[ExI] fractal-universe-and143-universal-chemical-shapes-extropy-chat Digest, Vol 57, Issue 23
Morris Johnson
mfj.eav at gmail.com
Sat Jun 28 03:33:54 UTC 2008
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org>
Date: Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 1:18 AM
Subject: extropy-chat Digest, Vol 57, Issue 23
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Send extropy-chat mailing list submissions to
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
extropy-chat-owner at lists.extropy.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of extropy-chat digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Groups (hkhenson)
2. Re: Groups (BillK)
3. Re: Energy crisis solution (Lee Corbin)
4. Re: Groups (Lee Corbin)
5. Re: Groups (Lee Corbin)
6. become immortal and *also* get a free t-shirt and game!
(John Grigg)
7. Re: become immortal and *also* get a free t-shirt and game!
(Michael LaTorra)
8. Energy, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming (Stefano Vaj)
9. Re: Energy crisis solution (The Avantguardian)
10. Re: Energy, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming (David C. Harris)
11. "the uncritical inference test" (hkhenson)
12. Re: Energy crisis solution (hkhenson)
13. differential gene expression (hkhenson)
14. A letter to Dobson (artillo at comcast.net)
15. Galaxy map hints at fractal universe (Jef Allbright)
16. Re: Galaxy map hints at fractal universe (Bryan Bishop)
17. Re: Galaxy map hints at fractal universe (scerir)
18. 12 Million Molecules Share 143 Basic Shapes (Jef Allbright)
19. Re: 12 Million Molecules Share 143 Basic Shapes (Mike Dougherty)
20. Re: Galaxy map hints at fractal universe (Lee Corbin)
21. Re: 12 Million Molecules Share 143 Basic Shapes (Lee Corbin)
22. Re: Galaxy map hints at fractal universe (spike)
23. Re: Galaxy map hints at fractal universe (Jef Allbright)
24. [Fwd: Aubrey De Grey sent you a message on Facebook]
(Brent Allsop)
25. [Cog, Context, Empathy] Independent thinkers judge distances
differently than holistic types (Jef Allbright)
26. "Martian Soil Appears Able to Support Life" (Damien Broderick)
27. Pride and/or thinking superior (Anna Taylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 12:04:54 -0700
From: hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Groups
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <1214161665_3753 at S3.cableone.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 07:56 AM 6/22/2008, you wrote:
>Lee wrote:
>
> > The difficulty is in figuring out what those subtasks actually are.
> >
>
>My Response:
>
>I wrote two or more years either here or on AGI that projects that are
large
>in scope with this many pieces/parts get lost without project plans.
You are so right. All the project I brought in on time and on budget
had project plans. The ones where there was no project plan, some
came in on time and budget and some didn't.
>I asked how many people working on AGI or Singularity related project held
>themselves to project plans or had project plans available for viewing, and
>I was thrashed soundly!
That's amusing, not particularly surprising though.
>Any business attempting a project of any size has to have a project plan to
>maintain focus and win support from the business who controls the money.
>
>They don't always make their milestones or cost projections and the
projects
>plans change often as new information is learned.
>
>But the project plan is a tool to help them keep focus on what the critical
>path is, determine what the subtasks are and estimate the overall time
frame
>and budget for the project.
>
>And the project plan is extremely useful for decomposing the main tasks
into
>the smaller subtasks that can delegated to volunteers, interns, employees
>with less than total understanding of the overall project architecture.
This only works when you understand the main task. I think that's
the main problem with AI/AGI, at least I don't think anyone
understands the main task. (If someone does, please respond.) Now
the project of building a brain emulator, that's a project that could
be done because we have examples of them all around. Mainline would
go something like: Understand the natural example in enough detail
to: Make a hardware emulation then: Turn it on. Tune. Enjoy
conversation with your new partner.
snip
>I have seen some signs lately that the AGI scene is getting it's act
>together. But still no project plans.
Speaking of project plan software, is there anything on the market as
good as Lisa Project? That was the best project planning software I
have ever seen. Is there any open source software?
>My understanding of Extropian goals simply put is to educate and prepare
for
>the Singularity and to bring people together to synergistically blend their
>talents and viewpoints to increase the likelihood of a positive outcome and
>somewhat painless transition for mankind.
Making into this era both personally and as a society are big
goals. The first is exemplified by cryonics. There seems to be a
lack interest in ideas about getting society through the singularity.
snip
Keith
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 23:09:34 +0100
From: BillK <pharos at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Groups
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<ee50357e0806221509n243a2af8p512cf2caeb85c813 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 8:04 PM, hkhenson wrote:
<snip>
> Speaking of project plan software, is there anything on the market as
> good as Lisa Project? That was the best project planning software I
> have ever seen. Is there any open source software?
>
<http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Software/Project_Management/Open_Source/>
22 entries here.
BillK
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:07:37 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Energy crisis solution
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <00ca01c8d4de$e76763c0$6401a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Keith writes
> In the course of working on another problem, I examined the payback
> time of solar power satellites lifted into space by rockets. To my
> surprise, the energy payback time was only 40 days....
> ...
> the cost of payload to GEO into a range corresponding to dollar a
> gallon gasoline.
>
> I gave a talk on this concept at the International Space Development
> Conference and a few days later to some Lockheed planners. It need
> to be verified by other engineers but looks like a way out of the
> world wide energy crisis....
Well, congratulations on getting them to listen! It's at points like this
where doers become distinguished from (mere) thinkers.
Lee
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:20:09 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Groups
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <00e501c8d4e0$4f65bed0$6401a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Gary writes
> Lee wrote:
>
> > The difficulty is in figuring out what those subtasks actually are.
Nay, 'twas Bryan wrote that.
> My [Gary Miller's] Response:
>
> I wrote two or more years either here or on AGI that projects that are
large
> in scope with this many pieces/parts get lost without project plans.
>
> I asked how many people working on AGI or Singularity related project held
> themselves to project plans or had project plans available for viewing,
and
> I was thrashed soundly!
Keith wrote that he wasn't surprised. I guess we shouldn't be.
> Any business attempting a project of any size has to have a project plan
to
> maintain focus and win support from the business who controls the money.
>
> They don't always make their milestones or cost projections and the
projects
> plans change often as new information is learned.
How many people look forward to the relatively boring, often routine,
and completely unglamorous role of project planner? Isn't it a lot more
fun just to conjecture away, or write emails like this one, or fight to
procure a more interesting or heroic-looking role once a project
does start to take shape? All hail the organizers, detail planners, and
those who get balls rolling.
> But the project plan is a tool to help them keep focus on what the
critical
> path is, determine what the subtasks are and estimate the overall time
frame
> and budget for the project.
>
> And the project plan is extremely useful for decomposing the main tasks
into
> the smaller subtasks that can delegated to volunteers, interns, employees
> with less than total understanding of the overall project architecture.
You are so right. Thanks for spelling it out.
Lee
> Sometimes matching key subtasks to people with specific experience/talents
> is crucial.
>
> I am sure that the people in ExI and AGI have a broad range of talents
that
> could be drawn upon. Those are your resources but before you can harness
> those resources you must understand the talents of your resources in order
> to match them to appropriate subtasks. You also have to then approach
each
> one asking them if they would be willing to work on a subtask and how many
> hours they would be able and willing to donate to the completion of that
> subtask...
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 20:49:59 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Groups
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <00e901c8d4e4$78708090$6401a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Brent wrote
> Lee Corbin asked:
> > "Why are we so ineffective?" is a very good question. Of course,
it
> > should be placed in some perspective such as "compared to what?
> > compared to whom?".
>
> Compared to the tens of millions of very well organized people that
support
> the LDS prophet, and the billions of well organized catholics that support
the
> Pope...and so on.
That's hardly a fair comparison! I'm sure that Keith meant for his original
question to be taken in the context of groups our size. And I submitted
the most remarkable example of all, the revolutionary groups.
Political revolution, that is. Lenin's followers were probably inferior in
number to transhumanists (though, of course, energizing people on
huge social issues where vast, vast numbers of people already sense that
the political or economic situation is in urgent need of repair will, duh,
turn out to be relatively easy). But I was thinking of the dedication,
fanaticism, commitment, and hard work often characteristic of the
social revolutionary.
Now for a religious example, since you mentioned the Mormons and
the Catholics, perhaps the very early followers of Joseph Smith and
Paul make for good paradigms.
So in one sense, Keith's question was unfair:
"Why are we so ineffective?" because, as I wrote "compared to what
and compared to whom?" The obvious candidates for comparison
are those groups who're very interested in a subject , have formed
with the help of the internet, an group or "movement" to alter the world
in some way.
Sadly (for us), we probably aren't really that much different from
those other "movements". Wo ist das Project Plan? (Works even
if you don't know any German.)
> The greatest idea in the world is completely useless if only one
> person knows about it. Without organization and cooperation
> you have nothing. Traditionally, the most effective organization
> structure has been the hierarchy...
>
> But, is a hierarchy really the best way to organize? There are
> so many obvious problems with a hierarchy. Like they are
> terrible bottlenecks since there is no way the guy at the top
> can manage all issues, let alone understand the infinite subtleties
> of all issues.
Okay, so I worry that you're drifting off into abstractionland and
ideal-compare, instead of grounding your thought a bit, say, with
some historical examples.
> But, obviously, the way of the hierarchy is starting to
> wain, primarily because of our improving ability to
> communicate.
I don't see you properly qualifying what you're saying.
Are you trying to suggest that soon police forces will
forego hierarchical structure, and just "self-mobilize"?
The various groups forging ahead with the French
Revolution had no difficulty communicating, but they
weren't really effective until one group or the other
was in a position to tell the others what to do, and
within that one group a single personality was dominant.
> All transhumanists seem to faithlessly accept the
> current sorry situation where only the popes and
> prophets have any moral or religious influence on
> society, and we have no ability to organize in any
> effective way. As if there is nothing we can do
> to make anything better. But is this truly the case?
Who knows? Perhaps things can eventually change.
After a decade or two of mostly lip-flapping and
spending the bulk of their time investigating philosophical
foundations, some groups may gradually take on a
different character. (I do not mean to demean the
efforts of the activists among us, but they are few
in number, and, who knows, may not be focused
on exactly the right goals.)
Lee
> In fact I think now is the final days of the moral damage these
hierarchical religions are doing to society. Once we can know
> concisely and quantitatively what everyone wants, then we will finally
have no more need for such hierarchies.
> Imagine what could happen if we got several thousand Transhumanists to
indicate concisely and quantitatively what they believe on
> the above canonized topics. Then imagine the herds attempting to keep up
by attempting to go viral, and by creating their own
> camps to defend what the popes and prophets are teaching against what is
so obviously true and rational. Certainly, as the popes
> and prophets see this ability to communicate taking away their moral
power, as they watch the members in their hierarchies start
> to diminish, they will be tempted to advise their flocks to not
participate right? But of course, this is precisely what we want.
> Any such evil or refusal to 'play' with everyone together should have no
moral influence over society.
> And the majority of sheepish people, the ones giving all the power to the
popes and prophets will obviously not be interested in
> playing right? They don't want to have to think about things, they just
want to "follow the prophet". This is why so many
> sheepish people haven't even thought about the above canonized isseus.
And this is what is killing us, morally, today. But, in
> todays dynamic, intelligent, and informed world, don't you think this
will tend to lead to their demise?
> If you ask me, the next big thing in the world is not going to be just
technological. It is going to finally be using these
> communication technologies to do something powerfully social. In fact you
can see this exploding, right now, before our eyes.
> The primary enabling technology will finally be something that enables the
masses to communicate, concisely and quantitatively,
> and in real time, precisely what it is they all want, value, and believe.
> And once you have that, and can apply such to reputations in quantitative
ways, then suddenly you don't need any more hierarchical
> police states and restricting laws. All you have to do is set up
reputation systems, where the masses can efficiently, concisely
> and quantitatively communicate the reputation of everything, in real time,
and then suddenly it becomes possible to simply ignore
> all the spam and scam...
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:05:08 -0700
From: "John Grigg" <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>
Subject: [ExI] become immortal and *also* get a free t-shirt and game!
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<2d6187670806222205u68c5f44aw7b54a7da91533d68 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I enjoyed the playful invitation to "become immortal" and thought
their offer was a cool one.
http://www.immortaleyesgames.com/winningmoves/ieg/immortals.asp
John Grigg : )
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:37:15 -0600
From: "Michael LaTorra" <mlatorra at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] become immortal and *also* get a free t-shirt and
game!
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<9ff585550806231037s46de540atbfe0b5dd1781f87e at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
That offer makes me think that a second t-shirt offer will become
inevitable. It will read:
"I became immortal and all I got was this lousy t-shirt"
Regards,
Mike
On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 11:05 PM, John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> I enjoyed the playful invitation to "become immortal" and thought
> their offer was a cool one.
>
> http://www.immortaleyesgames.com/winningmoves/ieg/immortals.asp
>
> John Grigg : )
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20080623/265c6806/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:29:51 +0200
From: "Stefano Vaj" <stefano.vaj at gmail.com>
Subject: [ExI] Energy, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming
To: "World Transhumanist Association Discussion List"
<wta-talk at transhumanism.org>, "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<580930c20806230629k55225a9eu5157cc56a475a3d2 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/20/mackay_on_carbon_free_uk/
Too long to be pasted on the lists, but it contains long and
interesting excerpts and plenty of data from what appears a very
serious and demistifying study on the intricacies of the subjects
above. It may not change one's stance on them, but at least it helps
one to base it on more substantial and quantitative arguments than it
is often the case.
Stefano Vaj
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 15:31:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: The Avantguardian <avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Energy crisis solution
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <131192.39153.qm at web65416.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
--- hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
> I gave a talk on this concept at the International Space Development
> Conference and a few days later to some Lockheed planners. It need
> to be verified by other engineers but looks like a way out of the
> world wide energy crisis. Done as a Manhattan type program it might
> be constructing new capacity at 500 GW/year inside an 8 year period
> at a cost in the same range as the Iraq War.
Given McCain's sudden shift in rhetoric toward an appeal to America's
creativity instead of sheer coercive force with regards to the energy
crisis,
it would appear you had a net positive effect, Keith.
Stuart LaForge
alt email: stuart"AT"ucla.edu
"In ancient times they had no statistics so that they had to fall back on
lies."- Stephen Leacock
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:11:40 -0700
From: "David C. Harris" <dharris234 at mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Energy, Fossil Fuels, Global Warming
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <48602DAC.2040207 at mindspring.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Stefano Vaj wrote:
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/20/mackay_on_carbon_free_uk/
>
> Too long to be pasted on the lists, but it contains long and
> interesting excerpts and plenty of data from what appears a very
> serious and demistifying study on the intricacies of the subjects
> above. It may not change one's stance on them, but at least it helps
> one to base it on more substantial and quantitative arguments than it
> is often the case.
>
>
Excellent! This looks (from a quick scanning) like a comparison of
alternatives in the same units that I've sought for a long time. Now if
the discussions of alternatives just were done for the United States or
even the world. Maybe someone can expand the book, building on his
universally true physics calculations. Everyone can use the guides to
making the calculations that he includes.
- David
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 16:51:34 -0700
From: hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
Subject: [ExI] "the uncritical inference test"
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <1214265267_851 at s1.cableone.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
I was dumping old paper files today and found this as hard copy.
Don't know how long ago someone mentioned it on this list, but it's
worth putting the phrase in Google and reading a site or two, perhaps
even taking the test.
Keith
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 18:35:06 -0700
From: hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Energy crisis solution
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <1214271479_1252 at S4.cableone.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
At 03:31 PM 6/23/2008, Stuart LaForge wrote:
>--- hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com> wrote:
> > I gave a talk on this concept at the International Space Development
> > Conference and a few days later to some Lockheed planners. It need
> > to be verified by other engineers but looks like a way out of the
> > world wide energy crisis. Done as a Manhattan type program it might
> > be constructing new capacity at 500 GW/year inside an 8 year period
> > at a cost in the same range as the Iraq War.
>
>Given McCain's sudden shift in rhetoric toward an appeal to America's
>creativity instead of sheer coercive force with regards to the energy
crisis,
>it would appear you had a net positive effect, Keith.
I *really* doubt it. The problem is getting any attention on ideas
the come up from "the bottom." The better way to do power sats is
with a space elevator. To get there, however, needs attention on nanotubes.
I have tried for some time to get someone to take up a research
project to make carbon nanotubes by catalytic dehydration of tri
hydroxy benzine with a rotating enzyme. An alternate method involves
using liquid iron as a carbon solvent. No luck, and it's not for a
lack of trying to reach someone who talks to Al Gore or someone of that ilk.
It is easy to see why. Even at my exceedingly low level I frequently
get presented with ideas that have not been thought out or just plain
violate the laws of chemistry and physics.
Keith
PS. McCaine's $300 million proposal isn't likely to be collected.
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 21:03:39 -0700
From: hkhenson <hkhenson at rogers.com>
Subject: [ExI] differential gene expression
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <1214280391_423 at s2.cableone.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
From The Times
June 20, 2008
Scientists say genetic variations show that men think differently
Sexes preprogrammed with different skills
Mark Henderson, Science Editor
Women and men may genuinely think in different ways, according to
research that has found subtle genetic variations between their brains.
Hundreds of genes that are switched on and off differently in the male
and female brain have been identified, suggesting that many patterns of
behaviour regarded widely as typical of each sex could be founded on
nature as well as nurture.
Dozens of mental traits and skills are said to differ between men and
women. They include empathy, aggression, risk-taking, navigation and the
qualities that are valued most in a sexual partner.
The existence of such differences is now widely accepted, but natural
and social scientists have long disagreed about the extent to which they
are rooted in our underlying biology, or are learnt through male and
female social roles. Women are generally more accomplished than men at
empathising with other people, and usually score as more compassionate
on standard personality tests.
Men are more prone to aggression and risk-taking behaviour, and tend to
be proficient at understanding and devising systems, from car engines to
the offside law.
While there are no sex differences in general intelligence, women tend
to have stronger visual memories, while men are more proficient at
visualising objects when rotated in space. It has been suggested that
this may reflect the way most men like to navigate by reading maps,
while many women prefer to remember landmarks.
Such observations have led Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, of the
University of Cambridge, to suggest the existence of "empathising-type"
and "systemising-type" brains, the first of which is more common among
men and the second among women. Professor Baron-Cohen said: "This is a
very original study, testing which genes are expressed differently in
males and females across different primate species. It confirms the
supposition that genetic sex differences are expressed not just in the
secondary sexual characteristics in the body, but in the brain.
"Finding genes that are conserved across species points to the evolution
of these genetic sex differences, and finding them in the brain suggests
that they may in part influence the way the mind works, and in part
influence our behaviour."
Men and women also differ in their approach to finding sexual partners.
Men generally place a higher value on youth and good looks, while women
are often more attracted by status.
The new study, led by Elena Jazin, of the University of Uppsala in
Sweden, does not directly prove that any of these traits is related to
differences in gene activity, but it shows a contrasting genetic
architecture of male and female brains that could plausibly contribute.
While the two sexes have the same basic genes, many of these are more
active in the brains of only one sex. These gender-specific patterns of
gene expression could affect many aspects of behaviour, the researchers
said.
"The obvious question to follow is whether or not these signatures of
sex in the brain have physiological significance for brain physiology
and/or behaviour," they wrote in the journal Public Library of Science
Genetics.
"Our results suggest that variation in expression of genes in the brain
may be an important component of behavioural variation within as well as
between species." The differences could also explain sex variations in
mental health and neurological diseases: women, for instance, are more
at risk of depression and Alzheimer's.
"Knowledge about gender differences is important for many reasons," Dr
Jazin said. "For example, this information may be used in the future to
calculate medical dosages, as well as for other treatments of diseases
or damage to the brain."The scientists said that their work needed to be
followed up to examine whether any human behavioural or health
differences were related to the sex-specific gene expression profiles.
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:05:36 +0000
From: artillo at comcast.net
Subject: [ExI] A letter to Dobson
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<
062420081805.15755.4861376F0008C0F100003D8B2205886442010404079B9D0E at comcast.net
>
I thought I'd share a little email I wrote to James Dobson about his recent
comments on one of Obama's prerecorded speeches. I wonder if it will even
reach him directly (I had to go through his Focus on Family website which
doesn't list any direct email addresses). My bet is that it will be like
pissing in the wind. If it does actually reach him, I wonder if it will
infuriate him, and I wonder if I will even see a response! :D
Onward!
Artillo
-------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. Dobson,
I have a few questions, comments, and criticisms for you regarding your
recent reaction published today to some of Senator Obama's comments reviewed
from a prerecorded speech.
(reference article
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20080624/REL.Dobson.Obama/ )
Do you think that Christians have cornered the market on morality?
Do you believe that unless a person is Christian, they can't possibly share
high moral standards?
I don't consider myself to be among the "lowest common denominator of
morality", in fact, I have very high moral standards compared to most of the
people I know, Christians and non-Christians alike.
Name calling is a VERY low tactic and saying that someone has a "fruitcake
interpretation" of the bible is both immature and condescending. It is an
attack on someone's character and not an attack on their position, and you
should understand that doing such only makes YOU look like the one swinging
the low blows.
Each individual is entitled to their own interpretation of the Bible, and
regardless of whether or not you agree with one person's interpretations, it
does NOT give you the moral high ground to participate in name calling or
disparaging remarks, ESPECIALLY in the public spotlight.
I think that before you jump up and declare that someone running for
political office "...is dragging biblical understanding through the gutter"
you need to take a step back and actually listen to what they are saying in
the context of their speech. Obama was saying that he aspires to politics of
INCLUSION, and simply suggested that if we are to have useful political
discourse that ALL opinions on the matter be considered in phrasing of a
problem.
As for your statement, "What he's (Obama) trying to say here is unless
everybody agrees, we have no right to fight for what we believe."
That statement does nothing except deliberately try to put words in
someone's mouth, and you need to be called out on it. Perhaps if you stated
it as your opinion rather than as a 'fact', you might be a bit less subject
to my criticism, but that is not the case.
If you are going to continue a public discussion on anything relating to
politics and religion, I suggest you learn how to parse a proper argument
before resorting to ridiculous leaps of logic and substituting your opinions
for what you think someone meant instead of understanding exactly what they
said and the context in which it was said.
I don't anticipate a response from you, but I definitely do encourage a well
thought out one.
Sincerely,
Brian S.
A concerned citizen
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:49:28 -0700
From: "Jef Allbright" <jefallbright at gmail.com>
Subject: [ExI] Galaxy map hints at fractal universe
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<22360fa10806250949k6f60c18byc2c96054e8456abf at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
A recent article in New Scientist, with its characteristic mix of
insight and inanity, points to further support for the universal
tendency toward preservation of self-similar structure at all scales.
Meta-interesting as yet another foil for those who prefer the comfort
and imagined simplicity and certainty of closed models of "reality."
- Jef
<
http://space.newscientist.com/article/dn14200-galaxy-map-hints-at-fractal-universe.html
>
Is the matter in the universe arranged in a fractal pattern? A new
study of nearly a million galaxies suggests it is ? though there are
no well-accepted theories to explain why that would be so.
Cosmologists trying to reconstruct the entire history of the universe
have precious few clues from which to work. One key clue is the
distribution of matter throughout space, which has been sculpted for
nearly 14 billion years by the competing forces of gravity and cosmic
expansion. If there is a pattern in the sky, it encodes the secrets of
the universe.
A lot is at stake, and the matter distribution has become a source of
impassioned debate between those who say the distribution is smooth
and homogeneous and those who say it is hierarchically structured and
clumpy, like a fractal.
Nearly all physicists agree that on relatively small scales the
distribution is fractal-like: hundreds of billions of stars group
together to form galaxies, galaxies clump together to form clusters,
and clusters amass into superclusters.
The point of contention, however, is what happens at even larger
scales. According to most physicists, this Russian doll-style
clustering comes to an end and the universe, on large scales, becomes
homogeneous.
But a small team of physicists, including Francesco Sylos Labini of
the Enrico Fermi Centre in Rome and Luciano Pietronero of the
University of Rome argue that the data shows the opposite: the
universe continues to look fractal as far out as our telescopes can
see.
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:30:43 -0500
From: Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Galaxy map hints at fractal universe
To: jef at jefallbright.net, ExI chat list
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Cc: ts at meme.com.au
Message-ID: <200806251230.43182.kanzure at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Jef Allbright wrote:
> But a small team of physicists, including Francesco Sylos Labini of
> the Enrico Fermi Centre in Rome and Luciano Pietronero of the
> University of Rome argue that the data shows the opposite: the
> universe continues to look fractal as far out as our telescopes can
> see.
I'm wondering what sort of interesting, non-optical but similar
statements can be (validly) constructed on an information theoretic
basis, instead of arguing the lack-of-a-wall. Something more juicy. But
not the typical strain of 'it just goes off to infinity' and leaving it
at that.
- Bryan
________________________________________
http://heybryan.org/
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 20:05:04 +0200
From: "scerir" <scerir at libero.it>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Galaxy map hints at fractal universe
To: <jef at jefallbright.net>, "ExI chat list"
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <001d01c8d6ed$ffaa4040$2d074797 at archimede>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
A recent article in New Scientist, with its characteristic mix of
insight and inanity, points to further support for the universal
tendency toward preservation of self-similar structure at all scales.
- Jef
Pietronero has a page here and I think his papers are
also published there.
http://pil.phys.uniroma1.it/twiki/bin/view/Pil/LucianoPietronero
He was a friend of mine, in the very late '60s,
we were interested in Machian universes,
and ... from his photo I realize how old I am now,
sigh.
------------------------------
Message: 18
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 10:20:20 -0700
From: "Jef Allbright" <jef at jefallbright.net>
Subject: [ExI] 12 Million Molecules Share 143 Basic Shapes
To: "Extropy chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<f7bfe5740806251020m2be58ba2s55182b506b3bf267 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252
Another observation pertinent to competent search of (a far from
random) possibility-space.
- Jef
ScienceDaily (June 23, 2008) ? Chemists in Ohio have discovered that
half of all of the known chemical compounds in the world have an
amazing similarity in sharing only 143 basic molecular shapes.
That sharply limits the number of molecular building blocks that
chemists often deploy in efforts to develop new drugs and other
products, the researchers say in a study scheduled for the June 20
issue of the bi-weekly ACS' Journal of Organic Chemistry.
Alan H. Lipkus and colleagues note that researchers have known for
years that certain features of molecules, such as rings of atoms and
the bonds than link them together, appear time after time in hundreds
of life-saving medications, food additives, and other widely used
products.
Scientists often tend to focus on these well-known types of molecular
scaffolding in their quest to select the most promising rings,
linkers, and other components for building new drugs while overlooking
less familiar structures, the researchers say.
In the new study, they analyzed the chemical frameworks of more than
24 million organic substances found in the ACS' Chemical Abstracts
Service (CAS) Registry, the world's most comprehensive database of
disclosed molecules. They found that half of the substances could be
described by only 143 basic framework shapes. By paying more attention
to a multitude of other molecular shapes, chemists might discover an
array of useful rings, linkers, and other building blocks for
tomorrow's drugs and other medical, commercial, and industrial
products, the study concluded.
________________________________
Journal reference:
Lipkus, Alan H., Yuan, Qiong, Lucas, Karen A., Funk, Susan A.,
Bartelt, William F., Schenck, Roger J., and Trippe, Anthony J.
Structural Diversity of Organic Chemistry. A Scaffold Analysis of the
CAS Registry. J. Org. Chem., 73, 12, 4443 - 4451, 2008 DOI:
10.1021/jo8001276
Adapted from materials provided by American Chemical Society, via
EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.
American Chemical Society (2008, June 23). 12 Million Molecules Share
143 Basic Shapes, Researchers Find. ScienceDaily. Retrieved June 24,
2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080623093425.htm
------------------------------
Message: 19
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 19:36:11 -0400
From: "Mike Dougherty" <msd001 at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] 12 Million Molecules Share 143 Basic Shapes
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<62c14240806251636p294f7f47q568f626cc9351160 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 1:20 PM, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net> wrote:
> Another observation pertinent to competent search of (a far from
> random) possibility-space.
>
Is that distribution due to some physical maxima of stable design? Would
looking outside those 143 shapes and leaving the top of the bell curve
reduce the likelihood of finding useful molecules? Or is the idea that the
more rare molecules will be substantially more useful to make it worth the
effort?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080625/35dae881/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 20
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:34:35 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Galaxy map hints at fractal universe
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <01ad01c8d724$fa4305b0$6401a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Bryan writes
> On Wednesday 25 June 2008, Jef Allbright wrote:
>> But a small team of physicists, including Francesco Sylos Labini of
>> the Enrico Fermi Centre in Rome and Luciano Pietronero of the
>> University of Rome argue that the data shows the opposite: the
>> universe continues to look fractal as far out as our telescopes can
>> see.
>
> I'm wondering what sort of interesting, non-optical but similar
> statements can be (validly) constructed on an information theoretic
> basis, instead of arguing the lack-of-a-wall. Something more juicy.
Yes, either way, we want an explanation. We do have to keep
in mind the discouraging possibility that there *is* no explanation
---just as it is possible that no theories will ever supersede QM
and GR. But we really do want more knowledge of the big picture,
and so long as our culture has any vigor at all, we'll keep looking.
Lee
> But not the typical strain of 'it just goes off to infinity' and leaving
it
> at that.
------------------------------
Message: 21
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:41:25 -0700
From: "Lee Corbin" <lcorbin at rawbw.com>
Subject: Re: [ExI] 12 Million Molecules Share 143 Basic Shapes
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <01ae01c8d725$ae65fb60$6401a8c0 at homeef7b612677>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=original
Mike Dougherty writes
> Jef wrote:
>
> Another observation pertinent to competent search of (a far from
> random) possibility-space.
>
> Is that distribution due to some physical maxima of stable design?
Maybe those are only the less dangerous designs.
> Would looking outside those 143 shapes and leaving the top of the
> bell curve reduce the likelihood of finding useful molecules? Or is
> the idea that the more rare molecules will be substantially more
> useful to make it worth the effort?
Perhaps we'll fool around long enough to get an analog to Vonnegut's
ice-nine that reorganizes the topos layer of everything.
Voila! We have here not only an explanation of the Fermi Paradox,
but an explanation of why just 143 shapes are so prevelant. Universes
that utilized more patterns found some which
------------------------------
Message: 22
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:11:38 -0700
From: "spike" <spike66 at att.net>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Galaxy map hints at fractal universe
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <200806260138.m5Q1cKKX017061 at andromeda.ziaspace.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of scerir
>
> ... from his photo I realize how old I am now, sigh.
There is a bright side to it scerir. At least now we don't need to worry
about dying young.
spike
------------------------------
Message: 23
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:36:30 -0700
From: "Jef Allbright" <jef at jefallbright.net>
Subject: Re: [ExI] Galaxy map hints at fractal universe
To: "Extropy chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<f7bfe5740806251836j20ef719al7151d293c5b36111 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
For some reason, my email client treated this as an offlist response:
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:47 PM, Jef Allbright <jef at jefallbright.net>
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 10:30 AM, Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm wondering what sort of interesting, non-optical but similar
>> statements can be (validly) constructed on an information theoretic
>> basis, instead of arguing the lack-of-a-wall. Something more juicy. But
>> not the typical strain of 'it just goes off to infinity' and leaving it
>> at that.
>
> I can't speak to their validity, but a quick search of arXiv reveals
these:
>
> Stochastic Self-Similar and Fractal Universe
> <http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0308370>
>
> Via Aristotle, Leibnitz and Mach to a Fractal D=2 Universe
> <http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0609432>
>
> Power-law distributions for the areas of the basins of attraction on a
> potential energy landscape
> <http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0509185>
>
> - Jef
>
------------------------------
Message: 24
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 18:10:44 -0600
From: Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at comcast.net>
Subject: [ExI] [Fwd: Aubrey De Grey sent you a message on Facebook]
To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <48643004.7020705 at comcast.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Have you guys seen Aubry needs our help?
Brent Allsop
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Aubrey De Grey sent you a message on Facebook
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 16:35:58 -0700
From: Facebook <notification+m-_p~u-i at facebookmail.com>
Reply-To: noreply <noreply at facebookmail.com>
To: Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at canonizer.com>
Aubrey sent you a message.
--------------------
Subject: PLEASE HELP!! DIGG US ON WIRED.COM RIGHT NOW!!!
Hi all,
We have great news! Wired just released an article about the Methuselah
Foundation and Aging 2008.
http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/news/2008/06/methuselah
We would love to get your help ensuring that a lot of people see the article
today and learn about this effort.
Here's what we can all do:
1) Digg the article at www.digg.com. This is one of the best ways to reach
more eyeballs. Registering only takes seconds.
Click "digg it" at the Wired article page, or go here:
http://digg.com/health/The_Fight_to_End_Aging_Gains_Legitimacy_and_Funding
2) Add a (hopefully positive!) comment about the article at the Digg page.
3) Give the article a point on www.reddit.com by clicking the up-arrow on
the Reddit button at the Wired article.. Like Digg, registering for Reddit
only takes seconds.
4) You can also comment at the Wired article page. A lot of comments will
help show there's major interest in the science of regenerative medicine,
increasing the odds of more coverage in the future.
Thank you for helping us spread the word!
Cheers,
Aubrey de Grey
--------------------
To reply to this message, follow the link below:
http://www.facebook.com/n/?inbox/readmessage.php&t=1011047526150
___
Want to control which emails you receive from Facebook? Go to:
http://www.facebook.com/editaccount.php?notifications&md=bXNnO2Zyb209NzA5NzM1MDE0O3Q9MTAxMTA0NzUyNjE1MDt0bz01Nzc3NTYyMjM=
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080626/a4668d71/attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 25
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 12:04:01 -0700
From: "Jef Allbright" <jef at jefallbright.net>
Subject: [ExI] [Cog, Context, Empathy] Independent thinkers judge
distances differently than holistic types
To: "Extropy chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID:
<f7bfe5740806261204v75e3f376nc80297e2c9bf3d13 at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Here's a study supporting what may be obvious to some and unreasonable
or even repugnant to others on this list.
<http://www.physorg.com/news133618396.html>
Every day we're faced with decisions that involve spatial judgments.
Which line should we choose at the supermarket? Which route should we
take to work? A new study in the Journal of Consumer Research shows
that thinking styles affect spatial judgment.
Authors Aradhna Krishna (University of Michigan), Rongrong Zhou (Hong
Kong University of Science and Technology), and Shi Zhang (UCLA),
designed a series of experiments that tested participants to assess
their thinking styles. The participants, who lived in China, Hong
Kong, and the United States, fell into two categories: independent
thinkers (self-focused) and interdependent (relationship-focused).
The researchers found significant differences between Western and
Eastern participants. "The independent self-construal is more dominant
in Western cultures, where people believe in the inherent separateness
of distinct persons and view the self as an autonomous, independent
person," write the authors. "The interdependent self-construal is more
dominant in Eastern cultures, where people believe in the
connectedness of human beings to each other and view the self as part
of a larger social group."
They tested participants' ability to judge spatial distances. One
experiment asked participants to imagine they were going to a football
stadium to buy tickets. They were given a map showing two lines, one
straight and one looped, and to estimate the number of dots in each
line. The study found that independent thinkers are more likely to
misjudge distance when they need to take multiple features into
account (like how winding a road is). Interdependent thinkers are less
likely to make distance errors but more prone to other kinds of
spatial errors (such as when intersecting lines on a map make one side
of the line appear longer than the other).
"Our data indicate that individuals with an independent (vs.
interdependent) self-construal are more likely to pay attention to
only the focal aspects of stimuli and to ignore the context and
background information in forming spatial judgments, resulting in
biases. In contrast, interdependents are capable of going beyond the
most salient dimension (e.g., direct distance) and incorporating other
information (e.g. line configuration) in their judgments, leading to
greater accuracy in these tasks."
Next time you pull out a map, remember that your thinking style may
affect your perception.
------------------------------
Message: 26
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:30:20 -0500
From: Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>
Subject: [ExI] "Martian Soil Appears Able to Support Life"
To: "'ExI chat list'" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080627002944.02582430 at satx.rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
"Martian Soil Appears Able to Support Life"
JILL SERJEANT - Reuters
LOS ANGELES -- "Flabbergasted" NASA scientists said on Thursday that
Martian soil appeared to contain the requirements to support life,
although more work would be needed to prove it.
Scientists working on the Phoenix Mars Lander mission, which has
already found ice on the planet, said preliminary analysis by the
lander's instruments on a sample of soil scooped up by the
spacecraft's robotic arm had shown it to be much more alkaline than
expected.
"We basically have found what appears to be the requirements, the
nutrients, to support life whether past present or future," Sam
Kounaves, the lead investigator for the wet chemistry laboratory on
Phoenix, told journalists.
"It is the type of soil you would probably have in your back yard,
you know, alkaline. You might be able to grow asparagus in it really
well. ... It is very exciting for us."
The 1 cubic centimeter (0.06 cubic inch) of soil was taken from about
1 inch below the surface of Mars and had a pH, or alkaline, level of
8 or 9. "We were all flabbergasted at the data we got back," Kounaves said.
Pressed on whether there was still any doubt that life existed on
Mars in some form, Kounaves said the results were "very preliminary"
and more analysis was needed.
But he added: "There is nothing about the soil that would preclude
life. In fact, it seems very friendly ... there is nothing about it
that is toxic."
The $420 million Phoenix lander touched down in the north pole region
of Mars on May 25 after a 10-month journey from Earth. It is the
latest NASA bid to determine whether water -- a crucial ingredient
for life -- ever flowed on the planet and whether life, even in the
form of mere microbes, exists or ever existed there.
Scientists said last week they had definitive proof that ice was on
the planet after eight dice-sized chunks were seen melting away in a
series of photographs.
Analysis in the past 24 hours of soil placed in the spacecraft's wet
chemistry laboratory showed it to be less acidic than many scientists
expected. It also contained traces of magnesium, sodium, potassium
and other elements, they said.
When told the pH levels, one colleague "jumped up and down as if he
had the winning lottery ticket," mission soil analysis specialist
Michael Hecht told a telephone news conference.
"It is a huge step forward," Hecht said, adding the "wet chemistry"
technique, which involves mixing Martian soil with water brought from
Earth, was aimed at discovering what native Martian microbes might be
able to live, survive and grow in the soil.
The mission scientists said levels of salt were reasonable and the
calcium levels appeared to be low but they warned that the
composition of the soil could change at deeper levels below the surface.
They also would not be drawn on what form of life the Martian soil
might have supported.
[]
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 17324d23.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 845 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080627/f9d7ec76/attachment-0001.jpg
------------------------------
Message: 27
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 00:51:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: Anna Taylor <femmechakra at yahoo.ca>
Subject: [ExI] Pride and/or thinking superior
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Message-ID: <151860.29618.qm at web30408.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Wiki says:
>Pride is an emotion which refers to a strong sense of self-respect, a
>refusal to be humiliated as well as joy in the accomplishments of oneself
>or a person, group, nation or object that one identifies with, or "to
>think of one's self as being better than anyone else"
How is this possible? If at any moment you think you are better than anyone
else it could mean you have a superiority complex. Which is useless. You
don't exist unless someone else acknowledges your presence. (Can you hear
the tree drop when no one is listening?). Please don't assume anyone is
unique. There are way too many species on the planet. One individual is
like a fish in the sea, a grain in the sand or a bull in a ring. How can you
possibly map it?
Just curious:)
Anna
__________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your
favourite sites. Download it now at
http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
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 57, Issue 23
********************************************
--
LIFESPAN PHARMA Inc.
Extropian Agroforestry Ventures Inc.
306-447-4944
701-240-9411
Mission: To Preserve, Protect and Enhance Lifespan
Plant-based Natural-health Bio-product Bio-pharmaceuticals
http://www.angelfire.com/on4/extropian-lifespan
http://www.4XtraLifespans.bravehost.com
megao at sasktel.net, arla_j at hotmail.com, mfj.eav at gmail.com
extropian.pharmer at gmail.com
Transhumanism ..."The most dangerous idea on earth"
-Francis Fukuyama,
June 2005
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20080627/09256085/attachment.html>
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list