811019
-Raymond Y. Chiao
Abstract.
Experiments have shown that individual photons
penetrate an optical tunnel barrier with an effective
group velocity considerably greater than the vacuum
speed of light. The experiments were conducted with
a two-photon parametric down-conversion light source,
which produced correlated, but random, emissions of
photon pairs. The two photons of a given pair were
emitted in slightly different directions so that one
photon passed through the tunnel barrier, while the
other photon passed through the vacuum. The time
delay for the tunneling photon relative to its
twin was measured by adjusting the path length
difference between the two photons in a Hong-Ou-Mandel
interferometer, in order to achieve coincidence detection.
We found that the photon transit time through the barrier
was smaller than the twin photon's transit time through
an equal distance in vacuum, indicating that the process
of tunneling in quantum mechanics is superluminal.
Various conflicting theories of tunneling times are
compared with experiment.

---------------
Superluminal Tunneling Devices
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0204043
-G?nter Nimtz
Abstract.
Photonic tunneling permits superluminal signal
transmission. The principle of causality is not
violated but the time duration between cause
and effect can be shortened compared with an
interaction exchange with velocity of light.
This outstanding property can be applied to
speed-up photonic signal modulation and transmission
as well as to improve micro-electronic devices.
Superluminal photonic signal transmission have
been presented at microwave and infrared frequencies
already. Presumably superluminal photonic and electronic
devices can become reality having in mind the
experimental evidence of the universal tunneling
time of photons and of electrons.

---------------
Basics of Superluminal Signals
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/physics/0104063
G. Nimtz, A. Haibel
Abstract.
The paper elucidates the physical basis of
experimental results on superluminal signal velocity.
It will be made plausible that superluminal signals
do not violate the principle of causality but they
can shorten the luminal vacuum time span between cause
and effect. This amazing behaviour is based on
the property that any physical signal has a finite
duration.




From scerir at libero.it  Fri Aug 17 08:14:01 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:14:01 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Nimtz >lux redux?
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816182136.0228ee28@satx.rr.com><46C4E807.8010203@pobox.com><7.0.1.0.2.20070816195109.02322e70@satx.rr.com><ee50357e0708170004x715df4f2l373b0400b932e04e@mail.gmail.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070817022020.02350838@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c7e0a6$920284a0$87951f97@archimede>

> *Snort*. What would *he* know? 

BTW, another quantum optics expert (Franson, the
man of the Franson interferometer) came out
with an extension of an old idea of Feynman 
(short range a-causality). That is to say that 
the Feynman propagator can be larger (wider?)
than the forward light cone. This doesn't mean,
per se, the possibility of 'causal' superluminal 
signalling. Especially because both HUP and the 
lineary of QM seem to forbid causal superluminal 
signalling (at least that is the content of the 
'peaceful coexistence' principle). It might be useful 
(that propagator) for an ontology of 'entanglements' 
though.
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/0704.1468
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/0707.0475

s.

'The law of causality, I believe, like much that passes 
muster among philosophers, is a relic of a bygone age, 
surviving, like the monarchy, only because it is erroneously 
supposed to do no harm.'.
-Bertrand Russell, 'On the Notion of Cause', 1912-1913





From stathisp at gmail.com  Fri Aug 17 09:56:53 2007
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 19:56:53 +1000
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>

On 17/08/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I've been thinking lately about crime and punishment...
>
> As a compatibilist I define free-will, roughly, as the capacity to act
> freely according to one's will or nature at any given moment.  We all have
> free-will. But this does not mean the future, including one's future
> choices and actions, cannot also be completely determined by the past. On
> the compatibilist view, free-will is compatible with determinism.
>
> The criminal chooses freely to commit the crime, but it does not follow
> necessarily that he could have chosen otherwise. If we could re-wind the
> clock to the moment before the crime, to the exact same circumstance, he
> would certainly choose to commit the same crime again. His choice to offend
> was a free choice (in that he was not forced) but it was also a
> determined choice (in that it was in his nature at that moment to make
> that choice).
>
> There is no need then for any philosophical hoo-hah about that
> quasi-religious mental construct we call 'moral agency', nor is there any
> need for the associated idea that we should punish people as retribution
> for having acted wrongly when they could have acted rightly. Such
> considerations are just so much metaphysical baggage.
>
> The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and no prosecutor can
> produce evidence to prove that a defendant could have acted rightly. As
> far as anyone knows, the criminal acted freely *but according to his
> nature*.
>
> So, in an enlightened society, the goal of a correctional facility should
> be
> simply to correct the nature of the criminal (rehabilitation), and to
> correct
> the natures of would-be criminals through his example (deterrence).
>
> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.
>
> At least that's my take on this subject. Comments?

If determinism is true, the criminal could not have acted differently
but neither could the judge have decided on a different sentence. An
enlightened society would not blame the criminal (or the judge), but
then whether society is enlightened or not is not a matter of choice
either. This doesn't stop us indulging in the fantasy that our choices
are "free", and indeed it is very difficult to stop thinking this way
even if we realise it is a fantasy.

Compatibilism involves redefining "free" so that it doesn't mean the
logically impossible thing we intuitively feel it means: neither
determined nor random. Whether you accept the redefinition and call
yourself a compatibilist is a matter of taste rather than a
substantive philosophical issue.



-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 17 16:14:45 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:14:45 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <4243831025.20070817000221@mail.ru>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle> <4243831025.20070817000221@mail.ru>
Message-ID: <op.tw7oqvozivvpma@shuttle>

Vladimir,

> Retribution/punishment IS a way to enforce lawful behaviour...

Thanks for your comments. I'm not suggesting that punishment has no place  
in our criminal justice system. I mean only that its motivation should be  
rehabilitation and deterrence, not retribution.

It strikes me that retribution is an archaic concept, inconsistent with  
modern science. But people are dying because of it. If you ask people why  
they support capital punishment, you'll hear lots of arguments about  
retribution.

-gts



From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 17 16:14:46 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:14:46 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle>

Stathis,

Thanks for your comments. My purpose here is not to defend compatibilism,
necessarily, but rather to criticize the theory of retributive justice. I
see no place for retribution in the absence of proof of a causally
autonomous self.

-gts



From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 17 16:44:48 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 12:44:48 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>

Pure retributive justice is punishment for its own sake, considered  
separate from issues of deterrence and rehabilitation. Capital punishment  
is motivated largely by belief in retributive justice.

But for retributive justice to make sense, there must be a causally  
autonomous self who deserves punishment. If a prosecutor desires  
retributive justice then the burden of proof is on him to prove the  
defendant is a causally autonomous self. The defense needn't prove the  
truth of determinism. The prosecutor must prove the defendant had absolute  
freedom to commit the crime or to not commit the crime and that he was not  
driven by other factors (nature/nurture/whatever).

But I maintain that no prosecutor can provide such proof. The best he can  
do is argue, (along with philosophers like Searle, Hume and others), that  
people think and act "as if" free will is true.

That observation about human psychology is all well and good, saith the  
wise men and women on the jury, but it's not proof that the defendant  
actually had free will. Such philosophical musings are not sufficient  
evidence to send a man to fry in the electric chair.

-gts



From robotact at mail.ru  Fri Aug 17 17:09:21 2007
From: robotact at mail.ru (Vladimir Nesov)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 21:09:21 +0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw7oqvozivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle> <4243831025.20070817000221@mail.ru>
	<op.tw7oqvozivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <8437097373.20070817210921@mail.ru>

Friday, August 17, 2007, gts wrote:

g> It strikes me that retribution is an archaic concept, inconsistent with
g> modern science. But people are dying because of it. If you ask people why  
g> they support capital punishment, you'll hear lots of arguments about
g> retribution.

Retribution is a particular form of the same framework, it is good
enough association. Rehabilitation itself doesn't act as deterrence, there still
needs to be something that acts in that capacity.

-- 
 Vladimir Nesov                            mailto:robotact at mail.ru



From jonkc at att.net  Fri Aug 17 17:38:22 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:38:22 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>

"gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>

>  I define free-will, roughly, as the capacity to act
> freely according to one's will

So one has free will if one's will is free. I said it before I'll say it
again, free will is an idea so bad it's not even wrong.

> the goal of a correctional facility should
> be  simply to correct the nature of the criminal

But we have no idea how to do that and even if we did the resulting mind
surgery would be so radical that the original individual would be mostly
dead anyway, the new fellow is a very nice man but has little to do with the
criminal. Seems to me a bullet to the brain would be more elegant.

> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.

It ought not to but it does, no use pretending that reptilian part of our
brain doesn't exist.

 John K Clark






From desertpaths2003 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 17 17:47:35 2007
From: desertpaths2003 at yahoo.com (John)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:47:35 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Robert Heinlein at 100
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070816164209.021a92e8@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <184797.94730.qm@web35610.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I have to say Heinlein looks terrific and gets around very well for a man who just turned 100! : )  If only it were true! lol  Reason magazine has a great article about Robert Heinlein's contributions to society, which focuses on how his supposedly disparate legacy of patriotic militarism (Starship Troopers) and free-love & communes (Stranger in a Strange Land) actually were different sides of the same coin.     
   
  It seems many people looked to him for wisdom and leadership, though this left him feeling perplexed at times.  If he had established his own organization (something vaguely akin to Hubbard's group) I wonder what it would have been like.  Perhaps in some parallel Earth we will find out that he did.
   
  I hope Hollywood turns "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" and "Stranger in a Strange Land" into *quality* films someday fairly soon.
   
  John Grigg      
  
http://reason.com/news/show/120766.html



       
---------------------------------
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story.
 Play Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070817/15ac3e04/attachment.html>

From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Fri Aug 17 20:44:02 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:44:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Good news on the Alzheimer's front
In-Reply-To: <007301c7e072$c42e7120$6801a8c0@ZANDRA2>
References: <a6a17bd40708161530j6a511c53t48ec3ceba25f68e6@mail.gmail.com>
	<007301c7e072$c42e7120$6801a8c0@ZANDRA2>
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708171344ted66d6erb4a83bdaad038d1b@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/16/07, Gary Miller <aiguy at comcast.net> wrote:

> It doesn't look like their company Socratech is public but they do have
> patents in place so no way to get rich off the coming miracle drug if there
> is one of course.
>
The notion that Socratech, a new company, is not "public" does not
preclude investing in it.  It just means that the way to invest is by
direct contact with the principles and negotiation of an investment
relationship, rather than the "public' method of stock purchase.  This
is the sort of thing we associate with venture capitalists.  But, hey,
anyone can do the venture capitalist thing.  Just form/call yourself a
VC company(or just skip this step and do a "private placement"),
gather up investors, and go for it.


From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Fri Aug 17 21:12:00 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 14:12:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/17/07, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
> "gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>
                      <snip>
> > the goal of a correctional facility should
> > be  simply to correct the nature of the criminal
>
> But we have no idea how to do that ...

John, don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically
defective) "offender" was placed under your tutelage, and you were
given wide lattitude regarding what measures you could employ, that
you couldn't straighten him/her out?  Perhaps not completely, but
substantially?  Without surgical intervention.  You know, like place
the individual in a new environment, where old (bad) habits don't
work, and new habits have to be learned to gradually supplant the old?

Or, if not under your tutelage (for whatever reason, say, you're
disinclined or feel your skill set would be more rationally allocated
to other tasks) then under someone else's.

-- 
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Fri Aug 17 20:35:30 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 16:35:30 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <op.tw70tgdgivvpma@shuttle>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:38:22 -0400, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:

>> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.
>
> It ought not to but it does, no use pretending that reptilian part of our
> brain doesn't exist.

Presumably post-humans will not have reptilian natures!

-gts




From femmechakra at yahoo.ca  Sat Aug 18 04:02:24 2007
From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 00:02:24 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [ExI] Sending clips by e-mail
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40708171344ted66d6erb4a83bdaad038d1b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <632875.18055.qm@web30413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

If anybody has a moment, can someone suggest how I can
send a DVD clip by e-mail that is 168 Mo?  I read that
the best thing I can do is send it as a zip file but
i'm not sure what are the best programs for such
maneuvers. Any suggestions?

Thanks
Anna
  


      Ask a question on any topic and get answers from real people. Go to Yahoo! Answers and share what you know at http://ca.answers.yahoo.com


From amara at kurzweilai.net  Sat Aug 18 05:00:34 2007
From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica)
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 22:00:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Sending clips by e-mail
In-Reply-To: <632875.18055.qm@web30413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <a6a17bd40708171344ted66d6erb4a83bdaad038d1b@mail.gmail.com>
	<632875.18055.qm@web30413.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <01d501c7e154$b6123ee0$1bf9b443@HP>


http://www.yousendit.com/


> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org 
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of 
> Anna Taylor
> Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 9:02 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Sending clips by e-mail
> 
> If anybody has a moment, can someone suggest how I can send a 
> DVD clip by e-mail that is 168 Mo? 




From jonkc at att.net  Sat Aug 18 16:08:59 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 12:08:59 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>

"Jeff Davis" <jrd1415 at gmail.com>

> don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically defective)
> "offender"

Why is that in quotation marks?

> was placed under your tutelage, and you were given wide lattitude
> regarding what measures you could employ, that you couldn't straighten
> him/her out?

No, I don't think I know how to straighten out criminals. People have had
that delusion for centuries but the results have varied from mediocre to
dreadful. It is more likely that the criminal under my tutelage ends up
murdering me than me reforming him, and I think history backs me up.

gts Wrote:

> Presumably post-humans will not have reptilian natures!

I don't presume that at all. The reptilian part of the brain must be doing
something very important if Evolution has kept it around for half a billion
years.

  John K Clark




From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 18 16:54:50 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 12:54:50 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <f21c22e30708171841k3de769a6te7abd66c85e34db0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7n201givvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708171841k3de769a6te7abd66c85e34db0@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.tw9k9obiivvpma@shuttle>

On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 21:41:26 -0400, Stathis Papaioannou
<stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:

> I completely agree with you, and I extend the notion not just to
> retributive justice, but to blame in general. If someone does
> something bad to me, it is either because of determined events, in
> which case they couldn't help it, or because of random events, in
> which case they couldn't help it.

Yes, or at least nobody can prove otherwise.

My hypothetical client was found guilty of premeditated murder. The
prosecutor is seeking the death penalty because he believes in
retribution; that is, he believes my client deeply and profoundly deserves
to die on the grounds that he was a free moral agent who could have chosen
to do right but chose instead to do wrong.

However the prosecution cannot prove that conjecture. I insist my client
did wrong simply because it was in his nature to do wrong. He is a
dangerous man with a defective nature, but I'm not going to let him die on
the electric chair for some philosophical hand-waving about what might
have happened in some contra-universe.

> However, what if it can be shown that anger and the threat of revenge  
> are an effective practical solution?

I think that probably can be shown to be true in the short-term in
personal relationships, but in the long run it's probably just asking for
trouble. Angry threats breed fear or more anger, resentment and contempt,
etc..

At an institutional level, in my view the threat of incarceration is an
effective and valid means to deter crime, and crime deterrence is a valid
goal of the criminal justice system. Prisons should not be fun places to
live even if their primary function should be rehabilitation.

-gts



From randall at randallsquared.com  Sat Aug 18 18:25:51 2007
From: randall at randallsquared.com (Randall Randall)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 14:25:51 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>


On Aug 18, 2007, at 12:08 PM, John K Clark wrote:
> gts Wrote:
>
>> Presumably post-humans will not have reptilian natures!
>
> I don't presume that at all. The reptilian part of the brain must  
> be doing
> something very important if Evolution has kept it around for half a  
> billion
> years.

Feathers are important for birds, too, but that's
no reason to put them on airplanes.

--
Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com>
"In just the past few centuries, and primarily in only
  one or two parts of the world, we suddenly develop
  medical science, cars, telephones, airplanes,
  refrigeration, central heating, electrical power,
  computers, and spaceships. Why here? And why now?"




From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Aug 18 20:25:19 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:25:19 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3F1975CD-6959-4266-ADD8-694A0E3068A0@mac.com>


On Aug 17, 2007, at 2:12 PM, Jeff Davis wrote:

> On 8/17/07, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
>> "gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>
>                       <snip>
>>> the goal of a correctional facility should
>>> be  simply to correct the nature of the criminal
>>
>> But we have no idea how to do that ...
>
> John, don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically
> defective) "offender" was placed under your tutelage, and you were
> given wide lattitude regarding what measures you could employ, that
> you couldn't straighten him/her out?

Given sufficient intelligence and time then this is likely.  For  
current levels of human intelligence and time it is much less likely  
as past efforts have shown.  There is also a question concerning the  
difference between leading a horse to water and forcing it to drink.   
With sufficient skill you could conceivably overwrite a seriously  
broken brain, broken in ways that led to seriously criminal behavior  
say.  But at some point this would be the ultimate invasion of the  
self and the result may arguably not be the original person at all  
but something else written over the original.   This concern is  
applicable on a large scale in transhuman possibilities of course.

>   Perhaps not completely, but
> substantially?  Without surgical intervention.  You know, like place
> the individual in a new environment, where old (bad) habits don't
> work, and new habits have to be learned to gradually supplant the old?
>

Possibly toss them into a high speed simulation.   Instant karma  
going to get you indeed.

- samantha




From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Aug 18 20:32:24 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:32:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <0755675E-D475-42CE-AD0B-905F22863EE6@mac.com>


On Aug 17, 2007, at 10:38 AM, John K Clark wrote:

> "gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>
>
>>  I define free-will, roughly, as the capacity to act
>> freely according to one's will
>
> So one has free will if one's will is free. I said it before I'll  
> say it
> again, free will is an idea so bad it's not even wrong.

Do you have the ability to choose among alternatives or not?  Does  
the accumulation of your choices lead to your developing a particular  
character and determine outcomes to some significant degree or not?   
If you do have this ability then why are we prattling on incessantly  
about whether or not we have "free will"?   To the extent that it  
matters and is reasonably delimited, we do.


>
>> the goal of a correctional facility should
>> be  simply to correct the nature of the criminal
>
> But we have no idea how to do that

Not entirely true.  We have very good ideas about how to give many  
criminals new skills and psychological tools that can make a large  
difference.

> and even if we did the resulting mind
> surgery would be so radical that the original individual would be  
> mostly
> dead anyway,

Who says we need to do surgery?  Perhaps I missed something.

> the new fellow is a very nice man but has little to do with the
> criminal. Seems to me a bullet to the brain would be more elegant.
>

There is a large spectrum between saying we can do nothing and  
relatively completely drastically rewriting the original.

>> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.
>
> It ought not to but it does, no use pretending that reptilian part  
> of our
> brain doesn't exist.
>

That it exist does not argue that we must follow its dictates.  That  
is the naturalistic fallacy.

- s



From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Aug 18 20:40:00 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:40:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle> <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <32BEBA79-CABC-4B99-BFD4-9BB12A235B90@mac.com>


On Aug 17, 2007, at 9:44 AM, gts wrote:

> Pure retributive justice is punishment for its own sake, considered
> separate from issues of deterrence and rehabilitation. Capital  
> punishment
> is motivated largely by belief in retributive justice.
>
> But for retributive justice to make sense, there must be a causally
> autonomous self who deserves punishment. If a prosecutor desires
> retributive justice then the burden of proof is on him to prove the
> defendant is a causally autonomous self.

Do you have the ability to choose whether to murder someone who  
annoys you or not?  If not then you are a very dangerous loose cannon  
that either should be disposed of or locked away. If you do and you  
murder someone that annoys you then you are subject to punishment for  
your choice.  Some impossible concept like "causal autonomy" in its  
fullest sense is not necessary or relevant.  Only a reasonable  
ability to choose between alternative action is.

> The defense needn't prove the
> truth of determinism. The prosecutor must prove the defendant had  
> absolute
> freedom to commit the crime or to not commit the crime and that he  
> was not
> driven by other factors (nature/nurture/whatever).

There is no such thing as absolute freedom this side of theological  
fantasy-land.  We will not think with any real insight as long as we  
think that such is required or even worth considering when we touch  
on such subjects.

- s


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sat Aug 18 20:49:32 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:49:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>


On Aug 17, 2007, at 2:56 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

> On 17/08/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I've been thinking lately about crime and punishment...
>>
>> As a compatibilist I define free-will, roughly, as the capacity to  
>> act
>> freely according to one's will or nature at any given moment.  We  
>> all have
>> free-will. But this does not mean the future, including one's future
>> choices and actions, cannot also be completely determined by the  
>> past. On
>> the compatibilist view, free-will is compatible with determinism.
>>
>> The criminal chooses freely to commit the crime, but it does not  
>> follow
>> necessarily that he could have chosen otherwise.

If he had no power to choose not to murder someone, for instance,  
then he is too dangerous to be left at large.  If he did have such  
power then he can be judged on his choices.

>> If we could re-wind the
>> clock to the moment before the crime, to the exact same  
>> circumstance, he
>> would certainly choose to commit the same crime again.

This does not follow in the slightest and is totally false by my  
experience of most critical choice points in my life.

>> His choice to offend
>> was a free choice (in that he was not forced) but it was also a
>> determined choice (in that it was in his nature at that moment to  
>> make
>> that choice).

Not so in any  actually relevant sense.  It is like saying that if I  
make a choice then my choice was determined by the very fact that I  
made a choice!   Therefore I could not really have made a choice  
because I in fact had no choice because, what?  There is no substance  
to that argument.  It begs the question.


>>
>> There is no need then for any philosophical hoo-hah about that
>> quasi-religious mental construct we call 'moral agency', nor is  
>> there any
>> need for the associated idea that we should punish people as  
>> retribution
>> for having acted wrongly when they could have acted rightly. Such
>> considerations are just so much metaphysical baggage.
>>

That we confuse the issue with theological constructs because  
philosophy was for too long entangled with theology and because of  
certain weaknesses of human mentation is largely the problem in these  
interminable discussions.

>> The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and no prosecutor can
>> produce evidence to prove that a defendant could have acted  
>> rightly. As
>> far as anyone knows, the criminal acted freely *but according to his
>> nature*.
>>
>> So, in an enlightened society, the goal of a correctional facility  
>> should
>> be
>> simply to correct the nature of the criminal (rehabilitation), and to
>> correct
>> the natures of would-be criminals through his example (deterrence).
>>
>> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.
>>
>> At least that's my take on this subject. Comments?
>
> If determinism is true, the criminal could not have acted differently
> but neither could the judge have decided on a different sentence.

And it is inescapable that we are having this discussion and we are  
doomed to continue to have it again and again.

> An
> enlightened society would not blame the criminal (or the judge), but
> then whether society is enlightened or not is not a matter of choice
> either. This doesn't stop us indulging in the fantasy that our choices
> are "free", and indeed it is very difficult to stop thinking this way
> even if we realise it is a fantasy.
>

The only fantasy is our horrifically poor model of what choice and  
"free will" does and does not mean.

> Compatibilism involves redefining "free" so that it doesn't mean the
> logically impossible thing we intuitively feel it means: neither
> determined nor random. Whether you accept the redefinition and call
> yourself a compatibilist is a matter of taste rather than a
> substantive philosophical issue.

A matter of taste?  Really?

- s



From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Sat Aug 18 20:55:24 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 13:55:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708181355j87b5a63v2e81a86f2cd297b3@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/18/07, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
> "Jeff Davis" <jrd1415 at gmail.com>
>
> > don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically defective)
> > "offender"
>
> Why is that in quotation marks?

Because there were other possible choices -- perp, dirtbag, lowlife,
criminal -- and I sought something minimally judgemental/prejudicial.

> > was placed under your tutelage, and you were given wide lattitude
> > regarding what measures you could employ, that you couldn't straighten
> > him/her out?
>
> No, I don't think I know how to straighten out criminals.

Fair enough.

> People have had that delusion

I think "delusion" is too strong.  I think "hope" or perhaps "foolish
notion" (which also conveys the sense of the non-reality conveyed by
"delusion") would be more judicious, if not more accurate.

> for centuries but the results have varied from mediocre to dreadful.

Mediocre?  Hmmmmm.  Well it's a place to start, though I'm inclined to
think it's a little better than that.  I'm thinking there is likely a
technique more forgiving and nurturing than the dungeons favored by
statist-authoritarians ("When we have tortur... I mean reeducated you
sufficiently, you will come to love Big Brother.")

> It is more likely that the criminal under my tutelage ends up
> murdering me than me reforming him, and I think history backs me up.

You're probably right, and that would be bad.  We would sorely miss
your prickly self here on the list.  ;-}

-- 
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


From stathisp at gmail.com  Sun Aug 19 02:08:19 2007
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 12:08:19 +1000
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
Message-ID: <f21c22e30708181908i58f9b47cxe288d9fcabe4d706@mail.gmail.com>

On 19/08/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

> > Compatibilism involves redefining "free" so that it doesn't mean the
> > logically impossible thing we intuitively feel it means: neither
> > determined nor random. Whether you accept the redefinition and call
> > yourself a compatibilist is a matter of taste rather than a
> > substantive philosophical issue.
>
> A matter of taste?  Really?

Compatibilists say that you had no choice in your actions given the
circumstances, but that's OK, you still have free will because if
circumstances had been different your actions could have been
different. Incompatibilists say that you had no choice in your actions
given the circumstances and this means that there is no free will,
even though if circumstances had been different your actions could
have been different. There is no difference in factual claims, just a
difference in whether the words "free will" should be used to describe
the facts.



-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From sjatkins at mac.com  Sun Aug 19 04:19:09 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 21:19:09 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <f21c22e30708181908i58f9b47cxe288d9fcabe4d706@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<f21c22e30708181908i58f9b47cxe288d9fcabe4d706@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <55699A70-F161-4C88-9C3C-37CF8D9CC78C@mac.com>


On Aug 18, 2007, at 7:08 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote:

> On 19/08/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
>>> Compatibilism involves redefining "free" so that it doesn't mean the
>>> logically impossible thing we intuitively feel it means: neither
>>> determined nor random. Whether you accept the redefinition and call
>>> yourself a compatibilist is a matter of taste rather than a
>>> substantive philosophical issue.
>>
>> A matter of taste?  Really?
>
> Compatibilists say that you had no choice in your actions given the
> circumstances, but that's OK, you still have free will because if
> circumstances had been different your actions could have been
> different.

But doesn't "a matter of taste" itself imply free choice?  :-)

Dropping philosophically ridiculous absolutes seems required to even  
begin to explore the area.  I don't see where doing that is simply a  
matter of taste.

> Incompatibilists say that you had no choice in your actions
> given the circumstances and this means that there is no free will,
> even though if circumstances had been different your actions could
> have been different.

In which case it isn't a matter of taste.

> There is no difference in factual claims, just a
> difference in whether the words "free will" should be used to describe
> the facts.
>
>
>
> -- 
> Stathis Papaioannou
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat



From pjmanney at gmail.com  Sun Aug 19 05:05:29 2007
From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney)
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2007 22:05:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Stephen Colbert for your entertainment
Message-ID: <29666bf30708182205v204338bhd2089c4cee0a7301@mail.gmail.com>

Oooh, oooh, oooh!  I got some Colbert to share!  And just to clear it
up in case anyone was confused, this is parody...

Ian Bogost and persuasive videogames (Hey!  The guy read my essay!)
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=91012

Andrew Keen and the Internet's cult of the amateur:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=91639

Michael Behe and Intelligent Design:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=90952

Jared Diamond and the gun thang:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=87258

David France and 'gaydar' i.e. homosexuality and bio-pre-determinism:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=89157

Cheating death with genetics:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=91642

Dr, Spenser Wells and Stephen's genetic heritage:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=91514

Stephen and Time Travel:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=83631

Stephen and the Fields Medal:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=73353

Stephen and the Fields part 2:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=73352

Neil deGrasse Tyson and Pluto part 1:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=73146

Pluto part 2:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=73145

Stephen vs. Global warming
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=71953

Daniel Smith and auditory hallucinations:
http://www.comedycentral.com/motherload/index.jhtml?ml_video=88628

Enjoy!
PJ


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 19 14:16:40 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 10:16:40 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <f21c22e30708181908i58f9b47cxe288d9fcabe4d706@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<f21c22e30708181908i58f9b47cxe288d9fcabe4d706@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.txa8l21eivvpma@shuttle>

On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 22:08:19 -0400, Stathis Papaioannou  
<stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 19/08/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

>> A matter of taste?  Really?
>
> Compatibilists say that you had no choice in your actions given the
> circumstances, but that's OK, you still have free will because if
> circumstances had been different your actions could have been
> different. Incompatibilists say that you had no choice in your actions
> given the circumstances and this means that there is no free will,
> even though if circumstances had been different your actions could
> have been different. There is no difference in factual claims, just a
> difference in whether the words "free will" should be used to describe
> the facts.

I prefer to think in terms of compatibilism because it resolves to my  
satisfaction the sticky question of why we think and act as if we free  
will is the fact of the matter, when in actual fact there is no evidence  
to support it.

On this subject I agree with David Hume. In Humean terms we are "slaves to  
our passions", (where of course "passions" is understood to include  
ordinary inclinations and is not limited only to the modern usage which  
has connotations of inflamed emotions). In this sense free-will is false;  
our choices are determined by our natures. And yet on Hume's view we also  
have free will, even despite being slaves to our passions, because it  
cannot be denied that we can always do whatever we want to do.

These questions have bearing in a court of law, because as a defense  
attorney I needn't deny that my client chose freely to commit the crime. I  
admit he chose freely in accordance with his criminal nature. However the  
prosecution, if it is seeking retributive punishment, must prove that my  
client could have chosen otherwise.

-gts



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug 19 15:28:21 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 08:28:21 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
Message-ID: <00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Samantha wrote

> [John Clark wrote]
> > So one has free will if one's will is free. I said it before I'll  
> > say it again, free will is an idea so bad it's not even wrong.
> 
> Do you have the ability to choose among alternatives or not?

Yes!  This is just the right way to approach "free will". Either
don't use the concept at all (perhaps very wisely), or reduce it
to whether something can "freely" choose. If a chess program
thinks for an hour and suggests Qxd8 check, then I'll say that
the program chose to exchange queens, just as I'll say that a
certain weather program, after crunching numbers for hours,
decides that the hurricane will surely abate.

If someone hacked into the program, however, and just
before the hour was up forced the program to emit Qxf6
instead, then the program's "free will" was abrogated.

But in another email, Samantha goes on

> [Stathis evidently wrote]
>> If we could re-wind the clock to the moment before the
>> crime, to the exact same circumstance, he would certainly
>> choose to commit the same crime again.
> 
> This does not follow in the slightest and is totally false by my  
> experience of most critical choice points in my life.

It seems that you are dismissing out of hand the possibility 
that you could be living in a deterministic simulation. Besides,
the very wide tracts of neurons that determine a decision a
few seconds before you make an action are, well, "deterministic"
and I think that we can safely regard people as very akin to
programs.

Lee



From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 19 15:29:59 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:29:59 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<0755675E-D475-42CE-AD0B-905F22863EE6@mac.com>
Message-ID: <002c01c7e275$ebfe48b0$47074e0c@MyComputer>

"Samantha Atkins" <sjatkins at mac.com>


> Do you have the ability to choose among alternatives or not?

I don't know. I haven't finished processing your question yet so
I don't know how I'll respond to it. I could be wrong but I'll probably
finish processing the information in a few minutes and then we'll both
know what I have to say about the subject. On the other hand your 
question may be one of those where time does not seem to clarify 
matters and I suspect has sent my mind into an infinite look; if so I 
will do the healthy thing and ignore it and turn to other things.

> We have very good ideas about how to give many criminals
> new skills and > psychological tools that can make a large
> difference.

Bullshit.

  John K Clark





From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug 19 15:06:32 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 08:06:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle>
	<op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

gts writes

> But for retributive justice to make sense, there must be a causally  
> autonomous self who deserves punishment. If a prosecutor desires  
> retributive justice then the burden of proof is on him to prove the  
> defendant is a causally autonomous self.

Someone *deserves* punishment?  Why?  That is, following your
(in my view correct) notion that of Rehabilitation, Removal,
Deterrence, and Revenge, only the first three should be lofty
enough for us, why should anyone *deserve* anything bad?

A human being finds itself in a position where---for whatever
reasons---he or she is to be punished. For God's sake, why?
No one ever deserves anything bad, except in the weak sense
that, say, they should have expected a certain outcome.

I'm all in favor of blaming perpetrators and punishing offenders,
but only because at present Rehabilitation is not practical or
possible, because we don't know enough. Instead of executing
offenders, they ought to be frozen and kept for a time when
rehabilitation becomes possible (if indeed it ever can be in 
some cases without changing the offender into someone else).

You are really saying that if there were (in your eyes) a
"causally autonomous self"  then punishment for Revenge
is somehow justified, and the subject *deserves* punishment?

Lee



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug 19 15:13:35 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 08:13:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00ae01c7e273$99cf3b00$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Jeff writes

> On 8/17/07, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> gts wrote
>> 
>> > the goal of a correctional facility should
>> > be simply to correct the nature of the criminal
>>
>> But we have no idea how to do that ...
> 
> John, don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically
> defective) "offender" was placed under your tutelage, and you were
> given wide lattitude regarding what measures you could employ, that
> you couldn't straighten him/her out?  Perhaps not completely, but
> substantially?

I agree with John that we really don't know how to do that. I
wonder if you aren't unconsciously assuming that Good is
superior to Evil.

Suppose that you had been raised in a Mafia household and that
all your friends and relatives from your earliest years believed that
exterminating anyone who got in the family's way was just and
correct. But somehow, you turned out wrong. Somehow you,
despite all their best wishes for you and all the counseling and
help they provided, persisted in not wanting to seek revenge
and hurt, maim, torture, and kill. 

Do you think that it necessarily follows that somewhere in the
world there has to be a Don wise enough to "correct", that
is, "rehabilitate" you, and turn you into a bloodthirsty killer?

Lee

>  Without surgical intervention.  You know, like place
> the individual in a new environment, where old (bad) habits don't
> work, and new habits have to be learned to gradually supplant the old?
> 
> Or, if not under your tutelage (for whatever reason, say, you're
> disinclined or feel your skill set would be more rationally allocated
> to other tasks) then under someone else's.



From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 19 15:55:46 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:55:46 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>

"Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>

> If someone hacked into the program, however,
> and just before the hour was  up forced the program
> to emit Qxf6 instead, then the program's "free will"
> was abrogated.

That is exactly equivalent to saying "After I started processing the data
but before I produced an output I came into possession of important
new data on the matter". Yep, an idea so bad it's not even wrong.

John K Clark




From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 19 16:42:51 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 12:42:51 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle> <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <op.txbfdpv9ivvpma@shuttle>

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:06:32 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:

>> But for retributive justice to make sense, there must be a causally
>> autonomous self who deserves punishment. If a prosecutor desires
>> retributive justice then the burden of proof is on him to prove the
>> defendant is a causally autonomous self.
>
> Someone *deserves* punishment?  Why?

It's part of the theory of retributive justice (which I am criticising).  
To believe in retributive justice is to believe that people are causally  
autonomous agents and that wrong-doers deserve their 'just desserts'.  
That, according to the theory, is how the scales of justice are balanced.

-gts



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug 19 19:17:38 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 12:17:38 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle>
	<op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle><00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txbfdpv9ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <00ca01c7e295$ebf8e3f0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

gts writes

> On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 11:06:32 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
> 
>>> But for retributive justice to make sense, there must be a causally
>>> autonomous self who deserves punishment. If a prosecutor desires
>>> retributive justice then the burden of proof is on him to prove the
>>> defendant is a causally autonomous self.
>>
>> Someone *deserves* punishment?  Why?
> 
> It's part of the theory of retributive justice (which I am criticising).  

So far as I am concerned, a theory of retributive justice need
not include the proposition that a human being *deserves* that
something bad happen to him.  As opposed to Removal, 
Deterrence, and Rehabilitation, Retribution seems actually
silly. Why do something awful to someone unless some good
can come from it?

(I sit here comfortably behind a keyboard, as do you, and no one
has killed my mother or my father or my brother, which I have to
admit may have a strong effect on my thinking.)

> To believe in retributive justice is to believe that people are causally  
> autonomous agents and that wrong-doers deserve their 'just desserts'.  

Maybe there is disagreement about what "causally autonomous agents"
could be or are?  Or perhaps misunderstanding?  Let's affirm instead
that we are all grown-ups here, and we do not in any way believe in
uncaused events. So there really cannot be any such thing as a causally
autonomous agent, right? 

But this is not enough to rebut retributive justice, as I'll try to make clear.
Your words above seem to uncharitably characterize retributive justice.

Now you and I, at least, do not sanction revenge-pain, or retributive-
justice, at least not simply in order to harm someone.

However, there can be exceptions. You have noticed the rather
amazing lengths some relatives and loved ones will go to in order
to see an execution take place. I hear that they "cannot rest" or
"cannot find peace" until the guilty are brought to justice. It's
simply astonishing the degree of inconvenience they then go
through to actually witness an execution, or to be present at
sentencing.

I feel forced to accept a sort of theory of retributive justice in that
these evident feelings of the victims must be taken into account.
I'm not sure where I would draw the boundaries! (But then---it's
not up to me, is it?)  Suppose that all the deceased's friends, relatives,
and loved ones could only be satisfied by torture of the perpetrator. 

In any particular society's particular culture, these things have
to be taken into account. More harm could in some cases
result from the people feeling that justice had not been done
than would result from, say, mild torture of the miscreant.

Lee



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Sun Aug 19 19:29:16 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 12:29:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

John writes


> "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
> 
>> If someone hacked into the program, however,
>> and just before the hour was  up forced the program
>> to emit Qxf6 instead, then the program's "free will"
>> was abrogated.
> 
> That is exactly equivalent to saying "After I started processing the data
> but before I produced an output I came into possession of important
> new data on the matter".

I don't agree at all!  In your example, my free will is not infringed.
Rather, on the contrary, I did decide freely to consider highly
the new data.

Here is a correct analogy:  I am trying to decide whether or not
to vote for X, and suddenly a goon shows up in the booth with
me and puts a gun to my head and says "vote for X or else".
That is analogous to a hacker substituing or forcing a program
at the last moment to emit a certain chess move.  The whole of
the program was not consulted.  In my case, all my judgments
and feelings and considerations were upended by fear of the
gun against my temple.

So with either the goon in the voting booth with me, or someone
tampering in a trivial way with the chess program, we may say
that the agent was not allowed to freely choose.  That is the
best way to use words, otherwise you end up in the ridiculous
predicament of having to deny that you had any choice about
answering this email.

You did have a choice, (as is affirmed by us compatibilists, as
gts has amply described).

Lee



From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Sun Aug 19 21:13:20 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 17:13:20 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <00ca01c7e295$ebf8e3f0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle> <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txbfdpv9ivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ca01c7e295$ebf8e3f0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <op.txbrwildivvpma@shuttle>

On Sun, 19 Aug 2007 15:17:38 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:

> So far as I am concerned, a theory of retributive justice need
> not include the proposition that a human being *deserves* that
> something bad happen to him.

I would have to say then that you are thinking here of something other  
than retributive justice.

Sorry to repeat myself, but a central doctrine of the theory of  
retributive justice is that wrong-doers should get their just deserts, and  
that *this is how the scales of justice are balanced*. An eye for an eye,  
a tooth for a tooth.

(Incidentally, I misspelled "just deserts" in my previous post. I spelled  
it "just desserts" because that is how it is pronounced, but it's properly  
spelled with only one 's'. The word is obsolete except in this context. To  
get one's just deserts is get that which one justly deserves.)

> Maybe there is disagreement about what "causally autonomous agents"
> could be or are?  Or perhaps misunderstanding?  Let's affirm instead
> that we are all grown-ups here, and we do not in any way believe in
> uncaused events. So there really cannot be any such thing as a causally
> autonomous agent, right?

Right, or at least there is no evidence to prove such beasts exist. But  
how do we explain this to the jury when the prosecutor is seeking the  
death penalty instead of a life sentence on the grounds that he believes  
the defendant was a causally autonomous agent who chose to do wrong when  
he could have chosen to do right and thus deserves to die to balance the  
scales of justice?

The prosecution cannot prove that the defendant could have chosen to do  
right. It seems to me that people are dying in the electric chair for what  
amounts to a religious belief.

Do I feel sorry for the friends and relatives of the murder victims? Sure  
I do. I feel sorry for everyone involved.

-gts



From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Aug 20 01:55:24 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 18:55:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <103D65FD-DC3A-4042-9045-26FA59804642@mac.com>


On Aug 19, 2007, at 8:28 AM, Lee Corbin wrote:

> Samantha wrote
>
>> [John Clark wrote]
>>> So one has free will if one's will is free. I said it before I'll
>>> say it again, free will is an idea so bad it's not even wrong.
>>
>> Do you have the ability to choose among alternatives or not?
>
> But in another email, Samantha goes on
>
>> [Stathis evidently wrote]
>>> If we could re-wind the clock to the moment before the
>>> crime, to the exact same circumstance, he would certainly
>>> choose to commit the same crime again.
>>
>> This does not follow in the slightest and is totally false by my
>> experience of most critical choice points in my life.
>
> It seems that you are dismissing out of hand the possibility
> that you could be living in a deterministic simulation.

Not really and most likely not relevant if we were.  A simulation of  
the complexity and variation we experience would have to include our  
own rather chaotic mental processes and choosing methodologies.    
Humans are not difficult to predict in many aspects but are not  
perfectly predictable by any means.  On second consideration of a  
decision point I might very well take a road not taken before.   
Perhaps some of that is just me as I seem to often be of at least two  
minds on many things.  I quite often find myself wishing I could try  
all or several of some set of alternatives.

> Besides,
> the very wide tracts of neurons that determine a decision a
> few seconds before you make an action are, well, "deterministic"
> and I think that we can safely regard people as very akin to
> programs.

They are not deterministic in the useful form or being precisely  
predictable in macro level outcome.  That it is all physics  
underneath is not terribly useful in this domain.

- samantha



From fauxever at sprynet.com  Mon Aug 20 03:37:10 2007
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 20:37:10 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Artificial life likely in 3 to 10 years - Yahoo! News
Message-ID: <001a01c7e2db$65ea0820$6401a8c0@brainiac>

 http://tinyurl.com/2xfrnj 



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Mon Aug 20 04:27:14 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 21:27:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<103D65FD-DC3A-4042-9045-26FA59804642@mac.com>
Message-ID: <00e701c7e2e2$f9ba9770$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Samantha writes

> On second consideration of a decision point I might very
> well take a road not taken before. Perhaps some of that
> is just me as I seem to often be of at least two minds on
> many things.

Do you believe in uncaused events? Unless you do, I don't
see how---under *exactly* identical circumstances---you
can choose other than you did.

>> Besides, the very wide tracts of neurons that determine
>> a decision a few seconds before you make an action are,
>> well, "deterministic" and I think that we can safely regard
>> people as very akin to programs.
> 
> They are not deterministic in the useful form or being precisely  
> predictable in macro level outcome.

True.  It is necessary to distinguish between "ontological determinism"
and "epistemological determinism"  (Barrow and Tipler, 1986).
I am making the ontological claim here that one's actions really
are physically determined, whether or not there might be any
short cut to their computation, or whether or not it's feasible to
compute them.

Lee

> That it is all physics underneath is not terribly useful in this domain.



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Mon Aug 20 04:21:28 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 21:21:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle> <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txbfdpv9ivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ca01c7e295$ebf8e3f0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txbrwildivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <00e201c7e2e2$4529ebd0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Gordon writes

>> Maybe there is disagreement about what "causally autonomous agents"
>> could be or are?  Or perhaps misunderstanding?  Let's affirm instead
>> that we are all grown-ups here, and we do not in any way believe in
>> uncaused events. So there really cannot be any such thing as a causally
>> autonomous agent, right?
> 
> Right, or at least there is no evidence to prove such beasts exist. But  
> how do we explain this to the jury when the prosecutor is seeking the  
> death penalty instead of a life sentence on the grounds that he believes  
> the defendant was a causally autonomous agent who chose to do
> wrong when he could have chosen to do right and thus deserves to
> die to balance the scales of justice?

Well, I agree with the prosecutor!  The defendent *could* have chosen
to do other than he did.  I thought you were a compatibilist. Unless
someone was (in effect) holding a gun to his head, then the defendent
did indeed have a choice in the matter.

And it's obvious that people need to be punished for making bad choices
(when those choices break the law, for instance, or harm people).

> The prosecution cannot prove that the defendant could have chosen to do  
> right. It seems to me that people are dying in the electric chair for what  
> amounts to a religious belief.

Why emphasize capital punishment?  How do you feel about the millions
of people in prison for doing things that---according to you, in this email
---they had no choice about.

Lee



From jef at jefallbright.net  Sun Aug 19 22:49:05 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 15:49:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Singularity Summit - lodging?
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708191549y432e1434ob5d27fbcd790c7ed@mail.gmail.com>

My boss (myself) just informed me that I can take a few days off from
business development to attend the Singularity Summit Sep 8-9 but that
lodging isn't in the budget.  (He's being tight, keeps talking about
the length of the runway, whatever that means.)

I'm wondering if any fellow extropes living in the Bay Area might want
to offer me a place to crash for the night(s) in exchange for good
conversation and sharing of drinks, meals, etc.

I plan to arrive in the Bay Area Friday evening, and travel home on
Monday, so looking for three nights, quite possibly with various
hosts.

If so, please contact me offlist.

- Jef


From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Aug 20 05:46:04 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:46:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The enthusiast
Message-ID: <6DA490D0-75CF-4F6D-8061-2813E80BEAC0@mac.com>

The Enthusiast by David Ewing Duncan
A controversial biologist at Harvard claims he can extend life span  
and treat diseases of aging. He may be right.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/19172/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070819/46c80258/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Aug 20 05:49:49 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:49:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <00e701c7e2e2$f9ba9770$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<103D65FD-DC3A-4042-9045-26FA59804642@mac.com>
	<00e701c7e2e2$f9ba9770$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <B61F12DB-F00B-4252-986C-5AF8AB4E83FE@mac.com>


On Aug 19, 2007, at 9:27 PM, Lee Corbin wrote:

> Samantha writes
>
>> On second consideration of a decision point I might very
>> well take a road not taken before. Perhaps some of that
>> is just me as I seem to often be of at least two minds on
>> many things.
>
> Do you believe in uncaused events? Unless you do, I don't
> see how---under *exactly* identical circumstances---you
> can choose other than you did.

That is because you are being perhaps too much of a literalist about  
cause and effect.  The real world is much more messy and chaotic.    
There are no exactly identical circumstances.  It is only a thought  
experiment.   It does not show that anyone is incapable of choosing  
differently than they did.  So what is the point?

>
>>> Besides, the very wide tracts of neurons that determine
>>> a decision a few seconds before you make an action are,
>>> well, "deterministic" and I think that we can safely regard
>>> people as very akin to programs.
>>
>> They are not deterministic in the useful form or being precisely
>> predictable in macro level outcome.
>
> True.  It is necessary to distinguish between "ontological  
> determinism"
> and "epistemological determinism"  (Barrow and Tipler, 1986).
> I am making the ontological claim here that one's actions really
> are physically determined, whether or not there might be any
> short cut to their computation, or whether or not it's feasible to
> compute them.

Then wouldn't that have to elicit a "so what"?.

- samantha



From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Aug 20 05:57:53 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2007 22:57:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Technology Review: A New Design for Computer Chips
Message-ID: <46C92D61.2030307@mac.com>

http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/19269/

Not so new in theory but a new commercial implementation.


From rpicone at gmail.com  Mon Aug 20 10:15:31 2007
From: rpicone at gmail.com (Robert Picone)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 03:15:31 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw7oqvozivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle> <4243831025.20070817000221@mail.ru>
	<op.tw7oqvozivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <ffcf8fff0708200315r7327a7ffm169db611bfa2bb5a@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/17/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Vladimir,
>
> > Retribution/punishment IS a way to enforce lawful behaviour...
>
> Thanks for your comments. I'm not suggesting that punishment has no place
> in our criminal justice system. I mean only that its motivation should be
> rehabilitation and deterrence, not retribution.
>
> It strikes me that retribution is an archaic concept, inconsistent with
> modern science. But people are dying because of it. If you ask people why
> they support capital punishment, you'll hear lots of arguments about
> retribution.
>
> -gts

Retribution -is- an archaic motivation for punishment, yes, but
honestly, I don't think that matters considering it tends to
correspond fairly well with a model focused on the risks/rewards to
society.

If someone was willing to take a life to benefit themselves, then they
are considerably more likely to do it again than the average person,
and as such, releasing them into the general population at any point
in the future is a rather big risk to be weighted with whatever reward
it might produce. so lifetime imprisonment and the death penalty (if
it were done at a reasonable cost) are both reasonable.

On the other hand, for non-capital crimes, there is a sense of how
much they have wronged, and how much they have wronged tends to be
directly related to how much they thought they stood to benefit at the
time.  The amount they stood to benefit is in turn related to how
willing they initially would be to risk getting caught doing it again,
this willingness decreases with punishment.  So the retribution model
seems to be a decent way of assessing future risk to society, if I get
caught doing something that would let me live comfortably for the rest
of my life if successful, and I only lose 6 months of my life for
failing, I'm going to try it again, but if someone estimates the worth
of that amount of harm to be 10 years of my life, I would be
considerably less willing to try it again, and wouldn't be as much of
a risk to society.

The other benefit of people going along with retribution, is it
doesn't bring about bullshit punishments, someone who bought a bag of
marijuana hasn't harmed someone, and thus doesn't deserve any
nontrivial punishment under model.  On the other hand, if the focus is
deterring people from anything that is socially unacceptable, then
then punishing someone for doing a drug, peacefully is perfectly
reasonable.

An example of retribution run rampant is Texas, and I really wouldn't
feel very constrained by it there...  On the other hand, the example
of deterrence run rampant is Singapore, where you face mandatory
hanging if you're found with more than a half ounce of heroin (it
doesn't seem as if they have any magical method for determining that
it is yours).


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 20 13:04:11 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 09:04:11 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <00e201c7e2e2$4529ebd0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw7oqwnwivvpma@shuttle> <op.tw7p4yvzivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ab01c7e272$e5c1c920$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txbfdpv9ivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ca01c7e295$ebf8e3f0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txbrwildivvpma@shuttle>
	<00e201c7e2e2$4529ebd0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <op.txczw9j7ivvpma@shuttle>

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 00:21:28 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:

> Well, I agree with the prosecutor!

I had a hunch you did. :)

> The defendant *could* have chosen to do other than he did.  I thought  
> you were a compatibilist.

Seems to me you're forgetting why it's called "compatibilism":  
compatibilism is compatible with determinism.

When a compatibilist speaks of free-will, he does so only in a manner of  
speaking. As you wrote to John, (and I agree completely) compatibilism is  
the best way to use words. But that's all it is!

For purposes of retributive punishment in a court of law the burden of  
proof is on the prosecution to prove determinism is false. I insist that  
no prosecutor can produce any such evidence. And if determinism is true  
then my client could not have chosen not to commit the murder and is  
therefore not deserving capital punishment for reasons of retribution.

I don't deny that my client chose freely to commit the crime. However, as  
far as anyone knows, it was in my client's criminal nature to choose to  
commit the crime, and his criminal nature is entirely a product of  
biological and environmental influences. He is a physical object fully  
embedded in physical reality like any other object, a caused object with a  
caused nature, not a causally autonomous agent who stands outside the  
ordinary chain of cause and effect.

> Why emphasize capital punishment?

I'm emphasizing the capital punishment issue in these arguments because if  
you ask people why they support capital punishment instead of life  
sentences, you'll hear a lot of arguments about retribution and revenge.  
Were it not for belief in retribution, capital punishment would probably  
not be in option in those states in which it is legal. It's extremely  
controversial whether capital punishment deters homicide more than life  
sentences (in fact there is evidence to suggest the reverse is true) and  
of course killing the criminal does nothing to rehabilitate him. Capital  
punishment is mostly about retribution.

-gts






From russell.wallace at gmail.com  Mon Aug 20 13:44:32 2007
From: russell.wallace at gmail.com (Russell Wallace)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 14:44:32 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Technology Review: A New Design for Computer Chips
In-Reply-To: <46C92D61.2030307@mac.com>
References: <46C92D61.2030307@mac.com>
Message-ID: <8d71341e0708200644k49898905pa1e73ccb9ad77d9f@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/20/07, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> http://www.technologyreview.com/Biztech/19269/
>
> Not so new in theory but a new commercial implementation.

Indeed first commercial implementation, I think? Looks good, seems
they're aiming initially for applications where a particular program
needs high throughput.


From kanzure at gmail.com  Mon Aug 20 14:10:33 2007
From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 09:10:33 -0500
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.tw9k9obiivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708171841k3de769a6te7abd66c85e34db0@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw9k9obiivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <200708200910.33971.kanzure@gmail.com>


Out of the entire discussion I find those two paragraphs to be 
the most notable.

It seems that the "Justice" people dispense is more for the 
emotional benefits such as finally seeing the rapist sent to 
the chair or something. Sending the rapist to the chair will 
of course not fix the problems and in fact 'waste' more 
resources.*

If we were serious about preservation of our systems we would 
instead not have to worry about problems like somebody 
stealing a few items from a store. Instead we would have 
backups, redundancy, an ability to reinitialize a person now 
found dead. But since we are not there yet, since we lack the 
knowledge, it looks like some people hope for there to be 
some "Justice" to dispense.

I am reminded of http://asarya.com/ which is quoted from 
Zindell's Neverness trilogy: "An asarya ... is a person who 
can look upon all aspects of creation and say \Yes\ no matter 
how 'painful' the universe may be." The dispensed "Justice" 
seems to be a way to try to say 'No'. Ouch.

- Bryan

* We cannot actually say it will waste resources; what if the 
rapist can be recovered into a Feynman/Einstein equivalent? 
We of course do not know this, and so focusing on just this 
one particular person looks suspicious- should we not be 
helping out all sorts of people instead of just the ones that 
show up in our Justice System? 

On Saturday 18 August 2007 11:54, gts wrote:
> My hypothetical client was found guilty of premeditated
> murder. The prosecutor is seeking the death penalty because
> he believes in retribution; that is, he believes my client
> deeply and profoundly deserves to die on the grounds that
> he was a free moral agent who could have chosen to do right
> but chose instead to do wrong.
>
> However the prosecution cannot prove that conjecture. I
> insist my client did wrong simply because it was in his
> nature to do wrong. He is a dangerous man with a defective
> nature, but I'm not going to let him die on the electric
> chair for some philosophical hand-waving about what might
> have happened in some contra-universe.


From jonkc at att.net  Mon Aug 20 14:56:34 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 10:56:34 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>

"Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com> Wrote:

> In your example, my free will is not infringed. Rather, on the contrary,
> I  did decide freely

So I have free will if I can will things freely. I said it before I'll say
it again, an idea so bad it's not even wrong.

> Here is a correct analogy:  I am trying to decide whether or not  to vote
> for X, and suddenly a goon shows up in the booth with  me and puts
> a gun  to my head and says "vote for X or else.

So you have received new information to decide the question of which
candidate it would be wisest to vote for. I personally would consider it
very important information indeed, more important even than the
candidate's positions on Free Trade.

John K Clark




From desertpaths2003 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 20 16:54:55 2007
From: desertpaths2003 at yahoo.com (John)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 09:54:55 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] documentary- "A Flock of Dodo's"
In-Reply-To: <00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <292886.7941.qm@web35607.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I recently viewed the very entertaining and informative documentary about the evolution/intelligent design debate, "A Flock of Dodo's."  Dr. Randy Olson, the host/filmmaker, was open about being an evolutionist and yet he was still able to look at things from the other side's perspective.  This was very warm and "down to earth" filmmaking at it's best and yet at the same time it was a very slick production.  He would in a very quick and humorous way explain various scientific concepts (sometimes using animations and techniques seemingly taken from children's programming) and then move on to show what each side thought.  
   
  A "Dodo" according to him is not necessarily a Creationist but simply anyone who does not know how to survive and thrive in our public relations obsessed information society.  The Dodo was a creature which did not adapt fast enough when its environment changed and so it perished.  Scientists who study and teach evolution are seen in the documentary as being the next Dodos if they do not soon adapt.  A scene where the filmmaker and his scientist buddies are playing poker together is highly instructive of their challenge...
   
  I highly recommend everyone see this film.  Surprisingly, I discovered it on Showtime.
   
  http://www.livescience.com/health/060303_flock_dodos.html
   
  http://www.amazon.com/Flock-Dodos-Jack-Cahill/dp/B000PATZKQ/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-2756377-4347339?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1187628327&sr=8-1
   
  John Grigg    



       
---------------------------------
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070820/3178c842/attachment.html>

From hibbert at mydruthers.com  Mon Aug 20 16:59:15 2007
From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 09:59:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Phishing URLs: was The enthusiast
In-Reply-To: <6DA490D0-75CF-4F6D-8061-2813E80BEAC0@mac.com>
References: <6DA490D0-75CF-4F6D-8061-2813E80BEAC0@mac.com>
Message-ID: <46C9C863.20702@mydruthers.com>

Samantha, did you look at that citation before you forwarded it?  (I 
assume you didn't construct the hidden URL you sent out.)

What people with mailers that display html saw looked like this:

The Enthusiast by David Ewing Duncan
A controversial biologist at Harvard claims he can extend life span and 
treat diseases of aging. He may be right.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/19172/

Both the title and the url were encoded links.  And while the URL works 
fine, the link under it was something obnoxious!

"http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe3115747c650675741474&ls=fdef1573716c0d7872107371&m=ff011674776105&l=fec4127776650574&s=fe2f167274620075741371&jb=ffcf14&t="

There's no way for anyone to safely click on something like that.  It 
would be much more polite to just send us the visible link, and not the 
obfuscated link that presumably goes through someone's tracking system.

Grumble,
Chris
-- 
I think that, for babies, every day is first love in Paris. Every
wobbly step is skydiving, every game of hide and seek is Einstein
in 1905.--Alison Gopnik (http://edge.org/q2005/q05_9.html#gopnik)

Chris Hibbert
hibbert at mydruthers.com
Blog:   http://pancrit.org
http://mydruthers.com



From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Mon Aug 20 15:31:42 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 11:31:42 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 10:56:34 -0400, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:

> So I have free will if I can will things freely.I said it before I'll  
> say it again, an idea so bad it's not even wrong.

I kinda' agree with you, John, but here's the rub:

Someday you may find yourself in court accused of serious moral turpitude.  
If you say to the judge in your defense, "Your honor, moral turpitude can  
exist only if free-will is true, but free-will is an idea so bad it's not  
even wrong", then he will most likely look at you with glazed eyes, slam  
his gavel, and sentence you to do time in prison. He might also order a  
psychiatric evaluation. :)

-gts



From jonkc at att.net  Mon Aug 20 19:02:03 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:02:03 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>

"gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>

> Someday you may find yourself in court
> accused of serious moral turpitude.

As that bowl of petunias said on it's way to certain death in the Hitchhiker
books,

 "Oh no, not again."

> If you say to the judge in your defense,
> "Your honor, moral turpitude can  exist
> only if free-will is true, but  free-will is
> an idea so bad it's not  even wrong", then
> he will most  likely look at you with glazed
> eyes, slam  his gavel, and sentence you to
> do time in prison. He might also order a
>  psychiatric evaluation.

I think what you say is true, a judge would most likely do exactly that, and
that is why the "idea" of free will has not only totally screwed up
philosophy it has also turned our legal system into a joke.

 John K Clark





From pjmanney at gmail.com  Mon Aug 20 20:26:08 2007
From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney)
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2007 13:26:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] LA Times: "Chasing Memory" Parts 1 & 2 of 4
Message-ID: <29666bf30708201326r704edc06q10e8a9e59e219d87@mail.gmail.com>

These are links to parts one and two of a four part series on Gary
Lynch's UC Irvine neuroscience lab called "Chasing Memory", from the
front page of the Los Angeles Times, which began on Sunday, August
19th.

"He has, for almost the length of his career, been trying to answer
essentially a single pair of questions: What happens in the brain when
a human being encounters a new experience so that he or she can recall
it at will tonight, tomorrow, in 2025? And what goes wrong when we
can't remember?"

Gary Lynch is described as an "often polarizing figure in his field,
that he had a reputation for being pugnacious, and that he had been
uncannily right about a lot of things over a very long time."  And he
believes, "we're about to nail this mother to the door."

I am only including links (which I have pulled myself...) for the
articles, since each is long.

Part 1:
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-na-memoryfirst19aug19,0,5585770.story?coll=la-news-science

Part 2:
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-na-memorysecond20aug20,0,7063203.story?coll=la-home-center

I'll send Parts 3 & 4 on Tuesday.

PJ


From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Aug 21 08:25:50 2007
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:25:50 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <200708200910.33971.kanzure@gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708171841k3de769a6te7abd66c85e34db0@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.tw9k9obiivvpma@shuttle> <200708200910.33971.kanzure@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <46CAA18E.8010602@mac.com>

Bryan Bishop wrote:
> Out of the entire discussion I find those two paragraphs to be 
> the most notable.
>
> It seems that the "Justice" people dispense is more for the 
> emotional benefits such as finally seeing the rapist sent to 
> the chair or something. Sending the rapist to the chair will 
> of course not fix the problems and in fact 'waste' more 
> resources.*
>   

I rather like a different sort of justice that would indenture the 
rapist for a considerable period to make some form of restitution for 
his acts. 
> If we were serious about preservation of our systems we would 
> instead not have to worry about problems like somebody 
> stealing a few items from a store. Instead we would have 
> backups, redundancy, an ability to reinitialize a person now 
> found dead. But since we are not there yet, since we lack the 
> knowledge, it looks like some people hope for there to be 
> some "Justice" to dispense.
>   
What?  How can you start by talking about preservation of our systems 
and then presuppose such radically different technology available as to 
underly change all our systems as the way to preserve them?   By systems 
do you mean preserving all the people?   

> I am reminded of http://asarya.com/ which is quoted from 
> Zindell's Neverness trilogy: "An asarya ... is a person who 
> can look upon all aspects of creation and say \Yes\ no matter 
> how 'painful' the universe may be." The dispensed "Justice" 
> seems to be a way to try to say 'No'. Ouch.
>
>   
That is far out science fiction dude, not a guide to life or the height 
of philosophical insight.

- samantha



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 08:33:34 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:33:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>

Beam me up. I think this sim is <counterfactual working stack
overflowing> and needs rebooting... :) Probably too many words follow.
I apologize in advance and will not post further in this thread...

/rantmode = ON

"My lack of God!"

Am I hallucinating, or is someone seriously proposing -- more than
once -- that nonlethal deterrence of criminal behavior including
punishment works and is somehow appropriate, but that capital
punishment is bad and isn't justified... ...without, apparently,
noticing that the threat of capital punishment juuuust miiight have a
deterrent effect on some people? And most particularly, that its
abolition might be problematical? I sense a lacuna in a world model.
And let's set aside the problems presented by the substrate of the
discussion.

Maybe capital punishment is "right  for the wrong reason." We do seem
to have wiring closely allied with "fairness" and "retribution" is
part of that. Below those constructs might be something as general as
"the universe makes sense and I know my place in it" or "I can relax
for now" -- luxuries in the Hobbesian wild, and part of what makes
civilizations worth some of the bother. Can the universe make sense
without the heuristic we call free will? If so, what kind of a life is
that? For whom? What about people who are just not wired in a way that
lets them act ethical in a world without retribution?

I present a practical contradictory case
   (recent history, local to me, a friend was the victim):

A guy shoots a cop who has arrived in response to a noise complaint on
a secluded residential street. The perp is outside drinking with some
buddies, he is out on parole (with only a few days left to go, btw)
and is carrying two concealed, loaded small arms and some amount of
controlled substance of undisclosed type. The cop's attention is
focused on the next person in the group while he's waiting for a
response from his dispatcher on the first person's ID being run. The
perpetrator shoots the cop once in the face, then stands over him and
puts 6 more rounds into him, then walks over to the patrol car and
puts a bullet into the car radio, and leaves the scene.

The perpetrator is seriously drunk and possibly on other drugs. The
perpetrator's nickname is "Gotti", and this suggests some amount of
semiosis related to gangsta-thug-MS culture.

Now, I have heard from libertarians (and whither libertarian
philosophy, or any philosophy, if the meat machine model is the only
correct one, pray tell?) who think more cops should get shot, because
drugs and guns should be legal, etc., etc. "Pour discourager les
autres".

And I take their point. BUT.

But the guy was on parole and it was his choice to get out of jail
early and accept the reduction of personal rights such as being
frisked. That expectation of being frisked is probably what was on his
mind, and the extrapolated likelihood of his going to jail for
multiple parole violations. His shooting a cop seven times suggests
something. But what?

The defense attorney tried to claim diminished capacity and fear,
meaning that the defendant was incapable of premeditation, so his
client should not get the death penalty.

I am unpersuaded, not least by the foreseeable consequences should the
defendant not receive the death sentence. Say I'm an angry, cop-hating
guy (or just a hypothetical borderline-personality libertarian :) ).
No worries, mate, get fucked up on drugs and when they ask you why you
shot the cop tell them you were scared. Be sure to shoot a lot, man,
you're in fear for your life, right?

Umm, no, you're in fear of going back to jail.

So the equation "X number of months of terrible inconvenience to me is
worth the act of ultimate cruelty performed upon someone, followed by
flight" is solved in favor of the people who want to claim they were
just not capable of choice and that they have the right to kill but no
one else has the right to "kill them back".

Call the cops "the blue gang" all you like. That is not the society I choose.

Oh, right, I forgot, I don't really have choice, any more than the
criminal. And the criminal in question did not choose parole, or to
carry drugs or guns while on parole, or to make too much noise and
draw attention, or to assassinate a random authority figure, etc.,
etc. And everyone who listens to gansta rap blissfully unaware that it
was tired shit before they were born...  They're all just clockwork,
right?

He just DID those things, along with every other moment in his life,
without choosing so much as how many times he wiped his ass after
going to the bathroom.

Right, that makes it all BETTER.

Sorry. Let's put it a different way: that meat machine needed to go
back to the vat. Pour discourager les autres. I deny that the
heuristics that ramify out of the notion of free will are valueless.
They continue to have value to me. Among other things, their absence
apparently would increase the number of people who treat others like
meat machines -- somewhat. Though proving that is hard.

I will continue to apply freewill heuristics in the areas where they
seem to serve. I hear that epicycles weren't half bad, in the short
run. As with both deontology and consequentialism, our tools are only
worse than all the known alternatives.

Criticism is the only known remedy for error.

I leave it to deeper thinkers to come up with a society that I'd feel
like coming back (out of cryo) to, where the notion of "free will" is
laughably outmoded. Maybe I'll fit into some mehum halfway house.

By the way, I waffled a lot about whether to post and what to say.
Does the Multiverse take the place of choices? If so, any defects in
this post should be reported to the sheaf of multiverses where I give
a flying f*** about the consequent elements of this thread :).

Thanks for your attention. :)

/rantmode = OFF

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From stathisp at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 10:48:29 2007
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:48:29 +1000
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f21c22e30708210348w588f22e1i29d6ba6c65ce9b9a@mail.gmail.com>

On 21/08/07, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com> wrote:

> Am I hallucinating, or is someone seriously proposing -- more than
> once -- that nonlethal deterrence of criminal behavior including
> punishment works and is somehow appropriate, but that capital
> punishment is bad and isn't justified... ...without, apparently,
> noticing that the threat of capital punishment juuuust miiight have a
> deterrent effect on some people? And most particularly, that its
> abolition might be problematical? I sense a lacuna in a world model.
> And let's set aside the problems presented by the substrate of the
> discussion.

You don't need to believe in free will to make deterrence work. If it
can be shown that a mindless automaton A will not do unpleasant act B
if faced with consequence C, then we should make sure that A believes
C will happen in case it does B. That is, unless we think that C or
the threat of C is not justified by its utility in preventing A, which
is another argument.



-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 21 13:51:14 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:51:14 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 04:33:34 -0400, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> Am I hallucinating, or is someone seriously proposing -- more than
> once -- that nonlethal deterrence of criminal behavior including
> punishment works and is somehow appropriate, but that capital
> punishment is bad and isn't justified... ...without, apparently,
> noticing that the threat of capital punishment juuuust miiight have a
> deterrent effect on some people?

As I mentioned to Lee, it is very controversial whether capital punishment  
deters homicide better than prison sentences. In fact there is evidence to  
support the hypothesis that it has the opposite effect. Some researchers  
theorize that capital punishment has a 'brutalization' effect on society  
in those states in which it is legal, an effect which could encourage more  
homicide than otherwise by cheapening the perceived value of human life.  
And unlike any other kinds of punishment, there can of course be no hope  
of rehabilitating a criminal by killing him.

In other words, deterrence and rehabilitation are weak arguments for  
capital punishment. It's mostly about retribution.

-gts




From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 21 15:37:49 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:37:49 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <op.txe1pbh0ivvpma@shuttle>

Lee,

"A man can surely do what he wills to do, but he cannot determine what he  
wills." -Schopenhauer

Schopenhauer's remark is consistent with compatibilism.

The criminal did freely what he willed to do, and in this sense he had  
free-will. Nobody held a gun to his head. But it does not follow that he  
could have willed to do other than what he in fact willed to do.

As such he should be incarcerated for what he did according to his  
criminal nature (a nature which is in need of rehabilitation), but he  
should not be condemned further on the grounds that he willed to do wrong  
when he could have willed to do right. There is no evidence to prove that  
he could have willed to do right. As far as anyone knows, his will to  
commit the crime was a function of his criminal nature and determined by  
it.

-gts



From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 16:27:42 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 17:27:42 +0100
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708210927t6b95356jace7b70ddc5233b@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/21/07, gts  wrote:
> As I mentioned to Lee, it is very controversial whether capital punishment
> deters homicide better than prison sentences. In fact there is evidence to
> support the hypothesis that it has the opposite effect. Some researchers
> theorize that capital punishment has a 'brutalization' effect on society
> in those states in which it is legal, an effect which could encourage more
> homicide than otherwise by cheapening the perceived value of human life.
> And unlike any other kinds of punishment, there can of course be no hope
> of rehabilitating a criminal by killing him.
>
> In other words, deterrence and rehabilitation are weak arguments for
> capital punishment. It's mostly about retribution.


Theoretically capital punishment also has economics as an argument.
The cost of a firing squad versus funding years of rehabilitation,
training, operations, psychologists, review boards, etc.  And the risk
that it is all a wasted effort and the criminal will continue to cause
damage to society.

The present US legal system often appears to do both. A life sentence
while appeal after appeal is considered. then after twenty years, an
execution.

BillK


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 16:58:16 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 09:58:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708210958o2862e2dt71f5d5dae8c3a39f@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/21/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> As I mentioned to Lee, it is very controversial whether capital punishment
> deters homicide better than prison sentences. In fact there is evidence to
> support the hypothesis that it has the opposite effect. Some researchers
> theorize that capital punishment has a 'brutalization' effect on society
> in those states in which it is legal, an effect which could encourage more
> homicide than otherwise by cheapening the perceived value of human life.
> And unlike any other kinds of punishment, there can of course be no hope
> of rehabilitating a criminal by killing him.
>
> In other words, deterrence and rehabilitation are weak arguments for
> capital punishment. It's mostly about retribution.

I can't think that anyone in their right mind would claim that an
actual prompt death penalty woul dhave any rehabilitative effect, so I
can't address that part of what you just said.

As for the rest: OK, I've heard this before and it might even be true.
I am not arguing. I am reporting that in the specific case I mentioned
I see a likely outcome of suddenly changing the rules and giving
creeps a "kill someone while drunk, get out of Death Row free" card.

I agree that having executions broadcast live on network HD TV would
have a brutalizing effect. But I am not sure what the curve is.
Certainly I am not as sure as you seem to be.

Do you seriously believe the counterwording of your claim?

Do you hold that the abolition of the death penalty and knowledge that
no amount of deathdealing will ever result in being killed, even in a
standoff with hostages, let's say...

...that the forgone knowledge present in the mind of anyone who ever
contemplates a crime that _he will not be killed for it_... ...that
_he can in fact assassinate at will_ and there is _zero_ chance of
dying for it... ...that there will be no retribution... ...which
perhaps the perpetrator _himself_ believes in...

Creates _less_ crime? Everywhere? Under all circumstances? No edge cases?

I think it is entirely arguable that there is no good solution, that
such undertakings have their own flaws.

Show me a civilization without this claimed brutalization. How about
the Yanomamo? They don't have the death penalty, they just kill
people. No, maybe that's a bad example.

Your secular "im'sh'Allah" has limited utility for me. If someone
seeks retribution, that's just in their nature, by your own reasoning.
As I said, it seems to be one of the things that makes the world seem
fair and lets some people feel more able to relax. There must be an
end to disputes and a limit on fear or nothing gets built. People
should vote with their feet. I'll stick around where the death penalty
is _rare, but available_.

"If someone does something horrible and terminates me and everyone I
know, well, I'm relieved that they'll get the best therapy available."
I don't see the evolutionarily-stable survival advantage for that
society. The calculus of death is tricky.

Pass the soma. It's not for me, but I can sell it to some suckers I
know down the block. :)

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 18:33:28 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 11:33:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txe1pbh0ivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle> <op.txe1pbh0ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708211133h13c029ado4f524fc8f08013fd@mail.gmail.com>

> As far as anyone knows, his will to commit the crime was a function
> of his criminal nature and determined by it.

Ah. I finally get it. So, I infer, anyone who believes in any form of
retribution/payback is also in need of rehabilitation? And any who
require rehabilitation can't rehabilitate themselves, right? Or that
wouldn't have really been their real nature. QED.

Ignore the whole question of free will. Treat actors as black boxes.
Are you not proposing that the satisficing iterated prisoner's dilemma
strategy of tit-for-tat is guaranteed worse than whatever it is that
you think you'll obtain with... something else, probably including
some central authority that will regroove people who don't fit?

The presuppositions, opportunity costs and other factors are
staggering for such a modest proposal as yours. Not that it's a new
one.

My cat is not spherical<footnote>. To me, a sheaf of human societal
strategies seems more robust and potentially survival-likely than a
no-capital-punishment-ever monoculture encompassing all of humankind
(or what we become). You're welcome to the societal strategies you
propose. Over wherever you are. :)

M

<footnote> Taken from the punchline of the old science joke.
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 19:11:02 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:11:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <ee50357e0708210927t6b95356jace7b70ddc5233b@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
	<ee50357e0708210927t6b95356jace7b70ddc5233b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708211211n7dae79b2nc0935f0f82340c26@mail.gmail.com>

> The present US legal system often appears to do both. A life sentence
> while appeal after appeal is considered. then after twenty years, an
> execution.

With the additional sad irony that given ten to 30 years there, some
few of the people on Death Row actually seem to rehabilitate to some
extent. How many of those are play-acting, hoping for a pardon, is
impossible to tell.

People's "natures" seem to be at least somewhat multifaceted, even if
that's purely stochastic.
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 19:18:03 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:18:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <op.tw70tgdgivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.tw70tgdgivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708211218l648349ffl2ce80ac870092738@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/17/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 13:38:22 -0400, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
>
> >> Retribution ought not figure into the equation.
> >
> > It ought not to but it does, no use pretending that reptilian part of our
> > brain doesn't exist.
>
> Presumably post-humans will not have reptilian natures!

Ahhh!  I'm glad that's cleared up. You're the kind of ExIan who wants
to be a Spock-In-A-Box! {TM} All that messy lizard brain stuff needs
to totally disappear. Feelings... feh!

Now I _know_ we can't speak meaningfully with one another about
desirable posthuman outcomes. Thanks for the calibration point.
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 19:21:15 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:21:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
	<487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/18/07, Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com> wrote:

> Feathers are important for birds, too, but that's
> no reason to put them on airplanes.

And how many children have airplanes produced? How many songs?

Effort moves toward what is valued. If feelings are completely
vestigial in your view, I know I don't want to sit next to you on a
plane ride :).

No offense intended.

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 19:44:04 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 12:44:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] More Sand;
	Better Sand, was Re: free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708211244v590387d9ld5b702e5740d87d2@mail.gmail.com>

I broke my word. I said I wan't going to post on this thread and I've
been popping off left and right. Typical after so much silence for so
long. :)

More thoughts about my current hobbyhorse, taken from some recent
offlist email and lightly amended...

==

There is no question that the "Justice System" is often not about
justice. Legitimized revenge is only part of its problem
//and in my view not the major problem//.
Another part of it is that everybody lies, as the lead character of the TV show
_House_ likes to say. And there is truth to the "Blue Gang" notion, that
cops are or tend to become just the sanctioned wolf pack. All those
tendencies are present.

But not equally, and not all the time -- and we gotta have _some_ system. :)

...snippage...

Thing is, maybe the guy really was just a Salvadoran illegale
political-refugee trying to make his way in the world, and getting
fucked up and talking trash on the street corner while strapped with
his gats and holding drugs was the only way he could feel like a man.
And maybe the thought of going down in front of his friends terrified
him. Maybe he was situationally on the edge of psychosis from speed
use and sleep deprivation, and drunk took the rest of his judgment
away. Maybe he didn't want to do hard time and become someone's bitch
in the joint. Maybe he was a scared little boy inside who saw
"Salvadoran death squad" when he looked at a uniformed policeman
checking his papers.

I can conceive of any of that. I can pity such a poor creature.

Doesn't matter. He didn't stand up like a member of _my_ civilization.
He didn't even have a single spasm of fear and pop one or two caps
into Patrolman Dan and run off. He stood over the guy and unloaded
like some character in a movie or the GTA video game. For something
like half a minute. Long enough to stop sooner. But he didn't. Or "couldn't."
And then he tried to get away with it. And he botched that. Gangsta
just can't get a break.

So, edit him out of the sim. (If Nick Bostrom is right and that's what
this probably is :) )

I hope his defense attorney has a good shrink or confessor. I'd need
counseling if I really put my heart into a leniency plea that way.

Irving "Gotti" Ramirez has (by California averages) at least ten years,
and maybe 30, to think about things. I get no satisfaction out of the
torment and deprivation he will experience sitting on Death Row. But
he did NOT have to do what he did. He could have been a real man in
any number of ways that did not involve executing another human being
during what was basically a freaking _traffic stop_.

//i.e., an encounter with a peace officer over an infraction, not even
rising to the level of a misdemeanor. //

He broke parole at least three ways, and my mind boggles at someone
implicitly saying that his precise molecular makeup constrained him to
carry (say) two guns and not one or three, and dump seven rounds into
the cop and not fewer. Ludicrous even if true. Had he not been
carrying, he would have had to listen to a lecture from his parole
officer. If he was associating with others with criminal records there
on that street, maybe... never mind.

I say he had choice, and it is not an intellectual exercise for me
even if all it does is keep the ship of Western Civilization from
springing another leak by reminding other potential actors-out that
"drunk ain't a good excuse for murder." The contrary _is_ what the
lighter life sentence would have conveyed.

//Cop dies, I live; what's not to like about that?//

If Western Civ is built on sand, and the sand is the myth of free will, fine!

BRING MORE SAND! _BETTER_ SAND! :)


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 21 19:23:54 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:23:54 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708211218l648349ffl2ce80ac870092738@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.tw70tgdgivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708211218l648349ffl2ce80ac870092738@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.txfb54p2ivvpma@shuttle>

I don't know about Spock-In-A-Box, but here's what I'll tell you about  
life in 2007:

Sometimes an ordinary man returns home from a long day's work to find his  
wife in bed with another man.
The reptilian brain takes control and the man turns suddenly into an angry  
alligator with a gun. Very bad things happen.

I'd like to think such events won't occur very often in the year 3000.

-gts



From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 21 19:47:36 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 15:47:36 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708211133h13c029ado4f524fc8f08013fd@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle> <op.txe1pbh0ivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708211133h13c029ado4f524fc8f08013fd@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.txfc9mtrivvpma@shuttle>

On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:33:28 -0400, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> Ah. I finally get it. So, I infer, anyone who believes in any form of
> retribution/payback is also in need of rehabilitation?

Yes, probably so!

Take a look at the Israelis and the Palestinians. Seems to me that both  
sides are off their rockers.

-gts



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Tue Aug 21 20:46:03 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 13:46:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txfc9mtrivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle> <op.txe1pbh0ivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708211133h13c029ado4f524fc8f08013fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txfc9mtrivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708211346u43f0d677if3ada6fe198d0cc1@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/21/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:33:28 -0400, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Ah. I finally get it. So, I infer, anyone who believes in any form of
> > retribution/payback is also in need of rehabilitation?
>
> Yes, probably so!
>
> Take a look at the Israelis and the Palestinians. Seems to me that both
> sides are off their rockers.

As I said elsewhere, I don't believe in avenging third cousins twice
removed, or the like. I believe there must be an end to disputes.

But by your lights because I find positive societal value in some
capital punishment, I still believe in retribution; and you'd say I
need rehabilitation. I asked about "anyone", and you said "yes" (with
a "probably" chaser).

I do not defer to that judgment.

I also don't think the lizard brain only kills.
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From robotact at mail.ru  Tue Aug 21 20:57:06 2007
From: robotact at mail.ru (Vladimir Nesov)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 00:57:06 +0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708211346u43f0d677if3ada6fe198d0cc1@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer> <op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle> <op.txe1pbh0ivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708211133h13c029ado4f524fc8f08013fd@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txfc9mtrivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708211346u43f0d677if3ada6fe198d0cc1@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4852698506.20070822005706@mail.ru>

Wednesday, August 22, 2007, Michael M. Butler wrote:

MMB> As I said elsewhere, I don't believe in avenging third cousins twice
MMB> removed, or the like. I believe there must be an end to disputes.

Problem is not who to avenge, but what form a revenge takes. Like
ignoring identity of actual murderer and killing similar number of random
people in the vicinity of the offender.

-- 
 Vladimir Nesov                            mailto:robotact at mail.ru



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Wed Aug 22 02:35:26 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:35:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Phishing URLs
References: <6DA490D0-75CF-4F6D-8061-2813E80BEAC0@mac.com>
Message-ID: <015a01c7e465$38a5ac80$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Chris writes (8/20/2007, 9:59 AM)

> > The Enthusiast by David Ewing Duncan
> > A controversial biologist at Harvard claims
> > he can extend life span and 
> > treat diseases of aging. He may be right.
> > http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/19172/

> Both the title and the url were encoded links.  And while the URL works 
> fine, the link under it was something obnoxious!

> > "http://cl.exct.net/?ju=fe3115747c650675741474&ls=fdef1573716c0d7872107371&m=ff011674776105&l=fec4127776650574&s=fe2f167274620075741371&jb=ffcf14&t="

> There's no way for anyone to safely click on something like that.  It 
> would be much more polite to just send us the visible link, and not the 
> obfuscated link that presumably goes through someone's tracking system.
> 
> Grumble,
> Chris

Thanks for pointing this out. I take implicit in your
warning that 

1. when posting links, try to go to the web page
   (wherever you found it), and copy the URL that
   appears in your browser window, instead of the
   potentially dangerous extended link
2. when about to click on an html posted link,
   like appeared in that email (below), examine
   where the link really takes you before clicking
3. avoid posting in HTML items such as the underlined
   "The Enthusiast" below, and post instead a string
   beginning with "http://" that takes you somewhere
   you'll gamble will be safe.

Are these right?

Lee

P.S.  Good article, by the way, Samantha
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Samantha Atkins 
  To: ExI chat list 
  Sent: Sunday, August 19, 2007 10:46 PM
  Subject: [ExI] The enthusiast


  The Enthusiast by David Ewing Duncan
  A controversial biologist at Harvard claims he can extend life span and treat diseases of aging. He may be right. 
  http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/19172/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070821/f6f50bba/attachment.html>

From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Wed Aug 22 02:43:19 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:43:19 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer><op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <015d01c7e466$a1a7e300$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

John writes

> [gts wrote]
>> If you say to the judge in your defense,
>> "Your honor, moral turpitude can  exist
>> only if free-will is true, but  free-will is
>> an idea so bad it's not  even wrong", then
>> he will most  likely look at you with glazed
>> eyes, slam  his gavel, and sentence you to
>> do time in prison. He might also order a
>>  psychiatric evaluation.
> 
> I think what you say is true, a judge would most likely do exactly that, and
> that is why the "idea" of free will has not only totally screwed up
> philosophy it has also turned our legal system into a joke.

Or possibly that you have become unbelievably
picky about words, and study too closely what
people should mean, instead of what they mean?

I sympathize;  even after decades, when people
ask me "How are you?", I have to resist the
impulse to tell them, even though I know full well
they mean "hi".  Er, "hey". (I'm trying to keep up.)

Even if I concede that your position "the concept
of free will is so bad it's not even wrong", I take
that to *force* me to give it a sensible interpretation
and go after what people *mean*, not what they
say.

Unless some loony-tunes really does believe in uncaused
events or something you and I would equally disparage,
just take references to "free will" to mean references to
decision making.

Lee

P.S.  You know very well that there is a big difference
between choosing a candidate as you normally do in a
voting booth, and choosing one because someone is
holding a gun to your head. Why do you insist on a
definite, particular, painstaking way of describing it?
Can you not simply understand a witness's description
"your honor, I did not freely choose to vote for X 
because a gun was being held to my head". 



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Wed Aug 22 02:24:15 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 19:24:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Models vs. Reality
Message-ID: <014c01c7e463$cff23240$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

I've always been very annoyed by the creeping practice in physics
and in other discourse of remarks referring to theories by default,
and not referring to the realist's world "out there".

For example, it often happens that a description of a physical
entity will slowly slip to a description of a description, as might
happen if someone becomes less conscious of studying, say,
planetary orbits and become more conscious of studying
the mathematical abstractions of planetary orbits.

Here is a typical instance, taken from the extremely carefully
written book "How is Quantum Field Theory Possible?" (a
Kantian question that raises the possibility of "Transcendental
Investigation", if you really must know).  In an effort to define
"physcial system", "single systems", and "states", and so on,
in the context of physics, this is offered:

     A *state* of a physical system give the abstract
     summary of all its characteristics.

I'm sure that I am not the only one who blithely continues to
talk about (to refer) the thing-in-itself rather than about the
"abstract summary". Besides, couldn't this be intrinsically
problematic? Suppose that we were to believe some physical
system contains uncountably much information, e.g. uncountably
many real numbers. Then a *description* on the ordinary 
meaning of words could not keep up, consisting of merely
countably many statements.

Yes, when I refer to the "state of a quantum system", then
of course I am aware that it's the "quantum state" that we 
wish to talk about. But when I ordinarily refer to the *state*
of a system, I mean the state or situation OF THE SYSTEM.
Don't you?

When Will Rogers complained that he did not belong to any
organized political party, he certainly wasn't alluding to the
notion that he did not belong to an abstract summary of one.

Lee



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Wed Aug 22 03:15:54 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:15:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer><op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle><000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer><7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <018901c7e46a$ddc303c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Gordon writes

> As I mentioned, it is very controversial whether capital punishment  
> deters homicide better than prison sentences. In fact there is evidence to  
> support the hypothesis that it has the opposite effect.

I'm getting more and more skeptical of the results many researchers
achieve that just happens to satisfy a pre-existing social agenda. So
I suppose that you find implausible the old scene in the movies where
one gangster says to the other, "Don't kill him!  We could fry!"

(which, FWIW, is one good reason to bring back "The Chair")

Our criminal justice system evolved from a much more
ruthless system of punishment in an era when defendents
were grateful for any protection at all. I believe that many
criminals today, on the other hand, do not fear the
consequences of being caught nearly as much as they
should; and you and I both believe in the power of
deterrence.

> Some researchers theorize that capital punishment has a
> 'brutalization' effect on society in those states in which it
> is legal,

Hogwash, I suspect.

> an effect which could encourage more homicide than
> otherwise by cheapening the perceived value of human life.  
> And unlike any other kinds of punishment, there can of
> course be no hope of rehabilitating a criminal by killing him.

In addition to the other arguments people have been assailing
you with, e.g. BillK's list, I will add the way that prisons have
turned into schools for crime. Often crimes on the outside are
even orchestrated from within.  It's an inane way to run prisons,
and any bright twelve year old could design a better one.

Lee



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Aug 22 03:42:06 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 22:42:06 -0500
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <018901c7e46a$ddc303c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
	<018901c7e46a$ddc303c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070821223711.023ada90@satx.rr.com>

At 08:15 PM 8/21/2007 -0700, Lee wrote:

>I suppose that you find implausible the old scene in the movies where
>one gangster says to the other, "Don't kill him!  We could fry!"
>
>(which, FWIW, is one good reason to bring back "The Chair")

That might happen. So might this:

one gangster says to the other, "Kill him!  He's the only witness. We 
could get jammed up for 15 years, no parole!"

(which, FWIW, is one good reason not to bring back "The Chair")

Is there any empirical data to distinguish the two cases?

Damien Broderick



From hibbert at mydruthers.com  Wed Aug 22 03:36:56 2007
From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 20:36:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Phishing URLs
In-Reply-To: <015a01c7e465$38a5ac80$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <6DA490D0-75CF-4F6D-8061-2813E80BEAC0@mac.com>
	<015a01c7e465$38a5ac80$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <46CBAF58.50106@mydruthers.com>

> 1. when posting links, try to go to the web page
>    (wherever you found it), and copy the URL that
>    appears in your browser window, instead of the
>    potentially dangerous extended link
> 2. when about to click on an html posted link,
>    like appeared in that email (below), examine
>    where the link really takes you before clicking
> 3. avoid posting in HTML items such as the underlined
>    "The Enthusiast" below, and post instead a string
>    beginning with "http://" that takes you somewhere
>    you'll gamble will be safe.
>  
> Are these right?
>  
> Lee

Roughly right.

1. When posting links, I go somewhat overboard.  In addition to cutting 
out the redirections through unnecessary sites, I often experiment with 
cutting off trailing cruft to find a url that won't be folded by mailers 
that think they know how long lines should be.  For instance, a simple 
web search produced this:

http://www.google.com/search?q=The+Enthusiast+by+David+Ewing+Duncan&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Which encodes lots of information about *my* configuration and 
preferences, but is completely irrelevant to the search or your display 
of it.  It looks like the prefix contains all the interesting info, so I 
send only this:

http://www.google.com/search?q=The+Enthusiast+by+David+Ewing+Duncan

after verifying that it produces the same results.

(The general rule is that stuff following ampersands in URLs is usually 
parameters of some kind.  They aren't all useless by any means, but 
there's a lot of noise there.)

2.  My mail UI (Thunderbird) displays the expanded link in the window 
border.  It also usually posts a warning when link text displays a 
different URL than that linked to.  (The warning isn't prominent 
enough.)  If the visible link is different, I often copy and past the 
visible text to Firefox rather than clicking on the link.  Anything less 
than this is definitely hazardous to your security in several ways.

3.  good suggestion.

Chris
-- 
C. J. Cherryh, "Invader", on why we visit very old buildings:
       "A sense of age, of profound truths.  Respect for something
       hands made, that's stood through storms and wars and time.
       It persuades us that things we do may last and matter."

Chris Hibbert
hibbert at mydruthers.com
Blog:   http://pancrit.org



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Aug 22 04:25:50 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:25:50 -0500
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070821223711.023ada90@satx.rr.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txewroq9ivvpma@shuttle>
	<018901c7e46a$ddc303c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070821223711.023ada90@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070821232243.0243c5e0@satx.rr.com>

Or in another situation:

>At 08:15 PM 8/21/2007 -0700, Lee wrote:
>
> >I suppose that you find implausible the old scene in the movies where
> >one gangster says to the other, "Don't kill him!  We could fry!"
> >
> >(which, FWIW, is one good reason to bring back "The Chair")
>
>That might happen. So might this:
>
>one gangster says to the other, "Kill him as well!  He's the only witness. We
>could fry!"
>
>(which, FWIW, is one good reason not to bring back "The Chair")



From jonkc at att.net  Wed Aug 22 04:53:49 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 00:53:49 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer><op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle><000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<015d01c7e466$a1a7e300$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <003601c7e478$789508f0$ab0a4e0c@MyComputer>

"Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>

> Unless some loony-tunes really does believe in uncaused events

Well then nearly every physicist alive is loony because they also believe
some events have no cause. Einstein was wrong, God not only plays dice
He sometimes rolls the dice where they can't be seen.

> just take references to "free will" to mean references to decision
> making.

Ok, then decision making is just data processing, as deterministic as a
Cuckoo Clock. You're a pair of dice or a Cuckoo Clock, those are the only
options.

> You know very well that there is a big difference between choosing a
> candidate as you normally do in a voting booth, and choosing one
> because  someone is holding a gun to your head.

Yes you're right, there is a big difference. In Case 1 I know that if I vote
for candidate X that ugly man standing next to me will pull the trigger on
the enormous gun he has aimed at my head and splatter my brains all
over the voting booth, and in case 2 I do not have that rather important
piece of new information. New information does not always bring good news.

 John K Clark




From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Wed Aug 22 06:36:02 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:36:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer><op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle><000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

Michael writes

> Am I hallucinating, or is someone seriously proposing -- more than
> once -- that nonlethal deterrence of criminal behavior including
> punishment works and is somehow appropriate, but that capital
> punishment is bad and isn't justified... ...without, apparently,
> noticing that the threat of capital punishment juuuust miiight have a
> deterrent effect on some people?

I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of
deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more
to be feared:  death or a life sentence?  It's hard to believe
that a life sentence---with guaranteed medical care, three
squares a day, chances for opportunity and advancement
in the criminal gangs, future possibilities of conjugal visits
(so far, only six states in the U.S., though 60% of inmates
claim to be married)--- I say, that a life sentence is more
foreboding than execution.

But if the statistics and studies say so, then perhaps I'll have
to amend the old adage about lies, damned lies, and statistics.

People like me focus on *incentives* (and, I'm very happy to
report, so do the latest economic texts).  So there must be a story
that makes sense in terms of incentives explaining why capital
punishment is ineffective as a deterrent. What is it?

As for the logical thing at present to do with criminal recividists,
namely to chop off their heads and drop them into a vat of 
liquid NO2, the only thing that worries me is that sooner or
later the whole society will realize that this might not be much
of a deterrent.

Lee



From scerir at libero.it  Wed Aug 22 06:32:49 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:32:49 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Models vs. Reality
References: <014c01c7e463$cff23240$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <003601c7e486$435da670$b0bd1f97@archimede>

Lee Corbin:
> Yes, when I refer to the "state of a quantum system", then
> of course I am aware that it's the "quantum state" that we 
> wish to talk about. But when I ordinarily refer to the *state*
> of a system, I mean the state or situation OF THE SYSTEM.
> Don't you?

Yes. And no. Unless you follow one of those ontological 
interpretations of QM (de Broglie - Bohm; MWI; Weak Measurements,
etc.) also the meaning of 'quantum state', or the meaning of
'state of a quantum system', has much to do with the *situation* 
of a larger system (preparation of the quantum in a certain state; 
detection of the quantum in a certain state; the quantum itself).
Here,ie, you may find a description of these intricacies ...
http://www.arxiv.org/abs/0705.2144

s.

"It was tacitly assumed that measurement of an 
observable must yield the same value independently 
of what other [say 'compatible'] measurements may 
be made simultaneously [....]. There is no apriori 
reason to believe that the results should be the same. 
The result of an observation may reasonably depend 
not only on the state of the system (including hidden 
variables) but also on the complete disposition of 
the apparatus [...]".
-John Bell, (Rev. Mod. Phys., 1966)
 

 



From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Wed Aug 22 06:47:55 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 23:47:55 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer><op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle><000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<015d01c7e466$a1a7e300$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<003601c7e478$789508f0$ab0a4e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <01b201c7e488$81fb8c60$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

John Clark writes

>> Unless some loony-tunes really does believe in uncaused events
> 
> Well then nearly every physicist alive is loony because they also believe
> some events have no cause. Einstein was wrong, God not only plays dice
> He sometimes rolls the dice where they can't be seen.

Yes, I forget that not everyone accepts MWI yet. All outcomes
occur. You can consider an event to be uncaused---I suppose---
by (1) throwing up your hands and saying that God chose the
eigenstate, (2) worrying about the "Measurement Problem" and
having no hint what collapsing is all about and no idea about how
to find out, or (3) saying that there is just Chance in the universe.

>> just take references to "free will" to mean references to decision
>> making.
> 
> Ok, then decision making is just data processing, as deterministic as a
> Cuckoo Clock. You're a pair of dice or a Cuckoo Clock, those are the only
> options.

Heh, heh. How about "elaborate cuckoo clock"?  It doesn't bother
me that I'm an elaborate machine.  I thought that you endorsed the
deterministic data processing option, no?

>> You know very well that there is a big difference between choosing a
>> candidate as you normally do in a voting booth, and choosing one
>> because  someone is holding a gun to your head.
> 
> Yes you're right, there is a big difference. In Case 1 I know that if I vote
> for candidate X that ugly man standing next to me will pull the trigger on
> the enormous gun he has aimed at my head and splatter my brains all
> over the voting booth, and in case 2 I do not have that rather important
> piece of new information. New information does not always bring good news.

The point, again, (sigh), is that we may conveniently and coherently
describe your choice as dictated by your entire judgment and consideration
of everything you as "choosing freely" and responding to the vulgar threat
as "involutary choice".  These simple descriptions should not send you up
the wall.  You know perfectly well what is meant---you and I really agree
on all the pertinent facts of the matter.

If you vote for X because of the thug and his gun, you'll not be
able to say in the light of later (political) developments "You know,
I made a mistake about that guy, and I shouldn't have voted for
him."  The actual important issues are covered up by your stubborn
choice of language.

Lee



From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Aug 22 13:11:57 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:11:57 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Phishing URLs
In-Reply-To: <015a01c7e465$38a5ac80$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <6DA490D0-75CF-4F6D-8061-2813E80BEAC0@mac.com>
	<015a01c7e465$38a5ac80$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708220611r3d114b7ch3eb8041890f88763@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, Lee Corbin wrote:
>
> 1. when posting links, try to go to the web page
>    (wherever you found it), and copy the URL that
>    appears in your browser window, instead of the
>    potentially dangerous extended link
> 2. when about to click on an html posted link,
>    like appeared in that email (below), examine
>    where the link really takes you before clicking
> 3. avoid posting in HTML items such as the underlined
>    "The Enthusiast" below, and post instead a string
>    beginning with "http://" that takes you somewhere
>    you'll gamble will be safe.
>


To be clear -
The example quoted is not a Phishing URL.

This is clickthrough tracking, used by thousands of companies. These
links are extremely common and appear in many net magazines. They want
to know what links their readers or customers click on, so that they
can provide more of what interests their customers.
This is similar to tracking advert clicks.

It is unfortunate that Phishing uses a similar link redirection
technique, where the underlying link is different and takes you to
e.g. an imitation bank site, where you will be asked to supply
personal info.

As you say, posting in text only, and avoiding HTML, is a simple
solution, recommended by many mailing lists.

Modern browsers now check links against lists of known phishing sites
and will pop up a warning if a fraudulent site is detected. Spam
filters should also detect almost all phishing emails. Before visiting
a site, you can also check with McAfee Site Advisor and scan the site
for viruses or spyware with Dr. Web.


BillK


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 22 13:35:09 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:35:09 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com>
	<3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:36:02 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:

> I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of
> deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more
> to be feared:  death or a life sentence?

Curiously, states that impose the death penalty have higher homicide rates  
than those that don't. And the differences are quite large.

The total number of yearly executions rose over the last ten years.  
Although this increase in executions correlated with a decreased national  
homicide rate, suggesting a possible deterrence effect, it's also true  
that during this time the gap between the murder rate in death penalty  
states and non-death penalty states grew progressively larger. By 2005 the  
murder rate was a whopping 46% higher in death penalty states than in non  
death penalty states!

This is based on FBI statistics. See this page for some interesting data,  
charts and graphs...

See http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/php/article.php?scid=12&did=168

-gts




From jonkc at att.net  Wed Aug 22 14:39:52 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 10:39:52 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer><00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer><op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle><000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer><015d01c7e466$a1a7e300$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677><003601c7e478$789508f0$ab0a4e0c@MyComputer>
	<01b201c7e488$81fb8c60$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
Message-ID: <001f01c7e4ca$6ea0b0e0$98044e0c@MyComputer>

"Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>

> If you vote for X because of the thug and his gun, you'll
> not be able to say in the light of later (political)
>developments "You know, I made a mistake about that guy

I will be able to say with complete sincerity "You know, I made a very wise
move voting for that man because if I hadn't my brains would have been
splattered all over that voting booth".

> we may conveniently and coherently describe your choice
> as dictated by your entire judgment and consideration
> of everything you as "choosing freely"

It is my judgment and consideration that I don't want my brains splattered 
all over the voting booth.

> You know perfectly well what is meant

No, and I'm not trying to be difficult; I don't know what is meant.

  John K Clark




From aiguy at comcast.net  Wed Aug 22 15:48:04 2007
From: aiguy at comcast.net (aiguy at comcast.net)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:48:04 +0000
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
Message-ID: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>

Since most prisoners attempt to plea bargain by testifying against their accomplices or confessing to other unsolved crimes to avoid the death sentence even though they know they will get a life sentence.   Also because most prisoners will run the appeals process aas far as it will go, this indicates that prison life is preferrable to them over death.

In many cases though a mandatory death sentence could be counter productive.  For instance if rapists knew that the death sentence was waiting for them then they may choose to murder their victims afterwards to prevent them from testifying against them.

As it is now the vast majority of rapists do not murder their victims making it easier for them to be caught and prevent them from repeating the crime.

Also I have read that the reason for murder reduction rates is due primarily to improved medical care and trauma centers where more people who would have died in the past are now being treated more quickly and effectively and being saved.   To get a real statistic attempted murders should be added to actual murder before we can conclude that we are really making any progress on violent crime.

It would be interesting to see if the states with the highest murder rates also have the least trauma units and lesser effective hospitals in these type of incidents.

In the case of police bringing in shot up gang members I can just hear the emergency room doctors thinking let's save the state the cost of a trial.

-------------- Original message -------------- 
From: gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> 

> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:36:02 -0400, Lee Corbin wrote: 
> 
> > I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of 
> > deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more 
> > to be feared: death or a life sentence? 
> 
> Curiously, states that impose the death penalty have higher homicide rates 
> than those that don't. And the differences are quite large. 
> 
> The total number of yearly executions rose over the last ten years. 
> Although this increase in executions correlated with a decreased national 
> homicide rate, suggesting a possible deterrence effect, it's also true 
> that during this time the gap between the murder rate in death penalty 
> states and non-death penalty states grew progressively larger. By 2005 the 
> murder rate was a whopping 46% higher in death penalty states than in non 
> death penalty states! 
> 
> This is based on FBI statistics. See this page for some interesting data, 
> charts and graphs... 
> 
> See http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/php/article.php?scid=12&did=168 
> 
> -gts 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ 
> 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/20070822/90e0441a/attachment.html>

From mmbutler at gmail.com  Wed Aug 22 16:26:53 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:26:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708220926g140d5044v1efd3a6746bc43bb@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:36:02 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> > I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of
> > deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more
> > to be feared:  death or a life sentence?
>
> Curiously, states that impose the death penalty have higher homicide rates
> than those that don't. And the differences are quite large.
>
> The total number of yearly executions rose over the last ten years.
> Although this increase in executions correlated with a decreased national
> homicide rate, suggesting a possible deterrence effect, it's also true
> that during this time the gap between the murder rate in death penalty
> states and non-death penalty states grew progressively larger. By 2005 the
> murder rate was a whopping 46% higher in death penalty states than in non
> death penalty states!

You can imply-by-assertion a causal relationship if you want, but
correlation, last time I heard, is not causation.

I conjecture that (to name two) the maintenance of the
outlaw/"gangsta" role model as a profit center for media and a
cultural focus for disaffected youth could be contributing. So could
any "disappearance of the middle class" effect that some analysts
report. Are those homogeneous across the 50 states? I'm not at all
sure they are. Gangsta rap and thug culture have been [prominent for
just about 15 years. What's the median age of the convicted murderers
in each of the 50 states, I wonder?

Include and cancel those effects, won't you? The FBI is not in that
business, though they might include age breakdowns.

I'd also want to look at the trends over longer periods than 10 years,
since the Supreme Court decisions that decided capital punishment was
unconstitutional as practiced back them came out in 1972 and 1976.

Off topic: this is not dissimilar from the question of whether CO2
levels lead or follow environmental warming.

Or is my demurral simply boring you? :) By the way, I thank you for
not denying that you think I require rehabilitation. It's refreshing
to know where we stand with each other: I'm in the same boat with
someone wearing a bomb vest. :)

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Wed Aug 22 16:26:53 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:26:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708220926g140d5044v1efd3a6746bc43bb@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:36:02 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> > I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of
> > deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more
> > to be feared:  death or a life sentence?
>
> Curiously, states that impose the death penalty have higher homicide rates
> than those that don't. And the differences are quite large.
>
> The total number of yearly executions rose over the last ten years.
> Although this increase in executions correlated with a decreased national
> homicide rate, suggesting a possible deterrence effect, it's also true
> that during this time the gap between the murder rate in death penalty
> states and non-death penalty states grew progressively larger. By 2005 the
> murder rate was a whopping 46% higher in death penalty states than in non
> death penalty states!

You can imply-by-assertion a causal relationship if you want, but
correlation, last time I heard, is not causation.

I conjecture that (to name two) the maintenance of the
outlaw/"gangsta" role model as a profit center for media and a
cultural focus for disaffected youth could be contributing. So could
any "disappearance of the middle class" effect that some analysts
report. Are those homogeneous across the 50 states? I'm not at all
sure they are. Gangsta rap and thug culture have been [prominent for
just about 15 years. What's the median age of the convicted murderers
in each of the 50 states, I wonder?

Include and cancel those effects, won't you? The FBI is not in that
business, though they might include age breakdowns.

I'd also want to look at the trends over longer periods than 10 years,
since the Supreme Court decisions that decided capital punishment was
unconstitutional as practiced back them came out in 1972 and 1976.

Off topic: this is not dissimilar from the question of whether CO2
levels lead or follow environmental warming.

Or is my demurral simply boring you? :) By the way, I thank you for
not denying that you think I require rehabilitation. It's refreshing
to know where we stand with each other: I'm in the same boat with
someone wearing a bomb vest. :)

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Wed Aug 22 16:26:53 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:26:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708220926g140d5044v1efd3a6746bc43bb@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:36:02 -0400, Lee Corbin <lcorbin at rawbw.com> wrote:
>
> > I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of
> > deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more
> > to be feared:  death or a life sentence?
>
> Curiously, states that impose the death penalty have higher homicide rates
> than those that don't. And the differences are quite large.
>
> The total number of yearly executions rose over the last ten years.
> Although this increase in executions correlated with a decreased national
> homicide rate, suggesting a possible deterrence effect, it's also true
> that during this time the gap between the murder rate in death penalty
> states and non-death penalty states grew progressively larger. By 2005 the
> murder rate was a whopping 46% higher in death penalty states than in non
> death penalty states!

You can imply-by-assertion a causal relationship if you want, but
correlation, last time I heard, is not causation.

I conjecture that (to name two) the maintenance of the
outlaw/"gangsta" role model as a profit center for media and a
cultural focus for disaffected youth could be contributing. So could
any "disappearance of the middle class" effect that some analysts
report. Are those homogeneous across the 50 states? I'm not at all
sure they are. Gangsta rap and thug culture have been [prominent for
just about 15 years. What's the median age of the convicted murderers
in each of the 50 states, I wonder?

Include and cancel those effects, won't you? The FBI is not in that
business, though they might include age breakdowns.

I'd also want to look at the trends over longer periods than 10 years,
since the Supreme Court decisions that decided capital punishment was
unconstitutional as practiced back them came out in 1972 and 1976.

Off topic: this is not dissimilar from the question of whether CO2
levels lead or follow environmental warming.

Or is my demurral simply boring you? :) By the way, I thank you for
not denying that you think I require rehabilitation. It's refreshing
to know where we stand with each other: I'm in the same boat with
someone wearing a bomb vest. :)

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From randall at randallsquared.com  Wed Aug 22 05:24:51 2007
From: randall at randallsquared.com (Randall Randall)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 01:24:51 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
	<487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
	<7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>


On Aug 21, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Michael M. Butler wrote:

> On 8/18/07, Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com> wrote:
>
>> Feathers are important for birds, too, but that's
>> no reason to put them on airplanes.
>
> And how many children have airplanes produced? How many songs?
>
> Effort moves toward what is valued. If feelings are completely
> vestigial in your view, I know I don't want to sit next to you on a
> plane ride :).

You're reading too much into my (too terse)
statement.  :)

John Clark asserts, if I remember correctly,
that if emotions weren't necessary for
intelligence, evolution would have removed
them.  I don't know whether emotions are
necessary for intelligence, but the argument
that if they weren't, they'd have been
removed by evolution also proves that you
can't build airplanes without feathers,
because if they weren't necessary for flight,
evolution would have removed them.

The point being, if I'm not belaboring it
too much, that how evolution solved a
problem in biology may say nothing about
how that problem can be most simply solved
in machina, and so without a theory of
intelligence that works, we can't say for
certian whether emotions are necessary for
intelligence, unless we can find examples
both ways.

--
Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com>
"This is a fascinating question, right up there with whether rocks
fall because of gravity or being dropped, and whether 3+5=5+3
because addition is commutative or because they both equal 8."
   - Scott Aaronson




From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Aug 22 16:35:29 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:35:29 +0200
Subject: [ExI] META: Re:  free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
References: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org>


I don't see what this thread has to do with extropy.

On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 03:48:04PM +0000, aiguy at comcast.net wrote:
> 
>    Since most prisoners attempt to plea bargain by testifying against
>    their accomplices or confessing to other unsolved crimes to avoid the
>    death sentence even though they know they will get a life sentence.
>    Also because most prisoners will run the appeals process aas far as it
>    will go, this indicates that prison life is preferrable to them over
>    death.
> 
> 
> 
>    In many cases though a mandatory death sentence could be counter
>    productive.  For instance if rapists knew that the death sentence was
>    waiting for them then they may choose to murder their victims
>    afterwards to prevent them from testifying against them.
> 
> 
> 
>    As it is now the vast majority of rapists do not murder their victims
>    making it easier for them to be caught and prevent them from repeating
>    the crime.
> 
> 
> 
>    Also I have read that the reason for murder reduction rates is due
>    primarily to improved medical care and trauma centers where more
>    people who would have died in the past are now being treated more
>    quickly and effectively and being saved.   To get a real statistic
>    attempted murders should be added to actual murder before we can
>    conclude that we are really making any progress on violent crime.
> 
> 
> 
>    It would be interesting to see if the states with the highest murder
>    rates also have the least trauma units and lesser effective hospitals
>    in these type of incidents.
> 
> 
> 
>    In the case of police bringing in shot up gang members I can just hear
>    the emergency room doctors thinking let's save the state the cost of a
>    trial.
> 
> 
> 
>      -------------- Original message --------------
>      From: gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>
>      > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:36:02 -0400, Lee Corbin wrote:
>      >
>      > > I admit to being confused on this point as well. Speaking of
>      > > deterrence alone, which consequence of conviction is more
>      > > to be feared: death or a life sentence?
>      >
>      > Curiously, states that impose the death penalty have higher
>      homicide rates
>      > than those that don't. And the differences are quite large.
>      >
>      > The total number of yearly executions rose over the last ten
>      years.
>      > Although this increase in executions correlated with a decreased
>      national
>      > homicide rate, suggesting a possible deterrence effect, it's also
>      true
>      > that during this time the gap between the murder rate in death
>      penalty
>      > states and non-de! ath pen alty states grew progressively larger.
>      By 2005 the
>      > murder rate was a whopping 46% higher in death penalty states
>      than in non
>      > death penalty states!
>      >
>      > This is based on FBI statistics. See this page for some
>      interesting data,
>      > charts and graphs...
>      >
>      > See
>      http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/php/article.php?scid=12&did=168
>      >
>      > -gts
>      >
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > extropy-chat mailing list
>      > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>      > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

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

-- 
Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org
______________________________________________________________
ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org
8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A  7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE


From scerir at libero.it  Wed Aug 22 18:48:10 2007
From: scerir at libero.it (scerir)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:48:10 +0200
Subject: [ExI]  Simulation arguments (links)
References: <014c01c7e463$cff23240$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<003601c7e486$435da670$b0bd1f97@archimede>
Message-ID: <000401c7e4ec$fd1efdf0$ef921f97@archimede>

Simulation arguments here ...

http://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=586
(see also the post by Greg Egan, at the end)

http://www.overcomingbias.com/2007/08/pseudo-criticis.html

http://scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=265
(Greg Egan again, in comments, at #33, #37, #60) 

http://www.philosophyetc.net/2007/08/scientism.html
 


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 22 18:11:09 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:11:09 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <7d79ed890708220926g140d5044v1efd3a6746bc43bb@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00bc01c7e275$b40313a0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<005501c7e279$70c72cd0$47074e0c@MyComputer>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708220926g140d5044v1efd3a6746bc43bb@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <op.txg3gvv5ivvpma@shuttle>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:26:53 -0400, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com>  
wrote:

> You can imply-by-assertion a causal relationship if you want, but
> correlation, last time I heard, is not causation.

I'm not arguing that the death penalty causes higher murder rates. I'm  
merely pointing out why it's so controversial whether the death penalty  
deters homicide better than prison sentences. The evidence is mixed at  
best.

-gts




From andres at neuralgrid.net  Wed Aug 22 17:19:28 2007
From: andres at neuralgrid.net (Andres Colon)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 13:19:28 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Google Sky Launches! See it on Thoughtware.TV
Message-ID: <f1d9c15f0708221019s1c6db83h60f918fe0f1c93e7@mail.gmail.com>

Google Sky has launched, 200 million galaxies on your desktop!

Watch it on Thoughtware.TV:  http://thoughtware.tv/videos/show/656

Here is the official Google video release on Sky in Google Earth, which lets
you explore the heavens like never before
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070822/212a15fe/attachment.html>

From sergio.ml.tarrero at mac.com  Wed Aug 22 19:21:37 2007
From: sergio.ml.tarrero at mac.com (Sergio M.L. Tarrero)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 21:21:37 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Sam's letter to Nature
References: <1101788237332.1101378562372.1738.5.5143001@scheduler>
Message-ID: <7B66DF3F-8E59-424D-87A0-F772ED86E482@mac.com>



Begin forwarded message:

> Sam has had a letter to the editor published in the Correspondence  
> section of the journal Nature:
>
> The letter can be read here.
>
> Note: Nature only gives free access to articles for one week after  
> publication.
>
> .
>
>
> email: author at samharris.org
> web: http://www.samharris.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070822/b216cf25/attachment.html>

From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 22 19:52:17 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 15:52:17 -0400
Subject: [ExI] META: Re:  free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org>
References: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
	<20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:35:29 -0400, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> I don't see what this thread has to do with extropy.

Crime and punishment is about law and order. Last time I checked, "order"  
had something to do with "extropy".

How do we secure and defend an extropic civilization? Is the retributive  
theory of justice a concept that should have traction in an enlightened  
society? Should criminals be treated as defective entities in need of  
repair (rehabilitation), or should they be treated as entities deserving  
pain or even termination for having done wrong? These are the sorts of  
questions under consideration here.

-gts



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Aug 22 20:26:38 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:26:38 +0200
Subject: [ExI] META: Re:  free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>
References: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
	<20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org> <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <20070822202638.GF20274@leitl.org>

On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 03:52:17PM -0400, gts wrote:

> Crime and punishment is about law and order. Last time I checked, "order"  
> had something to do with "extropy".

Yes, everything has to do with something else, somehow. But that's not good enough.

It is interesting what we collectively choose to discuss, and what we 
choose not to discuss. Why did we choose to focus on that particular thread,
and keep milling on and on and on?  
 
> How do we secure and defend an extropic civilization? Is the retributive  

How do we start having an extropic civilization, in the first place?

> theory of justice a concept that should have traction in an enlightened

Somebody fetch me an enlightened society, quick.
  
> society? Should criminals be treated as defective entities in need of  
> repair (rehabilitation), or should they be treated as entities deserving  
> pain or even termination for having done wrong? These are the sorts of  
> questions under consideration here.

Both the high incarceration rate and use of capital punishment are local to
the US. The rest of the world doesn't consider these particular global
problems.


From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Wed Aug 22 21:27:56 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 17:27:56 -0400
Subject: [ExI] META: Re:  free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <20070822202638.GF20274@leitl.org>
References: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
	<20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org> <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>
	<20070822202638.GF20274@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <op.txhckuccivvpma@shuttle>

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:26:38 -0400, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> It is interesting what we collectively choose to discuss, and what we  
> choose not to discuss.

It's interesting to me that in what I would call the good old days of this  
list, some number of years ago, people here were free to discuss pretty  
much whatever they wanted to discuss. The only requirement seemed to be  
that the issue be of importance to people of an intellectual bent. I  
insist that the philosophy of justice is one of those issues, Eugen, even  
if *to you* it might not seem important.

I'm sure you're a good guy, Eugen, but hate to you tell ya': this list is  
not all about what you happen to think is important.

I'm not happy that this list went from unmoderated to moderated. Your  
moderator policies sometimes force me to look for other places to find  
intelligent discussion of the things that interest me. Problem for me is,  
intelligent discussion is pretty hard to found outside of ExI.

-gts



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Aug 22 23:55:12 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:55:12 -0500
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>

Here's a sobering experience. They're probably mostly school kids 
hoping someone else's dog will eat their homework, but still:

http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html



From msd001 at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 00:07:02 2007
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:07:02 -0400
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <62c14240708221707x25e1b132l2aa5616835d7fd82@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> Here's a sobering experience. They're probably mostly school kids
> hoping someone else's dog will eat their homework, but still:
>
> http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html
>

There's more proof why no amount of funding or genius script can produce an
H+ movie for the masses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070822/0d1e33ee/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Aug 23 01:05:58 2007
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:05:58 -0500
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
In-Reply-To: <62c14240708221707x25e1b132l2aa5616835d7fd82@mail.gmail.com
 >
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
	<62c14240708221707x25e1b132l2aa5616835d7fd82@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822200433.021cf698@satx.rr.com>


><http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html>http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html 
>
>
>There's more proof why no amount of funding or genius script can 
>produce an H+ movie for the masses.

Actually I thought it was a shithouse movie (despite its prettiness), 
but not for any reason a tender hearted humanist would accept. The 
wonderful damaged natural human with a dud heart swims out after his 
(by hypothesis) supermanized gene-optimized big brother who's always 
(of course) beaten the pants off him before but is now about to 
drown, and saves him, driven by *sheer human dogged grit and pluck*! 
At the end, I dimly recall, he passes himself off as a standard 
superman for a trip to Mars or somethun, even though his heart will 
with p = 0.997 explode en route from the stress; instead of 
chastizing him for putting everyone else's lives at risk by bumping 
the real expert, we're meant to see this as a triumph for sheer human 
dogged grit and pluck, rather than selfish bastardry. Ah well. 



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 01:59:24 2007
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:29:24 +0930
Subject: [ExI] Google Sky Launches! See it on Thoughtware.TV
In-Reply-To: <f1d9c15f0708221019s1c6db83h60f918fe0f1c93e7@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f1d9c15f0708221019s1c6db83h60f918fe0f1c93e7@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0708221859l3718eeabha2696dde1a7baa8d@mail.gmail.com>

Wonderful!

On 23/08/07, Andres Colon <andres at neuralgrid.net> wrote:
> Google Sky has launched, 200 million galaxies on your desktop!
>
> Watch it on Thoughtware.TV:
> http://thoughtware.tv/videos/show/656
>
> Here is the official Google video release on Sky in Google Earth, which lets
> you explore the heavens like never before
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 02:43:54 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:43:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
	<487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
	<7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708221943t7ae12ed6r175507bc934815cf@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/21/07, Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com> wrote:
>
> On Aug 21, 2007, at 3:21 PM, Michael M. Butler wrote:
>
> > On 8/18/07, Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Feathers are important for birds, too, but that's
> >> no reason to put them on airplanes.
> >
> > And how many children have airplanes produced? How many songs?
> >
> > Effort moves toward what is valued. If feelings are completely
> > vestigial in your view, I know I don't want to sit next to you on a
> > plane ride :).
>
> You're reading too much into my (too terse)
> statement.  :)
>
> John Clark asserts, if I remember correctly,
> that if emotions weren't necessary for
> intelligence, evolution would have removed
> them.  I don't know whether emotions are
> necessary for intelligence, but the argument
> that if they weren't, they'd have been
> removed by evolution also proves that you
> can't build airplanes without feathers,
> because if they weren't necessary for flight,
> evolution would have removed them.
>
> The point being, if I'm not belaboring it
> too much, that how evolution solved a
> problem in biology may say nothing about
> how that problem can be most simply solved
> in machina, and so without a theory of
> intelligence that works, we can't say for
> certian whether emotions are necessary for
> intelligence, unless we can find examples
> both ways.

Oh, I take your meaning plain enough. :) I however tend to the view
that any advanced intellect sufficiently distant from me wrt emotions
would be something I'd find implacable and untrustworthy.

I think it has to do in part with mirror neurons (shorthand, I don't
have any idea if the recent vogue for them will pan out, but take that
as "elements of my consciousness that try to model others") and my gut
/ intuition regarding the lessons from Axelrod. Rough parity between
players, and all that.

Wells gave his Martian invaders intellects that were "vast, cool, and
unsympathetic" for a good (creepy-foreboding) reason.

For the record, I wouldn't want to sit next to the Old Testament
Jehovah on an airplane ride either, and I am supposedly created in his
image. :)

-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 02:53:14 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:53:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Re: free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txhckuccivvpma@shuttle>
References: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
	<20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org> <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>
	<20070822202638.GF20274@leitl.org> <op.txhckuccivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708221953g50f44c6eg71ba2c92d52b75ce@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 16:26:38 -0400, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>
> > It is interesting what we collectively choose to discuss, and what we
> > choose not to discuss.

Eugen, on the off chance that that was a hint, I'll take it.

Please be advised that my mailing address works just fine for off list
comments, kudos, chastisement, or whatever.

I apologize for wasting your bandwidth, since evidently skipping the
thread was not something your temperament or personal policy
permitted.

I absolutely agree that the wrangling that has ensued in this thread
was something I must apologize for. I apologize. I've mostly been
lurking since my latest return to the list, and I very much do not
want to be the new Michael Lorrey.

In future I'll try to focus more on safe Stapledonian hypotech/fantasy
and avoid current politics including things like Keith Henson's
imprisonment. After all, it's hard to see the Extropic connection
there.
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From mmbutler at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 02:58:07 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 19:58:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txg3gvv5ivvpma@shuttle>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<00ce01c7e297$5341f8c0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<00e401c7e33a$55585890$0a064e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txc6q4j4ivvpma@shuttle>
	<000f01c7e35c$a65c9450$36074e0c@MyComputer>
	<7d79ed890708210133w508a51cdwc2c2905ccf5fd59b@mail.gmail.com>
	<01b101c7e487$18b43690$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>
	<op.txgqovcgivvpma@shuttle>
	<7d79ed890708220926g140d5044v1efd3a6746bc43bb@mail.gmail.com>
	<op.txg3gvv5ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708221958r410a7873u47df3b1f9257e211@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, gts <gts_2000 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:26:53 -0400, Michael M. Butler <mmbutler at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > You can imply-by-assertion a causal relationship if you want, but
> > correlation, last time I heard, is not causation.
>
> I'm not arguing that the death penalty causes higher murder rates. I'm
> merely pointing out why it's so controversial whether the death penalty
> deters homicide better than prison sentences. The evidence is mixed at
> best.
>
> -gts

OK, let's leave it there. I think Eugen wants us to do this _not
here_, and it doesn't muss my hair to oblige him.

I agree the data are mixed and the issue is complicated. Thanks for
staying civil.

MMB
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From sparkle_robot at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 23 03:51:06 2007
From: sparkle_robot at yahoo.com (Anne Corwin)
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:51:06 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822200433.021cf698@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <862045.55473.qm@web56510.mail.re3.yahoo.com>

I think part of the problem was that there was no way for him to, you know, seek treatment for his heart condition in that society.  If you weren't perfect from birth, you were basically screwed.  And if you got into an accident (like Eugene or whatever his name was) you were also screwed, because there were no real services or treatments for people with acquired disabilities (plus, a colossal social stigma). 

Though I agree the main character shouldn't have put other people's lives at risk, I think the entire social structure they had in that movie was extremely dystopian.  I also think that level of social control would be impossible in the real world, though.  The whole film was mediocre fiction but not much more.

- Anne

Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote: 
>http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html 
>
>
>There's more proof why no amount of funding or genius script can 
>produce an H+ movie for the masses.

Actually I thought it was a shithouse movie (despite its prettiness), 
but not for any reason a tender hearted humanist would accept. The 
wonderful damaged natural human with a dud heart swims out after his 
(by hypothesis) supermanized gene-optimized big brother who's always 
(of course) beaten the pants off him before but is now about to 
drown, and saves him, driven by *sheer human dogged grit and pluck*! 
At the end, I dimly recall, he passes himself off as a standard 
superman for a trip to Mars or somethun, even though his heart will 
with p = 0.997 explode en route from the stress; instead of 
chastizing him for putting everyone else's lives at risk by bumping 
the real expert, we're meant to see this as a triumph for sheer human 
dogged grit and pluck, rather than selfish bastardry. Ah well. 

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



"Like and equal are not the same thing at all!"
- Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time"
       
---------------------------------
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect.  Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070822/0257525d/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Aug 23 08:26:41 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 10:26:41 +0200
Subject: [ExI] META: Re:  free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txhckuccivvpma@shuttle>
References: <082220071548.15176.46CC5AB40003153200003B482200760180979A09070E@comcast.net>
	<20070822163529.GV20274@leitl.org> <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>
	<20070822202638.GF20274@leitl.org> <op.txhckuccivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <20070823082641.GH20274@leitl.org>

On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 05:27:56PM -0400, gts wrote:

> It's interesting to me that in what I would call the good old days of this  
> list, some number of years ago, people here were free to discuss pretty  

The good old days of this list were when the list was closed, in 1980/90s. 
I wasn't there at the time, unfortunately. People who were say it's been
great.

> much whatever they wanted to discuss. The only requirement seemed to be  
> that the issue be of importance to people of an intellectual bent. I  

Only for very small values of intellectual bent, I'm afraid.

> insist that the philosophy of justice is one of those issues, Eugen, even  
> if *to you* it might not seem important.
> 
> I'm sure you're a good guy, Eugen, but hate to you tell ya': this list is  
> not all about what you happen to think is important.

I think good threads are important. This is not a good thread, though.
 
> I'm not happy that this list went from unmoderated to moderated. Your 

I'm also not happy. It's a lousy job, but someone's got to do it.
 
> moderator policies sometimes force me to look for other places to find  
> intelligent discussion of the things that interest me. Problem for me is,  
> intelligent discussion is pretty hard to found outside of ExI.

Which tells us we should all aspire to higher standards.


From sm at vreedom.com  Thu Aug 23 10:01:38 2007
From: sm at vreedom.com (Stephan Magnus)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:01:38 +0100
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
In-Reply-To: <862045.55473.qm@web56510.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <PNENJAKEPDGILBHELFBHOEOEDDAA.sm@vreedom.com>

I don?t think that the film is about the topic you are talking about. It is
not about genetical engineering being good or bad or about the possibilities
of enhancement or if you want it.
It is in a way about the same question like in ?Amadeus?. What can you do if
your wishes or dreams do not fit the genes/ talents given to you? And could
you reduce the personality and its possibilities to genetics? The whole
point of the film is that you cannot.
And that is not so far from transhumanist ideas: What counts is you as an
individual and as a personality! If you can use enhancement to develop you
farther: well enough. But the best genes will bring you nowhere without
personality and wishes.

I found the movie in no way mediocre. For this special topic, the script is
pretty smart, just like ?Truman Show? from the same guy. And that the
society is a little bit styled and too perfect: that is like in classical
fables. To make the point clear you have to make the background exaggerated
and easy to grasp. That is the canvas to paint the story on.


Stephan Magnus
Consulting und Training

Sitio Pincho, 8600-090 Bensafrim, Portugal
Telefon: 00351-282969161
Fax: 00351-282969162
Mail sm at vreedom.com
http://www.vreedom.com

Mein Podcast "Das Abenteuer Zukunft" <http://www.das-abenteuer-zukunft.de/>

Moderator Simulation & Gaming auf XING
<https://www.xing.com/net/simbizz/>

-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org]Im Auftrag von Anne Corwin
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. August 2007 04:51
An: ExI chat list
Betreff: Re: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world

I think part of the problem was that there was no way for him to, you know,
seek treatment for his heart condition in that society.  If you weren't
perfect from birth, you were basically screwed.  And if you got into an
accident (like Eugene or whatever his name was) you were also screwed,
because there were no real services or treatments for people with acquired
disabilities (plus, a colossal social stigma).

Though I agree the main character shouldn't have put other people's lives at
risk, I think the entire social structure they had in that movie was
extremely dystopian.  I also think that level of social control would be
impossible in the real world, though.  The whole film was mediocre fiction
but not much more.

- Anne

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

>http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html
>
>
>There's more proof why no amount of funding or genius script can
>produce an H+ movie for the masses.

Actually I thought it was a shithouse movie (despite its prettiness),
but not for any reason a tender hearted humanist would accept. The
wonderful damaged natural human with a dud heart swims out after his
(by hypothesis) supermanized gene-optimized big brother who's always
(of course) beaten the pants off him before but is now about to
drown, and saves him, driven by *sheer human dogged grit and pluck*!
At the end, I dimly recall, he passes himself off as a standard
superman for a trip to Mars or somethun, even though his heart will
with p = 0.997 explode en route from the stress; instead of
chastizing him for putting everyone else's lives at risk by bumping
the real expert, we're meant to see this as a triumph for sheer human
dogged grit and pluck, rather than selfish bastardry. Ah well.

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





"Like and equal are not the same thing at all!"
- Meg Murry, "A Wrinkle In Time"

  _____

Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=48516/*http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_pa
nel_invite.asp?a=7%20>  and lay it on us.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070823/6eaccf90/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 12:39:19 2007
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 08:39:19 -0400
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822200433.021cf698@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
	<62c14240708221707x25e1b132l2aa5616835d7fd82@mail.gmail.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070822200433.021cf698@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <62c14240708230539x44b9ee26hf697ca54fa3572b6@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/22/07, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> ><http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html>
> http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html
> >There's more proof why no amount of funding or genius script can
> >produce an H+ movie for the masses.
> chastizing him for putting everyone else's lives at risk by bumping
> the real expert, we're meant to see this as a triumph for sheer human
> dogged grit and pluck, rather than selfish bastardry. Ah well.
>

yeah, there is that angle - but I meant that even such a "shithouse" movie
as Gattacca could be so poorly understood, how could a movie do justice to
transhumanism and ever hope to be well received by the SL0/SL1 public.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070823/84debab9/attachment.html>

From jonkc at att.net  Thu Aug 23 16:16:37 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:16:37 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
Message-ID: <002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>

"Randall Randall" <randall at randallsquared.com>

> I don't know whether emotions are
> necessary for intelligence, but the argument
> that if they weren't, they'd have been
> removed by evolution also proves that you
> can't build airplanes without feathers,
> because if they weren't necessary for flight,
> evolution would have removed them.

There is however a rather obvious difference between these examples. Yes,
I can point at an airplane that flies just fine despite a lack of feathers,
and I can point at a creature that is very emotional but has little or no
intelligence; but you can NOT point to an intelligence that is not
emotional, it remains as mythical as the Unicorn. I can supply concrete
examples to support my view, you can supply none to support yours.

 John K Clark




From randall at randallsquared.com  Thu Aug 23 17:38:48 2007
From: randall at randallsquared.com (Randall Randall)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:38:48 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
	<002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <81CDD18E-02B1-4176-A3F4-D0B77CEDB000@randallsquared.com>


On Aug 23, 2007, at 12:16 PM, John K Clark wrote:

> "Randall Randall" <randall at randallsquared.com>
>
>> I don't know whether emotions are
>> necessary for intelligence, but the argument
>> that if they weren't, they'd have been
>> removed by evolution also proves that you
>> can't build airplanes without feathers,
>> because if they weren't necessary for flight,
>> evolution would have removed them.
>
> There is however a rather obvious difference between these  
> examples. Yes,
> I can point at an airplane that flies just fine despite a lack of  
> feathers,
> and I can point at a creature that is very emotional but has little  
> or no
> intelligence; but you can NOT point to an intelligence that is not
> emotional, it remains as mythical as the Unicorn. I can supply  
> concrete
> examples to support my view, you can supply none to support yours.

There are various psychological abnormalities
(autism, etc) that seem to point at the
possibility of intelligence without emotion,
but I'll agree that we have no clear-cut
evidence for the possibility.  On the other
hand, I think that biological evolution
probably does favor emotions, because they
serve as useful heuristics.  While this
suggests that entities of the future which
survive will be emotional on some level, it
doesn't seem to give any guidance on whether
it's possible to build AI without emotion.

In this case, absence of evidence is only very
weak evidence of absence, in my opinion.

--
Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com>
"Who made up all the rules / We follow them like fools ;
  Believe them to be true / Don't care to think them through."
  - "They", Jem Griffiths






From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 23 17:29:03 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 13:29:03 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
	<487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
	<7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
	<002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <op.txiv6pe4ivvpma@shuttle>

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 12:16:37 -0400, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:

> but you can NOT point to an intelligence that is not
> emotional, it remains as mythical as the Unicorn.

I suppose that depends how you define intelligence. I happen to think that  
even the lowly virus is endowed with primitive intelligence, but I doubt  
very much that a virus experiences emotions.

-gts



From robotact at mail.ru  Thu Aug 23 18:39:23 2007
From: robotact at mail.ru (Vladimir Nesov)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:39:23 +0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
	<002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <3736460066.20070823223923@mail.ru>

Thursday, August 23, 2007, John K Clark wrote:

JKC> "Randall Randall" <randall at randallsquared.com>

>> I don't know whether emotions are
>> necessary for intelligence, but the argument
>> that if they weren't, they'd have been
>> removed by evolution also proves that you
>> can't build airplanes without feathers,
>> because if they weren't necessary for flight,
>> evolution would have removed them.

JKC> There is however a rather obvious difference between these examples. Yes,
JKC> I can point at an airplane that flies just fine despite a lack of feathers,
JKC> and I can point at a creature that is very emotional but has little or no
JKC> intelligence; but you can NOT point to an intelligence that is not
JKC> emotional, it remains as mythical as the Unicorn. I can supply concrete
JKC> examples to support my view, you can supply none to support yours.

You can also not point to a human-level intelligence that lacks
blood. Immediacy of experience isn't necessary for evidence.

-- 
 Vladimir Nesov                            mailto:robotact at mail.ru



From gts_2000 at yahoo.com  Thu Aug 23 18:58:27 2007
From: gts_2000 at yahoo.com (gts)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 14:58:27 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <3736460066.20070823223923@mail.ru>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
	<487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
	<7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
	<002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<3736460066.20070823223923@mail.ru>
Message-ID: <op.txi0bpsrivvpma@shuttle>

Richard Dawkins agrees with me:

Let's all stop beating Basil's car (a short essay by Richard Dawkins)
http://www.edge.org/q2006/q06_9.html#dawkins

-gts



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Aug 23 20:10:54 2007
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:10:54 +0200
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20070823201054.GS20274@leitl.org>

On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 06:55:12PM -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:
> Here's a sobering experience. They're probably mostly school kids 
> hoping someone else's dog will eat their homework, but still:

I'm sorry, we've been school kids, too. But we never drove the short bus.
 
> http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html


From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Aug 23 22:15:03 2007
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 23:15:03 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Google Sky Launches! See it on Thoughtware.TV
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0708221859l3718eeabha2696dde1a7baa8d@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f1d9c15f0708221019s1c6db83h60f918fe0f1c93e7@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0708221859l3718eeabha2696dde1a7baa8d@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ee50357e0708231515v4d8c0878q433b0dd8e2f85b19@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/23/07, Emlyn wrote:
> Wonderful!
>

You can also download the free Stellarium program, which some say is
far better than Google Sky. And it can run offline as well.
Available for Linux, Mac and Windows.

<http://www.stellarium.org/>

Quote:
Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It
shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked
eye, binoculars or a telescope.
It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go.

BillK


From lcorbin at rawbw.com  Fri Aug 24 00:53:51 2007
From: lcorbin at rawbw.com (Lee Corbin)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:53:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Google Sky Launches! See it on Thoughtware.TV
References: <f1d9c15f0708221019s1c6db83h60f918fe0f1c93e7@mail.gmail.com><710b78fc0708221859l3718eeabha2696dde1a7baa8d@mail.gmail.com>
	<ee50357e0708231515v4d8c0878q433b0dd8e2f85b19@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003e01c7e5e9$55091df0$6501a8c0@homeef7b612677>

We really should be discussing comparisons between Google Sky,
Stellarium, and the only one I've used, the incomparable :-)
Celestia.

Lee

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "BillK" <pharos at gmail.com>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2007 3:15 PM
Subject: Re: [ExI] Google Sky Launches! See it on Thoughtware.TV


> On 8/23/07, Emlyn wrote:
>> Wonderful!
>>
> 
> You can also download the free Stellarium program, which some say is
> far better than Google Sky. And it can run offline as well.
> Available for Linux, Mac and Windows.
> 
> <http://www.stellarium.org/>
> 
> Quote:
> Stellarium is a free open source planetarium for your computer. It
> shows a realistic sky in 3D, just like what you see with the naked
> eye, binoculars or a telescope.
> It is being used in planetarium projectors. Just set your coordinates and go.
> 
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Fri Aug 24 00:55:08 2007
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 17:55:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] GATTACA discussed by the rest of the world
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com>
	<20070823201054.GS20274@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <004501c7e5e9$6c6111b0$6401a8c0@brainiac>

http://www.gnovies.com/discussion/gattacca.html

"To access all functionality?"  "To access all functionality?" (yes, I know 
that many people write like that these days).  It was bad enough reading 
through the comments ... only to be slapped in the face by "... 
functionality" ...

Access THIS "functionality," will you? (and then click on "List of errors" 
and have a few chuckles ...):

https://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/functionality.html

Olga (sometimes somewhat prone to fuddy-duddy-ness, yes)





From jef at jefallbright.net  Fri Aug 24 05:32:27 2007
From: jef at jefallbright.net (Jef Allbright)
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 22:32:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The Dopler Effect
Message-ID: <f7bfe5740708232232g7b55f27dl8eb173994e16f83a@mail.gmail.com>

This might be of interest.

<http://www.doplereffecttv.com/>

- Jef


From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Sat Aug 25 16:49:28 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 09:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] META: Re:  free-will, determinism, crime and punishment
In-Reply-To: <op.txg75f0civvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <539860.59885.qm@web45216.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

Another sort of question is why should criminals get 3 meals and a bed when many law abiding citizens don't? 


Should criminals be treated as defective entities in need of  
repair (rehabilitation), or should they be treated as entities deserving  
pain or even termination for having done wrong? These are the sorts of  
questions under consideration here.

-gts


rather than being positive, almost all politics are bad religion rather than good politics

       
---------------------------------
Got a little couch potato? 
Check out fun summer activities for kids.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070825/70b4133c/attachment.html>

From pgptag at gmail.com  Sun Aug 26 13:40:29 2007
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 15:40:29 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Singularity Fallacies: An essay by Extropia DaSilva
Message-ID: <470a3c520708260640r7853a3eej6ca25d3ce99996d3@mail.gmail.com>

Another thoughtful essay by Extropia DaSilva, on the Technological
Singularity and the evolution of the Internet towards the Omninet.

"In this extended essay, I look at some of the fallacies that crop up
in discussions of the Technological Singularity, and I don't just mean
the fallacies made by the people who think it is all a load of
nonsense. In fact, before proceeding, it's worth noting that, just
because the arguments put forward by most critics contain inaccuracies
and a general lack of understanding, that does not mean to say that
their conclusion (that there will be no Singularity) is wrong. Indeed,
at the end of this essay I argue that a proper understanding of what
the Singularity represents does show that its physical existence is an
illusion? "

Also, the 'Omninet': "Sci-fi visions of becoming immersed in
cyberspace imagined this would ocurr via us 'jacking in' by plugging a
cable into our brains. Cyberspace might indeed enter our brains,
albeit via a network of nanoscale transponders communicating with
neurons and each other on a local area wireless network. But,
ultimately, if this idea of an omninet is valid, immersion will happen
because the Internet spreads out into ubiquitous sensors that pervade
the environment. The sheer quantity of data and diversity of knowledge
that will exist in this age would overwhelm us, absolutely requiring
advanced machine intelligence to help organize and make sense of it".

http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/more/singularity_fallacies_an_essay_by_extropia_dasilva/


From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 26 14:06:46 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 10:06:46 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<3736460066.20070823223923@mail.ru>
Message-ID: <002c01c7e7ea$d13651b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>

"Vladimir Nesov" <robotact at mail.ru>

> You can also not point to a human-level
> intelligence that lacks blood.

True, but as you can't point to a non human intelligence that has or has not
blood your point is moot. Besides, blood is unimportant, emotion is not.

> Immediacy of experience isn't necessary for evidence.

Well, it sure as hell helps!

John K Clark






From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 26 14:08:46 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 10:08:46 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<81CDD18E-02B1-4176-A3F4-D0B77CEDB000@randallsquared.com>
Message-ID: <002d01c7e7ea$d1c30150$66074e0c@MyComputer>

"Randall Randall" <randall at randallsquared.com>

> There are various psychological abnormalities
> (autism, etc) that seem to point at the
> possibility of intelligence without emotion

It's odd you would use as an example an intelligence that just doesn't work
very well, but no matter, anyone who has seen an autistic person in a rage
or a panic knows that sometimes their problem is too much emotion not too
little.

> but I'll agree that we have no clear-cut
> evidence for the possibility.

OK.

> I think that biological evolution  probably does
> favor emotions, because they serve as useful heuristics.

I agree.

> While this  suggests that entities of the future which
> survive will be emotional on some level

I think your statement is a bit too understated but basically I agree.

> it doesn't seem to give any guidance on whether
> it's possible to build AI without emotion.

But then at the very least you must agree it would be easier to build an AI
with emotion than one without that "useful heuristic". And remember,
whatever AI gets there first will win the field.

> In this case, absence of evidence is only very
> weak evidence of absence, in my opinion.

it is never a good sign if your theory cannot point to concrete examples
while a competing theory can. I can point to such examples, you cannot.

  John K Clark






From robotact at mail.ru  Sun Aug 26 14:33:59 2007
From: robotact at mail.ru (Vladimir Nesov)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:33:59 +0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <002c01c7e7ea$d13651b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<3736460066.20070823223923@mail.ru>
	<002c01c7e7ea$d13651b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <19322196066.20070826183359@mail.ru>

Sunday, August 26, 2007, John K Clark wrote:

JKC> "Vladimir Nesov" <robotact at mail.ru>

>> You can also not point to a human-level
>> intelligence that lacks blood.

JKC> True, but as you can't point to a non human intelligence that has or has not
JKC> blood your point is moot. Besides, blood is unimportant, emotion is not.

>> Immediacy of experience isn't necessary for evidence.

JKC> Well, it sure as hell helps!

How do you decide that blood is unimportant? `Absence of immediately
experienceable evidence' argument invoked so far doesn't help with
this problem; so why should it help with decision about importance of
emotions?


-- 
 Vladimir Nesov                            mailto:robotact at mail.ru



From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 26 15:45:01 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:45:01 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<op.txiv6pe4ivvpma@shuttle>
Message-ID: <007501c7e7f8$434c0670$66074e0c@MyComputer>

"gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>

> I suppose that depends how you define intelligence.

I have no definition of intelligence nor do I need one. Compared with
examples definitions are of trivial importance.

> I happen to think that  even the lowly virus is endowed with primitive
> intelligence, but I doubt very much that a virus experiences emotions.

I have seen very little evidence that a virus has emotion but even less that
it was intelligent.

  John K Clark




From randall at randallsquared.com  Sun Aug 26 16:49:26 2007
From: randall at randallsquared.com (Randall Randall)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:49:26 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <002d01c7e7ea$d1c30150$66074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<81CDD18E-02B1-4176-A3F4-D0B77CEDB000@randallsquared.com>
	<002d01c7e7ea$d1c30150$66074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <D384F543-4E56-4A53-8FB5-10BB0B4C8F3C@randallsquared.com>


On Aug 26, 2007, at 10:08 AM, John K Clark wrote:

> "Randall Randall" <randall at randallsquared.com>
>
>> There are various psychological abnormalities
>> (autism, etc) that seem to point at the
>> possibility of intelligence without emotion
>
> It's odd you would use as an example an intelligence that just  
> doesn't work
> very well, but no matter, anyone who has seen an autistic person in  
> a rage
> or a panic knows that sometimes their problem is too much emotion  
> not too
> little.

A google for "disorder" and "emotionless" shows a
number of hits talking about autism, more-or-less
confirming my vague impression, here.  Some forms
of autism may well be characterized by "too much"
emotion, but at least some are the reverse.  Also,
I think we should draw a distinction between "just
doesn't work very well" and "doesn't behave socially";
these are not necessarily the same thing.

>> While this  suggests that entities of the future which
>> survive will be emotional on some level
>
> I think your statement is a bit too understated but basically I agree.

I said it that way because the idea that emotions
are useful heuristics seems to suggest that many
situations we need heuristics for will be simple
enough to make a rational decision on instead for
a greater intelligence.

We already have sets of situations that are simple
enough for humans to figure out rationally, for
which our emotions are just wrong (gambling, e.g.).


>> it doesn't seem to give any guidance on whether
>> it's possible to build AI without emotion.
>
> But then at the very least you must agree it would be easier to  
> build an AI
> with emotion than one without that "useful heuristic". And remember,
> whatever AI gets there first will win the field.

I do not agree that it would be easier to build
an AI with emotion, unless we precisely copy human
ones, for which it might not be useful.

Let us imagine building a superhuman intelligence.
Such an entity might well find all human-level
interaction solvable, and have emotions only for
more complex situations.

Here's the problem with that, though:  the only two
ways to get such emotions are by design or evolution,
and if design is possible, that means someone worked
out the (usually) correct solutions in advance for
that class of problems.  We can't do that, by definition,
since this is a superhuman intelligence, so this AI
must have gotten to those emotions by evolution, which
seems likely to be much harder than design in terms of
computing power and time.

Of course, that assumes someone has a correct theory
of intelligence when building the AI, which may well
not be the case.


>> In this case, absence of evidence is only very
>> weak evidence of absence, in my opinion.
>
> it is never a good sign if your theory cannot point to concrete  
> examples
> while a competing theory can. I can point to such examples, you  
> cannot.

Actually, I don't have a theory.  I'm not pointing
to a better theory, but instead pointing out that I
don't know that there's enough evidence to distinguish
between any theories without more evidence (that is,
more types of intelligence than just humans).


--
Randall Randall <randall at randallsquared.com>
"This is a fascinating question, right up there with whether rocks
fall because of gravity or being dropped, and whether 3+5=5+3
because addition is commutative or because they both equal 8."
   - Scott Aaronson




From pgptag at gmail.com  Sun Aug 26 16:56:31 2007
From: pgptag at gmail.com (Giu1i0 Pri5c0)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 18:56:31 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Singularity Fallacies: An essay by Extropia DaSilva
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520708260640r7853a3eej6ca25d3ce99996d3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <470a3c520708260640r7853a3eej6ca25d3ce99996d3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <470a3c520708260956r6aaa632cw3fb35a56cbc62669@mail.gmail.com>

The essay was too big for Expression Engine. I split it into 2 parts:

http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/comments/singularity_fallacies_an_essay_by_extropia_dasilva_part_1/


http://transumanar.com/index.php/site/comments/singularity_fallacies_an_essay_by_extropia_dasilva_part_2/

G.

On 8/26/07, Giu1i0 Pri5c0 <pgptag at gmail.com> wrote:
> Another thoughtful essay by Extropia DaSilva, on the Technological
> Singularity and the evolution of the Internet towards the Omninet.
>
> "In this extended essay, I look at some of the fallacies that crop up
> in discussions of the Technological Singularity, and I don't just mean
> the fallacies made by the people who think it is all a load of
> nonsense. In fact, before proceeding, it's worth noting that, just
> because the arguments put forward by most critics contain inaccuracies
> and a general lack of understanding, that does not mean to say that
> their conclusion (that there will be no Singularity) is wrong. Indeed,
> at the end of this essay I argue that a proper understanding of what
> the Singularity represents does show that its physical existence is an
> illusion? "
>
> Also, the 'Omninet': "Sci-fi visions of becoming immersed in
> cyberspace imagined this would ocurr via us 'jacking in' by plugging a
> cable into our brains. Cyberspace might indeed enter our brains,
> albeit via a network of nanoscale transponders communicating with
> neurons and each other on a local area wireless network. But,
> ultimately, if this idea of an omninet is valid, immersion will happen
> because the Internet spreads out into ubiquitous sensors that pervade
> the environment. The sheer quantity of data and diversity of knowledge
> that will exist in this age would overwhelm us, absolutely requiring
> advanced machine intelligence to help organize and make sense of it".


From jonkc at att.net  Sun Aug 26 16:44:11 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 12:44:11 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<81CDD18E-02B1-4176-A3F4-D0B77CEDB000@randallsquared.com>
Message-ID: <009a01c7e800$669010b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>

"Vladimir Nesov" <robotact at mail.ru>

> How do you decide that blood is unimportant?

I can conceive of an entity that has no blood that nevertheless acts in ways
that are very interesting, about as interesting as my tiny brain can imagine
actually. I can not conceive of an entity that lacked emotion doing anything
approaching that level of interest, or was deserving of the grand name
"intelligence"; in fact, to my mind such a thing approaches a logical
contradiction. Ok, maybe my inability to imagine such a thing is a function
of my tiny brain, but I don't think so.

> Absence of immediately  experienceable evidence' argument invoked
> so far doesn't help with this problem; so why should it help with
> decision about importance of emotions?

I don't know what you're talking about; there is experimental evidence in
this matter. The results are just now coming in of a 4 billion year long
experiment and the results support my views not yours. You response is
typical of those who's pet theory is not supported by evidence; it's just
one experiment, Nature could have made a mistake, the experiment needs
to be repeated before we know for sure. Do we really have to wait another
4 billion years before we can talk again?

 John K Clark





From robotact at mail.ru  Sun Aug 26 17:11:12 2007
From: robotact at mail.ru (Vladimir Nesov)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 21:11:12 +0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <009a01c7e800$669010b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com><00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer><487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com><7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com><D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com><002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<81CDD18E-02B1-4176-A3F4-D0B77CEDB000@randallsquared.com>
	<009a01c7e800$669010b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <18731628749.20070826211112@mail.ru>

Sunday, August 26, 2007, John K Clark wrote:

JKC> "Vladimir Nesov" <robotact at mail.ru>

>> How do you decide that blood is unimportant?

JKC> I can conceive of an entity that has no blood that nevertheless acts in ways
JKC> that are very interesting, about as interesting as my tiny brain can imagine
JKC> actually. I can not conceive of an entity that lacked emotion doing anything
JKC> approaching that level of interest, or was deserving of the grand name
JKC> "intelligence"; in fact, to my mind such a thing approaches a logical
JKC> contradiction. Ok, maybe my inability to imagine such a thing is a function
JKC> of my tiny brain, but I don't think so.

In essence, you present no explicit argument, but you have a strong
intuition that suggests that [interesting intelligence] must have
emotions. Fair enough. I don't insist that it's wrong, given
flexibility of definition of 'emotions' and 'interestingness of
intelligence' which can be additionally specified to make your point
right or wrong. In definitions specified by my intuition your
assertion is wrong. It might be enough to translate your
assertion through your intuitive specifications of these terms to make
it agreeable. I only assert that on current level of problem's
specification what you present as arguments doesn't work.

>> Absence of immediately  experienceable evidence' argument invoked
>> so far doesn't help with this problem; so why should it help with
>> decision about importance of emotions?

JKC> I don't know what you're talking about; there is experimental evidence in
JKC> this matter. The results are just now coming in of a 4 billion year long
JKC> experiment and the results support my views not yours. You response is
JKC> typical of those who's pet theory is not supported by evidence; it's just
JKC> one experiment, Nature could have made a mistake, the experiment needs
JKC> to be repeated before we know for sure. Do we really have to wait another
JKC> 4 billion years before we can talk again?

We are not talking about properties of natural intelligence. Assertion
that emotions are inherent part of interesting-minds-in-general is not
connected to assertion that emotions are inherent part of
minds-that-evolved. Which is an analogy to what I exemplified: blood
being an inherent part of evil-mind-hardware-in-general is not
connected to blood being an inherent part of mind-wetware-evolved-here-on-earth.

-- 
 Vladimir Nesov                            mailto:robotact at mail.ru



From mmbutler at gmail.com  Sun Aug 26 18:25:59 2007
From: mmbutler at gmail.com (Michael M. Butler)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 11:25:59 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Singularity Fallacies: An essay by Extropia DaSilva
In-Reply-To: <470a3c520708260956r6aaa632cw3fb35a56cbc62669@mail.gmail.com>
References: <470a3c520708260640r7853a3eej6ca25d3ce99996d3@mail.gmail.com>
	<470a3c520708260956r6aaa632cw3fb35a56cbc62669@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d79ed890708261125g203dd915j30da011a7e0acb86@mail.gmail.com>

> > Indeed,
> > at the end of this essay I argue that a proper understanding of what
> > the Singularity represents does show that its physical existence is an
> > illusion? "

"Its _physical_ existence"?

Beg pardon, but what does this mean? I must have been napping... I was
always under the impression that the (a) Singularity is or would be
_experiential_,
as-percieved-by-someone-from-here&now-trying-to-keep-up.

Someone has been arguing that it's physical? Need we take any such
claim seriously?

M
-- 
         Michael M. Butler  :  m m b u t l e r  ( a t )  g m a i l . c o m
         "I'm going to get over this some time. Might as well be now."


From pjmanney at gmail.com  Sun Aug 26 21:38:58 2007
From: pjmanney at gmail.com (PJ Manney)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 14:38:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Do you think too much?
Message-ID: <29666bf30708261438r6885974et9ce661bb88162681@mail.gmail.com>

You may have already seen this floating around, but it's new to me and
I laughed.  When you hit the punch line, feel free to remove the last
two words and add your own, least favorite, cultural institution.

PJ

**************************************

It started out innocently enough. I began to think at parties now and
then -- just to loosen up.  Inevitably, though, one thought led to
another, and soon I was more than just a social thinker.  I began to
think alone -- "to relax," I told myself -- but I knew  it wasn't
true. Thinking became more and more important to me, and finally I was
thinking all the time.

That was when things began to sour at home. One evening I turned off
the TV and asked my wife about the meaning of life. She spent that
night at her mother's.  I began to think on the job. I knew that
thinking and employment don't mix, but I couldn't help myself. I began
to avoid friends at lunchtime so I could read Thoreau, Muir, Confucius
and Kafka. I would return to the office dizzied and confused, asking,
"What is it exactly we are doing here?"

One day the boss called me in. He said, "Listen, I like you, and it
hurts me to say this, but your thinking has become a real problem. If
you don't stop thinking on the job, you'll have to find another
job."This gave me a lot to think about. I came home early after my
conversation with the boss. "Honey," I confessed, "I've been
thinking..."

"I know you've been thinking," she said, "and I want a divorce!"

"But Honey, surely it's not that serious." "It is serious," she said,
lower lip aquiver.  "You think as much as high school teachers, and
high school teachers don't make any money, so if you keep on thinking,
we won't have any money!"

"That's a faulty syllogism," I said impatiently.

She exploded in tears of rage and frustration, but I was in no mood to
deal with the emotional drama.  "I'm going to the library," I snarled
as I stomped out the door.  I headed for the library, in the mood for
some Nietzsche. I roared into the parking lot with NPR (Fresh Air
interview of Daniel Shore) on the radio and ran up to the big glass
doors. They didn't open. The library was closed.

To this day, I believe that a Higher Power was looking out for me that
night. Leaning on the unfeeling glass, whimpering for Zarathustra, a
poster caught my eye, "Friend, is heavy thinking ruining your life?"
it asked.  You probably recognize that line. It comes from the
standard Thinkers Anonymous poster.

This is why I am what I am today: a recovering thinker.  I never miss
a TA meeting. At each meeting we watch a non-educational video; last
week it was "Porky's." Then we share experiences about how we avoided
thinking since the last meeting. I still have my job, and things are a
lot better at home. Life just seemed easier, somehow, as soon as I
stopped thinking. I think the road to recovery is nearly complete for
me.

Today I took the final step...I joined the Republican Party.


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Aug 27 03:53:44 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Sun, 26 Aug 2007 20:53:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Seeking a source
Message-ID: <46D24AC8.5070206@pobox.com>

Heard from a friend:  "I recall a comment from D-Wave Systems that a 
1974 era computer running 2007 algorithms would beat a modern computer 
running 1974 algorithms."  Topic was decryption / factorization.

I am looking for the original source of the D-Wave comment, or any 
reputable source for a statement similar to it (computer from year X 
with new algorithm Y beats new computer from year Y with old algorithm 
from X).

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


From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Aug 27 10:27:10 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 05:27:10 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Seeking a source
In-Reply-To: <46D24AC8.5070206@pobox.com>
References: <46D24AC8.5070206@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <200708271027.l7RARGK3011563@ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com>

At 10:53 PM 8/26/2007, Eli wrote:
>Heard from a friend:  "I recall a comment from D-Wave Systems that a
>1974 era computer running 2007 algorithms would beat a modern computer
>running 1974 algorithms."  Topic was decryption / factorization.
>
>I am looking for the original source of the D-Wave comment, or any
>reputable source for a statement similar to it (computer from year X
>with new algorithm Y beats new computer from year Y with old algorithm
>from X).

Mark Miller might be able to answer this.  http://www.caplet.com/

Natasha


>--
>Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
>Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.8/973 - Release Date: 
>8/25/2007 5:00 PM

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070827/4d28c4fd/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Mon Aug 27 10:28:45 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 05:28:45 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Seeking a source
Message-ID: <200708271028.l7RASplY015571@ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com>

At 10:53 PM 8/26/2007, Eli wrote:
>Heard from a friend:  "I recall a comment from D-Wave Systems that a
>1974 era computer running 2007 algorithms would beat a modern computer
>running 1974 algorithms."  Topic was decryption / factorization.
>
>I am looking for the original source of the D-Wave comment, or any
>reputable source for a statement similar to it (computer from year X
>with new algorithm Y beats new computer from year Y with old algorithm
>from X).

Mark Miller might be able to answer this.  http://www.caplet.com/

Natasha


>--
>Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
>Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence
>_______________________________________________
>extropy-chat mailing list
>extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this incoming message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.8/973 - Release Date: 
>8/25/2007 5:00 PM

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070827/b4c844a2/attachment.html>

From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Aug 27 13:02:29 2007
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 22:32:29 +0930
Subject: [ExI] The Street Performer Protocol
Message-ID: <710b78fc0708270602r11dd1220y9ef569f4798f3c3e@mail.gmail.com>

"We introduce the Street Performer Protocol, an electronic-commerce
mechanism to facilitate the private financing of public works. Using
this protocol, people would place donations in escrow, to be released
to an author in the event that the promised work be put in the public
domain. This protocol has the potential to fund alternative or
"marginal" works."

http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue4_6/kelsey/

---

I was interested to come across this paper, because I've been thinking
about the same idea for some years. I think that the whole concept of
selling copies of creative information works is busy failing currently
and will fail completely at some point in, say, the next 10 years.

This concept, the idea of moving payment to pre-release, is the right
way to replace selling copies, imo. If you think about it, it actually
makes more sense in a way; the creator is paid directly for what is
created, rather than for copies, which are an indirect product of the
work.

I think there are a few errors in the focus of the paper, or at least
my opinion differs.

Firstly, I think the escrow/publisher party is better thought of as a
big time website. Think an Amazon or EBay. It'd track two major
things: Creator track record (inclusing ratings by sponsors and public
generally), and Sponsor donation history. Also, it'd provide all the
functions for creators to create & manage projects for sponsoring, and
sponsors to subscribe, etc etc, to projects. Some central organisation
is needed, not for trust reasons, so much as for marketting reasons -
the concept of donating prior to creative work release must be sold to
the public. It's not something that single artists in the wilderness
(even someone of say Steven King's fame) can do alone.

There is an idea that you need to bind the creator somehow, to ensure
they release the work. I'm not sure that matters too much. Creators
will be bound by their own reputation. Taking money and delivering
nothing will end up with a trashed reputation.

So, I think in many cases the idea of releasing money only on release
of the product into the public domain (let's be more realistic and say
"under creative commons licensing") is unnecessary. Over-engineered.
Let creators get the money up front. They might need it to live on
while creating the artwork!

I think the focus on small creators is wrong (even to the point of the
name, "The Street Performer Protocol"). Who are people going to donate
to, unknown people or known people? No matter how much we might like
the ideal of unknown creators getting a go, people aren't going to
part with their money without knowing they will get something for it.
I think that implies people will lean toward paying those with some
measure of fame (reputation). In fact, I think people will mostly
donate to people who are the most famous. I'd like to hope that the
overall curve of money vs fame would be less spiky than it is today,
but I can't prove it :-)

I don't think they address how you actually get people to sponsor
creation in that paper. I think this is surprisingly easy to answer...
it's via status. I think people generally spend their money to
increase their status with their social circle (friends, family, ...).
So, if you can promote the idea of sponsoring as a high status thing,
you should be able to get people to do it.

What creators will need to do to sweeten the deal is to make their
sponsors into a priveleged elite. A big name band should make the best
tickets to their gigs available to sponsors only. They could have some
special sponsor-only shows. Authors could offer signed paper copies of
books, or acknowledgements in the text, to the sponsors. Many types of
creators could offer prizes like inclusion of a sponsor as a minor
character (eg: in a video game) to the winner of sponsor-only
competitions. Etc.

This kind of stuff is actually rightly the domain of the traditional
publisher. The problem of soliciting donations is a problem of
marketting. Marketers have been selling us a brown fizzy drink for far
less substantive benefits for many years. If someone can get the core
concept off the ground, market the overall idea, then selling
individual creators / creative groups is just the new job for the
existing middle men.

How do you kickstart it? You take existing famous creators
(musicians/writers/artists/movie makers) en masse, and get them to
flog their work this way. How do you convince them to try it? Um, you
probably need to be their existing publishing company.

Why would a big company do it? Because copyright is going to die.
Their profits are already falling. Gotta do something! And, there'll
be a tipping point, where the public understands and supports the idea
to such an extent that they will no longer pay for a copy of anything.
At that point, the small handful (1 -> 5??) of publishers who went out
and owned the new space will own the revenue generation potential, and
the old guard will fall to bits.

Did I mention that there's no reason to consider that all the money
must go to the creator? You could properly fund entire projects this
way, paying all the same people who get paid now. Publishers,
advertisers, twenty zillion faceless people along the way. For
example, you could entirely fund a big budget movie this way. Just
imagine the money you could raise with some big star's names on the
project, big name directors, maybe a known franchise (Die Hard 8.0,
"He's really dead this time"). Sponsor only pre-release screenings. 10
lucky sponsors get to appear as extras in a crowd scene. Marketed
world wide. How much money could you pull in that way?

So how about it, Sony? EMI? Warner??

Emlyn


From sentience at pobox.com  Mon Aug 27 21:58:57 2007
From: sentience at pobox.com (Eliezer S. Yudkowsky)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 14:58:57 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Seeking a source
In-Reply-To: <46D24AC8.5070206@pobox.com>
References: <46D24AC8.5070206@pobox.com>
Message-ID: <46D34921.3060606@pobox.com>

Geordie Rose has kindly answered this question at:

http://dwave.wordpress.com/2007/08/27/algorithms-vs-hardware-the-throwdown/

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


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Aug 28 01:30:23 2007
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:00:23 +0930
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <710b78fc0708271830j4ce76255ja2ca2e981f005955@mail.gmail.com>

On 18/08/07, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/17/07, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
> > "gts" <gts_2000 at yahoo.com>
>                      <snip>
> > > the goal of a correctional facility should
> > > be  simply to correct the nature of the criminal
> >
> > But we have no idea how to do that ...
>
> John, don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically
> defective) "offender" was placed under your tutelage, and you were
> given wide lattitude regarding what measures you could employ, that
> you couldn't straighten him/her out?  Perhaps not completely, but
> substantially?  Without surgical intervention.  You know, like place
> the individual in a new environment, where old (bad) habits don't
> work, and new habits have to be learned to gradually supplant the old?
>
> Or, if not under your tutelage (for whatever reason, say, you're
> disinclined or feel your skill set would be more rationally allocated
> to other tasks) then under someone else's.

I was reading this, and had a hazy recollection of learning in
undergrad psych that sociopaths are actually made worse by traditional
therapy (it helps them learn how to fake being normal).

I thought I should dig up a reference, did a bit of googling, found this:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Is_it_a_fact_that_no_sociopath_can_be_helped_by_therapy

it's a *bizzare* read, I recommend it. I don't know how factual it is,
but it looks to be written by a sociopath.

Emlyn


From msd001 at gmail.com  Tue Aug 28 01:48:08 2007
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 21:48:08 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <009a01c7e800$669010b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<00c001c7e1b2$45f7e250$34064e0c@MyComputer>
	<487777F2-46F7-4507-A4FD-ADB673D3F493@randallsquared.com>
	<7d79ed890708211221o6db7100at4b6605c604cca4f4@mail.gmail.com>
	<D1B10F80-468D-4EAF-8331-668DE14A28DE@randallsquared.com>
	<002001c7e5a1$10ed7000$d7054e0c@MyComputer>
	<81CDD18E-02B1-4176-A3F4-D0B77CEDB000@randallsquared.com>
	<009a01c7e800$669010b0$66074e0c@MyComputer>
Message-ID: <62c14240708271848v3f39043jd212d6b63fa15493@mail.gmail.com>

On 8/26/07, John K Clark <jonkc at att.net> wrote:
>
> one experiment, Nature could have made a mistake, the experiment needs
> to be repeated before we know for sure. Do we really have to wait another
> 4 billion years before we can talk again?
>

Yes, so we had better perfect those life extension technologies in the
interim.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070827/baee0c8c/attachment.html>

From a_brooks7 at yahoo.com  Tue Aug 28 04:59:25 2007
From: a_brooks7 at yahoo.com (Alan Brooks)
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 21:59:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0708271830j4ce76255ja2ca2e981f005955@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <698929.62271.qm@web45209.mail.sp1.yahoo.com>

One problem here, with what we have today make the rehab attractive and you'll have sociopaths committing crimes to enter rehab programs-- make an institution pleasant enough to be REALLY humane, you'll encourage sociopaths to commit more crimes to obtain accomodation.
And funny how when a crime is committed against someone else we're inclined to be lenient, but if a crime is committed against us then we yell for retribution, like if someone kills a loved one then all of a sudden we want the death penalty or at least for the perp to be locked up and the key thrown away permanently.


> John, don't you think that if some sociopathic (but not organically
> defective) "offender" was placed under your tutelage, and you were
> given wide lattitude regarding what measures you could employ, that
> you couldn't straighten him/her out?  Perhaps not completely, but
> substantially?  Without surgical intervention.  You know, like place
> the individual in a new environment, where old (bad) habits don't
> work, and new habits have to be learned to gradually supplant the old?


rather than being positive, almost all politics are bad religion rather than good politics

       
---------------------------------
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070827/a3eb1f88/attachment.html>

From jonkc at att.net  Tue Aug 28 05:04:53 2007
From: jonkc at att.net (John K Clark)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 01:04:53 -0400
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer><a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0708271830j4ce76255ja2ca2e981f005955@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003801c7e931$0a389c60$4f054e0c@MyComputer>

"Emlyn" <emlynoregan at gmail.com>

> had a hazy recollection of learning in
> undergrad psych that sociopaths are
> actually made worse by traditional
> therapy (it helps them learn how to fake
>being normal).

I too remember reading something along those lines back in the stone age
when I was foolish enough to take a course in Physiology and was dumb
enough to think these people actually knew what the hell they were talking
about. But very unusually it seems that in this particular case they did 
know what they were talking about. Incidentally this was a major plot 
point in the conclusion of The Sopranos.

  John K Clark




From nanogirl at halcyon.com  Tue Aug 28 07:43:55 2007
From: nanogirl at halcyon.com (Gina Miller)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 00:43:55 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 2 Heinz animations
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle><f21c22e30708170256l33a95b9cyad3dd11446484e77@mail.gmail.com><3A5E0319-CF86-47BB-B126-608BDA61DDA8@mac.com><f21c22e30708181908i58f9b47cxe288d9fcabe4d706@mail.gmail.com>
	<55699A70-F161-4C88-9C3C-37CF8D9CC78C@mac.com>
Message-ID: <068a01c7e947$32cb90e0$0200a8c0@Nano>

Dear Extropes,
Back in June I had heard about the Top This T.V. contest generated by Heinz, and while I wasn't selected as one of the 15 semi finalists I've uploaded my two submissions onto my website so that you can watch them. 
-My first animation is called "The Perfect Combination" and is a tale of romance. 
-My second animation is called "Attack of the Edible Tomatoes" and is a parody of Attack of the Killer Tomatoes movies. My Mom actually gave me the last idea! 

Visit here to watch the movies:
http://www.nanogirl.com/personal/heinz.htm

Read a whole lot more about these animations and/or comment at the blog:
http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/2007/08/two-new-heinz-animations.html


Happy Week! 

Gina "Nanogirl" Miller
Nanotechnology Industries
http://www.nanoindustries.com
Personal: http://www.nanogirl.com
Animation Blog: http://maxanimation.blogspot.com/
Craft blog: http://nanogirlblog.blogspot.com/
Foresight Senior Associate http://www.foresight.org
Nanotechnology Advisor Extropy Institute  http://www.extropy.org
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/20070828/5d26cf38/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Tue Aug 28 10:36:34 2007
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:36:34 +1000
Subject: [ExI] free-will, determinism, crime and punishment.
In-Reply-To: <710b78fc0708271830j4ce76255ja2ca2e981f005955@mail.gmail.com>
References: <op.tw5ybijhivvpma@shuttle>
	<001b01c7e0f5$714512b0$55074e0c@MyComputer>
	<a6a17bd40708171412mcd278f3j2c76eb197b134004@mail.gmail.com>
	<710b78fc0708271830j4ce76255ja2ca2e981f005955@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f21c22e30708280336r20f46d47pcbbee1da6c72ea19@mail.gmail.com>

On 28/08/07, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:

> I was reading this, and had a hazy recollection of learning in
> undergrad psych that sociopaths are actually made worse by traditional
> therapy (it helps them learn how to fake being normal).

There's little evidence that "therapy" helps with anything, let alone
fundamentally changing the personality you were born with.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From brent.allsop at comcast.net  Tue Aug 28 20:23:05 2007
From: brent.allsop at comcast.net (Brent Allsop)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:23:05 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Canonized Answer to Hard Problem of Consciousness.
Message-ID: <46D48429.3070504@comcast.net>


(This was forwarded from a thread on the WTA-talk list.)

Michael,

Yeeaayy!! Thanks so much for adding your great statement. I already feel 
like the world is a much better place, and we are finally starting to 
make some real progress in finding out what it is all Transhumanists 
believe.

This is obviously still a difficult to use, bare minimum prototype. Some 
volunteers, like Karolis Ramanauskas, are helping us fix problems and 
improve things as fast as we possibly can. We can always use more help. 
I very much appreciate your patience and willingness to play with the 
system tell we get it right. Don't worry about making a mess! We make 
lots of backups, and we can always clean things up. We definitely still 
need an instruction manual, and to make things more obvious and 
intuitive, but there is lots to do and we're getting there.

You did get your statement entered, you just ended up with a few extra 
practice statement records which I easily cleaned up.

So, your statement, with your wonderful text, is now under the agreement 
statement, submitted as (or was, see below) a competing statement to mine:

http://karolisr.canonizer.com/topic.asp?topic_num=23&statement_num=3

Editing things on the Canonizer is quite a bit different than a 
traditional wiki system, since any edits must first be proposed, and 
then in a probationary state to be sure no current supporters, at or 
below the current structure, disapprove with the change. If anyone in 
that camp does disapprove, they can object. If this happens it will not 
go live, and you must make your additions or changes some place else in 
the POV structure. Either as a supportive sub statement (if you agree 
with everything else) or as a competing statement in some other branch 
under the agreement statement.

Also, the title you selected for your statement, 'The ?Hard Problem? of 
Consciosness, its Nature and Solution' seems more appropriate for the 
title of the topic as a whole. The topic, as a whole, is about the hard 
problem of consciousness, and the agreement statement is just the facts 
and describes the problem. Your statement is just one POV about what is 
the correct resolution to this problem right? Your statement title 
should be something that tells people what this camp's theory is, within 
this hard problem topic context right? There is a place lower down on 
the page where you can "manage" this statement (this block shows the 
current Name and Title that can be changed). If you take this manage 
link, it will take you to a history page for the statement. You can then 
select one of these history records (likely the most recent one) to use 
for the default values in the new proposed record. You can then make 
your change, add a required reason for the change, and finally propose it.

Another thing you should do is support your statement. Because only 
supporters can object to changes. As long as nobody is supporting a 
statement, anyone can make any change to it at any time. On the 
statement page, there is a place to "Directly support this statement". 
If there are other supporters of a statement, already, you can delegate 
your support to these, which will make it so your support automatically 
follows their "vote" for what is the best statement. Making it so you 
don't have to be as involved, but can still get your vote counted with 
someone you trust.

I completely support everything in your statement. In other words, I am 
in your camp on this issue. Yeeeaayy!! I think you are saying a few 
things that aren't necessary (even a bit misleading?) making it less 
concise, and missing a few other critical things. But, since I agree 
with everything you say, I changed the parant statement of my statement 
from the Agreement statement to your statement. So instead of being a 
competitor to your statement, my statement is now under and supports 
your statement. So my support of my statement, rolls up and 
automatically supports your statement. So once you support your 
statement, there will be 2 supports, making it the currently "Canonized" 
answer to this issue according to a "Blind Popularity" canonizer (the 
only one implemented so far).

In the future I'll try to talk you into some proposed changes, and if 
you (and anyone else who joins our camp) agrees, the changes will make 
it in. If not, I'll keep them in my supportive statement below. Also, 
I'll review your proposed suggested changes to my statement and possibly 
get them added. Got to think about it more, and consider what Stathis 
said first.

Also, you added your name to the bottom of the statement in the text. 
This should not be necessary, since the fact you submitted it, is 
recorded in the data base. Again, the place to add your name, is as a 
supporter of this statement right?

So, I hope we can find out what all the rest of you brilliant 
Transhumanists believe! Then we can get some real legitimacy and some 
infinitely valuable rapidly progressing information in all this right? 
So, in 10 years, when science finally shows us the real answer, we will 
know who will have been in the right camp the longest, and had the most 
influence on the researchers so they could look in the right place 
the soonest!?

Upward,

Brent Allsop






Michael Klein Breteler wrote:
> Brent,
> I did prepare a new POV to be Canonized, and tried to register and get it 
> placed. I could not register at the "karolisr" version, the program sent me 
> in a loupe, each time again asking for search, registration and login, 
> without getting anyware. Finaly got registerd at a "test" version, but this 
> one only allowed me to place the headings of the POV, not the text. Does not 
> let me edit either, did spent a few hours on this, resulting in multiple 
> entries, text without headings, headings without text, in short a complete 
> mess. Anyway, you find the text below.
>
>
> The "Hard Problem" of Consciosness, its Nature and Solution.
>
>
>
> The "hard" problem of consciousness can be compared with another "hard" 
> problem in biology, that of bird navigation. It is known that migratory 
> birds from the northern hemisphere want to migrate south in autumn and north 
> in spring. But how do they know the right direction? Experiments show that 
> birds in cages, completely isolated from natural day light, still have a 
> preference for a "south" position in their cage in autumn, and a "north" 
> position in spring. Since there was not any other physical property in their 
> cage than the geomagnetic field to navigate on, it was presumed that the 
> birds must have a sense organ to detect this field.  The theory that birds 
> use the geomagnetic field for navigations dates from as early as 1858 (Von 
> Middendorff), the biophysical mechanism of magnetoreception is still not 
> understood. It appears that birds lose their magnetoreception when their 
> ophthalmic nerve is cut, and a recently discovered photoreceptor 
> cryptochrome in the bird's retina could be involved. A quantum mechanic 
> mechanism of electrons with "radical pairs with anisotropic hyperfine 
> coupling" is suggested to be a possible biophysical mechanism of 
> magnetoreception (A Model for Photoreceptor-based Magnetoreception in Birds, 
> Biophysical Journal Volume 78 February 2000 707-718), but this is still 
> unsure.
>
>
>
> We know the birds are using the geomagnetic field, we know their eyes must 
> be involved, we probably know the molecules involved, yet the biophysical 
> explanation is extremely difficult. The reason is that our understanding of 
> physics on quantum scale is still very limited.  We tend to believe that we 
> have to explain everything in biology with "classic" Newton physics. But why 
> would organisms stick to Newton physics? With the bird navigation we know 
> what physical property is involved, the geomagnetic field. We can search for 
> molecules and mechanisms in migratory birds that interact with this field. 
> But imagine how difficult the bird navigation problem would be if we had not 
> discovered geomagnetism yet. How would we ever discover the geomagnetic 
> field if the bird's navigation system was the only way to detect it? Imagine 
> humans had this magnetoreceptive navigation system, but we had no magnets or 
> other devices to detect magnetism. We would just "feel" or "see" North and 
> South, and despite solving all "neural and sensory correlates of navigation" 
> we would still end up with a "hard" problem, so long we failed to discover 
> magnetism. Discovering the geomagnetic field by intensively studying the 
> molecules involved (the photoreceptor cryptochromes) could be possible, but 
> would require a very good understanding of the universe at its very 
> elementary level, far beyond our present knowledge of it.  This is the kind 
> of challenge we are facing with solving the "hard" problem of consciousness.
>
>
>
> It is already predicted by most philosophers and scientist that resolving 
> all "easy" problems of consciousness will leave us with an "explanatory gap" 
> leaving the main issue of "what is the physical substrate of phenomenal 
> consciousness" unsolved. Dennett denies such "explanatory gap" will occur 
> and Chalmers suggests only "non-physical" properties could give an 
> explanation. For the "hard problem" of bird navigation we needed to discover 
> geomagnetism to solve the problem. But for phenomenal consciousness we 
> should not look for an external physical property that can be detected by 
> our senses, but an internal one that is an elementary property of our 
> Universe. Neurobiological and biochemical analysis of the brain may finally 
> give some clues what to look for when the "explanatory gap" has become 
> evident. I think the final explanation of phenomenal consciousness will 
> require a good understanding of our Universe at its elementary level. 
> Although there was some optimism a few decades ago about finding a Theory Of 
> Everything (TOE)  of the Universe within a short period of time, it now 
> seems the Universe is a lot more complicated than we previously thought, and 
> we are still far away from this to happen.  But I am confident phenomenal 
> consciousness is a physical property of the Universe that organisms during 
> their billion years of evolution have integrated in their information 
> processing systems, to unify this information and associate it with qualia 
> to give the information a subjective value.
>
>
>
> I think our present understanding of the Universe is still very limited, we 
> have just began exploring it and we still do not even know the most basic 
> properties of it like how many dimensions it has and how its structure looks 
> like at its most elementary level. Without this knowledge it is impossible 
> to come to a theory that fully explains phenomenal consciousness.  But I am 
> quite sure we will finally find a physical explanation, like we will find 
> physical explanations for the many other mysteries of our Universe. 
> Research should focus on fundamental Physics, Neuro- and Molecular Biology.
>
>
>
> Michael Klein Breteler, MD.
>
>
> 		
> ___________________________________________________________ 
> The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html
> _______________________________________________
> wta-talk mailing list
> wta-talk at transhumanism.org
> http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk
>
>   

_______________________________________________
wta-talk mailing list
wta-talk at transhumanism.org
http://www.transhumanism.org/mailman/listinfo/wta-talk






From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Aug 29 03:25:54 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 22:25:54 -0500
Subject: [ExI] James Clement leads WTA into the future
Message-ID: <200708290326.l7T3Q1Qo009707@ms-smtp-02.texas.rr.com>


Long time Extropy Institute affiliate and friend James Clement has 
been elected the position of Executive Director of WTA.  I'd like to 
congratulate and support his success.

Filling the shoes of Giulio Prisco my be hard but Clement's 
background and distinct qualities offer great prospect and 
success.  I look forward to working with him to encourage a 
flourishing of transhumanism from both the visionary cutting edge 
ideas to the practical applications of ideas.

Congratulations JC!

Natasha

<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070828/85929231/attachment.html>

From spike66 at comcast.net  Thu Aug 30 04:53:59 2007
From: spike66 at comcast.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:53:59 -0700
Subject: [ExI] you cn't always get what you wnt
In-Reply-To: <46BE8823.7090007@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <200708300504.l7U54H1t009145@andromeda.ziaspace.com>

> 
> BillK wrote:
> > On 8/12/07, David C. Harris wrote:
> >
> >> As I read that, with my creative streak being exposed, it suggests
> >> vampires had it wrong in their search for immortality.  Rather than
> >> DRINKING blood, they should have arranged transfusions of young
> >> blood!    ;-)
> >>
...
> > BillK   ;)


There was a Simpsons episode about this that was at least 10 years ago.
Young Bart is the only matching blood donor for Mr. Burns, who is about 117
by my best estimate.  Burns feels better than he has in 80 years.

I just returned from a three week camping and motorcycling adventure.  So
good to be back home again.

spike




  




From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Thu Aug 30 20:49:26 2007
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:49:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nanotech-based generator
Message-ID: <a6a17bd40708301349q57935d0ar2a3f319324b83f42@mail.gmail.com>

Friends,

I wonder about nano- vs macro-world scale effects (ie differences).
In the macro world, electrical power is a fundamental tool. Will it be
the same in the nano world?  And whatever its role, what will the
implementation look like?  It's like a teaser/trailer for a movie you
are all frothy to see, but which won't be released for 10, 20, 30
years.  Argggggh!    The movie's a thriller, the suspense a killer.

Interesting times indeed.

http://www.technologyreview.com/tr35/Profile.aspx?Cand=T&TRID=632

-- 
Best, Jeff Davis

               "Everything's hard till you
                     know how to do it."
                              Ray Charles


From fauxever at sprynet.com  Fri Aug 31 05:41:52 2007
From: fauxever at sprynet.com (Olga Bourlin)
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:41:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Immortality Comes to TV
References: <7.0.1.0.2.20070822185237.023b3c70@satx.rr.com><62c14240708221707x25e1b132l2aa5616835d7fd82@mail.gmail.com>
	<7.0.1.0.2.20070822200433.021cf698@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <001101c7eb91$a33c45d0$6401a8c0@brainiac>

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/entertainment/2003860020_webimmortal30.html



From natasha at natasha.cc  Fri Aug 31 15:27:43 2007
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:27:43 -0500
Subject: [ExI] SENS Conference Cambridge - Transhumanists to Speak
Message-ID: <200708311528.l7VFSS95017958@ms-smtp-06.texas.rr.com>


The Third Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence Conference 
is taking place next week at Cambridge.  Aubrey has put together 
another top-notch conference which addresses a topic crucial to 
transhumanism -- extreme life extension.

The program is here:  http://www.sens.org/sens3/program.htm   Aubrey, 
Anders, Chris Phoenix, Kurzweil, Michael Rose, Ben Best and I will be 
speaking on Saturday/Sunday.

Here is a link to my abstract:
<http://www.sens.org/sens3/abs/Vita-More.htm>Brave biological design 
-- how biotechnology, generative media, and other currents are 
changing creative inquiry in the arts & sciences


<http://www.natasha.cc/>Natasha<http://www.natasha.cc/> Vita-More
PhD Candidate, <http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Planetary 
<http://www.planetary-collegium.net/about/>Collegium
Situated in the Faculty of Technology, School of Computing, 
Communications and Electronics,
University of Plymouth, England
<http://www.transhumanist.biz/>Transhumanist Arts & Culture
<http://www.extropy.org/>Extropy Institute

If you draw a circle in the sand and study only what's inside the 
circle, then that is a closed-system perspective. If you study what 
is inside the circle and everything outside the circle, then that is 
an open system perspective. - Buckminster Fuller


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070831/956f708c/attachment.html>

From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Wed Aug 29 04:41:35 2007
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry Colvin)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:41:35 +0700 (GMT+07:00)
Subject: [ExI] FWD [cryptolist] Crypto Group Update
Message-ID: <11426371.1188362495561.JavaMail.root@mswamui-bichon.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

-----Forwarded Message-----
>From: "Dale A. Drinnon" <daledrinnon at yahoo.com>
>Sent: Aug 24, 2007 11:42 PM
>
>The name and address of my Cryptozoology group have been changed in 
>anticipation of connecting it to a connected website and blog of the 
>same name. It is no longer the Cryptozoology Exchange group, it is 
>Frontiers-of-Zoology:
>
>http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/frontiers-of-zoology/
>
>Which is what the group members thought expressed their goals and 
>attitudes better. Anybody that is interested is invited, as before.
>
>                Best Wishes, Dale D.


Terry W. Colvin
Ladphrao (Bangkok), Thailand
Pran Buri (Hua Hin), Thailand


From andres at thoughtware.tv  Wed Aug 29 16:11:09 2007
From: andres at thoughtware.tv (Andres Colon)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 12:11:09 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Can you out-run this?
Message-ID: <f1d9c15f0708290911o1414a2a9keedef721342614b8@mail.gmail.com>

This detailed computer simulation pits five two-legged dinosaurs against
three modern bipeds - a human, an ostrich and an emu. Courtesy of the
University of Manchester.

The simulation <http://www.thoughtware.tv/videos/show/674> is available at
Thoughtware.TV: http://www.thoughtware.tv/videos/show/674

I'd like to know your thoughts on that simulation.

I think a more accurate simulation would include a human with technological
enhancements, in which case, we'd be in bikes, motorcycles, cars, in jet
airplanes and space-rockets. That is the real speed of humans today. We are
not the slowest but the fastest animal alive today.

If that simulation from the University of Manchester were more realistic,
we'd break the hell out of the sound barrier and leave all those late
cousins of ours depicted in that simulation, eating (simulated) dust. IMHO,
it is not a real comparison of current human beings....but hey...it was sure
fun to watch! :-)

Andr?s Col?n,
Thoughtware.TV <http://www.thoughtware.tv>  - Transhuman Television

--
"So physics is the laws of harmonies of the strings, chemistry is the laws
of melody of the strings, the universe is a symphony of strings, and the
"mind of God" is cosmic music resonating through eleven-dimensional
hyperspace. - Michio Kaku"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20070829/b3b38905/attachment.html>