From max at maxmore.com  Fri Apr  1 01:06:47 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 18:06:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] =?windows-1252?q?Stan_Ovshinsky=92s_Solar_Revolution?=
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wi22C+M6A2oReF-fDwwQ5AC=4C3-z=6cP0qLS@mail.gmail.com>

I've only very quickly skimmed this article, but thought it of interest
given the recent and continuing discussion on this list:

http://www.strategy-business.com/article/11111?gko=ddb47&cid=20110329enews


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110331/eb487d8c/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 03:25:01 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 21:25:01 -0600
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:49:45PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > Science has been slow to embrace Peak Oil, but they're
>> > there now. (How long will it take for them to admit
>> > Peak Coal?)
>>
>> I should expect hundreds of years. The US has something like 400 years
>> of coal reserves, and China has a lot too.
>
> Try around 2025.
>
> http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2396

"The general consensus view on coal supplies has long been that we
have hundreds of years of the stuff left"

The articles you provided indicated that we were close to peak coal,
but it also showed a slowly tailing off supply. What I'm saying is
that after peak oil most charts show the supplies falling off rather
precipitously, but with peak coal there was a significant amount of
coal available for a significant amount of time afterward. So peak oil
is a much greater problem than peak coal (assuming they are even right
there, which I'm not particularly giving in on yet.)

Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact
that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers
on China's usage, and reserves before commenting further... it is
interesting though.

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 04:17:21 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 22:17:21 -0600
Subject: [ExI] note from a foaf in japan
In-Reply-To: <4D8DEFD5.7050804@libero.it>
References: <AANLkTinq54Xbs4SAVJ2UgRWpE1hW2J-KQgE7-X3Nzt6i@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=kgz+an9ud1TuR+EHs-3eNn_U4p=nvEfG3K4G8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D8DEFD5.7050804@libero.it>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinHDsMGaVWD2cwLqQCfgAfSuqnrUfb=BwD2eQ_O@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
> Il 25/03/2011 10.23, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Keith Henson
>> <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 5:00 AM, ? Kelly Anderson
>>> <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> It seems unlikely to me that humans are genetically diverse
>>>> enough to account for highly social behavior in the face of
>>>> disaster as a genetic issue. It seems much more likely to be a
>>>> 100% cultural issue.
>>>
>>> I would not discount the genetic angle. ?I know it is not
>>> politically correct, but consider the differences between wild and
>>> tame foxes that came about in only 20 generations (with much of it
>>> in 8). ?It depends on a consistent selection criteria. ?If you
>>> have not read Gregory Clark's work, you should.
>>
>> I am familiar with the fox experiment in Russia (Siberia). In that
>> experiment, 1% of each generation was selected for each trait
>> (aggressive and tame) and 99% were put down.
>
> I have a big problem believing these numbers.
> Simply, I don't think they started with 10^16 foxes and then culled down
> the 99% too aggressive or not enough tame.

Don't be silly. They bred a few hundred foxes with each generation,
then only bred the 1% that were most tame or most aggressive. I don't
know the details of exactly how this culling was done, but I'd guess
that the selection was done more on the male side than the female to
avoid needing too much breeding stock.

> Given a normal figure of 6 kitten per litter or 10 (very optimistic), it
> is difficult to believe that.

Why would you assume that every litter would produce a selected survivor?

> A fox couple would need to have 100 kitten, and the female fox would
> need to give birth ten times (at least) during her life (improbable, as
> the live 1.5 years in the wild and up to twelve - very rarely - in
> captivity and I suppose their fecundity after the first two years is
> very low).
>
> Now, the article of ?1992 give number a bit different from yours:
> 5% of the males and 20% of the females could breed in in the first
> generations.
> This is a severe selection, but not as severe as you wrote.
> Humans were/are selected under historically a bit less severe conditions.

My numbers came from the report on NOVA. If you have a publication
direct from the source, then your numbers are probably better as they
are closer to the source. The main point though is that these foxes
were under a very severe selection compared to anything humans have
ever faced. The black death took 20% of a generation at its height!

> >From what I remember, it is common, during history, that only 40% of the
> males and 80% of the female reproduce.

But what was the selection process? If it is highly randomized, then
there is no selective pressure, right? If it is highly selected, then
what is it selected for? Has the selection pressure remained the same
over time? These things are necessary to produce genetic drift.

> We can add to this that humans are able to move in other places, if
> local conditions are unfriendly. And they are able of assortative
> mating. These possibilities can, alone, make up for the difference in
> selective pressure.

Agreed. Thus the selective pressure on humans has been fairly low over
time, which was my point.

>> That is a VERY heavy selection mechanism. Lots of genes go away very
>> quickly under that heavy of a culling.
>
> Again, this is against what the article say.
> After any selection, they added new foxes from commercial breed farm.
> These foxes were at the early stages of domestication (the point where
> the experiment started). So, the chance of interbreeding of recessive
> traits is very low (2-7%) for every generation.

But that is high enough to produce genetic drift over several
generations. It doesn't take much. I would suggest that you review the
mathematics of genetics, and you will see that anything that has a 2%
impact per generation will become very dominant after only 20
generations or so.

>> Humans have never faced that level of culling, so getting rid of any
>> specific set of genes is very difficult.
>
> Given the wrong premises, I can not agree with the conclusions.

Please restate your premise, or what you think is mine. I'm not
following your point here perhaps. Sorry, I'm just a bit lost...

>> We know this because two humans from any part of the world are more
>> closely genetically related than two chimpanzees from 20 miles apart
>> in Africa. The bottleneck around 600,000 years ago (Tambura(sp)
>> supervolcano??) was estimated to reduce the human ancestor population
>> to around 4000 individuals. So the chances of that big of a genetic
>> drift coming in seems very slight to me.
>
> The drifts is, probably, not so big. But I would call it difference, as
> drift recall some random process. And this is all but random.

If culture leads to genetic selection over the generations, i.e. if a
person has a specific trait, they are more likely to breed in a given
population, then yes, this could have an effect. This seems possible,
at least. But I can't think of a documented case.

>> If the Japanese had put down 99% of their population on
>> socialization principles, then I would be more likely to believe
>> there was a genetic component.
>
> In China, numbers I red said that 10% of the people (usually the poor)
> didn't reproduce in normal conditions (peace time). And this is
> consistent with the rate in other places like Western Europe.
> This rate is a mean, so it is very probable that poorer men didn't
> breed, where poorer women had a chance to reproduce with wealthier (than
> them) men.
> This would have amplified the reproductive fitness of the wealthier men
> a bit.

This should breed out the poor. So why do we keep getting new poor? ;-)

>> Obviously, I could be wrong here, but I think it would be hard to
>> prove either way. However, from a genetics standpoint, there just
>> isn't a heavy enough hand IMHO to have Occam come down on genetic vs.
>> culture in this particular case.
>
> The problem is, if culture is the culprit, it would work everywhere in
> the same way.

No, it would work differently in each culture... Again, not following
your logic.

> This, in the US is not true, as North-East Asians are law
> abiding more than Europeans that are more abiding than Latino Americans
> that are more law abiding than blacks.

This is a whole other can of worms. Blacks are more carefully watched
by the police, leading to higher arrest rates. Their poverty leads to
poor representation, which leads to higher conviction rates. That does
not imply that blacks are necessarily less law abiding than other
races. You might be able to make a successful argument on a different
basis. Besides, you can hardly argue that blacks in South Central LA
live in the same culture as I do. That is beyond naive.

> They are all exposed ?to the same culture (or cultures) and the outcome
> is very different. And this is consistent.
>
>> By the way, I'd love to get a hold of a mating pair of those tame
>> foxes.
>
> You only need money.
> http://www.sibfox.com/
> $6,950 (USA only) (delivery at your door in max 90 days)

Sweet! Now I wish I had some money. :-) That's really cool, and those
foxes are really quite cute fellows...

>> Have we had a serious disaster in those populations? I can't think of
>> one off the top of my head.
>
> I don't remember big riots or revolts during the fall of the East block.
> The only violence outbreaks were when some groups in power tried to take
> the power from another group (Romania was a coup against the Chaucescu -
> Gorbachev fell because a coup by the communist party).
>
> Nothing like LA riots or LO after Katrina and likes.
>
>>> I suspect several thousand years of farming in north temperate
>>> zones worked some fairly serious changes in the genetics of the
>>> populations, changes that a few decades of cultural variations
>>> don't erase.
>
>> Only where there is a selection pressure, such as melatonin in the
>> skin leading to skin cancer... You have to spell out the
>> selection/survival vector for this to be a credible genetic theory.
>
> Change in melatonin happened for Vit D deficit, not the reverse.

Of course.

>>>>> What are the difference in behavior between Sendai (Japan) and
>>>>> Bam (Iran) or Indonesia, Italy, Chile and China or New Orleans
>>>>> (US)?
>
>>> You might include Haiti. ?Re China:
>
>> I think Haiti went to hell after the earthquake. Roaming bands of
>> rapists and such. Having been to Haiti myself, it isn't hard to
>> believe. They have a really messed up culture from decades of living
>> ?off of the generosity of the first world.
>
> I don't remember they had any different culture before.
> IIRC, when Haiti gained his independence from France, they killed all
> the whites in their half of Santo Domingo (male, female and children).
> It could not be strange the Dominicans (the other half of the island) as
> black as them, but a colony from England, hate and despise them with all
> their heart and their past relations (probably even the current) were
> very violent.

Haiti is f'ed up. I would not necessarily attribute that to genetics.
Their government has been horrible for a very long time. I attribute
most of their problems to that.

>> Yes, I believe you are absolutely right here. I don't think that is
>> much of an argument for genetics, just an argument for the
>> persistence of underlying culture in the face of totalitarianism.
>> Just look at the comeback of Christianity in Russia...
>
> But Christianity is coming back in Russia because it was resilient or
> because the genetics of the russians make it easier to it to return.

Here is my bottom line. If there were as much genetic difference
between groups as you suggest, then I think there would be a larger
and more popular belief in racism. I'm not saying that you are a
racist, but what I am saying is that if there were as much difference
between different humans as you suggest, there would be a greater
basis for racist thought.

>>> Clark makes a case that impulse control has been intensely
>>> selected in stable societies along with literacy and numeracy.
>
>> If you were going to pick something, that might do it. However, you
>> would pretty quickly weed out any effective warrior class, which
>> could have downsides if other societies did not pick the same.
>
> In fact, stable societies don't like warrior classes. They want soldier
> classes. Warriors' ability to wage a war don't scale where the ability
> of soldiers scale much better. And, usually, stable societies are able
> to field much more soldiers than unstable ones, for more time and with
> stable goals.

I think that you have thought this particular aspect through more than
I have. I believe I will concede this point.

> In fact, modern and less modern armies usually make a point to kill
> their soldiers that don't respect orders and kill out of the
> battlefield, without orders and without a good reason.
>
> IMHO, modern armies want soldiers that have an internal "switch" they
> (soldiers) are able to turn on and off at will. The "switch" to kill and
> use violence.

Quite possibly. I do know that more extensive and effective training
makes a big difference in whether soldiers are able to pull the
trigger when the moment comes... and more modern armies have better
training facilities.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 04:31:59 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 22:31:59 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Moving big things in Utah tonight
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=KQ-RMfPTLHQmrN7mm=d=bA6VEN83q3s_Xkyot@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=wUuqrALdROy4SrByfhEA2LL8eVaeso4Yfy-95@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=KQ-RMfPTLHQmrN7mm=d=bA6VEN83q3s_Xkyot@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimr-OWs9YHzS4eYw1Rspxoc4OQ6nj7r0dPzd_RU@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:40 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Tonight, the Utah Transportation Authority will break the western
>> hemisphere record for moving a bridge constructed at the side of the
>> road. It is 80' x 354', roughly the size of a football field.
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORtXe3trR_o
>>
>> Is that cool or what? If it weren't going to be snowing at the time,
>> I'd go watch, even though it is in the middle of the night.
>>
>> Apparently 60% of ALL bridges built in this way have been built in
>> Utah. Why wouldn't they do this in California and other places? It
>> takes the disruption of traffic down from several months to one night
>> and makes things safer for workers too.
>
> 1) Not Invented Here

You probably have a point on this one. But if it is cheaper, faster,
safer and less disruptive to traffic, eventually I would think it
would prevail.

> 2) Because it is not well understood by contractors out here, and/or
> not well adapted to particular details of the local geography, the
> projected costs would be way up for doing it out here. ?Note, for
> example, that this bridge is being moved into place over completely
> dry ground - freeway, in fact - that can take the load and allow workers
> to access the bottom without special equipment.

The only cost is the need for a nearby empty field to build the bridge
on. This could really be a big problem in parts of Los Angeles, no
empty fields nearby could be a big problem. Utah has a good supply of
empty fields, apparently. I suspect that the contractors not knowing
the technology is a big part of the issue, but I think that education
is being done now. Apparently there were a lot of big wigs from around
the country watching this particular bridge being put in. One fellow
from Minnesota DOT was very excited about it.

I don't think the soil taking the load is a big issue. They moved the
bridge the other night in the mud as it was snowing at the time. They
had hundreds of big wheels on the ground, which would reduce the PSI
quite a bit. I don't have the specific numbers, but my sense having
watched a few of these go up, is that they don't do a lot of ground
prep to move the bridge. I might have missed something, but I do know
they move most of them over dirt.

UDOT has finished most of their projects lately under budget and on
time or early. It's pretty impressive really.

-Kelly



From max at maxmore.com  Fri Apr  1 06:54:26 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 23:54:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Source Code movie article
Message-ID: <AANLkTimrJc1jvXRFmLq7bc52QQMRLMU+qMJQDyASoK9k@mail.gmail.com>

The preview didn't look that interesting, but this interview raises my
interest some. Sounds like it might be worth transhumanists keeping an eye
on.

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/03/31/6384693-sci-fi-director-cracks-source-code


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110331/4ed2c233/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Apr  1 13:58:13 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 15:58:13 +0200
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110401135812.GG23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:25:01PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
> that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact
> that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
> other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
> through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers
> on China's usage, and reserves before commenting further... it is
> interesting though.

What I find quite concerning is how few people find peak fossil concerning.

The typical reactions are either ignorance, or denial. That worked
well enough in the last ~40 years, but we don't have another 40 years. 

-- 
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 mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 14:33:00 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:33:00 -0400
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110401135812.GG23560@leitl.org>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110401135812.GG23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinxLBxn0sMp40_Q9jzLgRDVyJvxhqUJTqK1d4y3@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> What I find quite concerning is how few people find peak fossil concerning.


Ignorance is bliss.  At least for now.  Until the whole thing comes crashing
down around their ears, and they're starving to death.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110401/51b444aa/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 15:16:00 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 08:16:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
Message-ID: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 5:00 AM,  Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:

> My Gedankenexperiment - which I admittedly like, but am ready to drop
> against the harsh truths of arithmetics - was:
>
> - You bring "n" tons of energy-generating solar-power stuff of the
> gravitational well by making use of large-scale Project-Orion nuclear
> propulsors (why a continuous flow of materials would be so different from a
> small number of very large launches?);
>
> - That "n" is calculated in a measure sufficient to send energy back to
> Earth which be enough to maintain and expand your installed space-based
> solar power facilities (e.g., by making use of lasers or by cheaply
> synthetising chemical fuels such hydrogen or hydrocarbons) without the need
> to continue resorting to nuclear propulsion.

If you are ever going to do laser propulsion, you don't need Orian
type propulsion at all.  The energy needed to power the lasers is
relatively modest and can be pulled from the existing grid, at least
in places such as Three Gorges or Sylmar.  The problem is the cost of
the lasers--$60 B or so at $10 per watt.

> - You end up with a permanent flow of energy in exchange for a
> pre-determined, "once for ever", increase in environmental radioactivity.

A million tons per year makes 200 GW/year.  We need on the order of 20
TW over the next few decades, so the production rate will probably go
to 2 TW per year.  Especially if the power sats are made of the
obvious material (Invar) then I suspect that mining asteroids for
nickle will start by ten years after the first power sat is turned on.

The combination of burning hydrogen with air to get above 20 km and up
to about 2 km/sec combined with the "long boost" of about 15 minutes
is the key to getting the laser power so low.  Previous work on
straight boost gives a laser requirement of a GW per ton.  This
approach puts 50 tons of vehicle and 50 tons of payload in LEO with 6
GW of laser power (up to 12 GW off the grid).  The cost is a flotilla
of redirection mirrors in GEO that lets the beam sweep along the
equator for good fraction of the circumference of the earth.
Relatively low acceleration takes a long distance to get up to orbital
speed.

Is it worth doing?

It all depends on how long humans stay in charge.  If I was sure the
singularity would get here before the energy crisis starves a
substantial fraction of the population, I would not bother.  Surely
thinking power that extreme can solve such simple problems as energy.

Keith


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 16:38:02 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:38:02 -0600
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110401135812.GG23560@leitl.org>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110401135812.GG23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimjY5mNStRS4tjNggxoykpD-dz6od3HUuD0ygQ9@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:25:01PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
>> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
>> that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact
>> that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
>> other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
>> through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers
>> on China's usage, and reserves before commenting further... it is
>> interesting though.
>
> What I find quite concerning is how few people find peak fossil concerning.
>
> The typical reactions are either ignorance, or denial. That worked
> well enough in the last ~40 years, but we don't have another 40 years.

It isn't that I'm not concerned. it's that I think with enough
economic incentive (which peak anything will produce) there are a
number of viable alternatives that can be developed.

-Kelly


From atymes at gmail.com  Fri Apr  1 17:33:35 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2011 10:33:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 8:16 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it worth doing?
>
> It all depends on how long humans stay in charge. ?If I was sure the
> singularity would get here before the energy crisis starves a
> substantial fraction of the population, I would not bother. ?Surely
> thinking power that extreme can solve such simple problems as energy.

Perhaps, but wouldn't it be easier on them - our children, in whatever
sense - if we'd already fixed that problem by then?  Besides, if we fix
the problem ourselves, we don't have to bet on a near-term Singularity.

More importantly, wouldn't a global energy surplus be more conducive to
factors accelerating the Singularity?  Chicken and the egg, and there's
no serious question that we can tackle the energy problem, given enough
resources directed the right way.



From painlord2k at libero.it  Fri Apr  1 18:57:37 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 20:57:37 +0200
Subject: [ExI] note from a foaf in japan
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinHDsMGaVWD2cwLqQCfgAfSuqnrUfb=BwD2eQ_O@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinq54Xbs4SAVJ2UgRWpE1hW2J-KQgE7-X3Nzt6i@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTi=kgz+an9ud1TuR+EHs-3eNn_U4p=nvEfG3K4G8@mail.gmail.com>	<4D8DEFD5.7050804@libero.it>
	<AANLkTinHDsMGaVWD2cwLqQCfgAfSuqnrUfb=BwD2eQ_O@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D962021.4070806@libero.it>

Il 01/04/2011 6.17, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Mirco Romanato 
> <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:

>> I have a big problem believing these numbers. Simply, I don't
>> think they started with 10^16 foxes and then culled down the 99%
>> too aggressive or not enough tame.

> Don't be silly.

It is a silly reply to a silly statement.


> They bred a few hundred foxes with each generation, then only bred 
> the 1% that were most tame or most aggressive.

As I stated, this could not happen without having an huge number of
foxes. Even with females able to carry ten kittens they would not be
able to keep their population stable without an huge inflow of new
foxes, that would have washed away any genetic trait selected.
It is a math problem, not other.
If we had 99 vixen and one fox, any vixen could give birth to 10 kittens
at time. Make it 20 in her life.
This is a total of 1980 kitten in two years. Half female and half male
(I don't know of any sex imbalance in foxes).
Kill all the males apart one and 99% of the female and you will have
only 20 (rounded up) females and 1 male.
The next generation would leave 4 vixen and a fox.
And they would be very inbreed.

Now, If you replenish the gene pool with other foxes and vixens, you
simply outnumber the selected breed with the unselected one, diluting
any gene selected for in the previous generation.

> I don't know the details of exactly how this culling was done, but 
> I'd guess that the selection was done more on the male side than the 
> female to avoid needing too much breeding stock.

I'm contesting the number of 1% as not real and not realistic.
Not anything else.

>> Given a normal figure of 6 kitten per litter or 10 (very 
>> optimistic), it is difficult to believe that.

> Why would you assume that every litter would produce a selected 
> survivor?

Where I wrote one kitten per litter would survive?

>> Now, the article of  1992 give number a bit different from yours: 
>> 5% of the males and 20% of the females could breed in in the first
>>  generations. This is a severe selection, but not as severe as you 
>> wrote. Humans were/are selected under historically a bit less 
>> severe conditions.

> My numbers came from the report on NOVA. If you have a publication 
> direct from the source, then your numbers are probably better as they
> are closer to the source.

http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/feature/early-canid-domestication-the-farm-fox-experiment/1

Even if the numbers you gave was from the source, I would criticize them
as I do with you, unless they are able to explain how they did the
process and didn't kill all of the breed with a so high selection rates.

> The main point though is that these foxes were under a very severe 
> selection compared to anything humans have ever faced. The black 
> death took 20% of a generation at its height!

This number is a bit optimistic.
The Black Death had taken out around 30% of the population of Europe
when ended. Given that more than one generation lived in the same time
(usually three), in many cases it wiped out entire generations and
populations and social strata.

We can suppose that it wiped out the most weak, physically, of the
population. And we can suppose that the poor were the most weak of all
(statistically).

>>> From what I remember, it is common, during history, that only
>>> 40% of the
>> males and 80% of the female reproduce.

> But what was the selection process? If it is highly randomized, then
>  there is no selective pressure, right? If it is highly selected, 
> then what is it selected for? Has the selection pressure remained
> the same over time? These things are necessary to produce genetic
> drift.

In the wild I think highly randomized selection is very rare if not
impossible.

The selective pressure of people living in cities is continuous over
centuries. They are selected for traits allowing to thrive there.
Also, being city population sinks, they attracted large numbers of
people during many generations that allowed the selection process to
continue unabated. Often, then, the most successful families in the
cities would move out of the city with their wealth and buy farms and
large homes, to be able to afford more children.

>> We can add to this that humans are able to move in other places, if
>> local conditions are unfriendly. And they are able of assortative
>> mating. These possibilities can, alone, make up for the difference
>> in selective pressure.

> Agreed. Thus the selective pressure on humans has been fairly low 
> over time, which was my point.

I don't think so.
The poor were able to become a class only in the last two centuries
because before they near always died with few or no offspring. And they
were supplanted by the less accomplished (but better than them)
offspring of the middle class.
In this way, in 20 generations (say the double of the time the foxes
needed to be culled) the people in England was selecting for middle
class traits and culling the poor (and partially the noble) out of the
breeding stock.

>> Again, this is against what the article say. After any selection, 
>> they added new foxes from commercial breed farm. These foxes were 
>> at the early stages of domestication (the point where the 
>> experiment started). So, the chance of interbreeding of recessive 
>> traits is very low (2-7%) for every generation.

> But that is high enough to produce genetic drift over several 
> generations. It doesn't take much. I would suggest that you review 
> the mathematics of genetics, and you will see that anything that has 
> a 2% impact per generation will become very dominant after only 20 
> generations or so.

Recessive traits can not become dominating after a few generations or
many generations.
They could outnumber the dominating traits due to selection or
inbreeding, but in presence of a dominating gene they would not appear.

An inbreeding of 2-7% could cause a drift during many generations if the
population is keep closed. But if the population is replenished of
individuals with no inbreeding, the inbreed traits of one generation
have only 2-7% of a chance to be passed to the next. So in the best case
we have 4/10K to pass the same trait to the second generation and in the
worst 49/10K AKA 0.5%.

> Please restate your premise, or what you think is mine. I'm not 
> following your point here perhaps. Sorry, I'm just a bit lost...

Your premises (as I understood them) are that the foxes and the vixens
were subjected to an extensive culling (1% surviving to generate), where
the actual number given in the article I linked were 5% for foxes and
20% for vixen.
Another premises of yours was that the population was not replenished by
new individuals. In fact, the scientists replenished the population
selected with other foxes and vixens coming from the original breeding
stock of foxes they started from (the ones used to produces furs).
They did it to avoid the spreading of recessive traits and inbreeding;
but you assumed inbreeding and the diffusion of recessive traits in the
tame foxes population.

>> The drifts is, probably, not so big. But I would call it 
>> difference, as drift recall some random process. And this is all 
>> but random.

> If culture leads to genetic selection over the generations, i.e. if a
> person has a specific trait, they are more likely to breed in a given
> population, then yes, this could have an effect. This seems possible,
> at least. But I can't think of a documented case.

The predisposition to learn how to read, write, do simple math is and
was a strong cultural trait that cause genetic selection.
Try to breed today without being able to read/write/do simple math.
Take away the welfare state, the food stamps and the rest. Leave them on
their devices. Like 200 years ago or more.
Even more strong and durable, the selection for taking out people unable
to control their impulses and empathize others.
They would be, at least, be banned from the civil society. And without
welfare they would die because of starvation or be prey of organized
groups. For example, a not married woman having sex and becoming
pregnant would lose her family support and be shunned by any other
reputable man. Why? Because they would not risk to be rising someone
else children instead of theirs.
Exceptions abound, but invariably they concern very low standing women
(prostitute or maiden) or very high standing women (too valuable to
consider their previous sins).

> This should breed out the poor. So why do we keep getting new poor? 
> ;-)

Because poor is relative and not absolute.
It is the Red Queen Effect.
Also, the people coming from the country have traits that could be
useful in the country but are not useful or are damaging when living in
a city. This is something discovered studying an African tribe; the same
traits that made them successful in herding sheep (so they were able to
feed themselves well) made them not very successful in keeping a job in
a city (so they were unable to keep themselves well fed).

>> The problem is, if culture is the culprit, it would work
>> everywhere in the same way.

> No, it would work differently in each culture... Again, not following
> your logic.

If the culture is the dominant factor, if you take Africans (black) and
put them on adoption on European (white) families they would be
behaviorally and intellectually indistinguishable from other (white)
Europeans. They would be intellectually indistinguishable from
Europeans. Unfortunately it is not so. The same would be true for Asians
in Europeans families and the reverse or Europeans in African families.

>> This, in the US is not true, as North-East Asians are law abiding 
>> more than Europeans that are more abiding than Latino Americans 
>> that are more law abiding than blacks.

> This is a whole other can of worms.

A can of worms that people in the US is often afraid to touch for
cultural and social reasons. It is like talking about freedom of
religion in Saudi Arabia. If you talk abut the freedom of some Christian
to convert to Islam, all is good. The reverse is not well accepted in
the mainstream.

> Blacks are more carefully watched by the police,

Why?
Why they don't check more for Hispanics or Vietnamese or Italians?
Are the policemen racists? Even the blacks one?

What allowed Jews, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese,
French, Russian and others to come in the US and, starting from the
bottom, climb up the social ladder until they were at par (and sometimes
over) the WASPs? Surely they were subjected to their fair (or unfair)
share of stereotyping, racist slurs, hate and lynching from the dominant
groups. Why they succeed anyway and the blacks didn't?

There are cultural (maybe also genetic) differenced in behavior between
blacks coming from American ancestries and blacks coming from the
Caribbeans and blacks coming from Africa. Often they don't go well
together because of this.

> leading to higher arrest rates.

If I know to be more carefully watched by police, I usually try to be
more law abiding than usual.

> Their poverty leads to poor representation, which leads to higher 
> conviction rates. That does not imply that blacks are necessarily 
> less law abiding than other races.

Law abiding, in fact, is a too vague.
Could we talk about homicide rate?
Could we compare the Blacks on Blacks, White on White, Blacks on Whites
and Whites on Blacks or the East Asians on Blacks, etc.?
I suppose this is independent of who the police is watching more.

> You might be able to make a successful argument on a different
> basis. Besides, you can hardly argue that blacks in South Central LA
> live in the same culture as I do. That is beyond naive.

So, if it is not genetics, then it is cultural. But this imply that the
culture of South Central is the main cause of the lawlessness (or of the
high arrest rate) of the Blacks.
But, if it is the culture, why is it not possible to force a culture on
a group to change its behavior in a generation or two. If it was
possible, someone would have already done it. What would had prevent
them from succeeding?

For example, the Conquistadors had not problem to raze Aztec temples,
kill their priests, and force the survivors to convert to Christianity.
One would suppose the Mexican population would be formed by perfect
Catholics, adopting Spanish costumes. It didn't worked exactly in this way.

> Sweet! Now I wish I had some money. :-) That's really cool, and those
> foxes are really quite cute fellows...

I would like to have the money to clone my current dog.
But also be able to buy a cute tame fox would be interesting.

> Haiti is f'ed up. I would not necessarily attribute that to genetics.
> Their government has been horrible for a very long time. I attribute
> most of their problems to that.

But the governments don't fall from the sky at random. Not usually.
Usually they are an expression of their population behaviors.
This is true for Haitians, Italians, Chinese and others.

> Here is my bottom line. If there were as much genetic difference 
> between groups as you suggest, then I think there would be a larger 
> and more popular belief in racism. I'm not saying that you are a 
> racist, but what I am saying is that if there were as much difference
> between different humans as you suggest, there would be a greater
> basis for racist thought.

Are you talking about emotive/innate basis for racism or
logical/scientific/moral basis for racism?
Are we talking about the gut feelings of common people or the rational,
often learned, arguments of polite people in polite circles?

Apart from the mainstream white western world, the rest is racist. Maybe
they don't wear the KKK hoods or don't shave
their heads, but they behave and often speak out their belief without
any problems.

For example, recently the Thai police cracked down on blacks of Africans
origin (mainly Nigerians) because they engaged in too much drug
trafficking and behave in a too aggressive way to be tolerated.
Was the Thai police "racist"?

Try to apply the "racism" argument to the foxes.
After the breeding program, we have two population of foxes.
One tame and one wild.
We know that some of the tame foxes developed characteristics that were
not present before in the wild population: curly tails, blue eyes, white
spots on the fur, floppy ears and these characteristics are common in
domesticated mammals.

Now, a blue eyed population of foxes, looking at their wild counterparts
living on the wild, could note the others are more aggressive. They
don't know why the others are more aggressive.
They could develop one or more  cultural explanations why the wild foxes
are more aggressive: the "racists" could say the "blue eyed" foxes are
superiors because they live in a peaceful civilization and all blue eyed
foxes must stick together to defend their civilization against the wild,
not blue eyed foxes. Others could think the white spotted foxes are
better behaving than the red foxes living in the wild.
Some full white and blue eyed foxes would develop the belief they are
better than all others (elitists exist everywhere).
On the other side the "racist" wild foxes would look at the white-lily,
watery eyed foxes as a bunch of weak, degenerated, infantile and whining
individuals, only able to play with their human masters and live in
their cages or inside human homes. Why don't take advantage of their
individual weakness?

Than another group of tame foxes could develop the explanation that the
wild ones are as they are because they are unfortunate and they never
were born inside their breeding farm. So they never developed and
learned how to behave and how good are humans to take care of them and
how beautiful is to love them.
Now, these "enlightened foxes" could be open to mate with wild ones or
adopt wild foxes kitten without parents or to invite the wild type to
live with them at the farm. Then they would be surprised that things
would not work out as they think. I think they could also blame the
"racist" foxes for the failure, because they never accepted and
continued to discriminated against the wild red furred, black eyed ones.

They all would be wrong. They could feel better or find some advantage
to believe a thing or another, but they would anyway be wrong.

If the tame foxes want to bring inside some wilder foxes they must know
and accept the facts. The wilder foxes must be breed and selected for a
behavior more tamer. And if the tame foxes want live with the wilder
one, they must breed themselves to be more aggressive (in this the most
aggressive can help).

Maybe they can breed in or out in different, novel, ways.
What they can not avoid, like it or not, is evolution and selection to
happen anyway. Their believes and their behavior can change how
evolution and selection happen, to themselves and to others, but can not
stop it.

>> In fact, modern and less modern armies usually make a point to kill
>> their soldiers that don't respect orders and kill out of the 
>> battlefield, without orders and without a good reason.
>> 
>> IMHO, modern armies want soldiers that have an internal "switch" 
>> they (soldiers) are able to turn on and off at will. The "switch"
>> to kill and use violence.
> 
> Quite possibly. I do know that more extensive and effective training
> makes a big difference in whether soldiers are able to pull the 
> trigger when the moment comes... and more modern armies have better 
> training facilities.

Yes. But soldiers in moder professional armies are mainly from middle
class and their IQ is a bit over the mean (this is surely true for in
the US). And in modern society the middle class is the bigger part of
the society.
If they come from there, they are genetically and culturally inhibited
from acting aggressively. In fact I remember a German soldier, in a
documentary about the Battle of Cassino, complaining that the US
soldiers didn't went in battle like "real soldiers" but like they were
going to a "normal" job.

-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>

Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>

*Mirco Romanato*

 <javascript:void(0);>


-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3544 -  Data di rilascio: 01/04/2011



From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 12:55:29 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 08:55:29 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

> More importantly, wouldn't a global energy surplus be more conducive to
> factors accelerating the Singularity?
>

**nods** exactly.  It'd make the wait a whole lot more manageable as well.
We (humanity) can spend $1T/yr to kill/destroy/blow up each other, but we
can't spend 10% of our 'death fund' to alleviate the issues we're fighting
for?  Penny-wise/Pound-foolish.

ReTool the Military Industrial Complex to Green Energy Complex, and this big
ship would steer much more manage-ably than we realize.
It's all about priorities, and ours (humanity) are severely misguided.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110402/2f8f112e/attachment.html>

From darren.greer3 at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 12:39:34 2011
From: darren.greer3 at gmail.com (Darren Greer)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 09:39:34 -0300
Subject: [ExI] Canada's Science Minister doesn't believe in evolution. Now
	what?
Message-ID: <AANLkTimxegnbc1Q58MUNHFOD6-s5a9429PkbU4dEc4tS@mail.gmail.com>

Just another little gift from our ultra-conservative, anti-everything
government up here in the great white north. Hope these bozos are defeated
in the May 2nd election.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/science-minister-wont-confirm-belief-in-evolution/article320476/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110402/b26b2a92/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 13:30:41 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 09:30:41 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Canada's Science Minister doesn't believe in evolution.
	Now what?
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimxegnbc1Q58MUNHFOD6-s5a9429PkbU4dEc4tS@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTimxegnbc1Q58MUNHFOD6-s5a9429PkbU4dEc4tS@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikp83W3-G=5yz4XvYEqut-R7cJ7PQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/2 Darren Greer <darren.greer3 at gmail.com>

> Just another little gift from our ultra-conservative, anti-everything
> government up here in the great white north. Hope these bozos are defeated
> in the May 2nd election.
>
>
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/science-minister-wont-confirm-belief-in-evolution/article320476/
>
>
He should be out immediately.  That's just plain ole "I'm sorry, you're not
qualified for the job" right there.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110402/59cef8b6/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sat Apr  2 14:53:31 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 07:53:31 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mr Jones
.

We (humanity) can spend $1T/yr to kill/destroy/blow up each other, but we
can't spend 10% of our 'death fund' to alleviate the issues we're fighting
for?  Penny-wise/Pound-foolish.  

.

 

This implies you understand what we (humanity) are fighting for.  Do you?
Explain please.

 

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110402/9e3f2964/attachment.html>

From lubkin at unreasonable.com  Sat Apr  2 13:24:41 2011
From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 09:24:41 -0400
Subject: [ExI] a new Vinge is coming
In-Reply-To: <4D8B6F7F.90302@satx.rr.com>
References: <4D8B6F7F.90302@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <201104021535.p32FZ9Tl000044@andromeda.ziaspace.com>

Damien B wrote:

>I see that Vernor Vinge's The Children of the Sky, the sequel to 
>Vinge's Hugo Award-winning A Fire Upon the Deep, will be released by 
>Tor books in October. Interesting!

FWIW, Amazon discounts books more heavily if you pre-order them.
They don't bill your credit card until the book ships. If the price drops
between order and release, you get the lower price. The only
annoyance is if the book is delayed, you have to reconfirm your
order or they cancel it. And again every time it's delayed further.

With enough pre-orders, a book can become an Amazon best-seller
months before it comes out. That's useful for an author. The publisher,
libraries, retail bookstores, show bookers, etc. pay attention, and
alter their plans.

On the other hand, it's also useful for authors to go in person to
bookstores and buy out their stock. A retail sales spike generates
replenishment orders up the distribution chain.

(So do both. And ask your library to order a copy.)

It's useful for avid readers to stay on top of how bookselling and
publishing work. (It's constantly changing.) Not as much as, say,
Damien and Charlie need to but, still, you need to understand the
ways you can send signals that shape the future for the authors
and genres you like.


-- David.



From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 15:55:18 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 11:55:18 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
	<001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/2 spike <spike66 at att.net>

>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:
> extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *Mr Jones
> *?*
>
> We (humanity) can spend $1T/yr to kill/destroy/blow up each other, but we
> can't spend 10% of our 'death fund' to alleviate the issues we're fighting
> for?  Penny-wise/Pound-foolish.
>
> ?
>
>
>
> This implies you understand what we (humanity) are fighting for.  Do you?
> Explain please.
>
>
>

Energy.  Whether it be in the form of fuel in our tanks, or food in our
stomach.  It's all about energy.  Always has been.  Before OIL it was COAL.
 Before COAL it was WOOD.
If the brilliant minds humanity has at it's disposal, spent less brain
cycles devoted to destroying/controlling one another, and instead focused on
freeing ourselves...we'd be much better off imho.
It's silly, we spend $400B plus a year importing oil, yet $100B investment
in renewable/sustainable energy is unheard of?

It's a matter of mindset.  Like being pro-peace, not anti-war.  Move towards
things, don't run away from them.
Hell, the USoA has spent what...$2-3T on Iraq/Afghanistan, for what..global
oil production?  Imagine what $2-3T would have accomplished had it went to
R&D in the energy sector.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110402/25f0e7d8/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 17:41:36 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 10:41:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 91, Issue 2
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1301745601.25740.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.1.1301745601.25740.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTike1JPPPRhgNQpbyR+5oqwkjbSjnQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 5:00 AM,  Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:

> Il 01/04/2011 6.17, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Mirco Romanato
>> <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:

Snip

>>> We can add to this that humans are able to move in other places, if
>>> local conditions are unfriendly. And they are able of assortative
>>> mating. These possibilities can, alone, make up for the difference
>>> in selective pressure.
>
>> Agreed. Thus the selective pressure on humans has been fairly low
>> over time, which was my point.
>
> I don't think so.

> The poor were able to become a

self sustaining [to clarify]

> class only in the last two centuries
> because before they near always died with few or no offspring. And they
> were supplanted by the less accomplished (but better than them)
> offspring of the middle class.

As Clark notes, "downward social mobility."

> In this way, in 20 generations (say the double of the time the foxes
> needed to be culled) the people in England was selecting for middle
> class traits and culling the poor (and partially the noble) out of the
> breeding stock.

I don't think the noble lost anything like the poor, who for
generation after generation, died with few offspring.

It doesn't take really intense breeding if it is over a long time.
And in fact the selection in the UK was fairly intense from the
numbers Clark found analyzing probated wills.

Kelly, I really recommend reading Clark's research paper, Genetically
capitalist.  Or his book or both.

Mirco has a solid understanding of the situation.

There are substantial differences in populations because of different
past selection pressures.  It's not politically correct to say so of
course.

snip

Keith


From pharos at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 19:57:59 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 20:57:59 +0100
Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 91, Issue 2
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTike1JPPPRhgNQpbyR+5oqwkjbSjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1301745601.25740.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<BANLkTike1JPPPRhgNQpbyR+5oqwkjbSjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=8ew4PTtWNWjZoD5rL6O99x+LuWQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Keith Henson  wrote:
<snip>
> Kelly, I really recommend reading Clark's research paper, Genetically
> capitalist. ?Or his book or both.
>
> There are substantial differences in populations because of different
> past selection pressures. ?It's not politically correct to say so of
> course.
>
>

Because it's wrong, of course.

Culture and institutions are far more important.

For example, you could try reading Capitalism and Material Life,
1400-1800 by Fernand Braudel. it is a massive 3-volume epic by a real
historian.

<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fernand_Braudel>

Quote:
Braudel claimed that there are long-term cycles in the capitalist
economy which developed in Europe in the 12th century. Particular
cities, and later nation-states, follow each other sequentially as
centers of these cycles: Venice and Genoa in 13th through 15th
centuries (1250?1510), Antwerp in 16th century (1500?1569), Amsterdam
in 16th through 18th centuries (1570?1733), and London (and England)
in 18th and 19th centuries (1733?1896).
------------------------------

BillK



From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Sat Apr  2 22:47:41 2011
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 15:47:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net>

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:25:01PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
> that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact

We might be exporting crap coal, and importing the good low-sulphur
stuff for use in domestic power.  Imports might be cheaper than burning
our crap more cleanly, even if we could provide all our own coal.  Just
a guess.

> that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
> other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
> through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers

And if oil runs out enough that people start synthesizing it from coal,
coal'll run down even faster.

-xx- Damien X-) 


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sat Apr  2 23:23:38 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 17:23:38 -0600
Subject: [ExI] note from a foaf in japan
In-Reply-To: <4D962021.4070806@libero.it>
References: <AANLkTinq54Xbs4SAVJ2UgRWpE1hW2J-KQgE7-X3Nzt6i@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=kgz+an9ud1TuR+EHs-3eNn_U4p=nvEfG3K4G8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D8DEFD5.7050804@libero.it>
	<AANLkTinHDsMGaVWD2cwLqQCfgAfSuqnrUfb=BwD2eQ_O@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D962021.4070806@libero.it>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimCXOkQpE_Cf4hXjj0aM+t1pqDggA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
> Il 01/04/2011 6.17, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Mirco Romanato
>> They bred a few hundred foxes with each generation, then only bred
>> the 1% that were most tame or most aggressive.
>
> As I stated, this could not happen without having an huge number of
> foxes. Even with females able to carry ten kittens they would not be
> able to keep their population stable without an huge inflow of new
> foxes, that would have washed away any genetic trait selected.
> It is a math problem, not other.
> If we had 99 vixen and one fox, any vixen could give birth to 10 kittens
> at time. Make it 20 in her life.
> This is a total of 1980 kitten in two years. Half female and half male
> (I don't know of any sex imbalance in foxes).
> Kill all the males apart one and 99% of the female and you will have
> only 20 (rounded up) females and 1 male.
> The next generation would leave 4 vixen and a fox.
> And they would be very inbreed.

This makes sense. Stated simply, to be able to pick 1% of the
population at each generation, you would have to have 200 offspring
per mating pair. So obviously, the report on NOVA was at the very
least incomplete, if not completely wrong or I just misunderstood it
completely.

> Now, If you replenish the gene pool with other foxes and vixens, you
> simply outnumber the selected breed with the unselected one, diluting
> any gene selected for in the previous generation.

Under heavy selection, genes would not be diluted, as long as you
always bred a new fox with one in the studied population. Suppose that
we have 50 foxes from the previous generation, 25 male and 25 female.
We bring in 50 foxes from a non-selected group. If the gene is
recessive, then we would expect 50% of the babies to be carriers, 25%
to express the gene, and 25% would (on average) not have the gene. If
you choose to keep the 25% that express the gene only, then the
recessive gene becomes the only expression of the gene in the
population in one generation. If it is a set of genes, it gets harder
to get just the genes you care about, but not so much that you can't
get terrific drift in 20 generations.

The key is how good the selection criteria are. Diluting the genes
from a general population would not be a huge issue. Genes don't
dilute like sugar in water... it's a digital issue. You have the gene,
or you don't. If you are doing good selection, you will get fast
results. If nature does the selection imprecisely, then it takes
longer, but it can still have a huge effect.

>> I don't know the details of exactly how this culling was done, but
>> I'd guess that the selection was done more on the male side than the
>> female to avoid needing too much breeding stock.
>
> I'm contesting the number of 1% as not real and not realistic.
> Not anything else.

Having thought it through with you, I am inclined to agree with you. I
was merely repeating what I had heard without critical thought. Not
good... thanks for straightening things out. I'd still like to see the
original research papers to see how they did it.

>> The main point though is that these foxes were under a very severe
>> selection compared to anything humans have ever faced. The black
>> death took 20% of a generation at its height!
>
> This number is a bit optimistic.
> The Black Death had taken out around 30% of the population of Europe
> when ended. Given that more than one generation lived in the same time
> (usually three), in many cases it wiped out entire generations and
> populations and social strata.

The key issue is what was the selection criteria? In this case, the
only criteria was 'can this individual survive the plague?' That
doesn't select for much of anything else, even though poor and weak
individuals would more likely die for non-genetic factors.

> We can suppose that it wiped out the most weak, physically, of the
> population. And we can suppose that the poor were the most weak of all
> (statistically).

Recall that most of the people at the time were very poor. The rich
ruling class was very small at this time, and there was virtually no
middle class in feudal Europe.

> In the wild I think highly randomized selection is very rare if not
> impossible.

It happens all the time on genes that are secondary to the primary
gene set that assures survival. For example, the first dinosaurs that
evolved feathers weren't selected for whether or not they had
feathers, but for how fast they could run, or some other feature that
was more important. As feathers evolved, the selection became more
focused on feathers, and particularly on the ability to glide and
eventually fly. Once birds were fully evolved, feather formation
became a primary selection mechanism because feathers are much more
important to birds than to the first dinosaurs that evolved feathers.

So for secondary traits, highly randomized selection is the norm, so
long as the mutation isn't negative towards the survival of the
animal.

> The selective pressure of people living in cities is continuous over
> centuries. They are selected for traits allowing to thrive there.
> Also, being city population sinks, they attracted large numbers of
> people during many generations that allowed the selection process to
> continue unabated. Often, then, the most successful families in the
> cities would move out of the city with their wealth and buy farms and
> large homes, to be able to afford more children.

Name a specific trait that allows people to thrive in cities. Then
tell me what the selection mechanism is to keep people without that
trait from reproducing.

The bottom line with people is that memes have been more important
than genes for hundreds of years, so I would not expect see a lot of
genetic changes over the past few hundred years because a wide cross
section of society reproduces. Another way to ask the question is what
sort of people don't reproduce in our modern societies?

>>> We can add to this that humans are able to move in other places, if
>>> local conditions are unfriendly. And they are able of assortative
>>> mating. These possibilities can, alone, make up for the difference
>>> in selective pressure.
>
>> Agreed. Thus the selective pressure on humans has been fairly low
>> over time, which was my point.
>
> I don't think so.
> The poor were able to become a class only in the last two centuries
> because before they near always died with few or no offspring. And they
> were supplanted by the less accomplished (but better than them)
> offspring of the middle class.

The children of rich people can become poor very easily. Today the
poor reproduce at higher rates than the rich. I'm not sure what the
historical case is, but farmers have historically had lots of kids.

> In this way, in 20 generations (say the double of the time the foxes
> needed to be culled) the people in England was selecting for middle
> class traits and culling the poor (and partially the noble) out of the
> breeding stock.

The evolution of the middle class is memetic more than genetic, imho.

> Recessive traits can not become dominating after a few generations or
> many generations.

This is true. However, the alternative gene set can become so rare
that the trait becomes ubiquitous in the population. I'm sure there
are thousands of recessive genes that are expressed in each of us for
just this reason.

> They could outnumber the dominating traits due to selection or
> inbreeding, but in presence of a dominating gene they would not appear.
>
> An inbreeding of 2-7% could cause a drift during many generations if the
> population is keep closed. But if the population is replenished of
> individuals with no inbreeding, the inbreed traits of one generation
> have only 2-7% of a chance to be passed to the next. So in the best case
> we have 4/10K to pass the same trait to the second generation and in the
> worst 49/10K AKA 0.5%.
>
>> Please restate your premise, or what you think is mine. I'm not
>> following your point here perhaps. Sorry, I'm just a bit lost...
>
> Your premises (as I understood them) are that the foxes and the vixens
> were subjected to an extensive culling (1% surviving to generate), where
> the actual number given in the article I linked were 5% for foxes and
> 20% for vixen.

You are probably right. Still, with a 5% or even 20% survival rate,
that is an EXTREME selection pressure that human beings have almost
never seen. And certainly we haven't seen those extreme selection
pressures based on the kinds of cultural issues that we started
talking about.

> Another premises of yours was that the population was not replenished by
> new individuals. In fact, the scientists replenished the population
> selected with other foxes and vixens coming from the original breeding
> stock of foxes they started from (the ones used to produces furs).
> They did it to avoid the spreading of recessive traits and inbreeding;
> but you assumed inbreeding and the diffusion of recessive traits in the
> tame foxes population.

That does not surprise me. Nevertheless, the genes apparently became
quite common in the population overall.

>> If culture leads to genetic selection over the generations, i.e. if a
>> person has a specific trait, they are more likely to breed in a given
>> population, then yes, this could have an effect. This seems possible,
>> at least. But I can't think of a documented case.
>
> The predisposition to learn how to read, write, do simple math is and
> was a strong cultural trait that cause genetic selection.

I don't think this is a justified statement.

> Try to breed today without being able to read/write/do simple math.

Lots of people do.

> Take away the welfare state, the food stamps and the rest. Leave them on
> their devices. Like 200 years ago or more.
> Even more strong and durable, the selection for taking out people unable
> to control their impulses and empathize others.
> They would be, at least, be banned from the civil society. And without
> welfare they would die because of starvation or be prey of organized
> groups. For example, a not married woman having sex and becoming
> pregnant would lose her family support and be shunned by any other
> reputable man. Why? Because they would not risk to be rising someone
> else children instead of theirs.
> Exceptions abound, but invariably they concern very low standing women
> (prostitute or maiden) or very high standing women (too valuable to
> consider their previous sins).

But can you point to one case where genetic change has happened. The
only one that comes to mind is that our genes for lactose intolerance
have been bred out after the creation of dairy as a main human food
source. That is a very different kind of genetic drift than you are
talking about. What you are saying is theoretically possible, but as
far as I know undocumented as having actually happened.

>> This should breed out the poor. So why do we keep getting new poor?
>> ;-)
>
> Because poor is relative and not absolute.

That is mostly because of technology, such as indoor plumbing, dentistry, etc.

> It is the Red Queen Effect.

Understood. This is what led Darwin to some of his initial thoughts in
the first place.

> Also, the people coming from the country have traits that could be
> useful in the country but are not useful or are damaging when living in
> a city. This is something discovered studying an African tribe; the same
> traits that made them successful in herding sheep (so they were able to
> feed themselves well) made them not very successful in keeping a job in
> a city (so they were unable to keep themselves well fed).

African tribes have definitely had enough time for some genetic drift.
Is this research or a guess? In western cultures where people move to
the city, then to the country and back, there isn't enough pressure or
time to create meaningful genetic drift.

>>> The problem is, if culture is the culprit, it would work
>>> everywhere in the same way.
>
>> No, it would work differently in each culture... Again, not following
>> your logic.
>
> If the culture is the dominant factor, if you take Africans (black) and
> put them on adoption on European (white) families they would be
> behaviorally and intellectually indistinguishable from other (white)
> Europeans. They would be intellectually indistinguishable from
> Europeans. Unfortunately it is not so. The same would be true for Asians
> in Europeans families and the reverse or Europeans in African families.

I am engaged in just such an experiment. I am Caucasian, I have six
African American children, four Hispanic and one half Asian child.
Culturally, they are all mostly culturally white. They are
intellectually indistinguishable from me (other than some physical
issues stemming from in utero abuse). Your position on this point
seems racist, and completely unsupported by research. Of course, there
is a cultural limit on how much real research has been done in this
area because nobody wants to be called a racist.

>>> This, in the US is not true, as North-East Asians are law abiding
>>> more than Europeans that are more abiding than Latino Americans
>>> that are more law abiding than blacks.
>
>> This is a whole other can of worms.
>
> A can of worms that people in the US is often afraid to touch for
> cultural and social reasons. It is like talking about freedom of
> religion in Saudi Arabia. If you talk abut the freedom of some Christian
> to convert to Islam, all is good. The reverse is not well accepted in
> the mainstream.

We talk a lot about the higher rates of incarceration of minorities.

>> Blacks are more carefully watched by the police,
>
> Why?
> Why they don't check more for Hispanics or Vietnamese or Italians?
> Are the policemen racists? Even the blacks one?

Yes, even some black policemen are racist against blacks. In certain
areas other minorities are targeted. For example in south Salt Lake
city, there is a lot of pressure by police on the Polynesian
population because so many of them have joined gangs. Again this is
cultural, not genetic.

> What allowed Jews, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese,
> French, Russian and others to come in the US and, starting from the
> bottom, climb up the social ladder until they were at par (and sometimes
> over) the WASPs? Surely they were subjected to their fair (or unfair)
> share of stereotyping, racist slurs, hate and lynching from the dominant
> groups. Why they succeed anyway and the blacks didn't?

My short answer is that politicians, particularly Democrats, have
conspired to keep the blacks poor so that they would remain dependent
upon the welfare state. It is a very complex situation. We have had
racial issues in America since the beginning of our nation. Those
issues are less prominent today than they ever have been, but they
still exist. The problems of poverty, hopelessness and drugs in the
inner cities affect minorities more than white people.

It took the Irish at least three generations to escape from being the
lowest in American society. At one point, the coal mines in West
Virginia would hire Irish over black slaves because they were less
valuable than the slaves to the mine owners. Similarly, the Chinese
who build the transcontinental railroad were valued less than slaves.

I blame politicians more than anyone else for the problems facing the
blacks in America today. The black leadership (Jessie Jackson and the
like) are particularly guilty IMHO.

> There are cultural (maybe also genetic) differenced in behavior between
> blacks coming from American ancestries and blacks coming from the
> Caribbeans and blacks coming from Africa. Often they don't go well
> together because of this.

Blacks who recently came from Africa or the Caribbean are usually more
immediately successful than African Americans with the cultural
history. Yesterday, I interacted with an African pharmacist. I was not
surprised, but I would have been more surprised by an African American
pharmacist. In other words, the problem is not such much the color of
their skin, but the color of their mind. After hearing that the "man
is going to keep you down" for generations, many African Americans
give up. My own African American children don't hear this negative
talk, and I fully expect them to succeed in America. It's not genetic,
it's cultural.

>> leading to higher arrest rates.
>
> If I know to be more carefully watched by police, I usually try to be
> more law abiding than usual.
>
>> Their poverty leads to poor representation, which leads to higher
>> conviction rates. That does not imply that blacks are necessarily
>> less law abiding than other races.
>
> Law abiding, in fact, is a too vague.
> Could we talk about homicide rate?
> Could we compare the Blacks on Blacks, White on White, Blacks on Whites
> and Whites on Blacks or the East Asians on Blacks, etc.?
> I suppose this is independent of who the police is watching more.

Where I live, the most disproportionate homicide is done by
undocumented Mexicans. Again, even if the homicide rate nation wide is
higher for black on whoever, that doesn't mean it is genetic. It is
societal and cultural if that is the case.

>> You might be able to make a successful argument on a different
>> basis. Besides, you can hardly argue that blacks in South Central LA
>> live in the same culture as I do. That is beyond naive.
>
> So, if it is not genetics, then it is cultural. But this imply that the
> culture of South Central is the main cause of the lawlessness (or of the
> high arrest rate) of the Blacks.

Correct. It is also the main cause of lawlessness of the Hispanics
that live there. I would suspect that any white people living in South
Central would also commit crime at a rate higher than the rest of the
nation, but there are very few whites living there. I don't have
numbers, this is a feeling. Four of my kids come from Compton (in
south central) and I have spent some time there. I have also spent a
couple of months in East Palo Alto, another troubled neighborhood.

> But, if it is the culture, why is it not possible to force a culture on
> a group to change its behavior in a generation or two. If it was
> possible, someone would have already done it. What would had prevent
> them from succeeding?

They have succeeded. This doesn't make sense. Large changes in the
zeitgeist are accomplished all the time. Look at the change in
Southern attitudes towards blacks, or the nation's view of
homosexuality. They have changed a lot just in my life time.

> For example, the Conquistadors had not problem to raze Aztec temples,
> kill their priests, and force the survivors to convert to Christianity.
> One would suppose the Mexican population would be formed by perfect
> Catholics, adopting Spanish costumes. It didn't worked exactly in this way.

I have also spent a lot of time in Mexico. It DID work exactly this
way. Mexico is 90%+ Catholic to this day. Where are you getting these
ideas?

>> Sweet! Now I wish I had some money. :-) That's really cool, and those
>> foxes are really quite cute fellows...
>
> I would like to have the money to clone my current dog.
> But also be able to buy a cute tame fox would be interesting.

Sadly, they not only charge close to $7K, but you also get a neutered
animal. Only five Americans have bothered to this point. You are
prohibited from reproducing the animal. Not that you could without
cloning. I think they are making a marketing mistake with this.

>> Haiti is f'ed up. I would not necessarily attribute that to genetics.
>> Their government has been horrible for a very long time. I attribute
>> most of their problems to that.
>
> But the governments don't fall from the sky at random. Not usually.
> Usually they are an expression of their population behaviors.
> This is true for Haitians, Italians, Chinese and others.

Yes, you do have something of a point here. Bad enough governments do
eventually get overthrown. There are secondary religious issues in
Haiti, as well as a huge amount of hopelessness. I took a water
filtration system to an orphanage in Haiti. Rather than using it to
filter water, it was immediately stolen and sold. It was very sad.

>> Here is my bottom line. If there were as much genetic difference
>> between groups as you suggest, then I think there would be a larger
>> and more popular belief in racism. I'm not saying that you are a
>> racist, but what I am saying is that if there were as much difference
>> between different humans as you suggest, there would be a greater
>> basis for racist thought.
>
> Are you talking about emotive/innate basis for racism or
> logical/scientific/moral basis for racism?
> Are we talking about the gut feelings of common people or the rational,
> often learned, arguments of polite people in polite circles?

I am talking about logical/scientific basis for racism. I don't think it exists.

> Apart from the mainstream white western world, the rest is racist. Maybe
> they don't wear the KKK hoods or don't shave
> their heads, but they behave and often speak out their belief without
> any problems.

If you believe some people, ONLY white people in America are capable
of racism. I don't agree with them. And in fact, I believe there are
more black racists than white. Unfortunately, it is self directed
racism in many cases. It's a kind of self inflicted wound. It really
sucks. Yes, there is racism in every corner of the globe. Japan is
racist against Koreans and Chinese. Don't even get started with tribal
racism (Rwanda, etc.) It's all over the place. That doesn't mean
people are right (in the scientific sense).

> For example, recently the Thai police cracked down on blacks of Africans
> origin (mainly Nigerians) because they engaged in too much drug
> trafficking and behave in a too aggressive way to be tolerated.
> Was the Thai police "racist"?

Possibly not. Racial profiling of criminals is not necessarily racist,
it's reality. Racial profiling of people getting on airplanes seems
like a good idea to me. I think it is ridiculous to confuse racism
with racial profiling of criminal elements. It is part of the
confusion that is rampant in America today.

> Try to apply the "racism" argument to the foxes.
> After the breeding program, we have two population of foxes.
> One tame and one wild.

And one VERY wild, don't forget.

> We know that some of the tame foxes developed characteristics that were
> not present before in the wild population: curly tails, blue eyes, white
> spots on the fur, floppy ears and these characteristics are common in
> domesticated mammals.

Correct. The chemical processes that bring about tameness, also bring
about these other changes.

> Now, a blue eyed population of foxes, looking at their wild counterparts
> living on the wild, could note the others are more aggressive. They
> don't know why the others are more aggressive.
> They could develop one or more ?cultural explanations why the wild foxes
> are more aggressive: the "racists" could say the "blue eyed" foxes are
> superiors because they live in a peaceful civilization and all blue eyed
> foxes must stick together to defend their civilization against the wild,
> not blue eyed foxes. Others could think the white spotted foxes are
> better behaving than the red foxes living in the wild.
> Some full white and blue eyed foxes would develop the belief they are
> better than all others (elitists exist everywhere).
> On the other side the "racist" wild foxes would look at the white-lily,
> watery eyed foxes as a bunch of weak, degenerated, infantile and whining
> individuals, only able to play with their human masters and live in
> their cages or inside human homes. Why don't take advantage of their
> individual weakness?

Ok. Here you are talking about real selected genetic difference.
Racism in humans is not based on significant genetic differences
because humans don't have very significant genetic differences. This
is primarily because of the population bottleneck around 600K years
ago.

> Than another group of tame foxes could develop the explanation that the
> wild ones are as they are because they are unfortunate and they never
> were born inside their breeding farm. So they never developed and
> learned how to behave and how good are humans to take care of them and
> how beautiful is to love them.
> Now, these "enlightened foxes" could be open to mate with wild ones or
> adopt wild foxes kitten without parents or to invite the wild type to
> live with them at the farm. Then they would be surprised that things
> would not work out as they think. I think they could also blame the
> "racist" foxes for the failure, because they never accepted and
> continued to discriminated against the wild red furred, black eyed ones.

As we progress towards real genetic differences engineered in
post-humanity, I can see this becoming a REAL issue. I don't think it
is a real genetic issue now.

> They all would be wrong. They could feel better or find some advantage
> to believe a thing or another, but they would anyway be wrong.
>
> If the tame foxes want to bring inside some wilder foxes they must know
> and accept the facts. The wilder foxes must be breed and selected for a
> behavior more tamer. And if the tame foxes want live with the wilder
> one, they must breed themselves to be more aggressive (in this the most
> aggressive can help).
>
> Maybe they can breed in or out in different, novel, ways.
> What they can not avoid, like it or not, is evolution and selection to
> happen anyway. Their believes and their behavior can change how
> evolution and selection happen, to themselves and to others, but can not
> stop it.

Ok.

> Yes. But soldiers in moder professional armies are mainly from middle
> class and their IQ is a bit over the mean (this is surely true for in
> the US). And in modern society the middle class is the bigger part of
> the society.

Actually, in the US armed forces, minorities and poor are represented
in higher proportion than middle class and white. This is because of
the financial benefits of joining the  armed forces are more effective
in recruiting people who need those benefits.

> If they come from there, they are genetically and culturally inhibited
> from acting aggressively. In fact I remember a German soldier, in a
> documentary about the Battle of Cassino, complaining that the US
> soldiers didn't went in battle like "real soldiers" but like they were
> going to a "normal" job.

In World War II, it was a very different issue because they had a
draft. So the army had more middle class elements.

My bottom line is that I believe memetics are more important in recent
human evolution than genetics. Culture brings about changes much more
quickly than genetics, to the point that human genetics (at this
point) are nearly meaningless. As we engineer human genetics, it will
start to make a bigger difference, of course. Even then, I personally
believe that cybernetic implants will have a bigger effect than
genetic changes.

Racism is wrong morally. It is also wrong scientifically. Comparing
humans to the foxes just throws out too much baby with the bath water.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 06:46:15 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 00:46:15 -0600
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimvQQKvnQc8iR0DyEAi4TjEEFrX-A@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Damien Sullivan
<phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:25:01PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
>> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
>> that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact
>
> We might be exporting crap coal, and importing the good low-sulphur
> stuff for use in domestic power. ?Imports might be cheaper than burning
> our crap more cleanly, even if we could provide all our own coal. ?Just
> a guess.

This is just the kind of crap that happens when we say that we're
concerned about the global environment, but really only care about the
politics of power. I'm just so sick of it. I really do care about the
environment, but none of the politicians seem to really care about
that, except when it gives them some political advantage. It makes me
sick. I hope this isn't really happening, but you're probably right.

>> that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
>> other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
>> through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers
>
> And if oil runs out enough that people start synthesizing it from coal,
> coal'll run down even faster.

True, but I'm not worried about that so much, because I think it's
cheaper to synthesize oil from tar sands (Canada has a LOT of that)
and even the methane deposits at the bottom of the ocean will
*probably* be cheaper in the long term than coal gassification. There
will probably be some conversion of coal to a liquid fuel, but I'm
hoping that the other options (even if they are fossil options) will
kick in first. I don't know what the actual cost is of each option,
this is just my sense of things hearing how people talk about it. I
can do the research later if anyone is really interested in the
relative costs. The methane fuel (methane hydrates?) is really a big
deal because there is an abundance of it. Of course, the global
warming crowd won't like liberating any more CO2, and at some point it
really is going to start having a big effect. Sorry, it's late... I'll
do more fact checking later if I get a chance.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 06:50:57 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 00:50:57 -0600
Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 91, Issue 2
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTike1JPPPRhgNQpbyR+5oqwkjbSjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1301745601.25740.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<BANLkTike1JPPPRhgNQpbyR+5oqwkjbSjnQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinFsNodjaBeEtCgdkuOJC4DU6sx0w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Kelly, I really recommend reading Clark's research paper, Genetically
> capitalist. ?Or his book or both.

Do you have a URL? I'm not afraid of additional facts, no matter how
politically incorrect they may be.

> Mirco has a solid understanding of the situation.
>
> There are substantial differences in populations because of different
> past selection pressures. ?It's not politically correct to say so of
> course.

I may be wrong, but I don't think genetics plays a bigger part in
recent zeitgeist shifts than memetics. You'll never convince me that
I'm smarter than my non-Caucasian children... :-)

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 07:08:06 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:08:06 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
	<001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/2 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> 2011/4/2 spike <spike66 at att.net>
>> This implies you understand what we (humanity) are fighting for.? Do you?
>> Explain please.

I'm fighting/hoping for more intelligence in the world. With enough
intelligence, I think we can solve our energy problems.

> Energy. ?Whether it be in the form of fuel in our tanks, or food in our
> stomach. ?It's all about energy. ?Always has been. ?Before OIL it was COAL.
> ?Before COAL it was WOOD.

Energy is clearly central to the endeavors of human beings and will be
to our successors as well. Let's do a little exercise... Let's suppose
that in 100 years most intelligence is non-human. That is, it runs on
a non-biological substrate. I would suppose that such a substrate
would be able to survive without too much difficulty in outer space.
Given the nearly limitless solar energy that could be harvested by
orbiting the sun, I kind of wonder if earth itself won't be a
backwater in 100 years. If intelligent robots can survive in space
without the life support that biological humans require, then
harvesting the needed materials from asteroids, comets and other
sources will be cheaper than bringing materials up from earth to
space.

So the whole concept of the importance of the space elevator, beaming
solar energy down to earth, solving global warming and so forth may be
a problem for the remaining biological legacy on earth, but may not be
"where it's happening" in the future.

This is just a thought experiment, I'm curious what you all think.

> If the brilliant minds humanity has at it's disposal, spent less brain
> cycles devoted to destroying/controlling one another, and instead focused on
> freeing ourselves...we'd be much better off imho.

Of course we would, but if we didn't spend money on war, we certainly
wouldn't be spending it on something less politically important. At
some point, when gasoline is $20 a gallon, and there is no hope of it
ever going under $15 a gallon, then the people of the USA will raise
the priority of energy management to the point that such spending will
seem justified to the point that the politicians will pay attention.
Sorry for the cynical attitude today... but I just don't see
politicians as an intelligent life form.

> It's silly, we spend $400B plus a year importing oil, yet $100B investment
> in renewable/sustainable energy is unheard of?

Yup. The idea that Al Gore would have done things differently is a
pipe dream... even with his green ideas, I don't think it would have
turned out all that differently.

> It's a matter of mindset. ?Like being pro-peace, not anti-war. ?Move towards
> things, don't run away from them.
> Hell, the USoA has spent what...$2-3T on Iraq/Afghanistan, for what..global
> oil production? ?Imagine what $2-3T would have accomplished had it went to
> R&D in the energy sector.

I love the spin on Libya. It's so clearly about oil, why do they have
to maintain the facade that it's human rights concerns? We haven't
done crap in Sudan. There is more human suffering in Haiti, Sumatra
and Japan than there ever will be in Libya, but Libya has oil... it's
the only difference.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 07:24:30 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:24:30 -0600
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <374011.22744.qm@web30101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <003a01cbed67$c7e4b4e0$57ae1ea0$@att.net>
	<AANLkTinZrBgU8RwSCvt4=eP_RtQphwAmpWwfPcogqyrt@mail.gmail.com>
	<374011.22744.qm@web30101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg@mail.gmail.com>

Serious question to the paleo dieters... Why would we emulate a diet
that resulted in a 25 year life span? I understand the bit about us
being evolved to the diet, but we also were living short fast
difficult lives at the time. Is that what we want to return to? It
just seems counter intuitive to me.

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 07:29:01 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:29:01 -0600
Subject: [ExI] THE END for nuclear power
In-Reply-To: <4D935653.5050607@lightlink.com>
References: <00f801cbe970$b6768260$23638720$@att.net>
	<AANLkTik08Pyi181Dt-kKTg6oqwHvbYaQL_ftQcD+O81s@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D8BD7E5.7030503@lightlink.com>
	<AANLkTin7rv1nr9tRNgYR33QGFuf3V=0NutAUaqU=-scE@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimwqnvTWY4DR-BX5jEh5zntW_miDqa3ttZa4Nb1@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D935653.5050607@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim7ynWTNc3JaeyJJ0cx2jwM+95o6Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
> Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
> *reflected* back by the wall, it will build up behind it, because it is
> travelling at 50 mph.

Just a dumb question here... but they say that the tsunami waves
travel at mid ocean around 500 MPH. Why do they slow down so much when
they go onto land? I get the bunching up and getting tall part, but
why does it slow down 10x? Does anyone have a handle on that?

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 08:41:59 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 02:41:59 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Are mini nuclear power stations the way forward?
In-Reply-To: <20110327113806.GM23560@leitl.org>
References: <4D8122EC.5060202@libero.it>
	<AANLkTikOXM9jhiUeoz6PBpy-PcdX8dd4BCgWbQpXg4sD@mail.gmail.com>
	<00b801cbe425$e882f310$b988d930$@att.net>
	<AANLkTimSA23es9_gsV=7FRbcAkd1xtgj8aiKcrYsUzPf@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110317075001.GS23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTimcQVyKRzGftZTh1WBNqKVocCFjpQ2n2RzvfwZv@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110319082726.GP23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTikzaVr6b4mpVmWkJqqS+GN_4bjGabzZmY1N6m0h@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110322092159.GT23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTi=otbEf37Zz1c9wwkAqwyCw+YR_MX80FNgMoi8Z@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110327113806.GM23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=sb+R5hGE6BZc=oZrZ3EAcZopRXw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 06:58:45PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:21 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>> >> I think the future in offline storage MAY lie in compressed air. Large
>> >
>> > No, only for very large scale. The thermodynamics of it doesn't allow
>> > small scale.
>>
>> Tell it to Tata motors.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_car
>
> Disadvantages
>
> The principal disadvantage is the indirect use of energy. Energy is used to compress air,
>which - in turn - provides the energy to run the motor. Any conversion of energy between
>forms results in loss.

Absolutely! And we have the same problem with batteries and fuel cells
as well. Since we're talking about storing excess solar energy, it is
all the same kind of problem, although the specific numbers may differ
for particular systems.

>For conventional combustion motor cars, the energy is lost when chemical energy in fossil
>fuels is converted to heat energy, most of which goes to waste. For compressed-air cars,
>energy is lost when chemical energy is converted to electrical energy, and then when
>electrical energy is converted to compressed air.

Yup.

> When air expands in the engine it cools dramatically (Charles's law) and must be heated to
>ambient temperature using a heat exchanger. The heating is necessary in order to obtain a
>significant fraction of the theoretical energy output. The heat exchanger can be problematic:
>while it performs a similar task to an intercooler for an internal combustion engine, the
>temperature difference between the incoming air and the working gas is smaller. In heating
>the stored air, the device gets very cold and may ice up in cool, moist climates.

I agree that the heating of air on compression, and the cooling of air
on decompression are the greatest problems to overcome in a compressed
air power storage system.

> Conversely, when air is compressed to fill the tank it heats up: as the stored air cools, its
>pressure decreases and available energy decreases. It is difficult to cool the tank efficiently
>while charging and thus it would either take a long time to fill the tank, or less energy is stored.

That is a correct analysis.

> Refueling the compressed air container using a home or low-end conventional air
>compressor may take as long as 4 hours, though specialized equipment at service stations
>may fill the tanks in only 3 minutes.[3] To store 14.3 kWh @300 bar in 300 l (90 m3 @ 1 bar)
>reservoirs, you need at least 93 kWh on the compressor side (with an optimum single stage
>compressor working on the ideal adiabatic limit), or rather less with a multistage unit. That
>means, a compressor power of over 1 Megawatt (1000 kW) is needed to fill the reservoirs in
>5 minutes from a single stage unit, or several hundred horsepower for a multistage one.[6]
>[citation needed]

Ok, correct me if I'm wrong on this one... but if you have compressed
air in a large storage tank at the gas station, and you merely
transport that compressed air into the car's tank, that doesn't
involve active compression, and thus for that particular exchange,
there is no heating or cooling issues. Getting the air compressed at
the gas station is admittedly a big issue, but fueling up is not, I
think, a big problem. Going down the road of course is another time
where the temperature issues come up.

> The overall efficiency of a vehicle using compressed air energy storage, using the above
>refueling figures, cannot exceed 14%, even with a 100% efficient engine?and practical
>engines are closer to 10-20%.[7] For comparison, well to wheel efficiency using a modern
>internal-combustion drivetrain is about 20%,[8] Therefore, if powered by air compressed
>using a compressor driven by an engine using fossil fuels technology, a compressed air car
>would have a larger carbon footprint than a car powered directly by an engine using fossil
>fuels technology.

Not if the compression were accomplished with solar or wind... right?

> Early tests have demonstrated the limited storage capacity of the tanks; the only published
>test of a vehicle running on compressed air alone was limited to a range of 7.22 km.[9]

I had heard Tata had gone above 20 miles, but that may have been with
a hybrid system compressing air as you go...

> A 2005 study demonstrated that cars running on lithium-ion batteries out-perform both
>compressed air and fuel cell vehicles more than threefold at the same speeds.[10]

Interesting.

>MDI has recently claimed that an air car will be able to travel 140 km in urban driving, and
>have a range of 80 km with a top speed of 110 km/h (68 mph) on highways,[11] when
>operating on compressed air alone, but in as late as mid 2009, MDI has still not produced any
>proof to that effect.

Yeah, got to see something actually working to totally believe it.

> A 2009 University of Berkeley Research Letter found that "Even under highly optimistic
>assumptions the compressed-air car is significantly less efficient than a battery electric
>vehicle and produces more greenhouse gas emissions than a conventional gas-powered car
>with a coal intensive power mix." however they also suggested, "a pneumatic?combustion
>hybrid is technologically feasible, inexpensive and could eventually compete with hybrid
>electric vehicles."[12]
>
>
>> If I could score some parts from a Tata Nano, I think I could make a
>> nice storage system... I don't understand what you mean by the
>> thermodynamics of the situation in detail, I do understand that
>
> Just ideal gas law.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_energy_storage
>
> Compression of air generates a lot of heat. The air is warmer after compression.

Understood.

>Decompression requires heat. If no extra heat is added, the air will be much colder after
>decompression. If the heat generated during compression can be stored and used again
>during decomression, the efficiency of the storage improves considerably.

Perhaps something can be accomplished with this more effectively in a
home electric storage system than in a car where weight is more of an
issue... just a thought.

> There are three ways in which a CAES system can deal with the heat. Air storage can be
>adiabatic, diabatic, or isothermic:
> Adiabatic storage retains the heat produced by compression and returns it to the air when
>the air is expanded to generate power. This is a subject of ongoing study, with no utility scale
>plants as of 2010. Its theoretical efficiency approaches 100% for large and/or rapidly cycled
>devices and/or perfect thermal insulation, but in practice round trip efficiency is expected to
>be 70%.[3] Heat can be stored in a solid such as concrete or stone, or more likely in a fluid
>such as hot oil (up to 300 ?C) or molten salt solutions (600 ?C).

fascinating.

> Diabatic storage dissipates the extra heat with intercoolers (thus approaching isothermal
>compression) into the atmosphere as waste. Upon removal from storage, the air must be
>re-heated prior to expansion in the turbine to power a generator which can be accomplished
>with a natural gas fired burner for utility grade storage or with a heated metal mass. The lost
>heat degrades efficiency, but this approach is simpler and is thus far the only system which
>has been implemented commercially. The McIntosh, Alabama CAES plant requires 2.5 MJ of
>electricity and 1.2 MJ lower heating value (LHV) of gas for each megajoule of energy
>output.[4] A General Electric 7FA 2x1 combined cycle plant, one of the most efficient natural
>gas plants in operation, uses 6.6 MJ (LHV) of gas per kW?h generated,[5] a 54% thermal
>efficiency comparable to the McIntosh 6.8 MJ, at 53% thermal efficiency.

So how much does the natural gas heating eat into the storage capacity
and efficiency?

> Isothermal compression and expansion approaches attempt to maintain operating
>temperature by constant heat exchange to the environment. They are only practical for low
>power levels, without very effective heat exchangers. The theoretical efficiency of isothermal
>energy storage approaches 100% for small and/or slowly cycled devices and/or perfect heat
>transfer to the environment. In practice neither of these perfect thermodynamic cycles are >obtainable, as some heat losses are unavoidable.

Yes, conversion of energy type always results in some heat loss. That
is to be expected. Low power levels sounds like it might work in a
home storage environment. How much do you think the rules change when
dealing with a home electricity storage unit vs. running a car? i.e.
what can you gain by having the luxury of extra weight in the system?

> A different, highly efficient arrangement, which fits neatly into none of the above categories,
>uses high, medium and low pressure pistons in series, with each stage followed by an airblast
>venturi that draws ambient air over an air-to-air (or air-to-seawater) heat exchanger between
>each expansion stage. Early compressed air torpedo designs used a similar approach,
>substituting seawater for air. The venturi warms the exhaust of the preceding stage and
>admits this preheated air to the following stage. This approach was widely adopted in various
>compressed air vehicles such as H. K. Porter, Inc's mining locomotives[6] and trams.[7] Here
>the heat of compression is effectively stored in the atmosphere (or sea) and returned later on.
> Compression can be done with electrically powered turbo-compressors and expansion with
>turbo 'expanders'[8] or air engines driving electrical generators to produce electricity.
> The storage vessel is often an underground cavern created by solution mining (salt is
>dissolved in water for extraction)[9] or by utilizing an abandoned mine. Plants operate on a
>daily cycle, charging at night and discharging during the day.
> Compressed air energy storage can also be employed on a smaller scale such as exploited
>by air cars and air-driven locomotives, and also by the use of high-strength carbon-fiber air
>storage tanks.

Yes, I understand that the carbon fiber tanks are a necessity for
weight and safety issues.

>> compressed air can get very hot and needs to be cooled... but it would
>> SEEM that Tata has resolved these issues to some extent.
>
> Tata can't magically route around thermodynamics.

No, they can't. It would seem that they have backed off of some of
their initial claims and schedules as well :-(

>> >> building sized batteries also have some interesting potential. An
>> >
>> > The car industry will bring you pretty powerful batteries within
>> > the next 10 years.
>>
>> I hope so. Battery power stored per kilogram follows a Law of
>> Accelerating Returns curve, does it not?
>
> Not at all, progress is linear, and will be sublinear as
> it asymptotically approaches the ceiling of the storage
> technology:
>
> e.g. http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2009/07/was_moores_law.php
>
> http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/Battery%20Energy%20Density.jpg
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
>
> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Energy_density.svg

Pity that.

>> > Yes, but one of the most inefficient things you can do with PV
>> > panels you rely on to sit under snow. Climbing up the roof to
>> > clean them off is not a particular sane way of dealing with the
>> > situation.
>>
>> I think it is the only sane way to deal with it... putting in a
>> heating system is just not practical. If I had it to do over again, I
>
> It is not that difficult to add adhesive resistive heating pads to the
> back of the panels even after the fact. (More adventurous natures
> could attempt to bypass the panel diodes, and use the panel
> itself for heating, e.g. this is a problem with monocrystalline
> cells parts of which are shaded off, but I wouldn't do that).
>
> Just use ethylene glycol or another antifreeze mix, picking a mix that
> will survive your worst case without freezing.

That makes sense.

> What is your battery capacity, in Wh? What exactly are you running
> at night? Is your diesel on-demand or has to be switched on manually?

My generator is gasoline, not diesel. Currently, I have no batteries,
but previously I had 8 large L16P Trojan batteries.

http://www.trojanbatteryre.com/PDF/datasheets/L16PAC_Trojan_Data_Sheets.pdf

I can't get it to download right now, so I don't know the Wh off hand.

-Kelly



From js_exi at gnolls.org  Sun Apr  3 09:18:33 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 02:18:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>

> From: Kelly Anderson
> Serious question to the paleo dieters... Why would we emulate a diet
> that resulted in a 25 year life span? I understand the bit about us
> being evolved to the diet, but we also were living short fast
> difficult lives at the time. Is that what we want to return to? It
> just seems counter intuitive to me.

That's a common myth, cleanly addressed here:

http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/gurven/papers/GurvenKaplan2007pdr.pdf
"The average modal age of adult death for hunter-gatherers is 72 with a 
range of 68-78 years. This range appears to be the closest functional 
equivalent of an "adaptive" human lifespan."
[...]
"Illnesses account for 70 percent, violence and accidents for 20 
percent, and degenerative diseases for 9 percent of all deaths in our 
sample."
[...]
"Post-reproductive longevity is a robust feature of hunter-gatherers and 
of the life cycle of Homo sapiens. Survivorship to grandparental age is 
achieved by over two-thirds of people who reach sexual maturity and can 
last an average of 20 years."

It is important to note that to a first approximation, 0% of 'civilized' 
people would survive to such a lifespan without the benefit of emergency 
rooms, antibiotics, stents, bypasses, joint replacements, and a 
pharmacopoeia of medications...let alone contribute positively to the 
society in which they live.

In other words, this is a functional human lifespan...and our functional 
lifespan, here in 'civilization', is currently *decreasing* even though 
absolute lifespan is increasing:
http://www.gnolls.org/864/the-lipid-hypothesis-has-officially-failed-part-2-of-many/

Further reading:
http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2010/02/paleo-life-expectancy.html
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/07/mortality-and-lifespan-of-inuit.html

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Apr  3 09:22:39 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 11:22:39 +0200
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>

On Sat, Apr 02, 2011 at 03:47:41PM -0700, Damien Sullivan wrote:

> And if oil runs out enough that people start synthesizing it from coal,
> coal'll run down even faster.

Things never run out. There just a point where demand
eclipses supply. Your pain starts at that point, and
gets more severe with the progressively opening demand
gap. In case of key resource like energy this cripples
growth until substituted.

Unlike WWII Fischer-Tropsch using coal both as carbon
and energy source won't save the day because declining
EROEI makes you consume it exponentially.

Even using fossils as concentrated carbon source
of synfuels using water electrolysis as hydrogen
and photovoltaics as energy source doesn't make sense,
as there's plenty of high-quality carbon dioxide sources
and in terms of energy input scrubbing CO2 directly
from the atmosphere has negligible penalty.

Photovoltaics has the interesting property that a 2%
electricity source can produce >20% peak demand. Obviously
you can be >100% after just 2-3 doublings, even not counting
other renewable. Even the grid could absorb it nobody
can use that much. Negative prices during peak happen
even now.

What do you do with surplus? Dump it into synfuel.
What does this mean long-term? That current projections of
future electricity demand are junk. Multiply them by N.

-- 
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 js_exi at gnolls.org  Sun Apr  3 09:41:22 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 02:41:22 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity  paleo diet again
Message-ID: <4D9840C2.2060604@gnolls.org>

Resending: roughly one-half of my emails to this list are inexplicably 
eaten.

On 3/29/11 5:00 AM, extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org wrote:
> My theory is that for optimum results, instead of eating low fat foods in
> high quantities, dieters should eat high fat foods in low quantities.

Similar to Stefano, I prefer to eat high-fat foods in high quantities,
but with low *frequency*.

In fact, a low frequency of eating is beneficial in several ways, AFAIK:
intermittent fasting produces most of the same effects as calorie
restriction (beneficial autophagy, etc.), without decreasing muscle mass
or lowering energy levels (as net calorie intake is diminished far less
than with full-time CR).

Even if you're not engaging in IF, it's best not to "snack", because
ingesting food without complete protein is always catabolic to some extent:
http://www.gnolls.org/1794/why-snacking-makes-you-weak-not-just-fat/

Quantities aren't independent. Dietary guidelines that "Everyone should
eat less fat" imply "Everyone should eat more of something else". For
decades this was left unstated, and the hole left by "Stop eating fat
and cholesterol" was filled with "Eat more sugar" (i.e. "carbohydrates").

My argument is that humans have an animal-fat-based metabolism as a 
consequence of our unique evolutionary history (not a protein-based 
metabolism, like obligate carnivores), and that is why we crave fat so much:
http://www.gnolls.org/1763/why-humans-crave-fat/

Currently the majority of my caloric intake comes from animal fat,
primarily from fatty red meat and eggs. I've never felt better in my 
life: apparently I've been suffering from a multi-decade saturated fat 
deficiency, and am just now re-learning to eat like a human being.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 09:47:52 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 10:47:52 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=9pny1nN2poHK5H-+tJ5mn40H-Jg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:18 AM, J. Stanton  wrote:
> "The average modal age of adult death for hunter-gatherers is 72 with a
> range of 68-78 years. This range appears to be the closest functional
> equivalent of an "adaptive" human lifespan."
>
> "Illnesses account for 70 percent, violence and accidents for 20 percent,
> and degenerative diseases for 9 percent of all deaths in our sample."
>
> "Post-reproductive longevity is a robust feature of hunter-gatherers and of
> the life cycle of Homo sapiens. Survivorship to grandparental age is
> achieved by over two-thirds of people who reach sexual maturity and can last
> an average of 20 years."
>
>

I don't believe it is a myth that paleo people only had an average
life span of around 30-35 years. But it wasn't due to their diet.

Your report is probably correct in saying that humans have evolved to
have a 70-80 year expected lifespan. But going back through history
the average life expectancy never got above about 45 years until
around 1950. Long life expectancy is a really new event in human
history. Think back to the 1920s when families had ten children and at
least half of them died.

The reason for the short lifespan had little to do with diet. Humans
can live on almost anything. They are very adaptable. Disease, lack of
hygiene, trauma, fighting, caused the short life spans.


BillK


From rpwl at lightlink.com  Sun Apr  3 12:43:44 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 08:43:44 -0400
Subject: [ExI] THE END for nuclear power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim7ynWTNc3JaeyJJ0cx2jwM+95o6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00f801cbe970$b6768260$23638720$@att.net>	<AANLkTik08Pyi181Dt-kKTg6oqwHvbYaQL_ftQcD+O81s@mail.gmail.com>	<4D8BD7E5.7030503@lightlink.com>	<AANLkTin7rv1nr9tRNgYR33QGFuf3V=0NutAUaqU=-scE@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTimwqnvTWY4DR-BX5jEh5zntW_miDqa3ttZa4Nb1@mail.gmail.com>	<4D935653.5050607@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTim7ynWTNc3JaeyJJ0cx2jwM+95o6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D986B80.3050501@lightlink.com>

Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
>> Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> *reflected* back by the wall, it will build up behind it, because it is
>> travelling at 50 mph.
> 
> Just a dumb question here... but they say that the tsunami waves
> travel at mid ocean around 500 MPH. Why do they slow down so much when
> they go onto land? I get the bunching up and getting tall part, but
> why does it slow down 10x? Does anyone have a handle on that?

If the waves bunch up and get very tall, they have to also be travelling 
slower because otherwise there would be gain of energy and momentum en 
route.

The underlying cause of the slowdown is the decreasing depth of the 
water.  The wave motion is a composite o orbital motions of the water 
particles, down to a certain depth below the surface.  When the water is 
deep this orbital motion can occur freely, but as the sea bed comes up 
there is obstruction of that motion that has the net effect of slowing 
the wave.



Richard Loosemore



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 13:00:20 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 06:00:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 91, Issue 3
In-Reply-To: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim8-VYWDmMz4BBHZDWPvgBiLxk8vw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:42 AM,  Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Kelly, I really recommend reading Clark's research paper, Genetically
>> capitalist. ?Or his book or both.
>
> Do you have a URL? I'm not afraid of additional facts, no matter how
> politically incorrect they may be.

I have cited the paper on this mailing list at least a dozen times in
the last few years, back to Dec 2007

http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2007-December/039363.html

I should add that Google is your friend.  The entire first page of
results for Genetically Capitalist in are about this paper, the third
one in the list point to the above URL

>> Mirco has a solid understanding of the situation.
>>
>> There are substantial differences in populations because of different
>> past selection pressures. ?It's not politically correct to say so of
>> course.
>
> I may be wrong, but I don't think genetics plays a bigger part in
> recent zeitgeist shifts than memetics.

The poor don't currently starve in western culture.  Incidentally, you
could Google memetics "Keith Henson" to see what I have contributed to
this area back to the mid 80s.

> You'll never convince me that
> I'm smarter than my non-Caucasian children... :-)

If you say so, I have no argument.  Given the spread we know, there is
much overlap between groups even if the Chinese average smarter than
people from Western Europe..

But in any case Clark was not talking about smartness, he was talking
more about the personality traits needed to become well off in a
stable agrarian society.  The twin studies have made it very clear
that personality traits are largely the results of genes.

If you want to argue that genes have little or no effect, I have this
horse that needs to learn calculus.

Keith


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 13:05:49 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 06:05:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
Message-ID: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>

(sorry about not fixing the subject line in the previous)

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2007-December/039363.html

Being much influenced by the concepts of evolutionary psychology, I
have tended to discount the idea of humans being much shaped by
recent evolution.  Exceptions have been accumulating, the taming of
wild foxes in as few as 8 generations, and the acquisition of genes
(a number of them!) for adult lactose tolerance in peoples with a
dairy culture.  Yes, you can get serious population average shifts if
the selection pressure is high enough.

Now Dr. Gregory Clark, in one of those huge efforts that lead to
breakthroughs, has produced a study that makes a strong case for
recent  (last few hundred years) and massive changes in population
average psychological traits.  It leaves in place that a huge part of
our psychological traits did indeed come out of the stone age, but
adds to that recent and very strong selection pressures on the
population of settled agriculture societies in the "Malthusian trap."

I came a bit late to this party, Dr. Clark's book _A Farewell to
Alms_ peaked at 17 on Amazon's sales months ago.  My copy has not
come yet so I read this paper off his academic web site.

http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf

"Genetically Capitalist? The Malthusian Era, Institutions and the
Formation of Modern Preferences."

There is lots of other material here:

http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/research.html

but this paper is just stunning because of how much light it shines on
a long list of mysteries.  Such as: Why did the modern world grow out
of a small part of Europe and why did it take so long?  Why are the
Chinese doing so well compared to say Africa?

The upshot of his research was that in the Mathusian era in England
people with the personality characteristics to become well off
economically had at least twice as many surviving children as those
in the lower economic classes--who were not replacing
themselves.  This, of course, led to "downward social mobility,"
where the numerous sons and daughters of the rich tended to be less
well off (on average) than their parents.  But over 20 generations
(1200-1800) it did spread the genes for the personality
characteristics for accumulating wealth through the entire population.

	"In the institutional and technological context of these societies,
a new set of human attributes mattered for the only currency
that mattered in the Malthusian era, which was reproductive
success. In this world literacy and numeracy, which were irrelevant
before, were both helpful for economic success in agrarian
pre-industrial economies. Thus since economic success was
linked to reproductive success, facility with numbers and wordswas
pulled along in its wake. Since patience and hard work found
a new reward in a society with large amounts of capital, patience
and hard work were also favored."

Fascinating work, memes that slot right in to the rest of my
understanding of the world and the people in it.  I very strongly
recommend reading this paper at least.

Keith Henson


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 15:43:00 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 08:43:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Clark and Braudel
Message-ID: <BANLkTim_Ga9iKhRygR9sXm6bMvGucpbqig@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:42 AM,  <pharos at gmail.com>> wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 6:41 PM, Keith Henson ?wrote:
> <snip>
>> Kelly, I really recommend reading Clark's research paper, Genetically
>> capitalist. ?Or his book or both.
>>
>> There are substantial differences in populations because of different
>> past selection pressures. ?It's not politically correct to say so of
>> course.
>
> Because it's wrong, of course.
>
> Culture and institutions are far more important.

Bill, if you read Clark's rather detailed research, you would find
that it was long persisting culture and institutions that set up the
conditions for the strong genetic selection in the UK.

Kind of like the strong selection for lactase production into
adulthood was the result of the culture where people were keeping
dairy animals.

So from a *causal* perspective, culture came before the strong
Darwinian/Malthusian selection that changed the average personality
characteristics of certain populations.

Clark makes a case that in 400 years of selection, the UK population
got a nearly complete genetic replacement by those well off in the
Middle ages.  By 1800, when the poor largely quit dying from
starvation, the stage was set for the industrial revolution.

"Importance" is hard to assign in complicated systems of feedback loops.

> For example, you could try reading Capitalism and Material Life,
> 1400-1800 by Fernand Braudel. it is a massive 3-volume epic by a real
> historian.

I have to wonder what Fernand Braudel would think about Gregory
Clark's work.  Braudel is one of the few who took a long enough view
of economic history to appreciate what Clark is proposing.  They are
both economic historians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Clark_%28economist%29

Keith

> <https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Fernand_Braudel>
>
> Quote:
> Braudel claimed that there are long-term cycles in the capitalist
> economy which developed in Europe in the 12th century. Particular
> cities, and later nation-states, follow each other sequentially as
> centers of these cycles: Venice and Genoa in 13th through 15th
> centuries (1250?1510), Antwerp in 16th century (1500?1569), Amsterdam
> in 16th through 18th centuries (1570?1733), and London (and England)
> in 18th and 19th centuries (1733?1896).
> ------------------------------
>
> BillK
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 15:47:41 -0700
> From: Damien Sullivan <phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
> Message-ID: <20110402224741.GA3953 at ofb.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:25:01PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
>> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
>> that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact
>
> We might be exporting crap coal, and importing the good low-sulphur
> stuff for use in domestic power. ?Imports might be cheaper than burning
> our crap more cleanly, even if we could provide all our own coal. ?Just
> a guess.
>
>> that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
>> other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
>> through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers
>
> And if oil runs out enough that people start synthesizing it from coal,
> coal'll run down even faster.
>
> -xx- Damien X-)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 17:23:38 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] note from a foaf in japan
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimCXOkQpE_Cf4hXjj0aM+t1pqDggA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
>> Il 01/04/2011 6.17, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Mirco Romanato
>>> They bred a few hundred foxes with each generation, then only bred
>>> the 1% that were most tame or most aggressive.
>>
>> As I stated, this could not happen without having an huge number of
>> foxes. Even with females able to carry ten kittens they would not be
>> able to keep their population stable without an huge inflow of new
>> foxes, that would have washed away any genetic trait selected.
>> It is a math problem, not other.
>> If we had 99 vixen and one fox, any vixen could give birth to 10 kittens
>> at time. Make it 20 in her life.
>> This is a total of 1980 kitten in two years. Half female and half male
>> (I don't know of any sex imbalance in foxes).
>> Kill all the males apart one and 99% of the female and you will have
>> only 20 (rounded up) females and 1 male.
>> The next generation would leave 4 vixen and a fox.
>> And they would be very inbreed.
>
> This makes sense. Stated simply, to be able to pick 1% of the
> population at each generation, you would have to have 200 offspring
> per mating pair. So obviously, the report on NOVA was at the very
> least incomplete, if not completely wrong or I just misunderstood it
> completely.
>
>> Now, If you replenish the gene pool with other foxes and vixens, you
>> simply outnumber the selected breed with the unselected one, diluting
>> any gene selected for in the previous generation.
>
> Under heavy selection, genes would not be diluted, as long as you
> always bred a new fox with one in the studied population. Suppose that
> we have 50 foxes from the previous generation, 25 male and 25 female.
> We bring in 50 foxes from a non-selected group. If the gene is
> recessive, then we would expect 50% of the babies to be carriers, 25%
> to express the gene, and 25% would (on average) not have the gene. If
> you choose to keep the 25% that express the gene only, then the
> recessive gene becomes the only expression of the gene in the
> population in one generation. If it is a set of genes, it gets harder
> to get just the genes you care about, but not so much that you can't
> get terrific drift in 20 generations.
>
> The key is how good the selection criteria are. Diluting the genes
> from a general population would not be a huge issue. Genes don't
> dilute like sugar in water... it's a digital issue. You have the gene,
> or you don't. If you are doing good selection, you will get fast
> results. If nature does the selection imprecisely, then it takes
> longer, but it can still have a huge effect.
>
>>> I don't know the details of exactly how this culling was done, but
>>> I'd guess that the selection was done more on the male side than the
>>> female to avoid needing too much breeding stock.
>>
>> I'm contesting the number of 1% as not real and not realistic.
>> Not anything else.
>
> Having thought it through with you, I am inclined to agree with you. I
> was merely repeating what I had heard without critical thought. Not
> good... thanks for straightening things out. I'd still like to see the
> original research papers to see how they did it.
>
>>> The main point though is that these foxes were under a very severe
>>> selection compared to anything humans have ever faced. The black
>>> death took 20% of a generation at its height!
>>
>> This number is a bit optimistic.
>> The Black Death had taken out around 30% of the population of Europe
>> when ended. Given that more than one generation lived in the same time
>> (usually three), in many cases it wiped out entire generations and
>> populations and social strata.
>
> The key issue is what was the selection criteria? In this case, the
> only criteria was 'can this individual survive the plague?' That
> doesn't select for much of anything else, even though poor and weak
> individuals would more likely die for non-genetic factors.
>
>> We can suppose that it wiped out the most weak, physically, of the
>> population. And we can suppose that the poor were the most weak of all
>> (statistically).
>
> Recall that most of the people at the time were very poor. The rich
> ruling class was very small at this time, and there was virtually no
> middle class in feudal Europe.
>
>> In the wild I think highly randomized selection is very rare if not
>> impossible.
>
> It happens all the time on genes that are secondary to the primary
> gene set that assures survival. For example, the first dinosaurs that
> evolved feathers weren't selected for whether or not they had
> feathers, but for how fast they could run, or some other feature that
> was more important. As feathers evolved, the selection became more
> focused on feathers, and particularly on the ability to glide and
> eventually fly. Once birds were fully evolved, feather formation
> became a primary selection mechanism because feathers are much more
> important to birds than to the first dinosaurs that evolved feathers.
>
> So for secondary traits, highly randomized selection is the norm, so
> long as the mutation isn't negative towards the survival of the
> animal.
>
>> The selective pressure of people living in cities is continuous over
>> centuries. They are selected for traits allowing to thrive there.
>> Also, being city population sinks, they attracted large numbers of
>> people during many generations that allowed the selection process to
>> continue unabated. Often, then, the most successful families in the
>> cities would move out of the city with their wealth and buy farms and
>> large homes, to be able to afford more children.
>
> Name a specific trait that allows people to thrive in cities. Then
> tell me what the selection mechanism is to keep people without that
> trait from reproducing.
>
> The bottom line with people is that memes have been more important
> than genes for hundreds of years, so I would not expect see a lot of
> genetic changes over the past few hundred years because a wide cross
> section of society reproduces. Another way to ask the question is what
> sort of people don't reproduce in our modern societies?
>
>>>> We can add to this that humans are able to move in other places, if
>>>> local conditions are unfriendly. And they are able of assortative
>>>> mating. These possibilities can, alone, make up for the difference
>>>> in selective pressure.
>>
>>> Agreed. Thus the selective pressure on humans has been fairly low
>>> over time, which was my point.
>>
>> I don't think so.
>> The poor were able to become a class only in the last two centuries
>> because before they near always died with few or no offspring. And they
>> were supplanted by the less accomplished (but better than them)
>> offspring of the middle class.
>
> The children of rich people can become poor very easily. Today the
> poor reproduce at higher rates than the rich. I'm not sure what the
> historical case is, but farmers have historically had lots of kids.
>
>> In this way, in 20 generations (say the double of the time the foxes
>> needed to be culled) the people in England was selecting for middle
>> class traits and culling the poor (and partially the noble) out of the
>> breeding stock.
>
> The evolution of the middle class is memetic more than genetic, imho.
>
>> Recessive traits can not become dominating after a few generations or
>> many generations.
>
> This is true. However, the alternative gene set can become so rare
> that the trait becomes ubiquitous in the population. I'm sure there
> are thousands of recessive genes that are expressed in each of us for
> just this reason.
>
>> They could outnumber the dominating traits due to selection or
>> inbreeding, but in presence of a dominating gene they would not appear.
>>
>> An inbreeding of 2-7% could cause a drift during many generations if the
>> population is keep closed. But if the population is replenished of
>> individuals with no inbreeding, the inbreed traits of one generation
>> have only 2-7% of a chance to be passed to the next. So in the best case
>> we have 4/10K to pass the same trait to the second generation and in the
>> worst 49/10K AKA 0.5%.
>>
>>> Please restate your premise, or what you think is mine. I'm not
>>> following your point here perhaps. Sorry, I'm just a bit lost...
>>
>> Your premises (as I understood them) are that the foxes and the vixens
>> were subjected to an extensive culling (1% surviving to generate), where
>> the actual number given in the article I linked were 5% for foxes and
>> 20% for vixen.
>
> You are probably right. Still, with a 5% or even 20% survival rate,
> that is an EXTREME selection pressure that human beings have almost
> never seen. And certainly we haven't seen those extreme selection
> pressures based on the kinds of cultural issues that we started
> talking about.
>
>> Another premises of yours was that the population was not replenished by
>> new individuals. In fact, the scientists replenished the population
>> selected with other foxes and vixens coming from the original breeding
>> stock of foxes they started from (the ones used to produces furs).
>> They did it to avoid the spreading of recessive traits and inbreeding;
>> but you assumed inbreeding and the diffusion of recessive traits in the
>> tame foxes population.
>
> That does not surprise me. Nevertheless, the genes apparently became
> quite common in the population overall.
>
>>> If culture leads to genetic selection over the generations, i.e. if a
>>> person has a specific trait, they are more likely to breed in a given
>>> population, then yes, this could have an effect. This seems possible,
>>> at least. But I can't think of a documented case.
>>
>> The predisposition to learn how to read, write, do simple math is and
>> was a strong cultural trait that cause genetic selection.
>
> I don't think this is a justified statement.
>
>> Try to breed today without being able to read/write/do simple math.
>
> Lots of people do.
>
>> Take away the welfare state, the food stamps and the rest. Leave them on
>> their devices. Like 200 years ago or more.
>> Even more strong and durable, the selection for taking out people unable
>> to control their impulses and empathize others.
>> They would be, at least, be banned from the civil society. And without
>> welfare they would die because of starvation or be prey of organized
>> groups. For example, a not married woman having sex and becoming
>> pregnant would lose her family support and be shunned by any other
>> reputable man. Why? Because they would not risk to be rising someone
>> else children instead of theirs.
>> Exceptions abound, but invariably they concern very low standing women
>> (prostitute or maiden) or very high standing women (too valuable to
>> consider their previous sins).
>
> But can you point to one case where genetic change has happened. The
> only one that comes to mind is that our genes for lactose intolerance
> have been bred out after the creation of dairy as a main human food
> source. That is a very different kind of genetic drift than you are
> talking about. What you are saying is theoretically possible, but as
> far as I know undocumented as having actually happened.
>
>>> This should breed out the poor. So why do we keep getting new poor?
>>> ;-)
>>
>> Because poor is relative and not absolute.
>
> That is mostly because of technology, such as indoor plumbing, dentistry, etc.
>
>> It is the Red Queen Effect.
>
> Understood. This is what led Darwin to some of his initial thoughts in
> the first place.
>
>> Also, the people coming from the country have traits that could be
>> useful in the country but are not useful or are damaging when living in
>> a city. This is something discovered studying an African tribe; the same
>> traits that made them successful in herding sheep (so they were able to
>> feed themselves well) made them not very successful in keeping a job in
>> a city (so they were unable to keep themselves well fed).
>
> African tribes have definitely had enough time for some genetic drift.
> Is this research or a guess? In western cultures where people move to
> the city, then to the country and back, there isn't enough pressure or
> time to create meaningful genetic drift.
>
>>>> The problem is, if culture is the culprit, it would work
>>>> everywhere in the same way.
>>
>>> No, it would work differently in each culture... Again, not following
>>> your logic.
>>
>> If the culture is the dominant factor, if you take Africans (black) and
>> put them on adoption on European (white) families they would be
>> behaviorally and intellectually indistinguishable from other (white)
>> Europeans. They would be intellectually indistinguishable from
>> Europeans. Unfortunately it is not so. The same would be true for Asians
>> in Europeans families and the reverse or Europeans in African families.
>
> I am engaged in just such an experiment. I am Caucasian, I have six
> African American children, four Hispanic and one half Asian child.
> Culturally, they are all mostly culturally white. They are
> intellectually indistinguishable from me (other than some physical
> issues stemming from in utero abuse). Your position on this point
> seems racist, and completely unsupported by research. Of course, there
> is a cultural limit on how much real research has been done in this
> area because nobody wants to be called a racist.
>
>>>> This, in the US is not true, as North-East Asians are law abiding
>>>> more than Europeans that are more abiding than Latino Americans
>>>> that are more law abiding than blacks.
>>
>>> This is a whole other can of worms.
>>
>> A can of worms that people in the US is often afraid to touch for
>> cultural and social reasons. It is like talking about freedom of
>> religion in Saudi Arabia. If you talk abut the freedom of some Christian
>> to convert to Islam, all is good. The reverse is not well accepted in
>> the mainstream.
>
> We talk a lot about the higher rates of incarceration of minorities.
>
>>> Blacks are more carefully watched by the police,
>>
>> Why?
>> Why they don't check more for Hispanics or Vietnamese or Italians?
>> Are the policemen racists? Even the blacks one?
>
> Yes, even some black policemen are racist against blacks. In certain
> areas other minorities are targeted. For example in south Salt Lake
> city, there is a lot of pressure by police on the Polynesian
> population because so many of them have joined gangs. Again this is
> cultural, not genetic.
>
>> What allowed Jews, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Vietnamese, Japanese,
>> French, Russian and others to come in the US and, starting from the
>> bottom, climb up the social ladder until they were at par (and sometimes
>> over) the WASPs? Surely they were subjected to their fair (or unfair)
>> share of stereotyping, racist slurs, hate and lynching from the dominant
>> groups. Why they succeed anyway and the blacks didn't?
>
> My short answer is that politicians, particularly Democrats, have
> conspired to keep the blacks poor so that they would remain dependent
> upon the welfare state. It is a very complex situation. We have had
> racial issues in America since the beginning of our nation. Those
> issues are less prominent today than they ever have been, but they
> still exist. The problems of poverty, hopelessness and drugs in the
> inner cities affect minorities more than white people.
>
> It took the Irish at least three generations to escape from being the
> lowest in American society. At one point, the coal mines in West
> Virginia would hire Irish over black slaves because they were less
> valuable than the slaves to the mine owners. Similarly, the Chinese
> who build the transcontinental railroad were valued less than slaves.
>
> I blame politicians more than anyone else for the problems facing the
> blacks in America today. The black leadership (Jessie Jackson and the
> like) are particularly guilty IMHO.
>
>> There are cultural (maybe also genetic) differenced in behavior between
>> blacks coming from American ancestries and blacks coming from the
>> Caribbeans and blacks coming from Africa. Often they don't go well
>> together because of this.
>
> Blacks who recently came from Africa or the Caribbean are usually more
> immediately successful than African Americans with the cultural
> history. Yesterday, I interacted with an African pharmacist. I was not
> surprised, but I would have been more surprised by an African American
> pharmacist. In other words, the problem is not such much the color of
> their skin, but the color of their mind. After hearing that the "man
> is going to keep you down" for generations, many African Americans
> give up. My own African American children don't hear this negative
> talk, and I fully expect them to succeed in America. It's not genetic,
> it's cultural.
>
>>> leading to higher arrest rates.
>>
>> If I know to be more carefully watched by police, I usually try to be
>> more law abiding than usual.
>>
>>> Their poverty leads to poor representation, which leads to higher
>>> conviction rates. That does not imply that blacks are necessarily
>>> less law abiding than other races.
>>
>> Law abiding, in fact, is a too vague.
>> Could we talk about homicide rate?
>> Could we compare the Blacks on Blacks, White on White, Blacks on Whites
>> and Whites on Blacks or the East Asians on Blacks, etc.?
>> I suppose this is independent of who the police is watching more.
>
> Where I live, the most disproportionate homicide is done by
> undocumented Mexicans. Again, even if the homicide rate nation wide is
> higher for black on whoever, that doesn't mean it is genetic. It is
> societal and cultural if that is the case.
>
>>> You might be able to make a successful argument on a different
>>> basis. Besides, you can hardly argue that blacks in South Central LA
>>> live in the same culture as I do. That is beyond naive.
>>
>> So, if it is not genetics, then it is cultural. But this imply that the
>> culture of South Central is the main cause of the lawlessness (or of the
>> high arrest rate) of the Blacks.
>
> Correct. It is also the main cause of lawlessness of the Hispanics
> that live there. I would suspect that any white people living in South
> Central would also commit crime at a rate higher than the rest of the
> nation, but there are very few whites living there. I don't have
> numbers, this is a feeling. Four of my kids come from Compton (in
> south central) and I have spent some time there. I have also spent a
> couple of months in East Palo Alto, another troubled neighborhood.
>
>> But, if it is the culture, why is it not possible to force a culture on
>> a group to change its behavior in a generation or two. If it was
>> possible, someone would have already done it. What would had prevent
>> them from succeeding?
>
> They have succeeded. This doesn't make sense. Large changes in the
> zeitgeist are accomplished all the time. Look at the change in
> Southern attitudes towards blacks, or the nation's view of
> homosexuality. They have changed a lot just in my life time.
>
>> For example, the Conquistadors had not problem to raze Aztec temples,
>> kill their priests, and force the survivors to convert to Christianity.
>> One would suppose the Mexican population would be formed by perfect
>> Catholics, adopting Spanish costumes. It didn't worked exactly in this way.
>
> I have also spent a lot of time in Mexico. It DID work exactly this
> way. Mexico is 90%+ Catholic to this day. Where are you getting these
> ideas?
>
>>> Sweet! Now I wish I had some money. :-) That's really cool, and those
>>> foxes are really quite cute fellows...
>>
>> I would like to have the money to clone my current dog.
>> But also be able to buy a cute tame fox would be interesting.
>
> Sadly, they not only charge close to $7K, but you also get a neutered
> animal. Only five Americans have bothered to this point. You are
> prohibited from reproducing the animal. Not that you could without
> cloning. I think they are making a marketing mistake with this.
>
>>> Haiti is f'ed up. I would not necessarily attribute that to genetics.
>>> Their government has been horrible for a very long time. I attribute
>>> most of their problems to that.
>>
>> But the governments don't fall from the sky at random. Not usually.
>> Usually they are an expression of their population behaviors.
>> This is true for Haitians, Italians, Chinese and others.
>
> Yes, you do have something of a point here. Bad enough governments do
> eventually get overthrown. There are secondary religious issues in
> Haiti, as well as a huge amount of hopelessness. I took a water
> filtration system to an orphanage in Haiti. Rather than using it to
> filter water, it was immediately stolen and sold. It was very sad.
>
>>> Here is my bottom line. If there were as much genetic difference
>>> between groups as you suggest, then I think there would be a larger
>>> and more popular belief in racism. I'm not saying that you are a
>>> racist, but what I am saying is that if there were as much difference
>>> between different humans as you suggest, there would be a greater
>>> basis for racist thought.
>>
>> Are you talking about emotive/innate basis for racism or
>> logical/scientific/moral basis for racism?
>> Are we talking about the gut feelings of common people or the rational,
>> often learned, arguments of polite people in polite circles?
>
> I am talking about logical/scientific basis for racism. I don't think it exists.
>
>> Apart from the mainstream white western world, the rest is racist. Maybe
>> they don't wear the KKK hoods or don't shave
>> their heads, but they behave and often speak out their belief without
>> any problems.
>
> If you believe some people, ONLY white people in America are capable
> of racism. I don't agree with them. And in fact, I believe there are
> more black racists than white. Unfortunately, it is self directed
> racism in many cases. It's a kind of self inflicted wound. It really
> sucks. Yes, there is racism in every corner of the globe. Japan is
> racist against Koreans and Chinese. Don't even get started with tribal
> racism (Rwanda, etc.) It's all over the place. That doesn't mean
> people are right (in the scientific sense).
>
>> For example, recently the Thai police cracked down on blacks of Africans
>> origin (mainly Nigerians) because they engaged in too much drug
>> trafficking and behave in a too aggressive way to be tolerated.
>> Was the Thai police "racist"?
>
> Possibly not. Racial profiling of criminals is not necessarily racist,
> it's reality. Racial profiling of people getting on airplanes seems
> like a good idea to me. I think it is ridiculous to confuse racism
> with racial profiling of criminal elements. It is part of the
> confusion that is rampant in America today.
>
>> Try to apply the "racism" argument to the foxes.
>> After the breeding program, we have two population of foxes.
>> One tame and one wild.
>
> And one VERY wild, don't forget.
>
>> We know that some of the tame foxes developed characteristics that were
>> not present before in the wild population: curly tails, blue eyes, white
>> spots on the fur, floppy ears and these characteristics are common in
>> domesticated mammals.
>
> Correct. The chemical processes that bring about tameness, also bring
> about these other changes.
>
>> Now, a blue eyed population of foxes, looking at their wild counterparts
>> living on the wild, could note the others are more aggressive. They
>> don't know why the others are more aggressive.
>> They could develop one or more ?cultural explanations why the wild foxes
>> are more aggressive: the "racists" could say the "blue eyed" foxes are
>> superiors because they live in a peaceful civilization and all blue eyed
>> foxes must stick together to defend their civilization against the wild,
>> not blue eyed foxes. Others could think the white spotted foxes are
>> better behaving than the red foxes living in the wild.
>> Some full white and blue eyed foxes would develop the belief they are
>> better than all others (elitists exist everywhere).
>> On the other side the "racist" wild foxes would look at the white-lily,
>> watery eyed foxes as a bunch of weak, degenerated, infantile and whining
>> individuals, only able to play with their human masters and live in
>> their cages or inside human homes. Why don't take advantage of their
>> individual weakness?
>
> Ok. Here you are talking about real selected genetic difference.
> Racism in humans is not based on significant genetic differences
> because humans don't have very significant genetic differences. This
> is primarily because of the population bottleneck around 600K years
> ago.
>
>> Than another group of tame foxes could develop the explanation that the
>> wild ones are as they are because they are unfortunate and they never
>> were born inside their breeding farm. So they never developed and
>> learned how to behave and how good are humans to take care of them and
>> how beautiful is to love them.
>> Now, these "enlightened foxes" could be open to mate with wild ones or
>> adopt wild foxes kitten without parents or to invite the wild type to
>> live with them at the farm. Then they would be surprised that things
>> would not work out as they think. I think they could also blame the
>> "racist" foxes for the failure, because they never accepted and
>> continued to discriminated against the wild red furred, black eyed ones.
>
> As we progress towards real genetic differences engineered in
> post-humanity, I can see this becoming a REAL issue. I don't think it
> is a real genetic issue now.
>
>> They all would be wrong. They could feel better or find some advantage
>> to believe a thing or another, but they would anyway be wrong.
>>
>> If the tame foxes want to bring inside some wilder foxes they must know
>> and accept the facts. The wilder foxes must be breed and selected for a
>> behavior more tamer. And if the tame foxes want live with the wilder
>> one, they must breed themselves to be more aggressive (in this the most
>> aggressive can help).
>>
>> Maybe they can breed in or out in different, novel, ways.
>> What they can not avoid, like it or not, is evolution and selection to
>> happen anyway. Their believes and their behavior can change how
>> evolution and selection happen, to themselves and to others, but can not
>> stop it.
>
> Ok.
>
>> Yes. But soldiers in moder professional armies are mainly from middle
>> class and their IQ is a bit over the mean (this is surely true for in
>> the US). And in modern society the middle class is the bigger part of
>> the society.
>
> Actually, in the US armed forces, minorities and poor are represented
> in higher proportion than middle class and white. This is because of
> the financial benefits of joining the ?armed forces are more effective
> in recruiting people who need those benefits.
>
>> If they come from there, they are genetically and culturally inhibited
>> from acting aggressively. In fact I remember a German soldier, in a
>> documentary about the Battle of Cassino, complaining that the US
>> soldiers didn't went in battle like "real soldiers" but like they were
>> going to a "normal" job.
>
> In World War II, it was a very different issue because they had a
> draft. So the army had more middle class elements.
>
> My bottom line is that I believe memetics are more important in recent
> human evolution than genetics. Culture brings about changes much more
> quickly than genetics, to the point that human genetics (at this
> point) are nearly meaningless. As we engineer human genetics, it will
> start to make a bigger difference, of course. Even then, I personally
> believe that cybernetic implants will have a bigger effect than
> genetic changes.
>
> Racism is wrong morally. It is also wrong scientifically. Comparing
> humans to the foxes just throws out too much baby with the bath water.
>
> -Kelly
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 00:46:15 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimvQQKvnQc8iR0DyEAi4TjEEFrX-A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Damien Sullivan
> <phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 09:25:01PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
>>> that the US is now a net coal importer. That has geopolitical impact
>>
>> We might be exporting crap coal, and importing the good low-sulphur
>> stuff for use in domestic power. ?Imports might be cheaper than burning
>> our crap more cleanly, even if we could provide all our own coal. ?Just
>> a guess.
>
> This is just the kind of crap that happens when we say that we're
> concerned about the global environment, but really only care about the
> politics of power. I'm just so sick of it. I really do care about the
> environment, but none of the politicians seem to really care about
> that, except when it gives them some political advantage. It makes me
> sick. I hope this isn't really happening, but you're probably right.
>
>>> that goes beyond whether we are imminently running out of coal. The
>>> other thing that was truly disconcerting is how fast China was going
>>> through their supplies. I'd like to see some more mainstream numbers
>>
>> And if oil runs out enough that people start synthesizing it from coal,
>> coal'll run down even faster.
>
> True, but I'm not worried about that so much, because I think it's
> cheaper to synthesize oil from tar sands (Canada has a LOT of that)
> and even the methane deposits at the bottom of the ocean will
> *probably* be cheaper in the long term than coal gassification. There
> will probably be some conversion of coal to a liquid fuel, but I'm
> hoping that the other options (even if they are fossil options) will
> kick in first. I don't know what the actual cost is of each option,
> this is just my sense of things hearing how people talk about it. I
> can do the research later if anyone is really interested in the
> relative costs. The methane fuel (methane hydrates?) is really a big
> deal because there is an abundance of it. Of course, the global
> warming crowd won't like liberating any more CO2, and at some point it
> really is going to start having a big effect. Sorry, it's late... I'll
> do more fact checking later if I get a chance.
>
> -Kelly
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 00:50:57 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 91, Issue 2
> Message-ID: <BANLkTinFsNodjaBeEtCgdkuOJC4DU6sx0w at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 11:41 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Kelly, I really recommend reading Clark's research paper, Genetically
>> capitalist. ?Or his book or both.
>
> Do you have a URL? I'm not afraid of additional facts, no matter how
> politically incorrect they may be.
>
>> Mirco has a solid understanding of the situation.
>>
>> There are substantial differences in populations because of different
>> past selection pressures. ?It's not politically correct to say so of
>> course.
>
> I may be wrong, but I don't think genetics plays a bigger part in
> recent zeitgeist shifts than memetics. You'll never convince me that
> I'm smarter than my non-Caucasian children... :-)
>
> -Kelly
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:08:06 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
> Message-ID: <BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> 2011/4/2 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
>> 2011/4/2 spike <spike66 at att.net>
>>> This implies you understand what we (humanity) are fighting for.? Do you?
>>> Explain please.
>
> I'm fighting/hoping for more intelligence in the world. With enough
> intelligence, I think we can solve our energy problems.
>
>> Energy. ?Whether it be in the form of fuel in our tanks, or food in our
>> stomach. ?It's all about energy. ?Always has been. ?Before OIL it was COAL.
>> ?Before COAL it was WOOD.
>
> Energy is clearly central to the endeavors of human beings and will be
> to our successors as well. Let's do a little exercise... Let's suppose
> that in 100 years most intelligence is non-human. That is, it runs on
> a non-biological substrate. I would suppose that such a substrate
> would be able to survive without too much difficulty in outer space.
> Given the nearly limitless solar energy that could be harvested by
> orbiting the sun, I kind of wonder if earth itself won't be a
> backwater in 100 years. If intelligent robots can survive in space
> without the life support that biological humans require, then
> harvesting the needed materials from asteroids, comets and other
> sources will be cheaper than bringing materials up from earth to
> space.
>
> So the whole concept of the importance of the space elevator, beaming
> solar energy down to earth, solving global warming and so forth may be
> a problem for the remaining biological legacy on earth, but may not be
> "where it's happening" in the future.
>
> This is just a thought experiment, I'm curious what you all think.
>
>> If the brilliant minds humanity has at it's disposal, spent less brain
>> cycles devoted to destroying/controlling one another, and instead focused on
>> freeing ourselves...we'd be much better off imho.
>
> Of course we would, but if we didn't spend money on war, we certainly
> wouldn't be spending it on something less politically important. At
> some point, when gasoline is $20 a gallon, and there is no hope of it
> ever going under $15 a gallon, then the people of the USA will raise
> the priority of energy management to the point that such spending will
> seem justified to the point that the politicians will pay attention.
> Sorry for the cynical attitude today... but I just don't see
> politicians as an intelligent life form.
>
>> It's silly, we spend $400B plus a year importing oil, yet $100B investment
>> in renewable/sustainable energy is unheard of?
>
> Yup. The idea that Al Gore would have done things differently is a
> pipe dream... even with his green ideas, I don't think it would have
> turned out all that differently.
>
>> It's a matter of mindset. ?Like being pro-peace, not anti-war. ?Move towards
>> things, don't run away from them.
>> Hell, the USoA has spent what...$2-3T on Iraq/Afghanistan, for what..global
>> oil production? ?Imagine what $2-3T would have accomplished had it went to
>> R&D in the energy sector.
>
> I love the spin on Libya. It's so clearly about oil, why do they have
> to maintain the facade that it's human rights concerns? We haven't
> done crap in Sudan. There is more human suffering in Haiti, Sumatra
> and Japan than there ever will be in Libya, but Libya has oil... it's
> the only difference.
>
> -Kelly
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:24:30 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
> ? ? ? ?survive.
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Serious question to the paleo dieters... Why would we emulate a diet
> that resulted in a 25 year life span? I understand the bit about us
> being evolved to the diet, but we also were living short fast
> difficult lives at the time. Is that what we want to return to? It
> just seems counter intuitive to me.
>
> -Kelly
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 01:29:01 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] THE END for nuclear power
> Message-ID: <BANLkTim7ynWTNc3JaeyJJ0cx2jwM+95o6Q at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
>> Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Jeff Davis <jrd1415 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> *reflected* back by the wall, it will build up behind it, because it is
>> travelling at 50 mph.
>
> Just a dumb question here... but they say that the tsunami waves
> travel at mid ocean around 500 MPH. Why do they slow down so much when
> they go onto land? I get the bunching up and getting tall part, but
> why does it slow down 10x? Does anyone have a handle on that?
>
> -Kelly
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 02:41:59 -0600
> From: Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Are mini nuclear power stations the way forward?
> Message-ID: <BANLkTi=sb+R5hGE6BZc=oZrZ3EAcZopRXw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 06:58:45PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:21 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>>> >> I think the future in offline storage MAY lie in compressed air. Large
>>> >
>>> > No, only for very large scale. The thermodynamics of it doesn't allow
>>> > small scale.
>>>
>>> Tell it to Tata motors.
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_car
>>
>> Disadvantages
>>
>> The principal disadvantage is the indirect use of energy. Energy is used to compress air,
>>which - in turn - provides the energy to run the motor. Any conversion of energy between
>>forms results in loss.
>
> Absolutely! And we have the same problem with batteries and fuel cells
> as well. Since we're talking about storing excess solar energy, it is
> all the same kind of problem, although the specific numbers may differ
> for particular systems.
>
>>For conventional combustion motor cars, the energy is lost when chemical energy in fossil
>>fuels is converted to heat energy, most of which goes to waste. For compressed-air cars,
>>energy is lost when chemical energy is converted to electrical energy, and then when
>>electrical energy is converted to compressed air.
>
> Yup.
>
>> When air expands in the engine it cools dramatically (Charles's law) and must be heated to
>>ambient temperature using a heat exchanger. The heating is necessary in order to obtain a
>>significant fraction of the theoretical energy output. The heat exchanger can be problematic:
>>while it performs a similar task to an intercooler for an internal combustion engine, the
>>temperature difference between the incoming air and the working gas is smaller. In heating
>>the stored air, the device gets very cold and may ice up in cool, moist climates.
>
> I agree that the heating of air on compression, and the cooling of air
> on decompression are the greatest problems to overcome in a compressed
> air power storage system.
>
>> Conversely, when air is compressed to fill the tank it heats up: as the stored air cools, its
>>pressure decreases and available energy decreases. It is difficult to cool the tank efficiently
>>while charging and thus it would either take a long time to fill the tank, or less energy is stored.
>
> That is a correct analysis.
>
>> Refueling the compressed air container using a home or low-end conventional air
>>compressor may take as long as 4 hours, though specialized equipment at service stations
>>may fill the tanks in only 3 minutes.[3] To store 14.3 kWh @300 bar in 300 l (90 m3 @ 1 bar)
>>reservoirs, you need at least 93 kWh on the compressor side (with an optimum single stage
>>compressor working on the ideal adiabatic limit), or rather less with a multistage unit. That
>>means, a compressor power of over 1 Megawatt (1000 kW) is needed to fill the reservoirs in
>>5 minutes from a single stage unit, or several hundred horsepower for a multistage one.[6]
>>[citation needed]
>
> Ok, correct me if I'm wrong on this one... but if you have compressed
> air in a large storage tank at the gas station, and you merely
> transport that compressed air into the car's tank, that doesn't
> involve active compression, and thus for that particular exchange,
> there is no heating or cooling issues. Getting the air compressed at
> the gas station is admittedly a big issue, but fueling up is not, I
> think, a big problem. Going down the road of course is another time
> where the temperature issues come up.
>
>> The overall efficiency of a vehicle using compressed air energy storage, using the above
>>refueling figures, cannot exceed 14%, even with a 100% efficient engine?and practical
>>engines are closer to 10-20%.[7] For comparison, well to wheel efficiency using a modern
>>internal-combustion drivetrain is about 20%,[8] Therefore, if powered by air compressed
>>using a compressor driven by an engine using fossil fuels technology, a compressed air car
>>would have a larger carbon footprint than a car powered directly by an engine using fossil
>>fuels technology.
>
> Not if the compression were accomplished with solar or wind... right?
>
>> Early tests have demonstrated the limited storage capacity of the tanks; the only published
>>test of a vehicle running on compressed air alone was limited to a range of 7.22 km.[9]
>
> I had heard Tata had gone above 20 miles, but that may have been with
> a hybrid system compressing air as you go...
>
>> A 2005 study demonstrated that cars running on lithium-ion batteries out-perform both
>>compressed air and fuel cell vehicles more than threefold at the same speeds.[10]
>
> Interesting.
>
>>MDI has recently claimed that an air car will be able to travel 140 km in urban driving, and
>>have a range of 80 km with a top speed of 110 km/h (68 mph) on highways,[11] when
>>operating on compressed air alone, but in as late as mid 2009, MDI has still not produced any
>>proof to that effect.
>
> Yeah, got to see something actually working to totally believe it.
>
>> A 2009 University of Berkeley Research Letter found that "Even under highly optimistic
>>assumptions the compressed-air car is significantly less efficient than a battery electric
>>vehicle and produces more greenhouse gas emissions than a conventional gas-powered car
>>with a coal intensive power mix." however they also suggested, "a pneumatic?combustion
>>hybrid is technologically feasible, inexpensive and could eventually compete with hybrid
>>electric vehicles."[12]
>>
>>
>>> If I could score some parts from a Tata Nano, I think I could make a
>>> nice storage system... I don't understand what you mean by the
>>> thermodynamics of the situation in detail, I do understand that
>>
>> Just ideal gas law.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compressed_air_energy_storage
>>
>> Compression of air generates a lot of heat. The air is warmer after compression.
>
> Understood.
>
>>Decompression requires heat. If no extra heat is added, the air will be much colder after
>>decompression. If the heat generated during compression can be stored and used again
>>during decomression, the efficiency of the storage improves considerably.
>
> Perhaps something can be accomplished with this more effectively in a
> home electric storage system than in a car where weight is more of an
> issue... just a thought.
>
>> There are three ways in which a CAES system can deal with the heat. Air storage can be
>>adiabatic, diabatic, or isothermic:
>> Adiabatic storage retains the heat produced by compression and returns it to the air when
>>the air is expanded to generate power. This is a subject of ongoing study, with no utility scale
>>plants as of 2010. Its theoretical efficiency approaches 100% for large and/or rapidly cycled
>>devices and/or perfect thermal insulation, but in practice round trip efficiency is expected to
>>be 70%.[3] Heat can be stored in a solid such as concrete or stone, or more likely in a fluid
>>such as hot oil (up to 300 ?C) or molten salt solutions (600 ?C).
>
> fascinating.
>
>> Diabatic storage dissipates the extra heat with intercoolers (thus approaching isothermal
>>compression) into the atmosphere as waste. Upon removal from storage, the air must be
>>re-heated prior to expansion in the turbine to power a generator which can be accomplished
>>with a natural gas fired burner for utility grade storage or with a heated metal mass. The lost
>>heat degrades efficiency, but this approach is simpler and is thus far the only system which
>>has been implemented commercially. The McIntosh, Alabama CAES plant requires 2.5 MJ of
>>electricity and 1.2 MJ lower heating value (LHV) of gas for each megajoule of energy
>>output.[4] A General Electric 7FA 2x1 combined cycle plant, one of the most efficient natural
>>gas plants in operation, uses 6.6 MJ (LHV) of gas per kW?h generated,[5] a 54% thermal
>>efficiency comparable to the McIntosh 6.8 MJ, at 53% thermal efficiency.
>
> So how much does the natural gas heating eat into the storage capacity
> and efficiency?
>
>> Isothermal compression and expansion approaches attempt to maintain operating
>>temperature by constant heat exchange to the environment. They are only practical for low
>>power levels, without very effective heat exchangers. The theoretical efficiency of isothermal
>>energy storage approaches 100% for small and/or slowly cycled devices and/or perfect heat
>>transfer to the environment. In practice neither of these perfect thermodynamic cycles are >obtainable, as some heat losses are unavoidable.
>
> Yes, conversion of energy type always results in some heat loss. That
> is to be expected. Low power levels sounds like it might work in a
> home storage environment. How much do you think the rules change when
> dealing with a home electricity storage unit vs. running a car? i.e.
> what can you gain by having the luxury of extra weight in the system?
>
>> A different, highly efficient arrangement, which fits neatly into none of the above categories,
>>uses high, medium and low pressure pistons in series, with each stage followed by an airblast
>>venturi that draws ambient air over an air-to-air (or air-to-seawater) heat exchanger between
>>each expansion stage. Early compressed air torpedo designs used a similar approach,
>>substituting seawater for air. The venturi warms the exhaust of the preceding stage and
>>admits this preheated air to the following stage. This approach was widely adopted in various
>>compressed air vehicles such as H. K. Porter, Inc's mining locomotives[6] and trams.[7] Here
>>the heat of compression is effectively stored in the atmosphere (or sea) and returned later on.
>> Compression can be done with electrically powered turbo-compressors and expansion with
>>turbo 'expanders'[8] or air engines driving electrical generators to produce electricity.
>> The storage vessel is often an underground cavern created by solution mining (salt is
>>dissolved in water for extraction)[9] or by utilizing an abandoned mine. Plants operate on a
>>daily cycle, charging at night and discharging during the day.
>> Compressed air energy storage can also be employed on a smaller scale such as exploited
>>by air cars and air-driven locomotives, and also by the use of high-strength carbon-fiber air
>>storage tanks.
>
> Yes, I understand that the carbon fiber tanks are a necessity for
> weight and safety issues.
>
>>> compressed air can get very hot and needs to be cooled... but it would
>>> SEEM that Tata has resolved these issues to some extent.
>>
>> Tata can't magically route around thermodynamics.
>
> No, they can't. It would seem that they have backed off of some of
> their initial claims and schedules as well :-(
>
>>> >> building sized batteries also have some interesting potential. An
>>> >
>>> > The car industry will bring you pretty powerful batteries within
>>> > the next 10 years.
>>>
>>> I hope so. Battery power stored per kilogram follows a Law of
>>> Accelerating Returns curve, does it not?
>>
>> Not at all, progress is linear, and will be sublinear as
>> it asymptotically approaches the ceiling of the storage
>> technology:
>>
>> e.g. http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/archives/2009/07/was_moores_law.php
>>
>> http://www.kk.org/thetechnium/Battery%20Energy%20Density.jpg
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_density
>>
>> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c6/Energy_density.svg
>
> Pity that.
>
>>> > Yes, but one of the most inefficient things you can do with PV
>>> > panels you rely on to sit under snow. Climbing up the roof to
>>> > clean them off is not a particular sane way of dealing with the
>>> > situation.
>>>
>>> I think it is the only sane way to deal with it... putting in a
>>> heating system is just not practical. If I had it to do over again, I
>>
>> It is not that difficult to add adhesive resistive heating pads to the
>> back of the panels even after the fact. (More adventurous natures
>> could attempt to bypass the panel diodes, and use the panel
>> itself for heating, e.g. this is a problem with monocrystalline
>> cells parts of which are shaded off, but I wouldn't do that).
>>
>> Just use ethylene glycol or another antifreeze mix, picking a mix that
>> will survive your worst case without freezing.
>
> That makes sense.
>
>> What is your battery capacity, in Wh? What exactly are you running
>> at night? Is your diesel on-demand or has to be switched on manually?
>
> My generator is gasoline, not diesel. Currently, I have no batteries,
> but previously I had 8 large L16P Trojan batteries.
>
> http://www.trojanbatteryre.com/PDF/datasheets/L16PAC_Trojan_Data_Sheets.pdf
>
> I can't get it to download right now, so I don't know the Wh off hand.
>
> -Kelly
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 91, Issue 3
> *******************************************
>



From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 15:39:33 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 08:39:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim_+ZRzA=KcxXJoDmeXur38vjjuwPLSE8vAsxgs@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:18 AM, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:
> http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/gurven/papers/GurvenKaplan2007pdr.pdf
> "The average modal age of adult death for hunter-gatherers is 72 with a
> range of 68-78 years. This range appears to be the closest functional
> equivalent of an "adaptive" human lifespan."
> [...]
> "Illnesses account for 70 percent, violence and accidents for 20 percent,
> and degenerative diseases for 9 percent of all deaths in our sample."
> [...]
> "Post-reproductive longevity is a robust feature of hunter-gatherers and of
> the life cycle of Homo sapiens. Survivorship to grandparental age is
> achieved by over two-thirds of people who reach sexual maturity and can last
> an average of 20 years."

Err...grandparental age ain't 68-78 years back in paleo times.  Even
accounting for later average sexual maturity than we see today, people
would have babies ASAP in that era - which means parent around 15
and grandparent around 30.

Moreover, that article seems to say near its beginning that, with modern
infectious diseases (which are around the globe regardless of where and
who you are) and other interactions, even modern people living the paleo
lifestyle (say, the remaining uncontacted tribes) don't get the same
lifespan as their ancestors.


From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr  3 15:40:51 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 08:40:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity  paleo diet again
In-Reply-To: <4D9840C2.2060604@gnolls.org>
References: <4D9840C2.2060604@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <00e101cbf215$83aeb110$8b0c1330$@att.net>

>...] On Behalf Of J. Stanton
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity paleo diet again

>Resending: roughly one-half of my emails to this list are inexplicably
eaten.
...
We don't know why that happens.  Some servers don't play well with the
server that ExI-chat uses.  Open to suggestion.

>...http://www.gnolls.org/1763/why-humans-crave-fat/

>...Currently the majority of my caloric intake comes from animal fat,
primarily from fatty red meat and eggs. I've never felt better in my
life: apparently I've been suffering from a multi-decade saturated fat
deficiency, and am just now re-learning to eat like a human being...JS


JS if you ever want dramatic confirmation of that notion, try a four night
backpacking trip with only freeze-dried foods.  Those must be zero fat: oils
will not freeze dry.  Carry about a third of your weight on your back, walk
about 15 miles a day.  In a situation where you are burning calories like a
forest fire and eat zero fat, watch what happens to your appetite.  You will
gain an immediate insight into why so many diets have failed for so many
decades of doctors urging low-fat diets.  Patients go on the zero-fat diets
with the grim determination of suicide bomber, yet about a week later they
are reduced to failure like whimpering addict on heroine withdrawal.  

I have never dieted for weight loss, but I get this.  My own experience: I
seriously wanted to try to catch a fish out there, rip it open with my bare
hands and devour the son of a bitch raw.  My vegetarian wife objected.
After about the fourth day of zero-fat calorie burning, the hikers present a
danger to the bears.  Although we actually had sufficient calories along, I
discovered there is a subtle but important difference between *hunger* and a
craving for fat.  Those are two related but distinct feelings.  Hunger is
tolerable but fat craving is overwhelming and diet-defeating.  Discount as
necessary, coming from a bony guy who has never even attempted a weight loss
diet: humans need both calories and fat.

Too many dieters have never had the backpacking experience, and don't
understand why their weight-loss plans consistently fail.

spike







From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 16:37:57 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:37:57 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <003a01cbed67$c7e4b4e0$57ae1ea0$@att.net>
	<AANLkTinZrBgU8RwSCvt4=eP_RtQphwAmpWwfPcogqyrt@mail.gmail.com>
	<374011.22744.qm@web30101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimKVyTixX1VJxpNvJaeOE4OXnj1iA@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 April 2011 09:24, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Serious question to the paleo dieters... Why would we emulate a diet
> that resulted in a 25 year life span? I understand the bit about us
> being evolved to the diet, but we also were living short fast
> difficult lives at the time. Is that what we want to return to? It
> just seems counter intuitive to me.
The point has been raised innumerable time, but it arises from a
confusion between life expectation and lifespan.

The first is obviously determined by inter alia things such as
infantile mortality, your chances of being killed by a rival tribe or
eaten by a predator, the risk of starving to death, or today your
exposure to car accidents.

As to the second, it would appear that in spite of relative advances
in medicine, sheltering, etc. we had to wait until the XVIII century
to reach back paleolitic standards. Individuals in their seventies or
eighties were in fact more frequent in hunter-and-gatherer society
than they were in Europe when America was discovered.

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 17:00:52 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 13:00:52 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
	<001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=-cqYeA_kg3XAvLbT6FE7fqCWT-g@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 3:08 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>wrote:

> 2011/4/2 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> > 2011/4/2 spike <spike66 at att.net>
> >> This implies you understand what we (humanity) are fighting for.  Do
> you?
> >> Explain please.
>
> I'm fighting/hoping for more intelligence in the world. With enough
> intelligence, I think we can solve our energy problems.
>
> > Energy.  Whether it be in the form of fuel in our tanks, or food in our
> > stomach.  It's all about energy.  Always has been.  Before OIL it was
> COAL.
> >  Before COAL it was WOOD.
>
> Energy is clearly central to the endeavors of human beings and will be
> to our successors as well. Let's do a little exercise... Let's suppose
> that in 100 years most intelligence is non-human. That is, it runs on
> a non-biological substrate. I would suppose that such a substrate
> would be able to survive without too much difficulty in outer space.
> Given the nearly limitless solar energy that could be harvested by
> orbiting the sun, I kind of wonder if earth itself won't be a
> backwater in 100 years.


I'm perhaps a touch idealistic, but I would hope that it's been maintained
as an 'animal preserve' so to speak.


> If intelligent robots can survive in space
> without the life support that biological humans require, then
> harvesting the needed materials from asteroids, comets and other
> sources will be cheaper than bringing materials up from earth to
> space.
>

Exactly.  And to increase real-estate when necessary, you tow hunks from
space into an orbit


>
> So the whole concept of the importance of the space elevator, beaming
> solar energy down to earth, solving global warming and so forth may be
> a problem for the remaining biological legacy on earth, but may not be
> "where it's happening" in the future.
>

I see abundant solar energy solutions as a precursor to the Singularity.
 Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think they're very necessary in the grand scheme
of things.  I'd like to see humanity build a solar/hydrogen economy, seeing
as it's the most abundant element in our Universe.


>
> This is just a thought experiment, I'm curious what you all think.
>

Sign me up for virtualization, I'm game.


>
> > If the brilliant minds humanity has at it's disposal, spent less brain
> > cycles devoted to destroying/controlling one another, and instead focused
> on
> > freeing ourselves...we'd be much better off imho.
>
> Of course we would, but if we didn't spend money on war, we certainly
> wouldn't be spending it on something less politically important. At
> some point, when gasoline is $20 a gallon, and there is no hope of it
> ever going under $15 a gallon, then the people of the USA will raise
> the priority of energy management to the point that such spending will
> seem justified to the point that the politicians will pay attention.
>

I just don't understand how the foresight isn't in place already.  How can
we not see the giant cliff we're headed towards?  It's not as if the writing
hasn't been on the wall for decades.  Not to mention previous 'empires'
being brought down by extremely similar situations.  The perfect storm of
sorts.  I get the 300+ million sheeple in the USoA sleeping at the wheel,
they've been programmed well.  What confuses me, is how upper management,
the top 10%, sees it as being in their own best interest to fleece the
middle/lower class they skim off of.  I guess everything's international and
out-sourced enough to where location is irrelevant.  Bad time to have
inferior manufacturing huh?


> Sorry for the cynical attitude today... but I just don't see
> politicians as an intelligent life form.
>

I'd like humanity to revolutionize governance by way of the internet.  Gov
2.0 type deal.


>
> > It's silly, we spend $400B plus a year importing oil, yet $100B
> investment
> > in renewable/sustainable energy is unheard of?
>
> Yup. The idea that Al Gore would have done things differently is a
> pipe dream... even with his green ideas, I don't think it would have
> turned out all that differently.
>

I agree.  Politicians go in with the best of intentions, I'm sure they're
not all evil/incompetent.  But reality sets in quickly.  It's very
entrenched, I have no doubt.  Which is why drastic actions are called for.
 No incumbents allowed, and 'none-of-the-above' would be a great start.


>
> > It's a matter of mindset.  Like being pro-peace, not anti-war.  Move
> towards
> > things, don't run away from them.
> > Hell, the USoA has spent what...$2-3T on Iraq/Afghanistan, for
> what..global
> > oil production?  Imagine what $2-3T would have accomplished had it went
> to
> > R&D in the energy sector.
>
> I love the spin on Libya. It's so clearly about oil, why do they have
> to maintain the facade that it's human rights concerns?


Because we're complacent enough to allow it to continue.


> We haven't
> done crap in Sudan. There is more human suffering in Haiti, Sumatra
> and Japan than there ever will be in Libya, but Libya has oil... it's
> the only difference.
>

The only one that matters right now, yes.

I just can't wrap my mind around this suicidal kind of thinking.  Each day
we push ahead with this garbage oil business, is a month (just a guess,
picked an arbitrary #, no sources) we're going to pay for it in spades down
the road.  I just can't comprehend how killing one another is a better
choice than cooperating until we colonize space, and then you can go your
way, I go mine, and we've got more room than we could ever know what to do
with.

We need to do it because we can, and it's necessary.  Not because it's
profitable.
</rant> sorry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110403/c641ba29/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 17:07:26 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 13:07:26 -0400
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <003a01cbed67$c7e4b4e0$57ae1ea0$@att.net>
	<AANLkTinZrBgU8RwSCvt4=eP_RtQphwAmpWwfPcogqyrt@mail.gmail.com>
	<374011.22744.qm@web30101.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimBvHx-6Rv-R5qEhZPUH3Tr-22WHQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 3:24 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>wrote:

> Serious question to the paleo dieters... Why would we emulate a diet
> that resulted in a 25 year life span? I understand the bit about us
> being evolved to the diet, but we also were living short fast
> difficult lives at the time. Is that what we want to return to? It
> just seems counter intuitive to me.
>
>
Clean water/sanitation are two areas that have significantly extended our
lives.  The paleo dieters of past didn't suffer from the diet itself, other
than lack of supply perhaps.  Their short lifespans were due to other
circumstances, not malnutrition.

I recently came across information claiming that the process of cooking
foods itself causes an immune response during digestion, and recommends that
at least 51% of each meal be raw/uncooked food to prevent/counter this
response.

I've been eating raw/uncooked as much as possible, and I've got to say, it
really does make a difference.  You have so much more energy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110403/d2b3f18c/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 17:10:41 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 13:10:41 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity paleo diet again
In-Reply-To: <4D9840C2.2060604@gnolls.org>
References: <4D9840C2.2060604@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=4yhPYLS=Qu_vBtT4OBjLAHqR7rQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:41 AM, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:

> My argument is that humans have an animal-fat-based metabolism as a
> consequence of our unique evolutionary history (not a protein-based
> metabolism, like obligate carnivores), and that is why we crave fat so much:


Absolutely.  Which is precisely why we suffer 'rabbit starvation' if we
consume too much protein with no fat.  Fresh fruits/vegetables and meat/eggs
like you said.  Never been better.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110403/6e323996/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 17:14:00 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 18:14:00 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity paleo diet again
In-Reply-To: <00e101cbf215$83aeb110$8b0c1330$@att.net>
References: <4D9840C2.2060604@gnolls.org>
	<00e101cbf215$83aeb110$8b0c1330$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimkfrCRM4F8vyr3kpiGXJvMqiCc3A@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 4:40 PM, spike  wrote:
> JS if you ever want dramatic confirmation of that notion, try a four night
> backpacking trip with only freeze-dried foods. ?Those must be zero fat: oils
> will not freeze dry. ?Carry about a third of your weight on your back, walk
> about 15 miles a day. ?In a situation where you are burning calories like a
> forest fire and eat zero fat, watch what happens to your appetite. ?You will
> gain an immediate insight into why so many diets have failed for so many
> decades of doctors urging low-fat diets. ?Patients go on the zero-fat diets
> with the grim determination of suicide bomber, yet about a week later they
> are reduced to failure like whimpering addict on heroine withdrawal.
>
>


Heroine withdrawal is terrible!

Where's Wonder Woman when you need her?     ;)


BillK



From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 17:27:04 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 13:27:04 -0400
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net> <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> What do you do with surplus? Dump it into synfuel.


Why not dump it into hydrogen?  I understand not converting fossils to
hydrogen, but water...

Hell, it's the most abundant element in our Universe, seems to me we should
get familiar with it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110403/b498645f/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 18:15:44 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 12:15:44 -0600
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net> <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimqDGj3k_4b15tYmA5ve59q5r+AGg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/3 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>>
>> What do you do with surplus? Dump it into synfuel.
>
> Why not dump it into hydrogen? ?I understand not converting fossils to
> hydrogen, but water...
> Hell, it's the most abundant element in our Universe, seems to me we should
> get familiar with it.

Some of the main challenges with hydrogen vs. synfuel are:
1) Storage. Hydrogen being such a small molecule, it escapes any
attempt to contain it with relative ease.
2) Energy density. Hydrogen stores less energy per pound of fuel.
3) Expense. Hydrogen fuel cells (the most direct way to turn hydrogen
into electricity) are currently rather expensive.
4) Infrastructure. Converting from current fuel systems to hydrogen is
massively expensive. Current pipelines don't handle hydrogen well (see
point 1).
5) Public acceptance. People still equate hydrogen with the
Hindenburg. In some ways, hydrogen is kind of like nuclear power in
the sense that people don't understand the true risks. Technological
solutions, and public experience will overcome this, I hope.
6) Some places with lots of energy don't have lots of water. Arizona
(solar) Wyoming (wind). This probably isn't a major issue.

The energy density problem is particularly difficult in mobile
applications (cars).

Hydrogen sounds like a great idea. It is a great idea. We just need
more research to make it practical and we need to understand its
limitations, particularly with regard to energy density. Some schemes
for packing the hydrogen into latices have been proposed which would
solve this problem, if they can actually build them.

Of course, synfuels still have the familiar problems including
pollution and CO2 production.

-Kelly



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 18:37:30 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 11:37:30 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
Message-ID: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:07 AM,  Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com> wrote:

snip

> I just don't understand how the foresight isn't in place already.

The simple reason is that energy sources are expensive.  Solar and
wind are particularly so because they are dilute and only there part
time.

If there were a way to get solar energy for less than the cost of
coal, gas or nuclear, then it would happen, but for the most part
people just don't know how to do it, or in one case, (SBSP) the front
end cost to get the transportation cost down is in the $100 B range.

But you won't see a lot of discussion here or any other place I know
about that gets into the details.  I guess it's just too hard and
people will not take the effort to understand it even if they are
able.

The few people of influence who do understand what we are up against
seem to be expecting a population collapse.

Keith


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 18:43:36 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 12:43:36 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=rzt5HKawr=oo1nxSYxzEO4yavnw@mail.gmail.com>

One of the best surviving examples of a hunter gatherer society is the
Hadza in Tanzania.
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/12/hadza/finkel-text/1

The story talks about the tribal elder, a man of 60. In conclusion,
the author remarks:

"But I could never live like the Hadza. Their entire life, it appears
to me, is one insanely committed camping trip. It's incredibly risky.
Medical help is far away. One bad fall from a tree, one bite from a
black mamba snake, one lunge from a lion, and you're dead. Women give
birth in the bush, squatting. About a fifth of all babies die within
their first year, and nearly half of all children do not make it to
age 15. They have to cope with extreme heat and frequent thirst and
swarming tsetse flies and malaria-?laced mosquitoes."

Granted, the Hadza have tobacco, which traditional hunter gatherers
did not have to deal with, but this hardly sounds like a group that
lives to an average age of 70. I don't know how you would come up with
an average mortality of 70 in groups like this. It just doesn't seem
possible.

-Kelly



From js_exi at gnolls.org  Sun Apr  3 18:50:29 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 11:50:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity: paleo diet again
Message-ID: <4D98C175.50209@gnolls.org>

Originally posted by spike:
> JS if you ever want dramatic confirmation of that notion, try a four night
> backpacking trip with only freeze-dried foods. ...
> Too many dieters have never had the backpacking experience, and don't
> understand why their weight-loss plans consistently fail.

I understand completely!

Even back when I was trying to eat the 'healthy' version of the SAD 
(Standard American Diet), only dinner would be freeze-dried on 
backpacking trips: the rest would be peanut butter on some sort of 
bread, plus "energy bars" that were ~30% fat.  I never liked oatmeal as 
a backpacking breakfast.

Fortunately I never totally bought into the low-fat hype (though I was 
bamboozled into vegetarianism for a while) because I always figured as a 
very active person I was just burning it off anyway.  But I still felt 
vaguely guilty about it, and spent a lot of time eating way too much 
pasta and bread and way too little meat.

The biggest dietary difference for me has been cutting 'carbs' to 
perhaps 15-20% of calorie intake (though I don't count anything), 
keeping the remaining ones gluten-free, and replacing them with fat: no 
more 'food coma', and I can skip meals at will.

I ate a bunch of pizza recently as a cheat.  No matter how much I ate I 
still felt hungry, and I felt like crap afterward.  Slow, tired, sleepy, 
almost drugged...like I had hand and ankle weights on.  Then I 
remembered: this is how I always used to feel after big meals.  I just 
defined it as "normal".

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From js_exi at gnolls.org  Sun Apr  3 18:50:42 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 11:50:42 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan (and an aside from Capitalism Genes)
Message-ID: <4D98C182.1090102@gnolls.org>

Originally posted by BillK:
> I don't believe it is a myth that paleo people only had an average
> life span of around 30-35 years. But it wasn't due to their diet.

Agreed.  All I'm pointing out is that "average lifespan" is a misleading 
measure of how long they lived, due to massive infant and child 
mortality, and therefore doesn't tell us whether Paleolithic habits are 
healthy.

Since we're talking about Clark's "Capitalism Genes", one of the 
startling facts he begins with is that the *average* modern 
hunter-gatherer tribe (banished to the most hostile and least productive 
lands on the planet) eats better than the residents of the richest 
countries in the world previous to 1800 -- and still eats better than 
the average African!

I will also note that several of these tribes are composed of people we 
call "pygmies", with average heights at or below five feet, and that 
their caloric intake is therefore even larger in proportion.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From js_exi at gnolls.org  Sun Apr  3 19:02:33 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 12:02:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Raw vs. cooked (was paleo)
Message-ID: <4D98C449.6020100@gnolls.org>

Originally posted by Mr Jones:
> I recently came across information claiming that the process of cooking
> foods itself causes an immune response during digestion, and recommends that
> at least 51% of each meal be raw/uncooked food to prevent/counter this
> response.
>
> I've been eating raw/uncooked as much as possible, and I've got to say, it
> really does make a difference.  You have so much more energy.

The raw/cooked thing is an interesting balancing act between energy 
availability (generally increased by cooking), nutrient availability 
(often decreased by cooking), and toxin degradation (usually the purpose 
of cooking in the first place).

As far as immune response, where did you read that?  Foods are so 
different in composition that I can't imagine a blanket recommendation 
that covers all of them.  Raw potatoes, for instance, are a bad idea, as 
are raw eggs...whereas certain raw veggies may be a good idea.

Interestingly, raw meat is actually a very good idea nutritionally: it's 
bacterial and parasitic contamination we're worried about.  I wonder if 
hard freezing (the same process used for sushi in America) does the same 
thing for meat that it does for fish?

"...'freezing and storing seafood at -4?F (-20?C) or below for 7 days 
(total time), or freezing at -31?F (-35?C) or below until solid and 
storing at -31?F (-35?C) or below for 15 hours, or freezing at -31?F 
(-35?C) or below until solid and storing at -4?F (-20?C) or below for 24 
hours' which is sufficient to kill parasites."
http://www.sushifaq.com/sushi-grade-fish.htm

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr  3 19:12:56 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 12:12:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <004501cbf233$2571cce0$705566a0$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of Keith Henson
...

>...The few people of influence who do understand what we are up against
seem to be expecting a population collapse...Keith

Those who do envision a population collapse somehow always envision
*somewhere else* being the place where the population collapses.  This helps
explain why we are *still* farting around worrying about long term
inconveniences such as global warming, instead of focusing on the
rattlesnake preparing to strike us.  Internet readers don't seem be able to
envision choosing their own least favorite child to stop feeding.

spike








From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 19:34:44 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 12:34:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <004501cbf233$2571cce0$705566a0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
	<004501cbf233$2571cce0$705566a0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikJk1xsiSetAvphFZnrMFnwpM_y3Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 12:12 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>... On Behalf Of Keith Henson
> ...
>
>>...The few people of influence who do understand what we are up against
> seem to be expecting a population collapse...Keith
>
> Those who do envision a population collapse somehow always envision
> *somewhere else* being the place where the population collapses. ?This helps
> explain why we are *still* farting around worrying about long term
> inconveniences such as global warming, instead of focusing on the
> rattlesnake preparing to strike us. ?Internet readers don't seem be able to
> envision choosing their own least favorite child to stop feeding.

Yeah.

I am most amused by the rich who think their money will protect them.
It never seems to occur to them that if the power goes off they will
have no money (most money is just magnetic spots on hard disks).

Keith



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Apr  3 19:47:31 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 21:47:31 +0200
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net> <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110403194731.GW23560@leitl.org>

On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 01:27:04PM -0400, Mr Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 5:22 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> 
> > What do you do with surplus? Dump it into synfuel.
> 
> 
> Why not dump it into hydrogen?  I understand not converting fossils to
> hydrogen, but water...

Hydrogen would be one of the gaseous synfuels, or at least
reduction equivalents and synthetic precursors. The interesting
part of hydrogen is that water electrolysis is an old, cheap
technology, and natural gas network can take considerable
fraction of hydrogen mix at the edge without producing embrittlement
or leaking.
 
> Hell, it's the most abundant element in our Universe, seems to me we should
> get familiar with it.

We've been deeply familiar with hydrogen on industrial scale roughly
for about a century

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

-- 
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 stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 20:01:36 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 22:01:36 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=rzt5HKawr=oo1nxSYxzEO4yavnw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTi=rzt5HKawr=oo1nxSYxzEO4yavnw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikLxBDusDSTvtWRkZ9WnEOx6m=eUg@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 April 2011 20:43, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> Granted, the Hadza have tobacco, which traditional hunter gatherers
> did not have to deal with, but this hardly sounds like a group that
> lives to an average age of 70. I don't know how you would come up with
> an average mortality of 70 in groups like this. It just doesn't seem
> possible.

No, it is undisputed that they do not have a life expectation of 70.

What  we are discussing here however is lifespan, meaning that they
*can* attain such an age, and even more, while doing that has only
quite recently been again made possible for medically-pampered,
disease-affected, functionally-impaired middle-class westerners.

If we can both reduce to nil the chance of being killed by a mamba
snake *and* profit from a healthier lifestyle, we would be have the
best of both worlds, wouldn't we?

An entirely different issue is whether a paleo lifestyle would be
sustainable on a global basis. The answer here is obviously no (there
was a reason after all for the neolithic revolution), but this also
true for an undefinitely growing post-neolithic society, and is
precisely  where transhumanism comes into play...

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Apr  3 20:10:07 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 22:10:07 +0200
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimqDGj3k_4b15tYmA5ve59q5r+AGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net> <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimqDGj3k_4b15tYmA5ve59q5r+AGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110403201007.GY23560@leitl.org>

On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 12:15:44PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> Some of the main challenges with hydrogen vs. synfuel are:
> 1) Storage. Hydrogen being such a small molecule, it escapes any
> attempt to contain it with relative ease.

The petrochemical industry maintains a considerable
high-pressure hydrogen pipeline network across much
of Europe. Hydrogen at normal pressure is no big deal,
and can be easily stored in gas holders. Hydrogen in
pressurized gas cyliders is also old, familiar stuff.
There is some volatility with ultra-high pressure
composite storage for vehicles. I frankly think it's
a stupid idea. There's more hydrogen in methanol than
in liquid hydrogen, by volume.

> 2) Energy density. Hydrogen stores less energy per pound of fuel.

Not a problem for stationary applications. In case of EV, consider
that ICEs have a street efficiency of about 20%.

> 3) Expense. Hydrogen fuel cells (the most direct way to turn hydrogen
> into electricity) are currently rather expensive.

Hydrogen burns just fine, and in micro co-gen efficiency is >90%.

> 4) Infrastructure. Converting from current fuel systems to hydrogen is
> massively expensive. Current pipelines don't handle hydrogen well (see

Depends, catalytic burners do fine, as to Stirlings.

> point 1).

Only high-pressure pipelines for natural gas. Yes, you need special
pipe materials, larger crossections and different pumps.

> 5) Public acceptance. People still equate hydrogen with the
> Hindenburg. In some ways, hydrogen is kind of like nuclear power in
> the sense that people don't understand the true risks. Technological
> solutions, and public experience will overcome this, I hope.

Small scale hydrogen should take care of that.

> 6) Some places with lots of energy don't have lots of water. Arizona
> (solar) Wyoming (wind). This probably isn't a major issue.

Water demand is negligible, there's 55.5 mol/l in water.
 
> The energy density problem is particularly difficult in mobile
> applications (cars).

Hydrogen doesn't work in cars very well, and probably never will.
Liquid hydrogen could be quite interesting for aerospace, however,
 
> Hydrogen sounds like a great idea. It is a great idea. We just need
> more research to make it practical and we need to understand its

The research part is already done. Apart from minor things like
really cheap and durable hydrogen fuel cells.

> limitations, particularly with regard to energy density. Some schemes
> for packing the hydrogen into latices have been proposed which would
> solve this problem, if they can actually build them.

The energy density is a non-issue for immobile applications.
 
> Of course, synfuels still have the familiar problems including
> pollution and CO2 production.

Synfuels from CO2 scrubbed from air or fuel gas are carbon neutral
by definition. E.g. DMFC ran from synmethanol obviously has a very
good carbon and pollution story, nevermind efficiency.

-- 
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 stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 20:07:59 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 22:07:59 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Frequency vs. quantity: paleo diet again
In-Reply-To: <4D98C175.50209@gnolls.org>
References: <4D98C175.50209@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=J0fncmDghjk7NR7yHGmaP-TXOsg@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 April 2011 20:50, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:
> Fortunately I never totally bought into the low-fat hype (though I was
> bamboozled into vegetarianism for a while) because I always figured as a
> very active person I was just burning it off anyway. ?But I still felt
> vaguely guilty about it, and spent a lot of time eating way too much pasta
> and bread and way too little meat.

I have always hated gastronomically and ideologically hi-carbo diets,
but at a time I thought that it would be best to reduce fats as well,
and try feeding as much as possible on lean proteins, and I have to
thank Atkins for making me see the light in this respect... :-)

> I ate a bunch of pizza recently as a cheat. ?No matter how much I ate I
> still felt hungry, and I felt like crap afterward. ?Slow, tired, sleepy,
> almost drugged...like I had hand and ankle weights on. ?Then I remembered:
> this is how I always used to feel after big meals. ?I just defined it as
> "normal".

Indeed.

-- 
Stefano Vaj



From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Apr  3 20:18:38 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 22:18:38 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110403201838.GZ23560@leitl.org>

On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 11:37:30AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:

> > I just don't understand how the foresight isn't in place already.
> 
> The simple reason is that energy sources are expensive.  Solar and
> wind are particularly so because they are dilute and only there part

If insolation on outer building skin is enough to drive the building
I don't call that dilute, I call that exactly right. A little bit
more than you can cool comfortably, and you've got failure modes
like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corium_%28nuclear_reactor%29 

> time.

When production matches demand peak you can have 2% of total
produce >20% (17 GW of 85 GW peak) and allow you to switch
off nuclear and coal. Another decade of such growht, and
you'd get >100% of peak. Sure, you'd have to cover with gas
turbines and micro co-gen for really dark, windstill days.
 
> If there were a way to get solar energy for less than the cost of
> coal, gas or nuclear, then it would happen, but for the most part

It is already there sometimes and in location. Give it less than
10 years for Mid-Europe. 

> people just don't know how to do it, or in one case, (SBSP) the front
> end cost to get the transportation cost down is in the $100 B range.
> 
> But you won't see a lot of discussion here or any other place I know
> about that gets into the details.  I guess it's just too hard and
> people will not take the effort to understand it even if they are
> able.

This used to surprise me, but no longer does.
 
> The few people of influence who do understand what we are up against
> seem to be expecting a population collapse.

So what? We've done it before, a few times, in fact.

-- 
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 lubkin at unreasonable.com  Sun Apr  3 20:23:02 2011
From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 16:23:02 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
	<001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <201104032023.p33KNMNj019476@andromeda.ziaspace.com>

Kelly wrote:

>I love the spin on Libya. It's so clearly about oil, why do they have
>to maintain the facade that it's human rights concerns? We haven't
>done crap in Sudan. There is more human suffering in Haiti, Sumatra
>and Japan than there ever will be in Libya, but Libya has oil... it's
>the only difference.

I find any analysis of a foreign policy or the causes of a war that says
it's about any one thing is too simplistic. There are inevitably many
things going on, and each country has a different set of priorities.
What matters to France is different than what matters to Jordan or
Canada.

I do enjoy the analyses of geopolitics or history that add a new
dimension to consider. For instance, the role of disease in
deciding the outcome of wars. Or the importance of transportation
hubs and of topography in migration, conflict, and prosperity.


-- David.




From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 20:33:45 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 22:33:45 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Raw vs. cooked (was paleo)
In-Reply-To: <4D98C449.6020100@gnolls.org>
References: <4D98C449.6020100@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinORZyQK-VbwgjugWpevknxYMEqew@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 April 2011 21:02, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:
>Raw potatoes, for instance, are a bad idea, as are raw
> eggs...whereas certain raw veggies may be a good idea.

I have always thought that at least "normal" potatoes (I do not know
how to call them in English) were not not edible unless cooked. But
what would be wrong with raw eggs?

> Interestingly, raw meat is actually a very good idea nutritionally: it's
> bacterial and parasitic contamination we're worried about.

Since after all we are not into neoprimitivism, but rather technology,
why not produce bacteria- and parasites-free meat? Not such a hard
feat, I would say. Even though "bacteria charge" seems to be important
at least for gastronomic purposes. But be reminded that we eat here
our steaks in 15, as opposed to the US 40, days of dry-aging...

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Apr  3 21:51:34 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2011 14:51:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikLxBDusDSTvtWRkZ9WnEOx6m=eUg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTi=rzt5HKawr=oo1nxSYxzEO4yavnw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikLxBDusDSTvtWRkZ9WnEOx6m=eUg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikEyN7M46tHH2w31r54RPLqGTjbwZQ6hg7BBC__@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:
> No, it is undisputed that they do not have a life expectation of 70.
>
> What ?we are discussing here however is lifespan, meaning that they
> *can* attain such an age, and even more, while doing that has only
> quite recently been again made possible for medically-pampered,
> disease-affected, functionally-impaired middle-class westerners.

People in Western societies have been making it past 100 for quite a
while now.

You're saying paleos *can* get to 70.  Westerners, on Western diets,
*can* get far past 70.



From js_exi at gnolls.org  Mon Apr  4 00:57:05 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2011 17:57:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan (and eggs/avidin)
Message-ID: <4D991761.90100@gnolls.org>


Originally posted by Adrian Tymes:
> You're saying paleos *can* get to 70.  Westerners, on Western diets,
> *can* get far past 70.

If you had read the articles I linked, you would have noticed that 
hunter-gatherers *can* make it into the 90s...

...without the benefit of nursing homes, emergency rooms, antibiotics, 
stents, bypasses, joint replacements, or any of the other benefits of 
modern health care.

Weston A. Price's "Nutrition and Physical Degeneration" is essential 
reading on this subject.  It shows what happens to physical health and 
development when traditional cultures adopt the Western diet, with 
hundreds of pictures.

Full text and illustrations here:
http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200251h.html

Price was far, far ahead of his time.  He couldn't have understood what 
epigenetics were, but he clearly understood their effects.  And he 
discovered what was later found to be vitamin K2 via its effects on 
dental and bone health.

Originally posted by Kelly Anderson:
> Granted, the Hadza have tobacco, which traditional hunter gatherers
> did not have to deal with, but this hardly sounds like a group that
> lives to an average age of 70.

Again: "The average modal age of *** adult *** death for 
hunter-gatherers is 72 with a range of 68-78 years."  Infant and child 
mortality pull the average down dramatically.

Keep in mind that natural selection has continued to operate amongst the 
Hadza, selecting them for survival in their environment -- whereas 
'civilized' humans haven't been selected for those skills for thousands 
of years.  (If anything, we've been selected for docility in response to 
arbitrary authority.)

Originally posted by Stefano Vaj:
 > But what would be wrong with raw eggs?

Raw egg white contains a protein called avidin, which bonds to the 
biotin in the yolk and makes it biologically unavailable.  Cooking the 
egg breaks down the avidin.

Not that raw eggs will kill you: you just won't get any biotin out of 
them, and they'll bond any biotin in whatever you eat with them.

As far as parasite-free meat, most meat these days is low enough in 
bacteria and parasites that a healthy person won't ever have a problem 
eating it raw.  But there are a lot of unhealthy people out there, and 
there is a lot more paranoia out there than is justifiable.

In fact, I seem to recall that someone brought up earlier the fact that 
intestinal parasites are used to treat autoimmune disease.  It turns out 
we're basically supposed to be fighting some number of intestinal 
parasites, and in the absence of real enemies, our immune system is more 
likely to react mistakenly against our own bodies.

This is related to the reason we have an appendix: it's the place our 
gut bacteria hang out so they can recolonize after we get cleaned out. 
Bush African water sources are generally full of hippo and crocodile 
shit, and get wallowed in by everything from elephants to hyenas: it 
seems likely, at least to me, that Paleolithic humans spent a 
significant amount of time with the trots.

Thus the difference between research and re-enactment when it comes to 
dietary recommendations.  We most likely ate a good quantity of rotten 
meat in the Paleolithic: the health benefits of doing so are dubious.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Mon Apr  4 09:58:07 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:58:07 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikEyN7M46tHH2w31r54RPLqGTjbwZQ6hg7BBC__@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4D983B69.6050803@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTi=rzt5HKawr=oo1nxSYxzEO4yavnw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikLxBDusDSTvtWRkZ9WnEOx6m=eUg@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikEyN7M46tHH2w31r54RPLqGTjbwZQ6hg7BBC__@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=w-H6bPmPU4c02U=NGZkTUMcBuqg@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 April 2011 23:51, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
> You're saying paleos *can* get to 70. ?Westerners, on Western diets,
> *can* get far past 70.

Diet is of course not the only factor with regard to longevity in
general, and to one's specific survival for the entire lifespan his
genes are going to allow.

But those in the west who get beyond 100 are rarely affected by
obesity, hypertension, cavities, diabete, or are used to gorge on
carbos.

And in fact, from a paleo POV western ?lites have been eating for a
long time much better than the average post-neolithic individual, as
long as they have been ignoring the "healthy" rules and thriving on
relatively fresh filet mignon, lobster, foie gras, salmon, oysters,
caviar, lettuce, berries, etc. :-)

I think that the only real problem with a 3-star Michelin regime (with
again involves having no more than one real meal per day...) are the
desserts. You are not getting to eat much bread in an eight-course,
proteine- and fat-rich meal...

--
Stefano Vaj



From dan_ust at yahoo.com  Mon Apr  4 13:24:12 2011
From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 06:24:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan (and eggs/avidin)
In-Reply-To: <4D991761.90100@gnolls.org>
References: <4D991761.90100@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <703900.19973.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I thought violent death would also be a factor. From what little I've read on 
hunter-gatherers, I gathered (sorry, bad pun!) that they were much more prone to 
violence and murder rates were far higher amongst them.

Regards,

Dan

From: J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org>
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Sent: Sun, April 3, 2011 8:57:05 PM
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan (and eggs/avidin)

[snip]

Originally posted by Kelly Anderson:
> Granted, the Hadza have tobacco, which traditional hunter gatherers
> did not have to deal with, but this hardly sounds like a group that
> lives to an average age of 70.

Again: "The average modal age of *** adult *** death for hunter-gatherers is 72 
with a range of 68-78 years."? Infant and child mortality pull the average down 
dramatically.

Keep in mind that natural selection has continued to operate amongst the Hadza, 
selecting them for survival in their environment -- whereas 'civilized' humans 
haven't been selected for those skills for thousands of years.? (If anything, 
we've been selected for docility in response to arbitrary authority.)

[snip]

JS
http://www.gnolls.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110404/acd05102/attachment.html>

From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Mon Apr  4 19:12:56 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 12:12:56 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] It's not only the fittest who survive.
In-Reply-To: <mailman.123.1301820127.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <38723.67107.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> asked:
> Message-ID: <BANLkTimzgxMOewoDG4KbzLxy8ZNXkgiiRg at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Serious question to the paleo dieters... Why would we
> emulate a diet
> that resulted in a 25 year life span? I understand the bit
> about us
> being evolved to the diet, but we also were living short
> fast
> difficult lives at the time. Is that what we want to return
> to? It
> just seems counter intuitive to me.


LOL. Is that really a serious question?

Your definition of 'diet' seems...  broad.  :D

Ben Zaiboc


      



From zero.powers at gmail.com  Mon Apr  4 18:56:28 2011
From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 11:56:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] IBM researchers create nanomedicine to kill bacteria where
 antibiotics fail
Message-ID: <BANLkTimFm3u6akVOSS8FJ1CMgQAZ9U1_QA@mail.gmail.com>

This strikes me as one of those "Holy Schlamoley" moments...

"IBM and a research group in Singapore have engineered a new kind of
synthetic, biodegradable nano particle that could be used to attack
bacteria that have become resistant to antibiotics."

http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/03/ibm-researchers-create-nanomedicine-to-kill-bacteria-where-antibiotics-fail/


From js_exi at gnolls.org  Mon Apr  4 21:57:54 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 14:57:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Foragers and violence
Message-ID: <4D9A3EE2.9000309@gnolls.org>


Dan wrote:
> I thought violent death would also be a factor. From what little I've read on
> hunter-gatherers, I gathered (sorry, bad pun!) that they were much more prone to
> violence and murder rates were far higher amongst them

Those are some very squishy numbers, based on a lot of assumptions, many 
of which are poor or entirely false.

First, most such arguments I've seen are based on non-hunter-gatherer 
cultures!  The Yanomamo, for instance, are swidden agriculturalists that 
live in villages, as are the New Guinea highlanders on which most of 
these comparisons are made.  It's astounding to see a competent 
anthropologist like Richard Wrangham making such comparisons with a 
straight face: you'd better go back more than a few thousand years if 
you're making an argument about 'human nature'.  (To be fair, he admits 
that the Yanomamo are farmers...but why, then, is that an interesting 
data point?  Primitive agriculture is still agriculture.)

Second, most of the violence figures for civilization are based on 
modern urban crime rates in Western nations, and omit the hundreds of 
millions of deaths due to war, genocide, famine, and plague.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_disasters_by_death_toll

Third, the few remaining hunter-gatherer societies only remain because 
their land is either so worthless to us that we never bothered to take 
it -- or because they were so warlike that we were unable to conquer 
them.  The Huaorani are warlike because their rainforest habitat is only 
*mostly* undesirable and they've had to survive the incursions of the 
Quechua, whereas the Hadza and !Kung, whose desert habitat no one wanted 
until very recently, are generally peaceful.  In other words, the 
sampling is not representative.

This isn't to say that foragers led an idyllic life free from violence. 
  But slavery, organized war, social class, and the entire notion that 
one can control another's behavior by threat of force are features of 
agricultural civilization, not of foragers.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Apr  4 22:38:35 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 15:38:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] New nuclear plants designed to be safest ever
In-Reply-To: <20110329063557.GY23560@leitl.org>
References: <AANLkTikc50-AwRw5e_RKm935EVnrG4u88pHph=j+E+cX@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110329063557.GY23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4D9A486B.5070107@mac.com>

On 03/28/2011 11:35 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 01:20:13PM -0700, Max More wrote:
>> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42258191/ns/business-world_business/
> When will they design people that will make use of them,
> everywhere, all the time?
>
> You cannot solve a political and human problem with
> technology. Not until tools themselves are persons,
> able to pursue their own agenda.
>

Hear, hear.  This latest nuclear hysteria has sent my working view of 
humanity as a whole through the floor.

- samantha



From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Apr  4 22:47:49 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 15:47:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinxLBxn0sMp40_Q9jzLgRDVyJvxhqUJTqK1d4y3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110401135812.GG23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinxLBxn0sMp40_Q9jzLgRDVyJvxhqUJTqK1d4y3@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D9A4A95.4080004@mac.com>

On 04/01/2011 07:33 AM, Mr Jones wrote:
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org 
> <mailto:eugen at leitl.org>> wrote:
>
>     What I find quite concerning is how few people find peak fossil
>     concerning.
>
>
> Ignorance is bliss.  At least for now.  Until the whole thing comes 
> crashing down around their ears, and they're starving to death.

I was concerned enough to think through what it would take 
technologically to be more than ready for Peak Oil.  BTW it turns out 
there is a LOT more natural gas available in the US and Europe than was 
thought.  Enough in the US for 100 years..  But I digress. What I can't 
do anything about is anyone actually applying the solutions instead of 
keeping their head firmly in the sand and wringing their hands like a 
bunch of brainless ninnies.

- samantha

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110404/63b362c5/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Apr  4 22:52:39 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2011 15:52:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D9A4BB7.40201@mac.com>

On 03/31/2011 08:25 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 3:59 AM, Eugen Leitl<eugen at leitl.org>  wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 11:49:45PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>> On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Eugen Leitl<eugen at leitl.org>  wrote:
>>>> Science has been slow to embrace Peak Oil, but they're
>>>> there now. (How long will it take for them to admit
>>>> Peak Coal?)
>>> I should expect hundreds of years. The US has something like 400 years
>>> of coal reserves, and China has a lot too.
>> Try around 2025.
>>
>> http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2396
> "The general consensus view on coal supplies has long been that we
> have hundreds of years of the stuff left"
>
> The articles you provided indicated that we were close to peak coal,
> but it also showed a slowly tailing off supply. What I'm saying is
> that after peak oil most charts show the supplies falling off rather
> precipitously,

No, I don't think so.  Peak Oil means "peak", i.e., that we manage to 
get less out of the ground year on year ever after that.  It doesn't 
mean the amount we get falls precipitously.   What would fall more 
rapidly is the percent of demand actually met as the demand curve for 
oil is still increasing.

>   but with peak coal there was a significant amount of
> coal available for a significant amount of time afterward. So peak oil
> is a much greater problem than peak coal (assuming they are even right
> there, which I'm not particularly giving in on yet.)
>
> Now one thing I found very concerning, and I hope it is not right is
> that the US is now a net coal importer.

Not from what I have read.  China has depleted enough of its coal supply 
that it is very likely it will seek to import coal from the US.

Build molten salt thorium reactors fast enough and you can forget about 
oil and coal as primary energy sources in a fairly short timeframe.

- samantha


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 04:28:34 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 21:28:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan (and eggs/avidin)
In-Reply-To: <703900.19973.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <4D991761.90100@gnolls.org>
	<703900.19973.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikgXtDif5cbrQDuyP6bNnccbPypOw@mail.gmail.com>

An Azar Gat paper "The Human Motivational Complex: Evolutionary Theory
And The Causes Of Hunter-Gatherer Fighting." goes into considerable
detail about the Australian aborigines who were pure hunter gatherers.

The number who died in wars or related violence was rather high, much
higher than the number who die in modern times from wars and related
violence.

Keith

2011/4/4 Dan <dan_ust at yahoo.com>:
> I thought violent death would also be a factor. From what little I've read
> on hunter-gatherers, I gathered (sorry, bad pun!) that they were much more
> prone to violence and murder rates were far higher amongst them.
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
> From: J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org>
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Sent: Sun, April 3, 2011 8:57:05 PM
> Subject: [ExI] Paleo lifespan (and eggs/avidin)
>
> [snip]
>
> Originally posted by Kelly Anderson:
>> Granted, the Hadza have tobacco, which traditional hunter gatherers
>> did not have to deal with, but this hardly sounds like a group that
>> lives to an average age of 70.
>
> Again: "The average modal age of *** adult *** death for hunter-gatherers is
> 72 with a range of 68-78 years."? Infant and child mortality pull the
> average down dramatically.
>
> Keep in mind that natural selection has continued to operate amongst the
> Hadza, selecting them for survival in their environment -- whereas
> 'civilized' humans haven't been selected for those skills for thousands of
> years.? (If anything, we've been selected for docility in response to
> arbitrary authority.)
>
> [snip]
> JS
> http://www.gnolls.org
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>



From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr  5 06:28:00 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2011 23:28:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikJk1xsiSetAvphFZnrMFnwpM_y3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>	<004501cbf233$2571cce0$705566a0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikJk1xsiSetAvphFZnrMFnwpM_y3Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000001cbf35a$9cc89b70$d659d250$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Keith Henson
...

>...I am most amused by the rich who think their money will protect them.
It never seems to occur to them that if the power goes off they will have no
money (most money is just magnetic spots on hard disks)...Keith


Even converting wealth to gold will not help much in worst case scenarios.
Anyone who tries to use it as a trade medium would likely become a target.
Hungry people are dangerous people.

spike






From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Apr  5 08:52:30 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 10:52:30 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <000001cbf35a$9cc89b70$d659d250$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
	<004501cbf233$2571cce0$705566a0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikJk1xsiSetAvphFZnrMFnwpM_y3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<000001cbf35a$9cc89b70$d659d250$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110405085230.GQ23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 04, 2011 at 11:28:00PM -0700, spike wrote:

> Even converting wealth to gold will not help much in worst case scenarios.
> Anyone who tries to use it as a trade medium would likely become a target.
> Hungry people are dangerous people.

Hungry people have to get to the tropical island first, and get
past security. Assuming they even know where it is.


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 10:54:23 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 12:54:23 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Foragers and violence
In-Reply-To: <4D9A3EE2.9000309@gnolls.org>
References: <4D9A3EE2.9000309@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikyd+7mGgp5RZ0MeqczdodtvL36fQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 4 April 2011 23:57, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:
> This isn't to say that foragers led an idyllic life free from violence. ?But
> slavery, organized war, social class, and the entire notion that one can
> control another's behavior by threat of force are features of agricultural
> civilization, not of foragers.

Moreover, this is not to say that there were not good reasons for the
neolithic revolution, not the least being its phenomenal competitive
success, indeed incomparably higher than that of industrialism,
communism, capitalism or anything else so far.

The idea in fact would be for transhumanism to be the next big thing... :-)

-- 
Stefano Vaj



From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 13:58:39 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 09:58:39 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <20110405085230.GQ23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTimr3khUoFqDFZ4qHKoY7ewzcBG=xA@mail.gmail.com>
	<004501cbf233$2571cce0$705566a0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikJk1xsiSetAvphFZnrMFnwpM_y3Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<000001cbf35a$9cc89b70$d659d250$@att.net>
	<20110405085230.GQ23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=ZO=qE1fzFF-8QdCcEx3dJH3VL_g@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 4:52 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> Hungry people have to get to the tropical island first, and get
> past security. Assuming they even know where it is.
>

May a Tsunami land on their heads.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/7948e69d/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr  5 14:59:18 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 07:59:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] IBM researchers create nanomedicine to kill bacteria
	where antibiotics fail
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimFm3u6akVOSS8FJ1CMgQAZ9U1_QA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimFm3u6akVOSS8FJ1CMgQAZ9U1_QA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <017a01cbf3a2$0b0eec50$212cc4f0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Zero Powers

>This strikes me as one of those "Holy Schlamoley" moments...
...
>http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/03/ibm-researchers-create-nanomedicine-to-ki
ll-bacteria-where-antibiotics-fail/
_______________________________________________



Zero Powers!  Where the heck have you been?  We looked all over for you man!

Welcome back.  {8-]

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr  5 17:14:52 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 10:14:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
Message-ID: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>

 

This caught my attention because I have long thought of this approach as
compelling:

 

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/04/6409132-spacex-shoots-for-ne
xt-big-thing

 

It has advantages in structural dynamics to have side-by-side boosters
instead of stacked vertically.  The aerodynamic disadvantage of that
arrangement is more than compensated by weight savings in structural
rigidity.  It has costs in replicating the thrust vector control so many
times, and it has disadvantages in reliability, since the risk of failure in
one or more of the 27 nozzles, but the design can likely tolerate any one
failing, and some pairs, so long as they are not adjacent.

 

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/a8f6ee89/attachment.html>

From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Tue Apr  5 17:27:24 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 13:27:24 -0400
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 5, 2011, at 1:14 PM, spike wrote:
>  
> This caught my attention because I have long thought of this approach as compelling:
>  
> http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/04/6409132-spacex-shoots-for-next-big-thing
>  
> It has advantages in structural dynamics to have side-by-side boosters instead of stacked vertically.  The aerodynamic disadvantage of that arrangement is more than compensated by weight savings in structural rigidity.  It has costs in replicating the thrust vector control so many times, and it has disadvantages in reliability, since the risk of failure in one or more of the 27 nozzles, but the design can likely tolerate any one failing, and some pairs, so long as they are not adjacent.
>  
> spike

I hope the claims made for this prove to be more accurate than those made for the space shuttle. There is more and a promotional video at:

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/05/powerful-rocket-world-ready-2012-spacex-says/

  John K Clark



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/278eeffc/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr  5 18:10:04 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:10:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>

 

 

>. On Behalf Of John Clark
Subject: Re: [ExI] new heavy lifter

 

On Apr 5, 2011, at 1:14 PM, spike wrote:

 

>>.This caught my attention because I have long thought of this approach as
compelling:

 

http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/04/6409132-spacex-shoots-for-ne
xt-big-thing

 

.

spike

 

>.I hope the claims made for this prove to be more accurate than those made
for the space shuttle. There is more and a promotional video at:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/05/powerful-rocket-world-ready-2012-s
pacex-says/

 

  >John K Clark

 

 

Hmmm, John there is a subtlety here I hope to up-clear.  

 

I often hear the comment that the space shuttle's capability was exaggerated
(30 tons to LEO, 12 tons return.)  It never came close to either, but it was
*theoretically* capable of both of these goals in its final configuration.
The original design specs called for carrying the Hubble Space Telescope to
orbit and returning it to the deck for periodic maintenance and relaunch.
The shuttle was never used for this purpose, but that was for a good reason:
it's dangerous as all hell to carry that much payload either direction.  In
either scenario, it stresses everything to the maximum.  We saw one shuttle
come apart on re-entry.  Carrying the maximum design load greatly increases
the risk of a structural failure resulting in the loss of vehicle and crew.

 

Also note: if they were to attempt a maximum payload re-entry, they need to
go to every level of heroics to get the human payload down.  It isn't just
the weight of the apes, it's the weight of all the associated life support
equipment, and the risk of a failure that may give the astronaut several
minutes forewarning of impending doom, with nothing to do about it but tell
her family and the whole world her final words.

 

One can imagine a single occupant aboard during an attempted landing, or
even none, since it would be inherently high risk.

 

Back in 1989 we returned a very valuable payload, the LDEF.  That one
weighed about 5 tons, and we were aaaaaallllll sweating blood in huge red
droplets until that payload rolled to a stop.  Nooooobody wanted to even
think about trying to return a 12 ton payload, nobody.  But I would estimate
a good ~85% chance the shuttle could have done it and landed safely, maybe
90%

 

spike

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/6fea4f0e/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 18:46:24 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:46:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
References: <AcvztPnZlwFsFlkXQK+uJJIW/d1Sww==>
	<005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimd0WKAEnsi5zUMXVizPYwDA0w=sg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/5 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>
>
> This caught my attention because I have long thought of this approach as
> compelling:
>
> http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/04/6409132-spacex-shoots-for-next-big-thing
>
They are saying $1000 per pound, $2200 per kg to LEO.  The cost to GEO
would be at least double, the cost per kW at 5 kg/kW for the lift
would be $22,000 plus the cost of the power sat materials and
rectenna.  Call it $24,000 per kW.  Paid off by the delivery of 80,000
kWh in a decade, the cost per kWh would be 30 cents per kWh.

Making synthetic oil out of power costs $10 per bbl for the capital
and $20 x 30 for the energy, or $610 per bbl.

Gasoline from that would sell for around $24 per gallon.

The Reaction Engine people think they can get the cost of a flight
down into the $2 million range for a high flight rate.  For that they
get 12 tons to LEO, or about 6 tons to GEO.

That's perhaps $400 per kg to GEO.  The lift cost would be $2,000 per
kW plus $1000 for parts and the rectenna.

This give a cost for power generation of around 4 cents per kWh.

Synthetic oil would be $90 per bbl and gasoline at about $4 per gallon.

Using laser boost on a Skylon type vehicle allows swapping oxygen for
payload so the payload to LEO would be 50 tons and the payload to GEO
35 tons.  You have to pay energy and capital on the lasers, but even
so, the cost of parts to GEO gets down to $100/kg and the cost per kW
to $1600.  At that the cost of power would be two cents.

The cost of synthetic oil would be around $50 per bbl and gasoline
around $2 per gallon.  If might be less if the synthetic oil companies
could buy off peak power and the numbers were expanded to where peak
demand could be met mostly from power satellites.

Power at a penny a kWh makes synthetic oil at $30 per bbl and gasoline
for under a dollar a gallon.

Keith

>
> It has advantages in structural dynamics to have side-by-side boosters
> instead of stacked vertically.? The aerodynamic disadvantage of that
> arrangement is more than compensated by weight savings in structural
> rigidity.? It has costs in replicating the thrust vector control so many
> times, and it has disadvantages in reliability, since the risk of failure in
> one or more of the 27 nozzles, but the design can likely tolerate any one
> failing, and some pairs, so long as they are not adjacent.
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>



From amara at kurzweilai.net  Tue Apr  5 18:41:41 2011
From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 11:41:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Invitation from Ray Kurzweil for S.F. screening of
	Transcendental Man
Message-ID: <011b01cbf3c1$1bea51d0$53bef570$@net>

Ray Kurzweil asked me to pass this along to the ExI list. (I plan to be at
the screening, and hope to catch up with folks in the ExItribe.)

From: Ray Kurzweil (April 5, 2011)

I'd like to invite members of the Extropy Institute list (started by my
friends Max and Natasha) to our much-anticipated screening of Transcendent
Man in San Francisco on April 14 (8 p.m. at the Palace of Fine Arts). I'll
be introducing the film, and afterward, director Barry Ptolemy and I will do
a Q&A with the audience. It's going to be a fun night, and I especially look
forward to meeting and talking to Extropy Institute list members. 

Where: Palace of Fine Arts 3301 Lyon Street San Francisco, CA 94123 

Tickets and info: transcendentman.com
<http://transcendentman.com/?utm_source=KurzweilAI.net&utm_medium=email&utm_
campaign=KurzweilAInet323>   

Reviews:

One of the top ten documentaries of the year" - International Documentary
Association "Not only is Transcendent Man the must-see film of 2011 but it
just might change your life forever." - Ain't It Cool News "Prophetic, [and]
mind-bending." - Fast Company

Press: 

Charlie Rose: Ray Kurzweil and Barry Ptolemy on the film 'Transcendent Man'
<http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11558>  [VIDEO] 3/18/11; Voice of
America: Ray Kurzweil and
<http://blogs.voanews.com/digital-frontiers/2011/03/18/transcending-man/>
"Transcendent Man" [VIDEO] 3/18/11; Voice of America: Barry Ptolemy on
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpcgIsgrmWE> "Transcendent Man" [VIDEO]
3/17/111; The Economist: The New Overlords
<http://www.economist.com/node/18329616?story_id=18329616&fsrc=rss>
3/10/11; CNN Newsroom with Ali Velshi: The Big
<http://newsroom.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/07/big-i-transcendent-man/> "I" -
Transcendent Man [VIDEO] 3/7/11; MSNBC.com: Ray and Barry on The Dylan
Ratigan Show <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31510813/#41856470>  [VIDEO]
3/1/11; Fox News "America's Newsroom": Rise of the Machines Not So
Farfetched
<http://video.foxnews.com/v/4556962/rise-of-the-machines-not-so-farfetched>
- Interview with Bill Hemmer [VIDEO] 2/25/11; TIME Magazine: 2045: The Year
Man Becomes Immortal 2/10/11.
<http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2048138,00.html> 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/4301f8cc/attachment.html>

From amara at kurzweilai.net  Tue Apr  5 20:10:50 2011
From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 13:10:50 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Invitation from Ray Kurzweil for S.F. screening of
	Transcendent Man
In-Reply-To: <011b01cbf3c1$1bea51d0$53bef570$@net>
References: <011b01cbf3c1$1bea51d0$53bef570$@net>
Message-ID: <01cb01cbf3cd$8fc26c80$af474580$@net>

To clarify: there are no complementary tickets available (the event is being
produced by a San Francisco promoter). (And I spelled "Transcendent" wrong
in the subject line.)  

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/43001a87/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Tue Apr  5 20:02:29 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 13:02:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>

U.S. traffic deaths dropped by 3 percent to a record annual low of 32,788
for 2010 even as motorists drove more in an improving economy, projected
government figures showed on Friday.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42383028/ns/health-health_care/

Good news for longevity! Once we finally conquer aging, attention will shift
even more strongly to progressively reducing the death rate from accidents.


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/9c4c7b32/attachment.html>

From zero.powers at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 21:47:47 2011
From: zero.powers at gmail.com (Zero Powers)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 14:47:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] IBM researchers create nanomedicine to kill bacteria
 where antibiotics fail
In-Reply-To: <017a01cbf3a2$0b0eec50$212cc4f0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTimFm3u6akVOSS8FJ1CMgQAZ9U1_QA@mail.gmail.com>
	<017a01cbf3a2$0b0eec50$212cc4f0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=MxCt3GKq2Vi_eiKZUAZzrQEKs1A@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Spike -- I still lurk.  But only contribute when I find something I think
might be of interest.  Hope this finds you doing well.

Take care,
Zero

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 7:59 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
> >... On Behalf Of Zero Powers
>
> >This strikes me as one of those "Holy Schlamoley" moments...
> ...
> >
> http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/03/ibm-researchers-create-nanomedicine-to-ki
> ll-bacteria-where-antibiotics-fail/
> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> Zero Powers!  Where the heck have you been?  We looked all over for you
> man!
>
> Welcome back.  {8-]
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110405/2175e888/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 21:56:43 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:56:43 +0100
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/5 Max More commented:
> U.S. traffic deaths dropped by 3 percent to a record annual low of 32,788
> for 2010 even as motorists drove more in an improving economy, projected
> government figures showed on Friday.
>
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42383028/ns/health-health_care/
>
> Good news for longevity! Once we finally conquer aging, attention will shift
> even more strongly to progressively reducing the death rate from accidents.
>
>

The 'improving economy' bit is just government spin.

Miles driven correlates strongly with the price of gas, not the economy.

There has been a consistent downward trend in traffic deaths for many
years. This is indeed good news.

This Wall street Journal article (Dec 2010) considers some of the reasons:
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703734204576019602118693930.html?mod=googlenews_wsj>

Quotes:
The dramatic decline in highway fatalities in the U.S. since 2005 is a
piece of good news that's also a bit of a mystery. Is it the result of
better vehicle safety technology? Less stupid, reckless behavior?
Smarter strategies for easing teens into the responsibilities of
driving? Or just an unexpected positive side effect of a slumping
economy?

A new study by two University of Michigan researchers of detailed
federal crash statistics from 2005 to 2008 suggests all these reasons
could be behind the reduced death toll.

Alcohol and speed, he says, explain why so many people die on the
highway alone, without hitting another car. Out of 34,017 total
accidents in 2008 ascribed in federal data to a collision, about
62%?just over 21,000?involved a single-vehicle crash. Such deadly
wrecks declined by 9% between 2005 and 2008, less than the 13% decline
in deadly collisions overall.

So what's helping to reduce deaths? Technology deserves some credit,
according to the data. Deaths in side-impact crashes declined between
2005 and 2008 at a faster rate than the decline for deaths overall.
That suggests that side airbags are helping more people survive
crashes, the researchers found.

The Michigan study found a nearly 20% decline in deaths among young
drivers, age 16 to 25. Among the possible reasons: the increasing
number of states that use graduated licensing programs that delay
granting full driving privileges until teens have more experience, and
rising teen joblessness.
etc......................

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

So fewer traffic deaths has multiple reasons.  No magic bullet here.


BillK



From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr  5 22:02:13 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:02:13 -0700
Subject: [ExI] IBM researchers create nanomedicine to kill bacteria
	where antibiotics fail
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=MxCt3GKq2Vi_eiKZUAZzrQEKs1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimFm3u6akVOSS8FJ1CMgQAZ9U1_QA@mail.gmail.com>	<017a01cbf3a2$0b0eec50$212cc4f0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=MxCt3GKq2Vi_eiKZUAZzrQEKs1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <010d01cbf3dd$1f6202b0$5e260810$@att.net>

Lurk schmurk, you should post stuff man!  We like your stuff from a few
years ago.  We missed you.   I recall last time we went looking for you, I
was surprised you had so little internet presence.  In any case, I hope you
do post, and that this finds you doing well too.

 

Me: laid off for a year and a half now, after 26 years at Lockheed.  I have
a four year old son, wife still working at the Heed, don't know for how
long, hoping for the best.

 

Later!

 

spike

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Zero Powers
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2011 2:48 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] IBM researchers create nanomedicine to kill bacteria
where antibiotics fail

 

Hi Spike -- I still lurk.  But only contribute when I find something I think
might be of interest.  Hope this finds you doing well.

 

Take care,

Zero

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 7:59 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:


>... On Behalf Of Zero Powers


>This strikes me as one of those "Holy Schlamoley" moments...

...

>http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/03/ibm-researchers-create-nanomedicine-to-ki
<http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/03/ibm-researchers-create-nanomedicine-to-ki
%0d%0all-bacteria-where-antibiotics-fail/> 
ll-bacteria-where-antibiotics-fail/

_______________________________________________



Zero Powers!  Where the heck have you been?  We looked all over for you man!

Welcome back.  {8-]

spike

_______________________________________________
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/20110405/d00ec901/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr  5 22:09:36 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:09:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <011501cbf3de$272b0090$758101b0$@att.net>

>On Behalf Of BillK

2011/4/5 Max More commented:
>> U.S. traffic deaths dropped by 3 percent to a record annual low of 
...

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

>...So fewer traffic deaths has multiple reasons.  No magic bullet
here...BillK


Ja.  I suspect there are a number of subtle items that make a difference,
such as improvements in tires.  In the 1990s, Japan incorporated started
developing stock motorcycles which would go 190 mph.  Those kinds of speeds
require special tires, otherwise the centrifugal force can unseat the bead
on the rim, causing the tubeless tire to lose pressure, which can be harmful
or seriously fatal at those speeds.  The fast bikes came stock with those
tires, but they are expensive, so a problem arose: yahoos would buy the
bikes new, wear out the tires, replace with lower rated cheaper tires, sell
the bike, the next owner gets it out, turns it loose, tire fails, prole is
slain.  

Answer: tire companies dropped their cheaper lines, made all their tires
capable of taking insane speeds, result: everyone pays more for rubber, but
all bikers are actually safer.

spike






From ryanobjc at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 22:23:23 2011
From: ryanobjc at gmail.com (Ryan Rawson)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 15:23:23 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Invitation from Ray Kurzweil for S.F. screening of
 Transcendent Man
In-Reply-To: <01cb01cbf3cd$8fc26c80$af474580$@net>
References: <011b01cbf3c1$1bea51d0$53bef570$@net>
	<01cb01cbf3cd$8fc26c80$af474580$@net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=E1EMDYhLK1Td4S_rr8anVg=hndg@mail.gmail.com>

Is ray showing up in person?
On Apr 5, 2011 1:28 PM, "Amara D. Angelica" <amara at kurzweilai.net> wrote:
> To clarify: there are no complementary tickets available (the event is
being
> produced by a San Francisco promoter). (And I spelled "Transcendent" wrong
> in the subject line.)
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/c51e7240/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Tue Apr  5 22:50:12 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 18:50:12 -0400
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <011501cbf3de$272b0090$758101b0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<011501cbf3de$272b0090$758101b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTindm5Gd77qwEizCd5ZbiZbeuYM88w@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:09 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> on the rim, causing the tubeless tire to lose pressure, which can be harmful
> or seriously fatal at those speeds. ?The fast bikes came stock with those

haha... seriously fatal.  As opposed to mildly fatal or even the
comically fatal?

I know there are degrees of fatality - it just made me laugh.



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr  6 00:54:35 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 17:54:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTindm5Gd77qwEizCd5ZbiZbeuYM88w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>	<011501cbf3de$272b0090$758101b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTindm5Gd77qwEizCd5ZbiZbeuYM88w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <004101cbf3f5$33486270$99d92750$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty
Subject: Re: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 6:09 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> on the rim, causing the tubeless tire to lose pressure, which can be 
>> harmful or seriously fatal at those speeds...

>...haha... seriously fatal.  As opposed to mildly fatal or even the
comically fatal?

>I know there are degrees of fatality - it just made me laugh.


Mike, being mildly killed is one thing.  Being severely killed is where
Alcor can't find enough of the prole to freeze.

We in the west make a big deal of the Amish habit beheading infidels, but
that to me looks like the mildest form of killing.  It would actually in
some ways make Alcor's job easier, assuming the team is present and ready to
take the appropriate actions.

So, yes there are degrees of fatality.

spike






From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 03:51:45 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 21:51:45 -0600
Subject: [ExI] THE END for fossil power
In-Reply-To: <20110403201007.GY23560@leitl.org>
References: <20110325162148.GX23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinUqvJ417yXGGK=uGPf=TV=ODMS6wfCdZzO3gF1@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110326095909.GH23560@leitl.org>
	<AANLkTinjSSjDNYQVK45hHB7v1BriMVOwF7bAmK+7o2Ht@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110402224741.GA3953@ofb.net> <20110403092239.GS23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTin4ogBjbenkZeBRqFKdEY-zPOKnug@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimqDGj3k_4b15tYmA5ve59q5r+AGg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110403201007.GY23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimAU1zcYZ-b+n7P2mi7TJEF9_gXtQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 2:10 PM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 03, 2011 at 12:15:44PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
>> Some of the main challenges with hydrogen vs. synfuel are:
>> 1) Storage. Hydrogen being such a small molecule, it escapes any
>> attempt to contain it with relative ease.
>
> The petrochemical industry maintains a considerable
> high-pressure hydrogen pipeline network across much
> of Europe.

At what cost? This goes to the infrastructure issue. Europe is of
course more dense than the US, and such infrastructure typically costs
us more because the pipes are longer. I wonder if there is any
significant leakage from the European system. Of course, electricity
is lost in long distance transmission, so this could be seen as an
equivalent sort of loss.

> Hydrogen at normal pressure is no big deal,
> and can be easily stored in gas holders. Hydrogen in
> pressurized gas cyliders is also old, familiar stuff.
> There is some volatility with ultra-high pressure
> composite storage for vehicles. I frankly think it's
> a stupid idea. There's more hydrogen in methanol than
> in liquid hydrogen, by volume.

The public face of hydrogen is that the exhaust produced is water.
Turning clean hydrogen into methanol, ethanol or some other
petrochemical that produces toxic exhaust is going to make it less
desirable from that point of view. Unless the full synthetic burns
much cleaner... but I don't know if it would. It is no surprise to me
that methanol has more hydrogen by volume.

>> 2) Energy density. Hydrogen stores less energy per pound of fuel.
>
> Not a problem for stationary applications.

True enough.

> In case of EV, consider
> that ICEs have a street efficiency of about 20%.

Sorry, no comprendo EV? ICEs?

>> 3) Expense. Hydrogen fuel cells (the most direct way to turn hydrogen
>> into electricity) are currently rather expensive.
>
> Hydrogen burns just fine, and in micro co-gen efficiency is >90%.

So you're saying you could just burn hydrogen in a little generator?
Would that be as clean as a fuel cell? Would there be pollution as a
side effect?

>> 4) Infrastructure. Converting from current fuel systems to hydrogen is
>> massively expensive. Current pipelines don't handle hydrogen well (see
>
> Depends, catalytic burners do fine, as to Stirlings.

But the current oil/gasoline infrastructure can't handle hydrogen... I
understand that replacing all of the gasoline infrastructure with
equivalent hydrogen infrastructure would cost billions if not
trillions.

>> point 1).
>
> Only high-pressure pipelines for natural gas. Yes, you need special
> pipe materials, larger crossections and different pumps.

i.e. it will be quite expensive.

>> 5) Public acceptance. People still equate hydrogen with the
>> Hindenburg. In some ways, hydrogen is kind of like nuclear power in
>> the sense that people don't understand the true risks. Technological
>> solutions, and public experience will overcome this, I hope.
>
> Small scale hydrogen should take care of that.

We can hope.

>> 6) Some places with lots of energy don't have lots of water. Arizona
>> (solar) Wyoming (wind). This probably isn't a major issue.
>
> Water demand is negligible, there's 55.5 mol/l in water.

Just to double check. Suppose that a wind turbine creates 1 MWatt. To
store 1 MW in hydrogen using electrolysis for a day, how much water is
required?

>> The energy density problem is particularly difficult in mobile
>> applications (cars).
>
> Hydrogen doesn't work in cars very well, and probably never will.
> Liquid hydrogen could be quite interesting for aerospace, however,

That's too bad since people are so focused on it.

>> Hydrogen sounds like a great idea. It is a great idea. We just need
>> more research to make it practical and we need to understand its
>
> The research part is already done. Apart from minor things like
> really cheap and durable hydrogen fuel cells.

And mass production... there is a lot of research and development
needed to produce this stuff on a mass scale. In addition, I've heard
of interesting research on ways to pack more hydrogen into matrices
such that you might be able to carry months worth of fuel in a very
small package. Whether such research is practical or not remains to be
seen, but it is very interesting, and if it is successful, it will
make hydrogen practical for automobiles.

>> limitations, particularly with regard to energy density. Some schemes
>> for packing the hydrogen into latices have been proposed which would
>> solve this problem, if they can actually build them.
>
> The energy density is a non-issue for immobile applications.

Yes, but it is a big issue for mobile applications.

>> Of course, synfuels still have the familiar problems including
>> pollution and CO2 production.
>
> Synfuels from CO2 scrubbed from air or fuel gas are carbon neutral
> by definition. E.g. DMFC ran from synmethanol obviously has a very
> good carbon and pollution story, nevermind efficiency.

I don't personally care as much about CO2 as pollution. Are synfuels
pollution free? I'm guessing not... but would be pleasantly surprised
if they were.

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 04:38:15 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:38:15 -0600
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>

I think the end game for reducing vehicle fatalities (esp the 21,000
solo idiots) is fully autonomous vehicles. It will take a decade or so
to get the technology common enough to save many lives, but I have
hope that eventually, this number will go way down. My prediction is
that we'll see some form of highway autonomy in the 2014 model year.

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 04:24:13 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:24:13 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=-cqYeA_kg3XAvLbT6FE7fqCWT-g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
	<001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=-cqYeA_kg3XAvLbT6FE7fqCWT-g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikKOhtQjkzApz9qC14CaP+R3v2r_w@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/3 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 3:08 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> 2011/4/2 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
>> Energy is clearly central to the endeavors of human beings and will be
>> to our successors as well. Let's do a little exercise... Let's suppose
>> that in 100 years most intelligence is non-human. That is, it runs on
>> a non-biological substrate. I would suppose that such a substrate
>> would be able to survive without too much difficulty in outer space.
>> Given the nearly limitless solar energy that could be harvested by
>> orbiting the sun, I kind of wonder if earth itself won't be a
>> backwater in 100 years.
>
> I'm perhaps a touch idealistic, but I would hope that it's been maintained
> as an 'animal preserve' so to speak.

I think of many outcomes, this one is very much within the realm of
possibility. The ethics of preservation would have to be accepted by
the AGIs... which is why artificial ethics is such an important area
for the future of biological humanity (not to mention the rest of the
biosphere). I can see Earth being a museum piece.

>> If intelligent robots can survive in space
>> without the life support that biological humans require, then
>> harvesting the needed materials from asteroids, comets and other
>> sources will be cheaper than bringing materials up from earth to
>> space.
>
> Exactly. ?And to increase real-estate when necessary, you tow hunks from
> space into an orbit

Precisely. Of course you eventually run out of hunks, and at that
point, earth starts to look like something you could harvest hunks
from... hopefully there won't be quite that level of greed in the
AGIs... I hope, I hope...

>> So the whole concept of the importance of the space elevator, beaming
>> solar energy down to earth, solving global warming and so forth may be
>> a problem for the remaining biological legacy on earth, but may not be
>> "where it's happening" in the future.
>
> I see abundant solar energy solutions as a precursor to the Singularity.

I don't think there is enough time. We aren't even working on space
based solar, except as a mental exercise.

> ?Perhaps I'm wrong, but I think they're very necessary in the grand scheme
> of things. ?I'd like to see humanity build a solar/hydrogen economy, seeing
> as it's the most abundant element in our Universe.

I think it would be nice too.

>> This is just a thought experiment, I'm curious what you all think.
>
> Sign me up for virtualization, I'm game.

That's a separate question. Very interesting but off thread to some
extent... I'm talking about intelligence that was always
non-biological first and foremost.

>> Of course we would, but if we didn't spend money on war, we certainly
>> wouldn't be spending it on something less politically important. At
>> some point, when gasoline is $20 a gallon, and there is no hope of it
>> ever going under $15 a gallon, then the people of the USA will raise
>> the priority of energy management to the point that such spending will
>> seem justified to the point that the politicians will pay attention.
>
> I just don't understand how the foresight isn't in place already.

Propaganda. The power brokers in oil and government (and they
cooperate) don't want a switch from oil to anything else until it is
absolutely necessary.

Sperm whale oil sold for $200 a barrel in 1823 (equivalent price by
2003 standards*), but by 1855 this animal product was fetching more
than seven times that amount. Those higher prices helped prompt the
permanent switch from whale oil to other lighting fluids and
eventually electricity. (Whale oil was only used by the rich, and was
the best fuel for lighting. It wasn't widely used, other liquid fuels
and candles were used by poorer folk.)

The point is that there are people who don't want us to have this
foresight, especially in public thought, and so we don't. Gasoline is
highly subsidized to this day. If we paid the full cost of gasoline at
the pump, we would be switching to something else rather more quickly.

> How can
> we not see the giant cliff we're headed towards? ?It's not as if the writing
> hasn't been on the wall for decades. ?Not to mention previous 'empires'
> being brought down by extremely similar situations. ?The perfect storm of
> sorts. ?I get the 300+ million sheeple in the USoA sleeping at the wheel,
> they've been programmed well. ?What confuses me, is how upper management,
> the top 10%, sees it as being in their own best interest to fleece the
> middle/lower class they skim off of.

Follow the money. Who donates to politician's reelection funds more
than oil companies? Why were George Bush 1 and 2 elected? Partly
because of their connections to the oil industry.

>?I guess everything's international and
> out-sourced enough to where location is irrelevant. ?Bad time to have
> inferior manufacturing huh?

Perhaps. I'm very concerned about the government numbers that came out
this week indicating that we have twice as many people working for the
government than we do in manufacturing. That seems very far out of
balance to me.

>> Sorry for the cynical attitude today... but I just don't see
>> politicians as an intelligent life form.
>
> I'd like humanity to revolutionize governance by way of the internet. ?Gov
> 2.0 type deal.

I'd like to see an AGI elected to be president, once it's smart enough.

>> > It's silly, we spend $400B plus a year importing oil, yet $100B
>> > investment
>> > in renewable/sustainable energy is unheard of?
>>
>> Yup. The idea that Al Gore would have done things differently is a
>> pipe dream... even with his green ideas, I don't think it would have
>> turned out all that differently.
>
> I agree. ?Politicians go in with the best of intentions, I'm sure they're
> not all evil/incompetent. ?But reality sets in quickly. ?It's very
> entrenched, I have no doubt. ?Which is why drastic actions are called for.
> ?No incumbents allowed, and 'none-of-the-above' would be a great start.

I couldn't agree more, but the bigger problem is the entrenched
bureaucratic monster. That's why I rather like the idea of government
shutting down... permanently, if possible.

>> I love the spin on Libya. It's so clearly about oil, why do they have
>> to maintain the facade that it's human rights concerns?
>
> Because we're complacent enough to allow it to continue.

I think the American public is losing it's complacency. See "tea party".

>> We haven't
>> done crap in Sudan. There is more human suffering in Haiti, Sumatra
>> and Japan than there ever will be in Libya, but Libya has oil... it's
>> the only difference.
>
> The only one that matters right now, yes.
> I just can't wrap my mind around this suicidal kind of thinking. ?Each day
> we push ahead with this garbage oil business, is a month (just a guess,
> picked an arbitrary #, no sources) we're going to pay for it in spades down
> the road. ?I just can't comprehend how killing one another is a better
> choice than cooperating until we colonize space, and then you can go your
> way, I go mine, and we've got more room than we could ever know what to do
> with.

Cooperation is not possible. Only competition. But competition can be
non-violent. It has been pointed out that no two nations both of which
have a McDonalds have ever declared war on each other. It's an
interesting point. Once you are part of the international marketplace,
it's tough to throw that away for a disagreement. It pulled India and
Pakistan back from the brink.

> We need to do it because we can, and it's necessary. ?Not because it's
> profitable.

But if the costs are born at the pump, then it will be profitable to
do the right thing. Pay for the wars with gasoline tax. Pay for CO2
sequestration with gasoline taxes. It's the only fair thing to do.
We're hurting bad soon if we do anything different.

-Kelly



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr  6 04:52:04 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 21:52:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002001cbf416$60be1940$223a4bc0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
Subject: Re: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low

>...I think the end game for reducing vehicle fatalities (esp the 21,000
solo idiots) is fully autonomous vehicles. It will take a decade or so to
get the technology common enough to save many lives, but I have hope that
eventually, this number will go way down. My prediction is that we'll see
some form of highway autonomy in the 2014 model year.  -Kelly


I predict we will not.  We haven't worked out the liability issues.  Those
seem to get bigger over time instead of smaller.  Technically we can do this
now, but legally, we are nowhere close, and the goal seems to be receding
all the time.

spike









From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr  6 05:11:28 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 22:11:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimd0WKAEnsi5zUMXVizPYwDA0w=sg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AcvztPnZlwFsFlkXQK+uJJIW/d1Sww==>	<005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimd0WKAEnsi5zUMXVizPYwDA0w=sg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002101cbf419$16e04f70$44a0ee50$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Keith Henson
Subject: Re: [ExI] new heavy lifter

2011/4/5 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>
>> This caught my attention because I have long thought of this approach as
compelling:
>
>>
http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/04/04/6409132-spacex-shoots-for-ne
xt-big-thing


>...They are saying $1000 per pound, $2200 per kg to LEO...Keith


Oh my, goooood luck SpaceX, I do hope you make it.

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/05/powerful-rocket-world-ready-2012-s
pacex-says/?test=faces

If they manage to achieve 1000 bucks a pound to LEO, it will be a new day
for space, and perhaps give us a new take on how we live our lives.  A
breakthrough of that magnitude would enable vast constellations of
communications satellites, so that much if not most travel would be
obviated.  Meeting with colleagues in an office would by an uncompetitive
thing to do: the opportunity cost of spending half an hour each way in a car
to get to an office would be far too high.  With far better information
technology, our needs would be far better met by staying close to our homes.
Energy would be used far differently from how it is used today.

Imagine for instance we re-examine many of our most basic assumptions.  I
already mentioned our daily trip to the office, but imagine we had
sufficient secure bandwidth to have all our business meetings right in our
own homes.  Imagine instead of going shopping for groceries for instance, we
make a list of items that are running low on the computer, visible in some
form, and by some mysterious process several sources which has that
particular item or product compete with each other to supply it to you.  You
choose the best deal, the item or product appears at your home perhaps
within minutes, possibly from a source over on the adjacent street, hand
carried by the person who lives there.  

Imagine your finding no further use for some household item of value, and
you list it somehow for a certain price.  At some unspecified time, a person
shows up at your door to collect the item and pay you, and carry it
somewhere else to where some other person has purchased the item for enough
profit to cover the local who picked it up.  Bricks and mortar stores, gone
with the wind, poof.  Shopping malls, poof.  Most offices, gone.  Most
traffic, gone.  Farms, still there, still producing food in much the same
way as always, still using energy, but a lot more of them, a lot smaller, a
wildly efficient market coming from nearby to take away the food as it
ripens, allowing small farms and small food value-added operations to exist,
with information flow allowing everyone to buy exactly what they need or
want, and everyone to sell exactly what they don't need or don't want, or
can make.

Look at what we already have, stuff which popped into existence just in the
past couple decades: the internet has enabled Craig's List, eBay, and their
many variations.  So much of what used to cost us money is now really free:
information we used to extract from books can now be accessed much more
easily.  Eventually our other needs will be filled the same way.  As energy
costs go up, we will find ways to move around less, and do everything much
more efficiently.

Cheaper access to space will allow information to move better, even if it
doesn't move us more effectively.

spike







From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 06:28:03 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 23:28:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <002101cbf419$16e04f70$44a0ee50$@att.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimd0WKAEnsi5zUMXVizPYwDA0w=sg@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101cbf419$16e04f70$44a0ee50$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinG9mGPAbnMb-jhmciZdUsJvhGCPA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 10:11 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> If they manage to achieve 1000 bucks a pound to LEO, it will be a new day
> for space, and perhaps give us a new take on how we live our lives. ?A
> breakthrough of that magnitude would enable vast constellations of
> communications satellites, so that much if not most travel would be
> obviated. ?Meeting with colleagues in an office would by an uncompetitive
> thing to do: the opportunity cost of spending half an hour each way in a car
> to get to an office would be far too high. ?With far better information
> technology, our needs would be far better met by staying close to our homes.
> Energy would be used far differently from how it is used today.

[etc.]

Most of the examples you list are already quite possible, and in fact have
been tried, with the Internet today.  They simply don't work, for reasons
having nothing to do with the cost of bandwidth.



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr  6 08:52:06 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 10:52:06 +0200
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <004101cbf3f5$33486270$99d92750$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<011501cbf3de$272b0090$758101b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTindm5Gd77qwEizCd5ZbiZbeuYM88w@mail.gmail.com>
	<004101cbf3f5$33486270$99d92750$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110406085206.GL23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 05:54:35PM -0700, spike wrote:

> Mike, being mildly killed is one thing.  Being severely killed is where
> Alcor can't find enough of the prole to freeze.

Unfortunately, bike accidents (particularly for people who
think helmets are optional or minimal) frequently make for vent
vegetable, which is a) extremely expensive b) not worth suspending.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr  6 09:01:13 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 11:01:13 +0200
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110406090113.GM23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 10:38:15PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> I think the end game for reducing vehicle fatalities (esp the 21,000
> solo idiots) is fully autonomous vehicles. It will take a decade or so
> to get the technology common enough to save many lives, but I have
> hope that eventually, this number will go way down. My prediction is
> that we'll see some form of highway autonomy in the 2014 model year.

It will happen the year an insurance will find the risk acceptable
to offer affordable insurance. Vendor liability is an issue even
now, consider the potential for litigation for autonomous vehicles.
Ugh.

-- 
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 pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 07:49:38 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 08:49:38 +0100
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=vf_VHe4Oqe6F8JQn4J93Bwc6uxA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 5:38 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> I think the end game for reducing vehicle fatalities (esp the 21,000
> solo idiots) is fully autonomous vehicles. It will take a decade or so
> to get the technology common enough to save many lives, but I have
> hope that eventually, this number will go way down. My prediction is
> that we'll see some form of highway autonomy in the 2014 model year.
>
>


Self driving cars might start as an option, which the driver can
enable when wanted.
Like if you want to catch up with emails during your one-hour commute.

Autonomous cars will, of course, be recording everything that happens
so that in the event of an accident there will be exact evidence as to
who or what was the cause.  Just a more advanced version of the black
box recorders already in most new cars today.

Driving is regarded as 'self-expression' by many, so many drivers
would still prefer to drive themselves. It is a pity that the 'self'
they are expressing is an aggressive yahoo.

It would be really neat if you stagger out the bar after a celebration
and the car car says 'Forget it - I'm driving us home'.   :)


BillK


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 12:47:51 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:47:51 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikKOhtQjkzApz9qC14CaP+R3v2r_w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTin+-F1jeGJJFigZ2-SscLgX=bLOdxPAdtwGtHri@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTinBJwPNRgSL3J5Jxa3SXo6KsDjVucMGaR0Qweat@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=r6t1mKVsx15PTq+9SW_t9H9tssw@mail.gmail.com>
	<001001cbf145$bcc11900$36434b00$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimO=0iToNuE8xCZnJUQxjAgxaYHzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikWH1pmJTxQDKHQS1=4crr1bUK_zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=-cqYeA_kg3XAvLbT6FE7fqCWT-g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikKOhtQjkzApz9qC14CaP+R3v2r_w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikuGE679VDDGgJb8RNr6N8ew_PMfw@mail.gmail.com>

On 6 April 2011 06:24, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think of many outcomes, this one is very much within the realm of
> possibility. The ethics of preservation would have to be accepted by
> the AGIs... which is why artificial ethics is such an important area
> for the future of biological humanity (not to mention the rest of the
> biosphere). I can see Earth being a museum piece.

I have no definite position on the subject. Of course, what appears
essential i the preservation of the *information* - which if anything
is more likely to succeed in a posthuman and technologically avanced
context as opposed to its contrary. Do we really want to preserve the
actual *rocks*? I am not so sure, but I am also not sure of the
contrary. :-/

OTOH, I do not see what this may have to do with "artificial" ethics
or with ethics at all. I do expect anthropomorfic AGIs to have
splitted, controversial opinions on the subject as most biological
humans today do. I do not see how and why running in silicon would
change one's view in this respect.

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 12:53:56 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 14:53:56 +0200
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinG9mGPAbnMb-jhmciZdUsJvhGCPA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimd0WKAEnsi5zUMXVizPYwDA0w=sg@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101cbf419$16e04f70$44a0ee50$@att.net>
	<BANLkTinG9mGPAbnMb-jhmciZdUsJvhGCPA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim3sg2_O5VTj2ZcM3NnT8fuX67cnQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 6 April 2011 08:28, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
> Most of the examples you list are already quite possible, and in fact have
> been tried, with the Internet today. ?They simply don't work, for reasons
> having nothing to do with the cost of bandwidth.

Yep. This was also my first thought. Actually, available bandwith
already exceeds in most places by orders of magnitude what is required
by things as trivial as e-commerce or telework.

-- 
Stefano Vaj



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr  6 13:23:26 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:23:26 +0200
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <002101cbf419$16e04f70$44a0ee50$@att.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimd0WKAEnsi5zUMXVizPYwDA0w=sg@mail.gmail.com>
	<002101cbf419$16e04f70$44a0ee50$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110406132326.GR23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 10:11:28PM -0700, spike wrote:

> Oh my, goooood luck SpaceX, I do hope you make it.
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/04/05/powerful-rocket-world-ready-2012-s
> pacex-says/?test=faces

Sanity check from http://aldaylongmusings.blogspot.com/2011/04/spacex-sanity-check.html
thinks the claims are not outrageous.
 
-- 
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 bbenzai at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  6 13:39:04 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 06:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1302091203.27679.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <800426.81143.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I can see Earth being a museum piece.
> 


Permanently lock away all that useful rock and metal, for the sake of a zoo for a few primitive biological organisms?

I think there are probably better solutions.


Ben Zaiboc


      



From dan_ust at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  6 14:52:34 2011
From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 07:52:34 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <800426.81143.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <800426.81143.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <852847.50723.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

You speak as if Earth contained most of the rock and metal in the solar system 
if not the galaxy. There's plenty of rock and metal around to play with.

Regards,

Dan

From: Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com>
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Sent: Wed, April 6, 2011 9:39:04 AM
Subject: Re: [ExI] Millions of tons to space

Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I can see Earth being a museum piece.

Permanently lock away all that useful rock and metal, for the sake of a zoo for 
a few primitive biological organisms?

I think there are probably better solutions.

Ben Zaiboc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/63560955/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr  6 15:30:09 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:30:09 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <852847.50723.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <800426.81143.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<852847.50723.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20110406153009.GT23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:52:34AM -0700, Dan wrote:
> You speak as if Earth contained most of the rock and metal in the solar system 
> if not the galaxy. There's plenty of rock and metal around to play with.

Most of the metals in the solar system are locked in the inner
planets. There are 4 MT/s of flux to work with, and more if you
use fusables for fuel.

-- 
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 hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu  Tue Apr  5 10:31:35 2011
From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera)
Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2011 06:31:35 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
Message-ID: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>

A number of points in Mirco's argument have face validity, but they oversimplify the dynamics at work. As a psychologist, I must interject some data he has not factored in to this discussion. I'm not suggesting a resolution to the discussion; I just want to demonstrate that it is more complicated when we are dealing with humans. Human selection processes in recent generations have likely been significantly influenced by non-rational cultural factors such as these: 

Microaggressions: people often internalize racists beliefs and behave accordingly without conscious awareness or intent of being racist. The proposition that human "races" exist is a social construct; there are variable human phenotypes for hair color and texture as well as skin color. Some variations/mutations will confer advantages over time, but the discrete categories we try to group them in at a particular moment in time are not robust. Thus it is difficult to make sense of microaggressions as being genetically driven. Seehttp://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=microaggressions+&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C22&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

Implicit biases: these are prevalent and largely outside of conscious awareness. Decisions about, for example, who to breed with are influence by such biases which we are not even aware of, and I'd suggest these are not genetically driven biases. Do some Implicit Association Tests athttps://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/ to discover biases you may hold that you are not conscious of.

Psychology of oppression and social change: those in positions of power create rules that perpetuate their power and facilitate the continued oppression of those who might threaten their power. People with traits more different from those in positions of power are systematically oppressed more aggressively. Consider that law enforcement (police) are instruments of the oppressors. Much on this topic has been published:http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=psychology+oppression+&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C22&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

Lastly,  human societal status and education (intelligence increase), at least in recent generations, has had significant influence from factors beyond one's genetic predisposition. I submit it is self-evident that access to information and literacy, for example is a relatively new advantage available to the non-elites.Tim Leary wrote much about this is Chaos and Cyber Culture (http://www.scribd.com/doc/35954417/Timothy-Leary-Chaos-Cyber-Culture). Here's a quote to give you a flavor: "CHILDHOOD'S END? It seems clear that we are facing one of those genetic cross-roads that have occurred so frequently in the history of primates. The members of the human gene pool who form symbiotic links with solid-state computers will be characterized by extremely high individual intelligence and will settle in geographic niches that encourage individual access to knowledge-information-processing software. New associations of individuals linked by computers will surely emerge. Information nets will encourage a swift, free inter- change among individuals. Feedback peripherals will dramatically expand the mode of exchange from keyboard punching to neuro- physiological interaction. The key word is, of course, "interaction." The intoxicating power of interactive software is that it eliminates dependence on the enormous bureaucracy of knowledge professionals that flourished in the industrial age. In the factory culture, guilds and unions and associations of knowledge-workers jealously monopolized the flow of information. Educators, teachers, professors, consultants, psychotherapists, librarians, managers, journalists, editors, writers, labor unions, medical groups all such roles are now threatened."

None of these factors carry weight among the tame and aggressive foxes but are very relevant to human interaction (and thus selection).

-hENRY
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110405/d1f0f874/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 15:49:05 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:49:05 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
In-Reply-To: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
References: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikY4u9JAcdpGHPfmmKn4CN8tC02UQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/5 Henry Rivera <hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu>:
> The proposition that human "races" exist is a social construct.

The proposition that animal races, or for that matter species, exist
is also a "social construct", more accurately an epistemological
construct.

What really matters is diversity and its protection and if possible increase.

Taxonomies are however inevitable to organise our perceptions and
understanding thereof.

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr  6 15:42:19 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 08:42:19 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=vf_VHe4Oqe6F8JQn4J93Bwc6uxA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=vf_VHe4Oqe6F8JQn4J93Bwc6uxA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005301cbf471$36bd5290$a437f7b0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
...

>...Autonomous cars will, of course, be recording everything that happens so
that in the event of an accident there will be exact evidence as to who or
what was the cause.  Just a more advanced version of the black box recorders
already in most new cars today...BillK
_______________________________________________


That still doesn't get us there.  In the states, whenever there is *any*
accident and one of the drivers is found to be legally intoxicated, the
drunk is considered at fault, even if there is clear evidence the other car
caused the accident.  If a drunk is sitting stopped at a red light and is
struck from behind by another driver who is sober and merely stupid, the
drunk is at fault.  The line of reasoning may be that had the stationary
drunk been sober, perhaps she could have carried out some evasive action.

That line of reasoning could be extended to fault the computer in any
accident, with the reasoning being that even if the other driver caused the
accident, an actual human could have perhaps done a better job of defensive
driving.  This argument will hold even after computers become expert drivers
and humans are even more pathetic than we are now.

I predict that researchers will go down the same line of reasoning I just
did, and realize it isn't worth their time.  I predict we will not see
auto-autos in the next couple decades at least.

spike






From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr  6 17:10:47 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 10:10:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
Message-ID: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>

Some interesting data on the (low) efficiency of wind power:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/whoa-windfarms-in-uk-operate-well-below-advertised-efficiency/#more-37420

--- Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/9b23ca21/attachment.html>

From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Wed Apr  6 17:18:55 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 13:18:55 -0400
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>
	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>
Message-ID: <D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 5, 2011, at 2:10 PM, spike wrote:
> 
> I often hear the comment that the space shuttle?s capability was exaggerated (30 tons to LEO, 12 tons return.)  It never came close to either, but it was *theoretically* capable of both of these goals in its final configuration. 

Originally we were told that a Space Shuttle would have a turnaround time of only 2 weeks and could make 25 trips a year, but they were lucky to get 3 trips a year. Originally we were told the probability of catastrophic failure was astronomically unlikely, but the true figure was about 2% per flight. Originally we were told that because its reusable the cost of putting something into orbit would drop by many orders of magnitude, but we'd have done better if we never heard of the shuttle and just kept on making Saturn 5's.

 John K Clark     
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/5aade67e/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 17:42:07 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:42:07 +0200
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>
	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>
	<D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikAZrsEX8g8W8rCTnQmocqS95L+oA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/6 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> Originally we were told that a Space Shuttle would have a turnaround time of
> only 2 weeks and could make 25 trips a year, but they were lucky to get 3
> trips a year. Originally we were told the probability of catastrophic
> failure was astronomically unlikely, but the true figure was about 2% per
> flight. Originally we were told that because its reusable the cost of
> putting something into orbit would drop by many orders of magnitude, but
> we'd have done better if we never heard of the shuttle and just kept on
> making Saturn 5's.

I am far from being an expert, but read that the real problem is that
the Shuttles never had a clear mission in the first place. And of
course price per trip of an expensive re-usable vs that of throw-away
solutions is bound to increase dramatically if it is severely
under-used.

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From dan_ust at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  6 18:00:12 2011
From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 11:00:12 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <20110406153009.GT23560@leitl.org>
References: <800426.81143.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<852847.50723.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20110406153009.GT23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <343324.38897.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Given the likehood of Uranus and Neptune having rocky metal cores about an Earth 
mass or so, this still means most of the rock and metal in the solar system is 
off Earth, no? Of course, it'd be really hard to access much of it, but the same 
applies to the rock and metal not in Earth's crust. (And, once you're off world, 
it seems like the rock and metal available on Luna and smaller bodies would be 
far more accessible and useable than the stuff packed into the Earth or any 
terrestrial planet.)

I just don't see, at this time, such a shortage of these materials, that the 
only possible attitude to take is Earth must be gobbled up for resource 
extraction.

Regards,

Dan
?
From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Sent: Wed, April 6, 2011 11:30:09 AM
Subject: Re: [ExI] Millions of tons to space

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:52:34AM -0700, Dan wrote:
> You speak as if Earth contained most of the rock and metal in the solar system 

> if not the galaxy. There's plenty of rock and metal around to play with.

Most of the metals in the solar system are locked in the inner
planets. There are 4 MT/s of flux to work with, and more if you
use fusables for fuel.

-- 
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
_______________________________________________
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/20110406/98a67c17/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 18:43:47 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 19:43:47 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
In-Reply-To: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
References: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinwAD2bixAEGxiUt-8_Dh6o+wRJDA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/5 Henry Rivera wrote:
> A number of points in Mirco's argument have face validity, but they
> oversimplify the dynamics at work. As a psychologist, I must interject some
> data he has not factored in to this discussion. I'm not suggesting a
> resolution to the discussion; I just want to demonstrate that it is more
> complicated when we are dealing with humans. Human selection processes in
> recent generations have likely been significantly influenced by non-rational
> cultural factors such as these:
>
> Microaggressions: people often internalize racists beliefs and behave
> accordingly without conscious awareness or intent of being racist. The
> proposition that human "races" exist is a social construct; there are
> variable human phenotypes for hair color and texture as well as skin color.
>
> Implicit biases: these are prevalent and largely outside of conscious
> awareness. Decisions about, for example, who to breed with are influence by
> such biases which we are not even aware of, and I'd suggest these are not
> genetically driven biases. Do some Implicit Association Tests
> athttps://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/demo/?to discover biases you may
> hold that you are not conscious of.
>
> Psychology of oppression and social change: those in positions of power
> create rules that perpetuate their power and facilitate the continued
> oppression of those who might threaten their power. People with traits more
> different from those in positions of power are systematically oppressed more
> aggressively. Consider that law enforcement (police) are instruments of the
> oppressors. Much on this topic has been
> published:http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=psychology+oppression+&btnG=Search&as_sdt=0%2C22&as_ylo=&as_vis=0
>
> Lastly,? human societal status and education (intelligence increase), at
> least in recent generations, has had significant influence from factors
> beyond one's genetic predisposition. I submit it is self-evident that access
> to information and literacy, for example is a relatively new advantage
> available to the non-elites.
>
> None of these factors carry weight among the tame and aggressive foxes but
> are very relevant to human interaction (and thus selection).
>
>


Agreed. Human culture and institutions are far more significant in
human behaviour. Genetic changes cannot possibly have such an
immediate and powerful effect.

Show me the capitalist gene that is supposed to have appeared in
Britain in a few generations!  Especially as the trading and business
culture developed across Europe centuries before the British
Industrial Revolution.


BillK



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr  6 19:28:19 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 12:28:19 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 10:11 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power

 

Some interesting data on the (low) efficiency of wind power:

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/whoa-windfarms-in-uk-operate-well-belo
w-advertised-efficiency/#more-37420


--- Max

 

 

Thanks Max.  I was a big fan of wind power until ~2008.  Starting in that
year, I began making frequent trips coast to coast, and saw wind farms in
various places.  I noted the locations and set my computer to remind me to
look out the window when various wind farms were coming into view.  It is
something that burned an image into my retinas: most of the time in most of
those wind farms, all of the turbines were sitting still and quiet.

 

spike

 

 

 


 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/aeee17fa/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr  6 20:00:23 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 13:00:23 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>
	<D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <013401cbf495$442aa120$cc7fe360$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Subject: Re: [ExI] new heavy lifter

 

On Apr 5, 2011, at 2:10 PM, spike wrote:

 

>.I often hear the comment that the space shuttle's capability was
exaggerated (30 tons to LEO, 12 tons return.)  It never came close to
either, but it was *theoretically* capable of both of these goals in its
final configuration.  

 

>.Originally we were told that a Space Shuttle would have a turnaround time
of only 2 weeks and could make 25 trips a year, but they were lucky to get 3
trips a year. Originally we were told the probability of catastrophic
failure was astronomically unlikely, but the true figure was about 2% per
flight. Originally we were told that because its reusable the cost of
putting something into orbit would drop by many orders of magnitude, but
we'd have done better if we never heard of the shuttle and just kept on
making Saturn 5's. John K Clark     

 

John I agree the shuttle program was a long term catastrophe for the US
space program.  Do let us make sure we are whooping the right dog.  Those
numbers you cited were for a different set of assumptions.  NASA made some
decisions in the 1970s during the shuttle design and build phase that made
it clear they were sacrificing some of those end goals, long before the
shuttles flew.  During the design phase, and after a lot of the hype had
already been printed in hard copy, they defunded a lot of the stuff that
would have contributed to faster turnaround and long term performance.

 

After the first transport to Cape Canaveral aboard a B747, it was already
clear the shuttle would achieve nothing like a 2 week turnaround.  That was
on 10 April 1979.  I remember that day as clearly as any from that entire
decade.  I was there when the aircraft landed at Cape Canaveral.  That was
the oddest mixture of elation and disappointment, I have a hard time even
describing it, but I will try.   

 

Many of the tiles failed during the 10 April flight and fell off.  I was an
engineering student at the University of Central Florida then, so you can
imagine the hot topic of conversation.  We knew enough about re-entry
systems to know that if any of the tiles came off the critical surfaces
(pretty much anything on the bottom side) during re-entry, the aerodynamic
load would be transferred to the tile behind the failed one, and it too
would fail within seconds, then the one behind that, in what came to be
called the zipper effect.  Row of tiles come off, front to back, wing rips
off, result: loss of vehicle and crew.  We saw an example of that on 16
January 2003.  Most were surprised when Challenger exploded on liftoff in
1986, but few were surprised by Columbia's break up on reentry in 2003.  We
knew that could happen.

 

Back in 1979, a lot of the smart guys realized the existing thermal
protection system would need to be redone.  I knew this because I was
acquainted with many of these smart guys, including my girlfriend's father.
He had crystal foresight: NASA would end up redoing the tiles, payload
capacity would go way down, turnaround time would go way up, costs would go
thru an already very high roof.  All this was well known by summer of 1979,
two years before first flight.  

 

There was a strong contingency arguing at the time to scrap the damn thing
and restart the Saturn V program.  There were already credible voices
arguing that we couldn't rebuild a Saturn V at that time.  I was there,
heard it, saw it, believed it, still do.

 

spike

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/69e859a5/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 22:37:56 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 15:37:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinwAD2bixAEGxiUt-8_Dh6o+wRJDA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
	<BANLkTinwAD2bixAEGxiUt-8_Dh6o+wRJDA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinU6Q3GPJ_=yGieay6pvru1x4+yaA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:43 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

snip
>
> Agreed. Human culture and institutions are far more significant in
> human behaviour. Genetic changes cannot possibly have such an
> immediate and powerful effect.

I am kind of amazed that you deny the results of several decades of
twin studies.

Or for that matter the horror of David Reimer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

You don't have to be politically correct on this list.

Culture and institutions do indeed have an effect.  But if everyone is
well fed, the differences in say, adult height, are due to genes.

> Show me the capitalist gene that is supposed to have appeared in
> Britain in a few generations!

Come back in a decade or so when we have mapped the genes that became
more common over 400 years of a stable society that was both drawinian
and malthusian.

It might not take that long.  They already have a list of some 40
genes that are different between tame and wild foxes.  Given that we
fished out the DNA of Neanderthals, it should not be too hard to get a
decent DNA sampling from a 1000 years ago in the UK and compare it to
the current prevalence of various genes.

> Especially as the trading and business
> culture developed across Europe centuries before the British
> Industrial Revolution.

And farming came in ten millennia before that.  I suspect that farming
drove the selection for acquisitiveness at least in the northern
temperate zone.  In a bad winter those who just had enough food and
fuel to make it through a normal winter died and the children of the
ones who had piled up more than most thought they needed repopulated
the farms of those who starved or froze.

Keith


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 22:47:14 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 23:47:14 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinU6Q3GPJ_=yGieay6pvru1x4+yaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
	<BANLkTinwAD2bixAEGxiUt-8_Dh6o+wRJDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinU6Q3GPJ_=yGieay6pvru1x4+yaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimTKGp5nT6_FxbVNL4QJnR5b-3ZMg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Keith Henson  wrote:
>
> Come back in a decade or so when we have mapped the genes that became
> more common over 400 years of a stable society that was both drawinian
> and malthusian.
>
> It might not take that long. ?They already have a list of some 40
> genes that are different between tame and wild foxes. ?Given that we
> fished out the DNA of Neanderthals, it should not be too hard to get a
> decent DNA sampling from a 1000 years ago in the UK and compare it to
> the current prevalence of various genes.
>
> And farming came in ten millennia before that. ?I suspect that farming
> drove the selection for acquisitiveness at least in the northern
> temperate zone. ?In a bad winter those who just had enough food and
> fuel to make it through a normal winter died and the children of the
> ones who had piled up more than most thought they needed repopulated
> the farms of those who starved or froze.
>
>

Well, if you believe that some nations evolved superior genes that
make them good capitalists, then you must also believe that they
un-evolve these genes as their capitalism goes downhill and other
nations take over.

National success goes in cycles. The torch gets passed along from
nation to nation over the centuries.

It's a cultural thing. Empires rise and fall. Nothing to do with genetics.


BillK



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Wed Apr  6 22:52:26 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 15:52:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
Message-ID: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Dan <dan_ust at yahoo.com> wrote,
> This also seems to fit some of the archaeological evidence too. There seems to 
> have been many big kills where there was even waste, but these were not everyday 
> or even every month affairs, it seems.

This is my problem with the Paleo diet.  The archeology does not fit a
high-fat diet.  Everything I read shows that hunter/gatherers got more
of their diet from gathering than hunting.  Big game meat was not a
daily occurrence.  And even when big game was bagged, it was not
high-fat as seen in today's deliberately fattened meats.  Therefore, I
do not believe that high-fat meals are a good emulation of a paleo diet,
even if eaten rarely.

I also doubt the lack of grains in the diet.  Archeological evidence
shows that grains were routinely gathered and used in paleo times.  Just
because agriculture did not domesticate grains until later does not mean
they were lacking in the paleo diet.

So, besides the nutritional objections to the paleo diet, I also object
to the diet on archeological grounds.  Even if I wanted to emulate a
paleo diet, it certainly would not be a high-meat or high-fat diet.  And
it would not exclude grains.  (It might exclude dairy.)

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Apr  6 23:47:13 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 16:47:13 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimTKGp5nT6_FxbVNL4QJnR5b-3ZMg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
	<BANLkTinwAD2bixAEGxiUt-8_Dh6o+wRJDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinU6Q3GPJ_=yGieay6pvru1x4+yaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimTKGp5nT6_FxbVNL4QJnR5b-3ZMg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=a9vsXRG+Vd4rit9FmauSKbpZYtg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:47 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 11:37 PM, Keith Henson ?wrote:
>>
>> Come back in a decade or so when we have mapped the genes that became
>> more common over 400 years of a stable society that was both drawinian
>> and malthusian.
>>
>> It might not take that long. ?They already have a list of some 40
>> genes that are different between tame and wild foxes. ?Given that we
>> fished out the DNA of Neanderthals, it should not be too hard to get a
>> decent DNA sampling from a 1000 years ago in the UK and compare it to
>> the current prevalence of various genes.
>>
>> And farming came in ten millennia before that. ?I suspect that farming
>> drove the selection for acquisitiveness at least in the northern
>> temperate zone. ?In a bad winter those who just had enough food and
>> fuel to make it through a normal winter died and the children of the
>> ones who had piled up more than most thought they needed repopulated
>> the farms of those who starved or froze.
>>
>
> Well, if you believe that some nations evolved superior genes

Not superior genes.  Those genes would have come in dead last in
hunter gatherer societies.  Just better adapted to a stable agrarian
society where the accumulation of wealth greatly improved the chances
of your kids reaching adulthood.

> that
> make them good capitalists, then you must also believe that they
> un-evolve these genes as their capitalism goes downhill and other
> nations take over.

The selection pressure has been off for 200 years now.  Even the
poorest of the poor seldom starve.

> National success goes in cycles. The torch gets passed along from
> nation to nation over the centuries.
>
> It's a cultural thing. Empires rise and fall. Nothing to do with genetics.

Can you think of an example where cultural failure was the cause of an
empire failing?

The ones that really went down hard like the Myans were due to weather
and environmental damage.  The Greenland Norse I suppose were partly a
failure of their culture to change in the face of much colder weather.

Keith



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr  7 00:57:17 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 17:57:17 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency of
	wind power
Message-ID: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More



 

>>Some interesting data on the (low) efficiency of wind power:

 

>>http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/whoa-windfarms-in-uk-operate-well-be
low-advertised-efficiency/#more-37420


--- Max

 

>.  It is something that burned an image into my retinas: most of the time
in most of those wind farms, all of the turbines were sitting still and
quiet.  spike

 

 

I gave you some bad news, now I will give you something good.

 

This past weekend I was at a class reunion for Shelly's high school, in
Caldwell Idaho where she is from.  We went to a big party out north and west
past Vale Oregon.  Driving out to the ranch of some old friends, I was
struck by how much land there is where there is insufficient water resources
to grow much of anything, no civilization, harsh climate, clear, windy most
of the time, but there is a road and some existing power infrastructure.
There is no reason whatsoever we couldn't make a mile wide field of PVs on
either side of the road going up highway 26 from Vale and out highway 20
west of Vale, south from Marsing on highway 95, where one goes for hour
after hour seeing on either side of the road to the horizon, flat unused
ground, un-farmable, unbuildable.  There is sooooo damn much wide open land
out there, being used for nothing, useful for nothing else.

 

If you have a few days to mess around, I do encourage those who worry about
mankind's future energy resources to get in a Detroit and drive out to some
of these desert wastelands, just to get a feel for how open and vast they
are.  Go down highway 395 in eastern Oregon and California, or go nearly
anywhere in Nevada.  Plenty of open space out there, and the land is
practically free.  We could add enormous power lines, or set up coal to
octane plants out there to soak up the peak production.  If you don't have
time to drive out there, go on Google maps, enter Ontario Oregon, look
around.

 

If we really committed to doing this, we could set up solar panel fabs that
would produce standardized 1 meter by 1 meter panels in quantities that
would give manufacturing engineers the tingles.  We would churn out so many
of these things, we could get very close to lights-out factories.  Over a
couple decades we could gradually replace so many of the alternative energy
sources, all of which have their severe shortcomings.  We could end up with
enough with enough spare energy to use the excess to synthesize ammonium
nitrate for fertilizers, octane for our Detroits, power air conditioning to
counteract global warming, all that stuff.  

 

The wind farms haven't lived up to their promise, geothermal and falling
water are nearly completely exploited, oil is in decline, coal is dirty,
Japanese tsunami generated all that bad press for nuclear power.  Now I am
convinced to steer my own investment dollars towards advanced domestic PV
fabs.  After it is all said and done, I am convinced to my own satisfaction
that PVs are the path forward, with load leveling being largely accomplished
by using peak power for conversion of coal to octane and for electric
power-intensive processes such as metal extraction.  Expensive, takes a long
time to transition, lot of loss in transmission.  But considering all
alternatives, the downsides don't seem so far down now.

 

spike

 

 

 

 

 


 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/71ec9da7/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 01:26:16 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 18:26:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikjCn1wLTe5umNS=VZ=c9r=gY8nfg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/6 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> If you have a few days to mess around, I do encourage those who worry about
> mankind?s future energy resources to get in a Detroit and drive out to some
> of these desert wastelands, just to get a feel for how open and vast they
> are.? Go down highway 395 in eastern Oregon and California, or go nearly
> anywhere in Nevada.? Plenty of open space out there, and the land is
> practically free.

Save for the cost of fending off inevitable "environmentalist" lawsuits.
The existing oil players have shown that they will astroturf large solar
energy plants to death where they can.



From painlord2k at libero.it  Thu Apr  7 01:50:14 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 03:50:14 +0200
Subject: [ExI] note from a foaf in japan
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimCXOkQpE_Cf4hXjj0aM+t1pqDggA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinq54Xbs4SAVJ2UgRWpE1hW2J-KQgE7-X3Nzt6i@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTi=kgz+an9ud1TuR+EHs-3eNn_U4p=nvEfG3K4G8@mail.gmail.com>	<4D8DEFD5.7050804@libero.it>	<AANLkTinHDsMGaVWD2cwLqQCfgAfSuqnrUfb=BwD2eQ_O@mail.gmail.com>	<4D962021.4070806@libero.it>
	<BANLkTimCXOkQpE_Cf4hXjj0aM+t1pqDggA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D9D1856.8090501@libero.it>



Il 03/04/2011 1.23, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Mirco Romanato
> <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
>> Il 01/04/2011 6.17, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Mirco Romanato They bred a few
>>> hundred foxes with each generation, then only bred the 1% that
>>> were most tame or most aggressive.


>> We can suppose that it wiped out the most weak, physically, of the 
>> population. And we can suppose that the poor were the most weak of
>> all (statistically).

> Recall that most of the people at the time were very poor. The rich 
> ruling class was very small at this time, and there was virtually no 
> middle class in feudal Europe.

I think "poor" in this discussion is whoever is not able to feed
themselves and his family members and allow them to be healthy enough to
pass the genes to the next generation. Many paesants would be able to do
so. Many others not.

>> The selective pressure of people living in cities is continuous
>> over centuries. They are selected for traits allowing to thrive
>> there. Also, being city population sinks, they attracted large
>> numbers of people during many generations that allowed the
>> selection process to continue unabated. Often, then, the most
>> successful families in the cities would move out of the city with
>> their wealth and buy farms and large homes, to be able to afford
>> more children.

> Name a specific trait that allows people to thrive in cities. Then 
> tell me what the selection mechanism is to keep people without that 
> trait from reproducing.

Attention disorders and hyperactivity disorders are not good for city
dwellers. It interfere with the constant toiling of the jobs usually
available in cities like blacksmithing.

The predisposition to learn how read and write and do maths. For
example, in Florence during the XII century half of the children in the
city went to "Schools of Abacus" (not public funded) to learn to do
maths and be able to land a good job in some banks or keep a shop.

Impulsiveness is a bad trait, as you are near too much people to get
away with aggression, murder, thief, etc. easily.

There is a reason the word "urbane" and "villain" are used to denote a
behavior and not only the dweller in city and in the country.

> The bottom line with people is that memes have been more important 
> than genes for hundreds of years, so I would not expect see a lot of 
> genetic changes over the past few hundred years because a wide cross 
> section of society reproduces. Another way to ask the question is
> what sort of people don't reproduce in our modern societies?

The productive middle class that it taxed out of existence and have not
the resources to raise more than two children (often not enough to raise
one). The lower classes, the unproductive on the dole, many of them
reproduce far more than the the middle class because they can offload
their reproduction to the taxpayers.

This is a problem much debated in the manosphere.


>> I don't think so. The poor were able to become a class only in the
>> last two centuries because before they near always died with few or
>> no offspring. And they were supplanted by the less accomplished
>> (but better than them) offspring of the middle class.

> The children of rich people can become poor very easily. Today the 
> poor reproduce at higher rates than the rich. I'm not sure what the 
> historical case is, but farmers have historically had lots of kids.

Some farmers rarely were poor for the standards of the time.
They had many children and bough land. They divided the land with their
children. Some succeed and some not. Repeat.

>> Your premises (as I understood them) are that the foxes and the
>> vixens were subjected to an extensive culling (1% surviving to
>> generate), where the actual number given in the article I linked
>> were 5% for foxes and 20% for vixen.

> You are probably right. Still, with a 5% or even 20% survival rate, 
> that is an EXTREME selection pressure that human beings have almost 
> never seen. And certainly we haven't seen those extreme selection 
> pressures based on the kinds of cultural issues that we started 
> talking about.

In fact, I think it required much more time for the humans to select the
right traits in the right conditions.
In England it was something like 5-600 years or 20-30 generations.

>> Take away the welfare state, the food stamps and the rest. Leave
>> them on their devices. Like 200 years ago or more. Even more strong
>> and durable, the selection for taking out people unable to control
>> their impulses and empathize others. They would be, at least, be
>> banned from the civil society. And without welfare they would die
>> because of starvation or be prey of organized groups. For example,
>> a not married woman having sex and becoming pregnant would lose her
>> family support and be shunned by any other reputable man. Why?
>> Because they would not risk to be rising someone else children
>> instead of theirs. Exceptions abound, but invariably they concern
>> very low standing women (prostitute or maiden) or very high
>> standing women (too valuable to consider their previous sins).
> 
> But can you point to one case where genetic change has happened. The 
> only one that comes to mind is that our genes for lactose
> intolerance have been bred out after the creation of dairy as a main
> human food source. That is a very different kind of genetic drift
> than you are talking about. What you are saying is theoretically
> possible, but as far as I know undocumented as having actually
> happened.

I think deMause "History of childhood" and "The Emotional Life of
Nations" could be interesting.

For something available on the net:
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/07/return-of-quetzalcoatl-preface.html

>> Also, the people coming from the country have traits that could be 
>> useful in the country but are not useful or are damaging when
>> living in a city. This is something discovered studying an African
>> tribe; the same traits that made them successful in herding sheep
>> (so they were able to feed themselves well) made them not very
>> successful in keeping a job in a city (so they were unable to keep
>> themselves well fed).
> 
> African tribes have definitely had enough time for some genetic
> drift. Is this research or a guess? In western cultures where people
> move to the city, then to the country and back, there isn't enough
> pressure or time to create meaningful genetic drift.

Recent research about a tribe, I read it a few years ago.
Probably from Futurepundit.


> I am engaged in just such an experiment. I am Caucasian, I have six 
> African American children, four Hispanic and one half Asian child. 
> Culturally, they are all mostly culturally white. They are 
> intellectually indistinguishable from me (other than some physical 
> issues stemming from in utero abuse). Your position on this point 
> seems racist, and completely unsupported by research. Of course,
> there is a cultural limit on how much real research has been done in
> this area because nobody wants to be called a racist.

Exactly.
The data about the IQ gap of blacks relative to whites in the US is well
know. It also didn't change much with time. IIRC the data about
mulattos/mestizos is something in between.
Also, the distribution of personality traits and psychic disorders is
different for Africans and Europeans and, IMHO, appear to follow the
adaptations to the local conditions of Africa and Europe.

I think the next decade will be very interesting in this field,
dispelling many wrong ideas.

> We talk a lot about the higher rates of incarceration of minorities.

The problem is when some explanations can not be uttered because they
are not acceptable to the polite discourse.

>>> Blacks are more carefully watched by the police,
>> 
>> Why? Why they don't check more for Hispanics or Vietnamese or
>> Italians? Are the policemen racists? Even the blacks one?

> Yes, even some black policemen are racist against blacks.

This beg the question:
"Are they racist without reasons or with reasons?"

> It took the Irish at least three generations to escape from being
> the lowest in American society. At one point, the coal mines in West 
> Virginia would hire Irish over black slaves because they were less 
> valuable than the slaves to the mine owners. Similarly, the Chinese 
> who build the transcontinental railroad were valued less than
> slaves.

This because slaves were property and the freemen not.

> I blame politicians more than anyone else for the problems facing
> the blacks in America today. The black leadership (Jessie Jackson and
> the like) are particularly guilty IMHO.

:-)
I agree that many politicians (blacks and whites) give as much help as
they are able to keep the blacks in the plantation.

> Blacks who recently came from Africa or the Caribbean are usually
> more immediately successful than African Americans with the cultural 
> history. Yesterday, I interacted with an African pharmacist. I was
> not surprised, but I would have been more surprised by an African
> American pharmacist. In other words, the problem is not such much the
> color of their skin, but the color of their mind. After hearing that
> the "man is going to keep you down" for generations, many African
> Americans give up. My own African American children don't hear this
> negative talk, and I fully expect them to succeed in America. It's
> not genetic, it's cultural.

How much old are they.
Theory say the older they will be the greater the difference.
For the sake of the experiment you could sequence their genome when the
costs will be down in the next few years and look for their real share
of European, African, whatever genes.

I agree that skin color is a poor proxy for something so complex like
the genetics of the mind.

> Where I live, the most disproportionate homicide is done by 
> undocumented Mexicans. Again, even if the homicide rate nation wide
> is higher for black on whoever, that doesn't mean it is genetic. It
> is societal and cultural if that is the case.

As I wrote before, this decade will give up so much genetic data that we
will be able to know much more about this. Maybe more than many of us
would know are are able to accept. Reality have many surprises.

> Correct. It is also the main cause of lawlessness of the Hispanics 
> that live there. I would suspect that any white people living in
> South Central would also commit crime at a rate higher than the rest
> of the nation, but there are very few whites living there. I don't
> have numbers, this is a feeling. Four of my kids come from Compton
> (in south central) and I have spent some time there. I have also
> spent a couple of months in East Palo Alto, another troubled
> neighborhood.

Wish you a successful experiment.

> They have succeeded. This doesn't make sense. Large changes in the 
> zeitgeist are accomplished all the time. Look at the change in 
> Southern attitudes towards blacks, or the nation's view of 
> homosexuality. They have changed a lot just in my life time.

These are cultural changes of others, not the blacks.

> I have also spent a lot of time in Mexico. It DID work exactly this 
> way. Mexico is 90%+ Catholic to this day. Where are you getting
> these ideas?

The issue is a bit more complex than formal adhesion to the Catholic
Church. Local customs and way of thinking resisted the Conquistadors,
mainly in the rural areas.

> Ok. Here you are talking about real selected genetic difference. 
> Racism in humans is not based on significant genetic differences 
> because humans don't have very significant genetic differences. This 
> is primarily because of the population bottleneck around 600K years 
> ago.

Significant genetic differences must be defined.
It would be interesting, but not very ethics, to take a group of
Africans and land them in rural Finland (with enough resources for
living for a few years and have the chance to adapt) and land a group of
Finns in rural Africa (with the same resources). Then look  at how they
succeed or not. I remember something like this in an old sci-fi book
(Genoa-Texcoco:0.0) but it was more a testing of economics systems.

>> Yes. But soldiers in moder professional armies are mainly from
>> middle class and their IQ is a bit over the mean (this is surely
>> true for in the US). And in modern society the middle class is the
>> bigger part of the society.
> 
> Actually, in the US armed forces, minorities and poor are
> represented in higher proportion than middle class and white. This is
> because of the financial benefits of joining the  armed forces are
> more effective in recruiting people who need those benefits.

I would reconsider this info. Mine is that whites, middle class are the
majority and overrepresented in the armed forces.
Minorities are more represented in not combat positions than in combat
positions.


-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>

Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>

*Mirco Romanato*




-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3555 -  Data di rilascio: 06/04/2011



From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr  7 05:25:52 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2011 22:25:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikg=U5BzfJJO3Suami2kkoT4DRb7A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>wrote:

> Dan <dan_ust at yahoo.com> wrote,
> > This also seems to fit some of the archaeological evidence too. There
> seems to
> > have been many big kills where there was even waste, but these were not
> everyday
> > or even every month affairs, it seems.
>
> This is my problem with the Paleo diet.  The archeology does not fit a
> high-fat diet.  Everything I read shows that hunter/gatherers got more
> of their diet from gathering than hunting.  Big game meat was not a
> daily occurrence.  And even when big game was bagged, it was not
> high-fat as seen in today's deliberately fattened meats.  Therefore, I
> do not believe that high-fat meals are a good emulation of a paleo diet,
> even if eaten rarely.
>

There are a range of opinions about this in the paleo community. As a
30-year advocate of low-fat eating, I have made a huge shift in deciding
that animal fats are not a bad thing (so long as they are not combined with
high levels of carbohydrates). Have you read Loren Cordain's analyses of the
paleo diet? Have you read the more high-fat-friend paleo analyses, such as
that by recent, well-informed poster to this list, J. Stanton? Additionally,
regardless of the history, have you read Gary Taubes' Good Calories, Bad
Calories?

I would add that there is no one Paleo diet. What human ate varied
considerably depending on the time period we're talking about and on their
location. Some people ate almost exclusively animal meat. Others a more
varied diet. I'm not aware of *any* vegetarian paleo people.


>
> I also doubt the lack of grains in the diet.  Archeological evidence
> shows that grains were routinely gathered and used in paleo times.


That contradicts everything I've seen. I'd be interested in the evidence
that you mention. We had this discussion a few months back. The skeptics of
paleo could only come up with rather weak evidence of apparently rare
consumption of any kind of grains.

Whatever our differences on these issues, can I assume that you would agree
that the vast increase in consumption over the last few decades of refined
carbohydrates -- especially high-fructose corn syrup -- is a very bad thing
for health?

--- Max


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110406/b1c19e37/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr  7 07:00:14 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 09:00:14 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <343324.38897.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
References: <800426.81143.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<852847.50723.qm@web30105.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
	<20110406153009.GT23560@leitl.org>
	<343324.38897.qm@web30108.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20110407070014.GW23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 11:00:12AM -0700, Dan wrote:
> Given the likehood of Uranus and Neptune having rocky metal cores about an Earth 

Please do not top-post (message unchanged below).

> mass or so, this still means most of the rock and metal in the solar system is 
> off Earth, no? Of course, it'd be really hard to access much of it, but the same 

Exactly.

> applies to the rock and metal not in Earth's crust. (And, once you're off world, 

Absolutely not, asteroids, rocky planetesimals, Mercury, Moon are all
fair game for stripmining. Once you run out of these you can e.g. blow
off the atmosphere off Venus, which is frankly quite useless as is.

> it seems like the rock and metal available on Luna and smaller bodies would be 
> far more accessible and useable than the stuff packed into the Earth or any 
> terrestrial planet.)
> 
> I just don't see, at this time, such a shortage of these materials, that the 
> only possible attitude to take is Earth must be gobbled up for resource 
> extraction.

Self-replication has exponential dynamics, so you'll run out of stuff
before you run out of flux (4 MT/s, you'll need to build a cloud of
nodes at about ~AU), and of course if you run out of flux before you 
run out of stuff there's fusion.
 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> ?
> From: Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org>
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Sent: Wed, April 6, 2011 11:30:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
> 
> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 07:52:34AM -0700, Dan wrote:
> > You speak as if Earth contained most of the rock and metal in the solar system 
> 
> > if not the galaxy. There's plenty of rock and metal around to play with.
> 
> Most of the metals in the solar system are locked in the inner
> planets. There are 4 MT/s of flux to work with, and more if you
> use fusables for fuel.
> 
> -- 
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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 painlord2k at libero.it  Thu Apr  7 08:15:39 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 10:15:39 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikjCn1wLTe5umNS=VZ=c9r=gY8nfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikjCn1wLTe5umNS=VZ=c9r=gY8nfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D9D72AB.1000503@libero.it>

Il 07/04/2011 3.26, Adrian Tymes ha scritto:
> 2011/4/6 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>> If you have a few days to mess around, I do encourage those who worry about
>> mankind?s future energy resources to get in a Detroit and drive out to some
>> of these desert wastelands, just to get a feel for how open and vast they
> 
>> are.  Go down highway 395 in eastern Oregon and California, or go nearly
>> anywhere in Nevada.  Plenty of open space out there, and the land is
>> practically free.
> 
> Save for the cost of fending off inevitable "environmentalist" lawsuits.
> The existing oil players have shown that they will astroturf large solar
> energy plants to death where they can.

They opened a large PV plant, here, near Verona (Romeo, Juliet, a big
mess, you know).
They obtained a large incentive from the government and placed
themselves over good land used for horticulture. Now they produce
electricity instead of fine food (and when I say fine, it is really fine).

PV is reasonable inside city (where it will be used offsetting the use
of power transmitted on long lines) or where fuel or lines can not be
used or are impractical.

-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>

Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>

*Mirco Romanato*


 <javascript:void(0);>


-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3556 -  Data di rilascio: 06/04/2011



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr  7 08:31:03 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 10:31:03 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 12:28:19PM -0700, spike wrote:

> Thanks Max.  I was a big fan of wind power until ~2008.  Starting in that

I never was. The potential is limited to locations, and as a secondary
source to the solar primary it is limited in total volume.

See respective total available energy on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Available_Energy-4.png

As you see, even terrestrial solar flux is about a factor
of 6000 in excess our needs, and 2000 in excess of our
needs just considered land area. Incidentally, just the flux
upon human-made structures matches the total energy demand.

Solar also happens to match demand very closely, at least
in Germany (peak around noon), so you can get rid of inefficient
and/or nonagile peak plants.

> year, I began making frequent trips coast to coast, and saw wind farms in
> various places.  I noted the locations and set my computer to remind me to
> look out the window when various wind farms were coming into view.  It is
> something that burned an image into my retinas: most of the time in most of
> those wind farms, all of the turbines were sitting still and quiet.

Nevertheless it is possible to generate a fair fraction of total
electricity with wind alone:

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

Recent study says 65% of total electricity production in
Germany could be done with wind power -- in theory.

-- 
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 stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 11:48:15 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:48:15 +0200
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <013401cbf495$442aa120$cc7fe360$@att.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>
	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>
	<D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>
	<013401cbf495$442aa120$cc7fe360$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikErr5FxKbQHbyXbkadWQiYwkmAdQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/6 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> Back in 1979, a lot of the smart guys realized the existing thermal
> protection system would need to be redone.? I knew this because I was
> acquainted with many of these smart guys, including my girlfriend?s father.
> He had crystal foresight: NASA would end up redoing the tiles, payload
> capacity would go way down, turnaround time would go way up, costs would go
> thru an already very high roof.? All this was well known by summer of 1979,
> two years before first flight.

So, what should they have done, in your opinion?

-- 
Stefano Vaj



From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 12:31:24 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 14:31:24 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikMOJZUvgzoBtGfu96pRPyom03s-A@mail.gmail.com>

On 7 April 2011 00:52, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> This is my problem with the Paleo diet. ?The archeology does not fit a
> high-fat diet. ?Everything I read shows that hunter/gatherers got more
> of their diet from gathering than hunting. ?Big game meat was not a
> daily occurrence. ?And even when big game was bagged, it was not
> high-fat as seen in today's deliberately fattened meats. ?Therefore, I
> do not believe that high-fat meals are a good emulation of a paleo diet,
> even if eaten rarely.

Certainly, there were differences between the diet. say. in equatorial
Africa and in northern Europe. But gathering what? Eggs, insects,
shellfish, half-eaten carcasses do not really qualify as hunting.

Moroever, while nuts *are* high fat, wild semi-ripe fruits and roots
are even more different (high-fiber, high-vitanutrients, low sugar)
from contemporary agricultural products than meat is.

But yes, nothing wrong in preferring venison or wild salmon over
hormones-pumped veals.

I suppose however that our paleo ancestors whenever they had to choose
which part of their rare-treat big game to eat and which to relinquish
were obviously favouring the fattest parts, which offered a better
caloric deal pro-kilo.

-- 
Stefano Vaj



From sparge at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 12:35:24 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 08:35:24 -0400
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=3rx1h_5GZqLVWe5ewceUD-kOSxg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>wrote:

>
> This is my problem with the Paleo diet.  The archeology does not fit a
> high-fat diet.  Everything I read shows that hunter/gatherers got more
> of their diet from gathering than hunting.


I'd be curious to know what evidence there is for that assertion.


> Big game meat was not a daily occurrence.


Big game is not the only source of meat. There's small games, fish, and
insects, too.

And even when big game was bagged, it was not
> high-fat as seen in today's deliberately fattened meats.


Most primal/paleo eaters prefer pasture-raised and finished meat for that
reason and because of the better balance of omega 3's and omega 6's.

I also doubt the lack of grains in the diet.  Archeological evidence
> shows that grains were routinely gathered and used in paleo times.  Just
> because agriculture did not domesticate grains until later does not mean
> they were lacking in the paleo diet.
>

There's evidence of pre-agricultural grain consumption but it's pretty thin.
However, a diet that includes occasional *wild* grains would have to qualify
as primal/paleo, in my book.

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110407/8fb05333/attachment.html>

From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Thu Apr  7 13:37:00 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 06:37:00 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
In-Reply-To: <mailman.154.1302129486.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <178983.39412.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Dan <dan_ust at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 
> You speak as if Earth contained most of the rock and metal
> in the solar system 
> if not the galaxy. There's plenty of rock and metal around
> to play with.
> 
> From: Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com>
> To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> Sent: Wed, April 6, 2011 9:39:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Millions of tons to space
> 
> Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > I can see Earth being a museum piece.
> 
> Permanently lock away all that useful rock and metal, for
> the sake of a zoo for 
> a few primitive biological organisms?
> 
> I think there are probably better solutions.


There was plenty of oil, too, a century ago, yet many people think we're going to run out of the stuff soon.

If we discovered an oil-reservoir-dwelling bacterial ecosystem, I rather doubt it would be widely thought a good idea to preserve a multi-billion-barrel amount of oil under the ground, for the sake of those bacteria.

We would think of a better solution, I'm sure.  We could easily provide for the bacteria *and* still avail ourselves of the bulk of the oil.

Planets are a terrible way to make a habitat (even for biologicals). Wasteful, dangerous, and so difficult to leave, when you want to.  I wouldn't be surprised if there were no bodies larger than a few km in size left in the whole solar system (expect the sun), in a few hundred years.

Ben Zaiboc


      



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr  7 15:05:04 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 08:05:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikErr5FxKbQHbyXbkadWQiYwkmAdQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>	<D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>	<013401cbf495$442aa120$cc7fe360$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikErr5FxKbQHbyXbkadWQiYwkmAdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006001cbf535$2d454fa0$87cfeee0$@att.net>


... On Behalf Of Stefano Vaj
Subject: Re: [ExI] new heavy lifter

2011/4/6 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>> Back in 1979... acquainted with many of these smart guys, including my
girlfriend?s father.
>> He had crystal foresight: ...? All this was well known by summer of 1979,
two years before first flight.

>So, what should they have done, in your opinion?--Stefano Vaj

With the advantage of hindsight, what should have been done in 1979? 

	* Cancel the shuttle program, forget returning payloads from space.
That was a bad idea all along.  Most of the time, the shuttles returned
nearly empty, which is why they didn't break up on re-entry from structural
failure.  

	* Make a small re-entry vehicle, possibly even with wings and
wheels, but no cargo bay, with six seats, three rows of two, or possibly
five: one three one, with a heat shield and parachute landing.  Keep a
smaller two-seat re-entry body like the Gemini capsule (which is steerable
to some extent and has a ground landing option.)  Keep a single seat RB like
the Mercury capsule with sea-landing only capability.

	* Have a small man-lifter that doesn't do much other than haul
humans, four at a time, to orbit.  The acceptable risk per launch is about
1% for man-rated launch.

	* Make heavy-lift non-man rated.  This allows engineers to cut
margins closer.  Set acceptable risk to 10% loss per launch, for enormous
weight savings.  That isn't far off from what we ended up doing anyway, with
the Titan and Delta families heavy lifters.  The heavies could be more
Titaney and less Delta-ey, but that might be personal bias.  The Booeing
boys might disagree. 

	* Forget the space station.  We had one of those in 1975, and we
already knew in 1979 that humans can live a long time in weightlessness, and
that they have nothing to do up there but copulate.  (Well what you think
they are doing up there for months at a time?)

	* Use most of that NASA budget in figuring out how to build highly
capable autonomous robotics, to eventually assemble space stations and build
Mars habitats.  Have NASA study science, not humans in weightlessness for
decades.

	* Use NASA budgets to work out aggressive goals for miniaturization,
which has one hell of a lot of commercial spinoff.

	* Encourage space commercialization at every step.

spike










From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 15:13:27 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 11:13:27 -0400
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=3rx1h_5GZqLVWe5ewceUD-kOSxg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTi=3rx1h_5GZqLVWe5ewceUD-kOSxg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimmso_sQKe9D8X6DD6Bx3pVt6wArg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/7 Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com>

> There's evidence of pre-agricultural grain consumption but it's pretty
> thin. However, a diet that includes occasional *wild* grains would have to
> qualify as primal/paleo, in my book.


I believe they had to be near starving before they resorted to grains.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110407/999689c8/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 15:26:17 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 11:26:17 -0400
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikpmDfna+qeW1sH6fWqBD0r5YL3fg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/6 spike <spike66 at att.net>

> geothermal and falling water are nearly completely exploited


I think geothermal heating/cooling should be used for homes/buildings.
 Using the Earth's constant temperature could save us a lot of grid usage.
 Sure, on the heating side we'll need to supplement, but we 'pay' to heat
from 55-70, versus 34-70.

Water sources deeper than 8' I believe it is, can be used as these
geothermal heatsinks.  We can kill 2 birds with one stone on this one, and
create more ponds/lakes to help with the upcoming water issues
(sporadic cycles, floods, droughts, etc.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110407/d34572bf/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Thu Apr  7 16:50:53 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 11:50:53 -0500
Subject: [ExI] ANNOUNCE:  Humanity+ Conference May 14-15,  in NYC
Message-ID: <5D51A350333346618AEDBCF4FAACCF64@DFC68LF1>

On May 14-15 2011, Humanity+ International is partnering with Parsons The
New School for Design in New York City to produce Transhumanism Meets
Design, a conference exploring emerging technology, transdisciplinary
design, culture and media theory, and biotech.
http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/

The conference brings together futurists, cyberneticists, life
extensionists, singularity advocates, A[G]I and robotics experts, human
enhancement specialists, inventors, ethicists, philosophers, and theorists
to meet with the creativity and rigorous scholarship of design at Parsons.
<http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/>
http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/
http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/speakers/

Technological innovation permeates all aspects of society-from tiny water
purification packets and portable LifeStraw filters, to GPS tracking
devices, wearable Timex iPods and Gel-Kinsei high-tech running shoes.
Because technology and society evolve together, it has become increasingly
important to develop a greater understanding of how technology is shaping
the course of our lives. We are faced with a need to continuously become
more innovative in harnessing and controlling technology's acceleration.
Nevertheless, innovation develops in stages. When it speeds up, we are faced
with an urge to become ever more resourceful. When it slows down there is an
impending impatience to compete with the exuberance of China. There is no
doubt that even the most conservative thinkers agree that we have stepped
into an era of a massive change. The good news is that our human diversity
continues to spawn inventiveness and novelty.

Register!  http://www.eventbrite.com/event/1089760503

Hotels information:
http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/travel-hotels/

Other travel information:
http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/travel-airports-subway/

See you there!

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110407/ce2d2981/attachment.html>

From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com  Thu Apr  7 18:15:50 2011
From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 20:15:50 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik2e1PSgCcHG4hUeZonky85G9_OEg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 06, 2011 at 12:28:19PM -0700, spike wrote:
>
> > Thanks Max.  I was a big fan of wind power until ~2008.  Starting in that
>
> I never was. The potential is limited to locations, and as a secondary
> source to the solar primary it is limited in total volume.
>
>
> [...]
>


> Nevertheless it is possible to generate a fair fraction of total
> electricity with wind alone:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Germany
>
> Recent study says 65% of total electricity production in
> Germany could be done with wind power -- in theory.
>

And in practice, wind power in Spain is already generating 21% of the total
electricity - and that's an average over the whole month of March 2011:

link in English:
http://www.ree.es/ingles/sala_prensa/web/notas_detalle.aspx?id_nota=180

On a particularly good day, Spanish wind power generation surpassed 50% of
the total generation:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/traftery/4100600251/lightbox/

Note how hydroelectric goes negative (pumped storage), and how coal and gas
stations are almost turned off. Also, international exchanges remained quite
low - the load balancing was done mostly inside Spain, without increasing
exports.

This is exactly what wind power can do - not replace 100% of your electrical
generation, but offset a significant percentage of fossil fuel generation.
Up to 50% on any given day (on a sizable country with 46m people) has
already been demonstrated in practice.

Alfio
<http://www.ree.es/ingles/sala_prensa/web/notas_detalle.aspx?id_nota=180>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110407/ac62c927/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Apr  7 19:19:00 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 14:19:00 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>

[chances are that this email, like an earlier couple of mine, will be 
bounced by ExI chat]

On 4/7/2011 3:31 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> See respective total available energy on
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Available_Energy-4.png
>
> As you see, even terrestrial solar flux is about a factor
> of 6000 in excess our needs, and 2000 in excess of our
> needs just considered land area. Incidentally, just the flux
> upon human-made structures matches the total energy demand.

I don't suppose anyone here has even the slightest curiosity about the 
alleged Rossi process:

<http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>

Damien Broderick



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr  7 19:48:47 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:48:47 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik2e1PSgCcHG4hUeZonky85G9_OEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTik2e1PSgCcHG4hUeZonky85G9_OEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110407194847.GD23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 08:15:50PM +0200, Alfio Puglisi wrote:

> This is exactly what wind power can do - not replace 100% of your electrical
> generation, but offset a significant percentage of fossil fuel generation.
> Up to 50% on any given day (on a sizable country with 46m people) has
> already been demonstrated in practice.

Solar PV in Germany provides up to 17 GW peak of 85 GW peak demand.
That at only 2% total contribution (doubled from 1% within a year).

At the current growth rate renewable would provide >100% of
peak by 2020, though it won't as the grid won't be able to be refitted
for variable, multiple distributed sources on time.

http://www.renewablesinternational.net/yes-we-have-no-base-load/150/537/29353/
 
> Alfio
> <http://www.ree.es/ingles/sala_prensa/web/notas_detalle.aspx?id_nota=180>


-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr  7 19:54:11 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:54:11 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org> <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:19:00PM -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:

> I don't suppose anyone here has even the slightest curiosity about the  
> alleged Rossi process:
>
> <http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>

The known fraudster (illegal gold import and tax fraud) Andrea Rossi? 

-- 
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 thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Apr  7 20:37:32 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 15:37:32 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Rossi
In-Reply-To: <20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com> <20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4D9E208C.3010305@satx.rr.com>

On 4/7/2011 2:54 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

>> <http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>
>
> The known fraudster (illegal gold import and tax fraud) Andrea Rossi?

You mean the obsessive Biblical interpreter and alchemical madman Isaac 
Newton?

Or the many tax dodgers and gold hoarders on this list?

As a physicist associate commented:

<Note however the involvement of the chairman of the energy committee of 
the Royal Swedish Academy, which should count for something.>

Whatever.

Damien Broderick




From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr  7 20:44:57 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 13:44:57 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>


-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien
Broderick
...

>I don't suppose anyone here has even the slightest curiosity about the
alleged Rossi process:

<http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>

>Damien Broderick

It's bogus Damien.  A huge hint is the comment that the used powder contains
10% copper.  It suggested proton capture to transform nickel to copper, but
to do that would require the presence of a lot of the rare-ish (~3%) isotope
nickel62 doing the proton capture (never mind how such a wacky event could
be happening.)  

Otherwise, if we imagine the copper is formed by a neutron decay (never mind
how) the nickel atom would form copper62 which has a half life of about 10
minutes.  This we can nail before we go to the trouble of calculating the
nucleon energy transitions.

Into the bit bucket with it.

spike






From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Apr  7 22:30:23 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 17:30:23 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
Message-ID: <4D9E3AFF.7000606@satx.rr.com>

On 4/7/2011 3:44 PM, spike wrote:

> It's bogus Damien.  A huge hint is the comment that the used powder contains
> 10% copper.  It suggested proton capture to transform nickel to copper, but
> to do that would require the presence of a lot of the rare-ish (~3%) isotope
> nickel62 doing the proton capture (never mind how such a wacky event could
> be happening.)

Yer probably right. But one physicist replies:

<People in CF have already figured such issues out.  3% may be enough if 
nuclear processes are involved.  It is much more likely that there have 
been problems measuring the composition (this part is not in the 
experimenters' report) than with the measurements of the very large 
quantities of heat.  Let's also not forget that Levi has been studying 
the reactor over a large period of time, and has noted that it would 
hardly do his career much good if he were involved in fraud or 
deception.  I think we have to wait until the composition issue gets 
clarified.  Incidentally, one of the observers was ex-chairman of the 
Swedish Sceptics Society (and also a physicist), who would be strongly 
motivated to spot flaws in the measurement>

while another agrees strenuously with you:

<As I've said before any nuclear reaction with by products such as 
neutrons or gammas and operating at these power levels would fry 
everyone in the room.  The same comment applies here. Imagine 10% of the 
mass being copper 62 which I see has a radioactivity of 1.2 x 10^7 
Terabecquerels per gram, you can see the problem.

Whatever is going on, if anything, is not this.  I suspect /dev/null is 
the right repository. >

Damien Broderick


From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr  7 22:35:48 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 15:35:48 -0700
Subject: [ExI] ANNOUNCE: Humanity+ Conference May 14-15, in NYC
In-Reply-To: <5D51A350333346618AEDBCF4FAACCF64@DFC68LF1>
References: <5D51A350333346618AEDBCF4FAACCF64@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin4WHp+6vsWWG+TZ2mh+=iG=JKOcw@mail.gmail.com>

Fantastic!

I'm really looking forward to participating in this event, the venue and
focus being refreshingly different from so many other transhumanist
conferences. The collection of speakers is large, diverse, and impressive. I
hope lots of east coasters will attend, as well as some from further afield.

See you in New York!

--- Max

2011/4/7 Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc>

>  On *May 14-15 2011, Humanity+* International is partnering with *Parsons
> The New School for Design* in New York City to produce *Transhumanism
> Meets Design*, a conference exploring emerging technology,
> transdisciplinary design, culture and media theory, and biotech.
> http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/
>
> The conference brings together futurists, cyberneticists, life
> extensionists, singularity advocates, A[G]I and robotics experts, human
> enhancement specialists, inventors, ethicists, philosophers, and theorists
> to meet with the creativity and rigorous scholarship of design at Parsons.
> http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/
> http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/speakers/
>
> Technological innovation permeates all aspects of society?from tiny water
> purification packets and portable LifeStraw filters, to GPS tracking
> devices, wearable Timex iPods and Gel-Kinsei high-tech running shoes.
> Because technology and society evolve together, it has become increasingly
> important to develop a greater understanding of how technology is shaping
> the course of our lives. We are faced with a need to continuously become
> more innovative in harnessing and controlling technology?s acceleration.
> Nevertheless, innovation develops in stages. When it speeds up, we are faced
> with an urge to become ever more resourceful. When it slows down there is an
> impending impatience to compete with the exuberance of China. There is no
> doubt that even the most conservative thinkers agree that we have stepped
> into an era of a massive change. The good news is that our human diversity
> continues to spawn inventiveness and novelty.
>
> Register!  http://www.eventbrite.com/event/1089760503
>
> Hotels information:
> http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/travel-hotels/
>
> Other travel information:
> http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/travel-airports-subway/
>
> See you there!
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110407/ff3908c6/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Thu Apr  7 22:45:22 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 00:45:22 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
Message-ID: <4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>

Il 07/04/2011 22.44, spike ha scritto:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Damien
> Broderick
> ...
> 
>> I don't suppose anyone here has even the slightest curiosity about the
> alleged Rossi process:

> <http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>

> It's bogus Damien.  A huge hint is the comment that the used powder contains
> 10% copper.  It suggested proton capture to transform nickel to copper, but
> to do that would require the presence of a lot of the rare-ish (~3%) isotope
> nickel62 doing the proton capture (never mind how such a wacky event could
> be happening.)  

> Otherwise, if we imagine the copper is formed by a neutron decay (never mind
> how) the nickel atom would form copper62 which has a half life of about 10
> minutes.  This we can nail before we go to the trouble of calculating the
> nucleon energy transitions.

> Into the bit bucket with it.

Well, Rossi say they will install a 1MW heat modular reactor in Greece
in October. If it will deliver heat water until march to the paying
customers could we agree there is something interesting there?

It is interesting, for a scammer, to have the device tested by
professionals from famous universities. Hanno Essen was chairman of the
Sceptick Society in Sweden, so I suppose he know how debunk scammers.
http://www.vof.se/visa-english

Rossi could have stumbled on the effect by chance and found a way to
turn it on and off at will by trial and error, without any knowledge of
what is happening.

The news is they are building the modules that will form the 1 MW plant
in the US and will give a demonstration of them for the journalists
before shipping to Greece.

I suppose it will be an interesting summer.

-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>

Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>

*Mirco Romanato*



-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3557 -  Data di rilascio: 07/04/2011



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr  7 23:16:11 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 16:16:11 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <4D9E3AFF.7000606@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
	<4D9E3AFF.7000606@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <00eb01cbf579$c9129fc0$5b37df40$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Damien Broderick
...

>...while another agrees strenuously with you:

>...<As I've said before any nuclear reaction with by products such as
neutrons or gammas and operating at these power levels would fry everyone in
the room.  The same comment applies here. Imagine 10% of the mass being
copper 62 which I see has a radioactivity of 1.2 x 10^7 Terabecquerels per
gram, you can see the problem... Damien Broderick



{8^D  haaaaaaa this is a classic physicist joke.  {8^D  I did get a hearty
laugh, but this time I was laughing at my own foolish self: when I made the
original comment, I hadn't done that calculation.  But he is right on, and I
shoulda spotted it: the amount of material sitting there with a 10 minute
half life would cause all present to flee in all directions at once, for
several seconds, until their flesh burned away from their scorched and
smoking skeletal remains, from gamma emmisions alone, ignoring any other
radioactive effects, such as fast neutrons which will also spoil one's day.
One can ignore stuff like neutron flux for BOTECs, since gamma radiation
makes for easy calculations of energy levels and estimates how much would be
absorbed by any unfortunate proles standing in the same zip code.

There is another way to do the calculation however, one which I actually
found a bunch of years ago in an analysis of a SF story written by Isaac
Asimov about a goose that laid golden eggs.  The story was in jest of
course, but the analysis went thru a calculation showing that if proton
capture could take place and the goose devoured a sufficient amount of
platinum, using the nucleon energy criterion, a goose could (with a strong
dose of imagination) convert the platinum and lay a golden egg.  The story
as I recall from perhaps 25 yrs ago did note the fact that this would
actually destroy value, as platinum is more valuable per nucleon than is
gold.

Asimov went on to show that it was not possible to go back the other way,
having the goose devour a mercury isotope and forming the gold via (as I
vaguely recall) alpha decay coupled with a mysterious proton capture, or by
having the goose eat thallium and having the goose somehow catalyze the
stable isotope undergo alpha decay somehow.  Again we draw the curtain of
mercy upon the exact mechanism, for it all goes on in the gizzard of a
goose, but just end-state energy balance of the nucleons demonstrate that
the energy required to drive such a reaction would have the goose devouring
and digesting several tons of grain a day per gram of gold produced, which
would be far more costly than the resulting precious metal, as well as
creating a mess in the barnyard.  Still the calculations are fun and not
difficult.

Math is so cool.  Physics even more so.  Get those two guys working
together, and one has nearly infinite opportunities to entertain oneself.

spike







From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr  7 23:24:51 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 16:24:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
	<4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>
Message-ID: <00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Mirco Romanato
...

>> Otherwise, if we imagine the copper is formed by a neutron decay  (never
mind
> how) the nickel atom would form copper62 which has a half life of 
> about 10 minutes.  This we can nail before we go to the trouble of 
> calculating the nucleon energy transitions.

>> Into the bit bucket with it.

>...Well, Rossi say they will install a 1MW heat modular reactor in Greece
in October. If it will deliver heat water until march to the paying
customers could we agree there is something interesting there?

...

>I suppose it will be an interesting summer. -- *Mirco Romanato*

Guys, did anyone every check the date on the original postings for this
whole thing?  Was it by any chance from last Friday?

{8^D

I saw the funniest April Fools gag ever: a news anchor was punked into
believing someone had come up with an Ipad app that would cause the device
to emit an odor and a flavor:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNxX4SDqpVU&feature=player_embedded#at=12

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Fri Apr  8 01:51:27 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 18:51:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>	<4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>
	<00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <002501cbf58f$79e350a0$6da9f1e0$@att.net>

...

>> Into the bit bucket with it.

>...Well, Rossi say they will install a 1MW heat modular reactor in 
>Greece in October. If it will deliver heat water until march to the paying
customers could we agree there is something >interesting there?

...


Regarding cold fusion, I do not universally treat it as a joke.  In an
autobiography called Alvarez: Adventures of a Physicist, the Nobel laureate
Luis Alvarez describes an experiment they were doing at Berkeley (as I
recall from reading it over 20 yrs ago), in the mid 1950s.  They couldn't
explain it, but there appeared to be excess heat being generated.  They did
an audit of all materials in the experiment, did some nucleon end-state
energy calculations and thought they must somehow be seeing muon-catalyzed
nuclear reactions.  He writes: for a few heady hours, we thought we had
found the solution to all mankind's energy needs for all time.  (Quote
approximate, from 20+ year old memories.)

The team calculated furiously for some time, then realized the muon's life
span was too short to do what they thought might be happening.  Still,
Alvarez was at the top of his game in the mid 1950s, and he had a team of
the best minds around.  If they could be fooled, even for a few hours, I can
see how other teams can fumble as well.  A couple years after I read
Alvarez's book, Pons and Fleischmann announced they had achieved cold
fusion.  I hoped like hell they were right, but thought they were most
probably mistaken.

spike









From thespike at satx.rr.com  Fri Apr  8 02:51:57 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 21:51:57 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <002501cbf58f$79e350a0$6da9f1e0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>	<4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>	<00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>
	<002501cbf58f$79e350a0$6da9f1e0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <4D9E784D.7050008@satx.rr.com>

On 4/7/2011 8:51 PM, spike jones wrote:

> Nobel laureate
> Luis Alvarez describes an experiment they were doing at Berkeley (as I
> recall from reading it over 20 yrs ago), in the mid 1950s.  They couldn't
> explain it, but there appeared to be excess heat being generated.

My understanding is that some serious, experienced physicists are 
reporting that they see unexplained excess heat from Rossi's set-up. If 
that is true and isn't due to some overlooked glitch, while nuclear 
explanations are inapplicable, it just means that some other kind of 
account is needed (maybe of some new sort).

I'm always surprised when science buffs think that "It can't be due to 
X" means that an observed phenomenon therefore doesn't exist, or if it 
does exist it can't be anomalous, must be due to fraud or carelessness 
or stupidity. Yes, often that will be the case. The history of science 
shows that often enough it *isn't* the case.

In this instance, it looks to me as if time, and lots of scrutiny, will 
tell; it's too soon to bit-bucket the claim. Since it's already had 
quite a lot of initial scrutiny without falling over, it is interesting 
enough to track.

Damien Broderick


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 03:41:39 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:41:39 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimqKoMex+2hbOGtryaJxx+4bMWYyg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/6 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> Thanks Max.? I was a big fan of wind power until ~2008.? Starting in that
> year, I began making frequent trips coast to coast, and saw wind farms in
> various places.? I noted the locations and set my computer to remind me to
> look out the window when various wind farms were coming into view.? It is
> something that burned an image into my retinas: most of the time in most of
> those wind farms, all of the turbines were sitting still and quiet.

You must not have spent much of your time in Wyoming... :-)

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 03:49:50 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:49:50 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org> <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
	<4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>
	<00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimnk5q-iKZ7U_Ha=8EpSvGRc2jufw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:24 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> I saw the funniest April Fools gag ever: a news anchor was punked into
> believing someone had come up with an Ipad app that would cause the device
> to emit an odor and a flavor:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNxX4SDqpVU&feature=player_embedded#at=12

Ha! Reminds me of the iPhone app distributed by Orabrush that
"detected" whether you had bad breath when you blew on it. What a
great app!!!

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 03:52:37 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:52:37 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik2e1PSgCcHG4hUeZonky85G9_OEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTik2e1PSgCcHG4hUeZonky85G9_OEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin1Sx0fGr7LdMuD5+AQRz7R+uCy_A@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/7 Alfio Puglisi <alfio.puglisi at gmail.com>:
> And in practice, wind power in Spain is already generating 21% of the total
> electricity - and that's an average over the whole month of March 2011

I have heard (on talk radio) that the pursuit of alternative energy
sources in Spain has had a very large negative effect on job creation
and other aspects of their economy. It makes sense that there would be
problems if you put too much capital investment all at once. Does
anyone have good data on that?

-Kelly


From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Fri Apr  8 06:30:18 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 02:30:18 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 7, 2011, at 4:31 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> Recent study says 65% of total electricity production in
> Germany could be done with wind power -- in theory.

I don't believe that number, current wind farms produce less than 30% of the power they were supposed to and their output is very irregular. See: 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/whoa-windfarms-in-uk-operate-well-below-advertised-efficiency/

And wind power is not inexhaustible, if wind farms become common that 30% figure will drop even more; and environmentalists will bitch about disrupting wind patterns killing birds looking ugly and making noise.  

As for solar cells, they use indium and tellurium and there is not enough in the earth's crust to make enough cells to make a serious dent in the problem. Maybe substitutions will be found but they wouldn't be a solution to global warming; solar cells are black and only about 20% efficient, so 80% of the light that would otherwise be reflected back into space is converted directly into heat. And I just can't see powering a steel making blast furnace with solar cells. The only technology that is ready today to take over from fossil fuels is nuclear fission, moonbeams just aren't going to work.

  John K Clark   





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110408/29ec3140/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Apr  8 06:58:13 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 08:58:13 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Rossi
In-Reply-To: <4D9E208C.3010305@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org> <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
	<20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org> <4D9E208C.3010305@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20110408065813.GK23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 03:37:32PM -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:
> On 4/7/2011 2:54 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
>>> <http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>
>>
>> The known fraudster (illegal gold import and tax fraud) Andrea Rossi?
>
> You mean the obsessive Biblical interpreter and alchemical madman Isaac  
> Newton?
>
> Or the many tax dodgers and gold hoarders on this list?

Damien, do you remember how many scientists could find
no fault with spiritual media of yore? Yet at closer
inquiry by professionals experienced in charlatan 
exposure they turned out frauds.

> As a physicist associate commented:
>
> <Note however the involvement of the chairman of the energy committee of  
> the Royal Swedish Academy, which should count for something.>
>
> Whatever.

Science doesn't work that way. There's nothing wrong with
wanting to believe a piece of good news. There's plenty of
wrong with being gullible enough to fall for common crooks
camouflaging as scientists.

I wasn't looking for that guy, but I kept hearing mentions
of him, including first hand accounts of students at the 
school he teaches.

I did a websearch of on him in conjunctions with Randi, and
I did post an URL of the thread discussing him. Do read it,
and form your own opinion. I did.

> Damien Broderick

-- 
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 alfio.puglisi at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 08:18:13 2011
From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 10:18:13 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org> <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimFfhjkv=5sqHdt05PDQNwq-0burg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 9:19 PM, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>wrote:


> I don't suppose anyone here has even the slightest curiosity about the
> alleged Rossi process:
>
> <http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>
>
>
Apart from problems like the deadly neutron flux, I found this other claim:

...the inventive apparatus, installed on October 16, 2007, is *?*at present
perfectly operating 24 hours per day, and provides an amount of heat
sufficient to heat the factory of the Company EON of via Carlo Ragazzi 18,
at Bondeno Province of Ferrara, Italy.?

So, if he's got a large working system since two and half years ago, why the
need for theatrical demonstrations?

Alfio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110408/b8ba0816/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Apr  8 09:54:23 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 11:54:23 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <20110408095423.GQ23560@leitl.org>

On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 02:30:18AM -0400, John Clark wrote:
> On Apr 7, 2011, at 4:31 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> 
> > Recent study says 65% of total electricity production in
> > Germany could be done with wind power -- in theory.
> 
> I don't believe that number, 

Take your beef to Fraunhofer (IWES):

http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Studie-Onshore-Wind-kann-Kernenergie-ersetzen-1222015.html

> current wind farms produce less than 30% of the power they were supposed to and their output is very irregular. See: 

390 TWh/year contains the unit hours.

Again, the 65% of total is a theoretical value, assuming
100% utilization of existing *potential*. Trying to 
approach that would be a stupid idea, since PV will
eat wind's lunch long term.
 
> http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/whoa-windfarms-in-uk-operate-well-below-advertised-efficiency/
> 
> And wind power is not inexhaustible, if wind farms become common that 30% figure will drop even more; and environmentalists will bitch about disrupting wind patterns killing birds looking ugly and making noise.  

You forgot the bats.
 
> As for solar cells, they use indium and tellurium and 

Plants don't use scarce elements. Even photovoltaics
has produced a wide range of semiconductor materials
in a short time.

FWIW, there are about 12 g/m^2 of CdTe in a thin-film
cell. CuInGaSe ditto.

> there is not enough in the earth's crust to make enough 
> cells to make a serious dent in the problem. 

I'd call 17 GW peak of 85 GW total peak demand a good start.

> Maybe substitutions will be found but they wouldn't 
> be a solution to global warming; solar cells are 

You're forgetting that the roofs are already there,
and they are black. The change in Earth's albedo will
be effectively zero.

If you care about global warming, look into reducing
greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane.

> black and only about 20% efficient, so 80% of the 
> light that would otherwise be reflected back into 

But it wouldn't be reflected back into space.

> space is converted directly into heat. And I just can't 
> see powering a steel making blast furnace with solar cells. 

Then you're uninformed. Power is fungible, most of local
steel is electrosteel, and hydrogen ore reduction is of
course possible.

> The only technology that is ready today to take over from fossil fuels is nuclear fission, moonbeams just aren't going to work.

You know, for a guy who likes numbers and actual
arguments instead of rhetorical assertions your
post was remarkably devoid of such.

You know what, let's postpone this and rehash the issue in 2021.
Let's see what the numbers for renewable and nuclear
will be in Germany ten years from now.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Fri Apr  8 10:16:39 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 12:16:39 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <4D9E784D.7050008@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org> <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
	<00c301cbf564$a86754b0$f935fe10$@att.net>
	<4D9E3E82.7060205@libero.it>
	<00ec01cbf57a$ff7034f0$fe509ed0$@att.net>
	<002501cbf58f$79e350a0$6da9f1e0$@att.net>
	<4D9E784D.7050008@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <20110408101639.GT23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 09:51:57PM -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:
> On 4/7/2011 8:51 PM, spike jones wrote:
>
>> Nobel laureate
>> Luis Alvarez describes an experiment they were doing at Berkeley (as I
>> recall from reading it over 20 yrs ago), in the mid 1950s.  They couldn't
>> explain it, but there appeared to be excess heat being generated.
>
> My understanding is that some serious, experienced physicists are  
> reporting that they see unexplained excess heat from Rossi's set-up. If  

That's just the point: it's Rossi's setup. 

> that is true and isn't due to some overlooked glitch, while nuclear  
> explanations are inapplicable, it just means that some other kind of  
> account is needed (maybe of some new sort).

My guess it's a hidden power line or he's otherwise feeding
the device with external power, or energetic material.

> I'm always surprised when science buffs think that "It can't be due to  
> X" means that an observed phenomenon therefore doesn't exist, or if it  
> does exist it can't be anomalous, must be due to fraud or carelessness  
> or stupidity. Yes, often that will be the case. The history of science  
> shows that often enough it *isn't* the case.

I genuinely hope you're not as gullible as this in your daily life.
The crooks would otherwise have a field day.

> In this instance, it looks to me as if time, and lots of scrutiny, will  
> tell; it's too soon to bit-bucket the claim. Since it's already had  
> quite a lot of initial scrutiny without falling over, it is interesting  
> enough to track.

The only moment it will become interesting is when it will be
replicated elsewhere and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Before it's about as interesting as a dog barking outside.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Fri Apr  8 10:19:15 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 12:19:15 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin1Sx0fGr7LdMuD5+AQRz7R+uCy_A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTik2e1PSgCcHG4hUeZonky85G9_OEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTin1Sx0fGr7LdMuD5+AQRz7R+uCy_A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110408101915.GU23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 09:52:37PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> 2011/4/7 Alfio Puglisi <alfio.puglisi at gmail.com>:
> > And in practice, wind power in Spain is already generating 21% of the total
> > electricity - and that's an average over the whole month of March 2011
> 
> I have heard (on talk radio) that the pursuit of alternative energy
> sources in Spain has had a very large negative effect on job creation
> and other aspects of their economy. It makes sense that there would be
> problems if you put too much capital investment all at once. Does
> anyone have good data on that?

What cooked Spain's goose single-handedly was the real estate bubble.
That was basically the single source that powered the Spain's economy,
for a while. There have been some shenanigans with renewables as well
(illuminating photovoltaics with fossil power during the night rings
a bell?), but they were negligible in comparison.

-- 
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 painlord2k at libero.it  Fri Apr  8 12:02:25 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 14:02:25 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com> <20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4D9EF951.10101@libero.it>

Il 07/04/2011 21.54, Eugen Leitl ha scritto:
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2011 at 02:19:00PM -0500, Damien Broderick wrote:

>> I don't suppose anyone here has even the slightest curiosity about the  
>> alleged Rossi process:
>> <http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece>
> The known fraudster (illegal gold import and tax fraud) Andrea Rossi? 

I don't know the case, but in Italy it is too much easy to break the
laws in good faith or be find guilty for something no sane person could
think is illegal. The laws are confused and broad and often the
prosecutors are totally irrational.

For example, just a few days ago, Dolce & Gabbana were acquited for tax
fraud. The prosecutor accused them of fraud because they sold a 100 what
the prosecutor say had a value of 300 and paid the taxes on the 100. So
they defrauded the government of the taxes on the difference.

-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>
Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>
*Mirco Romanato*




-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3558 -  Data di rilascio: 07/04/2011



From amon at doctrinezero.com  Fri Apr  8 13:06:38 2011
From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:06:38 +0100
Subject: [ExI] "Wolfpack" (Transhumanist media intervention team)
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=85EZCa8x=Cju_wyfP0yJ_Z7KQaA@mail.gmail.com>

Hi All -

I hope this post is appropriate here.

Over a year ago, it was pointed out on the ExtroBritannia (H+UK) list that a
good way to influence public opinion (or at least perceived public opinion)
in favour of transhumanism is to comment on online articles - particularly
in major mainstream publications - and to follow up those comments where
conversations are sparked. The idea is that it doesn't take many such
comments for newspaper editors and the like to realise that there is an
audience with and for pro-tech opinions, which subsequently seems to
influence editorial decisions on which articles to print. Most importantly,
in order to be effective such comments must be intelligent, friendly, and
open-minded.

Some of us on ExtroB briefly discussed the possibility of setting up an H+UK
"media intervention team", pooling resources in order to make such
interventions most effective. Anders Sandberg even suggested using the
colourful name "Wolfpack" for the team.

At the time, the idea went no further. As part of my new Zero
State<http://zerostate.net> project,
however, I've set up a wiki page for the Wolfpack, as originally discussed.
The plan is to create a new entry under that page documenting each media
intervention, with a few brief notes on any feedback. When anyone is
planning a new comment or article in any publication, they can check the
list for any previous interventions which may yield useful material, which
you may freely use as you see fit.

https://sites.google.com/site/dimensionzerodmz/home/08-resources/ongoing-projects/wolfpack

This is a Google Sites wiki, closed to the public, so you must request
permission to access it.

Regardless of whether you're remotely interested in any other aspect of the
ZS project, I do hope you'll consider making at least one comment in favour
of transhumanism or technology on any media site, and using the Wolfpack
resource in order to make your effort most effective. If you document your
intervention - a simple cut'n'paste which takes a few seconds - then you
will also be helping those who follow in your footsteps.

Onward & Upward!

- Amon
http://zerostate.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110408/227c2d18/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 19:05:57 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 13:05:57 -0600
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <005301cbf471$36bd5290$a437f7b0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=vf_VHe4Oqe6F8JQn4J93Bwc6uxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<005301cbf471$36bd5290$a437f7b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimfu9gr9Jztvz0tanS3pvcL=7A6pw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:42 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> I predict we will not see
> auto-autos in the next couple decades at least.

Sweet! Want to go on Stewart Brand's Long Now web site and make a wager? :-)

I can't imagine a case where autonomous vehicles aren't the default in
2025. People are just too slow, too inattentive (and getting worse),
and too drunk at times to drive cars as safely as a good computerized
system.

And yes, I agree with BillK that initially it will be something the
driver initiates when he feels comfortable.

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 19:25:08 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 13:25:08 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Racist foxes
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=a9vsXRG+Vd4rit9FmauSKbpZYtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <961F55C4-97AF-483B-8AF9-64E63291409E@alumni.virginia.edu>
	<BANLkTinwAD2bixAEGxiUt-8_Dh6o+wRJDA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinU6Q3GPJ_=yGieay6pvru1x4+yaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimTKGp5nT6_FxbVNL4QJnR5b-3ZMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=a9vsXRG+Vd4rit9FmauSKbpZYtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimqgcVLxucAjB4LGs-rdn-58A6R_g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 5:47 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Can you think of an example where cultural failure was the cause of an
> empire failing?

Oh, I don't know... How about Rome. Or the disintegration of Greece at
the death of Alexander. The Jews in 70 AD (not submitting to
reasonable Roman rule). There are many other examples. Rome is by far
the best example. They did not run out of any resource other than
intelligence.

Or the USA over the past 25 years (granted, it hasn't completely fallen YET).

Yes, there are the cases of environmental overuse, like Easter Island,
Mayans, Mohenjo Daro, and so forth, but these cases are elevated in
the public mind by the environmental faction.

-Kelly


From eugen at leitl.org  Fri Apr  8 19:41:11 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 21:41:11 +0200
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimfu9gr9Jztvz0tanS3pvcL=7A6pw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=vf_VHe4Oqe6F8JQn4J93Bwc6uxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<005301cbf471$36bd5290$a437f7b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimfu9gr9Jztvz0tanS3pvcL=7A6pw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110408194111.GF23560@leitl.org>

On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:05:57PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:42 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> > I predict we will not see
> > auto-autos in the next couple decades at least.
> 
> Sweet! Want to go on Stewart Brand's Long Now web site and make a wager? :-)
> 
> I can't imagine a case where autonomous vehicles aren't the default in
> 2025. People are just too slow, too inattentive (and getting worse),

That's just 14 years away. You *might* get some autonomous vehicles
and armor for the military. Which don't have to deal with liability,
unlike truckers and delivery guys.

> and too drunk at times to drive cars as safely as a good computerized
> system.

It will take many lawsuits until people will eventually get there.
 
> And yes, I agree with BillK that initially it will be something the
> driver initiates when he feels comfortable.

So what happens when the system disengages, and the driver isn't
ready, or says he isn't ready, and something happens, for parts
irrelevant? Blame assignment is a a game a lot like ballistic feces.

-- 
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 sjatkins at mac.com  Fri Apr  8 20:05:24 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2011 13:05:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <20110408194111.GF23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w3iV5gp+JD4C683BHkXwAZcWTAA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=vf_VHe4Oqe6F8JQn4J93Bwc6uxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<005301cbf471$36bd5290$a437f7b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimfu9gr9Jztvz0tanS3pvcL=7A6pw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110408194111.GF23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4D9F6A84.7080109@mac.com>

A good site on robocars, their variations and many associated issues and 
possible ways forward is at

http://www.templetons.com/brad/robocars/


On 04/08/2011 12:41 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 01:05:57PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:42 AM, spike<spike66 at att.net>  wrote:
>>> I predict we will not see
>>> auto-autos in the next couple decades at least.
>> Sweet! Want to go on Stewart Brand's Long Now web site and make a wager? :-)
>>
>> I can't imagine a case where autonomous vehicles aren't the default in
>> 2025. People are just too slow, too inattentive (and getting worse),
> That's just 14 years away. You *might* get some autonomous vehicles
> and armor for the military. Which don't have to deal with liability,
> unlike truckers and delivery guys.
>
>> and too drunk at times to drive cars as safely as a good computerized
>> system.
> It will take many lawsuits until people will eventually get there.
>
>> And yes, I agree with BillK that initially it will be something the
>> driver initiates when he feels comfortable.
> So what happens when the system disengages, and the driver isn't
> ready, or says he isn't ready, and something happens, for parts
> irrelevant? Blame assignment is a a game a lot like ballistic feces.
>



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 20:25:25 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:25:25 -0600
Subject: [ExI] note from a foaf in japan
In-Reply-To: <4D9D1856.8090501@libero.it>
References: <AANLkTinq54Xbs4SAVJ2UgRWpE1hW2J-KQgE7-X3Nzt6i@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=kgz+an9ud1TuR+EHs-3eNn_U4p=nvEfG3K4G8@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D8DEFD5.7050804@libero.it>
	<AANLkTinHDsMGaVWD2cwLqQCfgAfSuqnrUfb=BwD2eQ_O@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D962021.4070806@libero.it>
	<BANLkTimCXOkQpE_Cf4hXjj0aM+t1pqDggA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D9D1856.8090501@libero.it>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinpe36yophAgSiPQ4N0FU7Lb+=taA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:50 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
> Il 03/04/2011 1.23, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Mirco Romanato
>> <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:
>>> Il 01/04/2011 6.17, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
>> Recall that most of the people at the time were very poor. The rich
>> ruling class was very small at this time, and there was virtually no
>> middle class in feudal Europe.
>
> I think "poor" in this discussion is whoever is not able to feed
> themselves and his family members and allow them to be healthy enough to
> pass the genes to the next generation. Many paesants would be able to do
> so. Many others not.

Starvation of a portion of the populace at each generation was fairly
common until the past couple hundred years. Occasionally, you would
have mass famines (China, Irish Potato famine), but more common was
families that fell on hard times as individual units. This is classic
individual Darwinistic pressure.

>> Name a specific trait that allows people to thrive in cities. Then
>> tell me what the selection mechanism is to keep people without that
>> trait from reproducing.
>
> Attention disorders and hyperactivity disorders are not good for city
> dwellers. It interfere with the constant toiling of the jobs usually
> available in cities like blacksmithing.

There is more attention disorder and hyperactivity today than in the
past. At least it is easier to notice when you have the problem
because there are so many things to distract us today.

> The predisposition to learn how read and write and do maths. For
> example, in Florence during the XII century half of the children in the
> city went to "Schools of Abacus" (not public funded) to learn to do
> maths and be able to land a good job in some banks or keep a shop.

Did this effect reproduction? Usually higher education leads to lower
reproductive levels. Farmers reproduced at the highest rates
historically, due to the free labor of children.

> Impulsiveness is a bad trait, as you are near too much people to get
> away with aggression, murder, thief, etc. easily.
>
> There is a reason the word "urbane" and "villain" are used to denote a
> behavior and not only the dweller in city and in the country.

But none of these are Darwinistic pressures. That is, being bad at
math does not lead to lower reproductive levels.

>> The bottom line with people is that memes have been more important
>> than genes for hundreds of years, so I would not expect see a lot of
>> genetic changes over the past few hundred years because a wide cross
>> section of society reproduces. Another way to ask the question is
>> what sort of people don't reproduce in our modern societies?
>
> The productive middle class that it taxed out of existence and have not
> the resources to raise more than two children (often not enough to raise
> one). The lower classes, the unproductive on the dole, many of them
> reproduce far more than the the middle class because they can offload
> their reproduction to the taxpayers.

We are now selecting for people willing to live off of welfare. This
is a heavy pressure. Some males in the inner city have as many kids as
they possibly can to get bigger government checks. If this keeps up
for a few more generations, this may indeed lead to some genetic
results, but for now I would say it is mostly cultural.

> This is a problem much debated in the manosphere.
>
>
>> The children of rich people can become poor very easily. Today the
>> poor reproduce at higher rates than the rich. I'm not sure what the
>> historical case is, but farmers have historically had lots of kids.
>
> Some farmers rarely were poor for the standards of the time.
> They had many children and bough land. They divided the land with their
> children. Some succeed and some not. Repeat.

The problem with farming is how the land is inherited. If all the land
goes to the eldest son, then he still has enough land for the next
generation. The other nine kids have to fend for themselves, perhaps
by going to the city, if there is one. If the land is divided amongst
the ten kids, then you have a problem.

>> You are probably right. Still, with a 5% or even 20% survival rate,
>> that is an EXTREME selection pressure that human beings have almost
>> never seen. And certainly we haven't seen those extreme selection
>> pressures based on the kinds of cultural issues that we started
>> talking about.
>
> In fact, I think it required much more time for the humans to select the
> right traits in the right conditions.
> In England it was something like 5-600 years or 20-30 generations.

And now that we are mixing our genes across country boundaries at a
fast rate, any such selection is quickly being diluted, or at least
distributed. I of course contend that there haven't been any terribly
important genetic changes in the last 60K years of human evolution. Of
course, there have been some, particularly related to livestock
domestication and agriculture.

>> But can you point to one case where genetic change has happened. The
>> only one that comes to mind is that our genes for lactose
>> intolerance have been bred out after the creation of dairy as a main
>> human food source. That is a very different kind of genetic drift
>> than you are talking about. What you are saying is theoretically
>> possible, but as far as I know undocumented as having actually
>> happened.
>
> I think deMause "History of childhood" and "The Emotional Life of
> Nations" could be interesting.
>
> For something available on the net:
> http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2009/07/return-of-quetzalcoatl-preface.html

That was sad, frightening and pretty disgusting. However, I did not
see anything there that pointed towards Darwinian selection. Killing
female babies does not lead to fewer females in the next generation.
Duh.

>> African tribes have definitely had enough time for some genetic
>> drift. Is this research or a guess? In western cultures where people
>> move to the city, then to the country and back, there isn't enough
>> pressure or time to create meaningful genetic drift.
>
> Recent research about a tribe, I read it a few years ago.
> Probably from Futurepundit.
>
>> I am engaged in just such an experiment. I am Caucasian, I have six
>> African American children, four Hispanic and one half Asian child.
>> Culturally, they are all mostly culturally white. They are
>> intellectually indistinguishable from me (other than some physical
>> issues stemming from in utero abuse). Your position on this point
>> seems racist, and completely unsupported by research. Of course,
>> there is a cultural limit on how much real research has been done in
>> this area because nobody wants to be called a racist.
>
> Exactly.
> The data about the IQ gap of blacks relative to whites in the US is well
> know.

Yes, but is it genetic or cultural? That is the question.

> It also didn't change much with time. IIRC the data about
> mulattos/mestizos is something in between.
> Also, the distribution of personality traits and psychic disorders is
> different for Africans and Europeans and, IMHO, appear to follow the
> adaptations to the local conditions of Africa and Europe.
>
> I think the next decade will be very interesting in this field,
> dispelling many wrong ideas.

I hope so.

>> We talk a lot about the higher rates of incarceration of minorities.
>
> The problem is when some explanations can not be uttered because they
> are not acceptable to the polite discourse.
>
>>>> Blacks are more carefully watched by the police,
>>>
>>> Why? Why they don't check more for Hispanics or Vietnamese or
>>> Italians? Are the policemen racists? Even the blacks one?
>
>> Yes, even some black policemen are racist against blacks.
>
> This beg the question:
> "Are they racist without reasons or with reasons?"

I would assume with reason. If blacks are incarcerated at a higher
rate, and you as a police man want to optimize your time, it is better
to arrest people more likely to be incarcerated. So you might focus on
the poor, or drug addicted, or minorities to up your effectiveness
measured in numbers. This is not because they are more apt to crime
(although generations of being prayed upon can lead to moral decay due
to the loss of parents to the next generation) but because of the
circumstances created.

>> It took the Irish at least three generations to escape from being
>> the lowest in American society. At one point, the coal mines in West
>> Virginia would hire Irish over black slaves because they were less
>> valuable than the slaves to the mine owners. Similarly, the Chinese
>> who build the transcontinental railroad were valued less than
>> slaves.
>
> This because slaves were property and the freemen not.

Exactly.

>> I blame politicians more than anyone else for the problems facing
>> the blacks in America today. The black leadership (Jessie Jackson and
>> the like) are particularly guilty IMHO.
>
> :-)
> I agree that many politicians (blacks and whites) give as much help as
> they are able to keep the blacks in the plantation.

The sick thing to me is that Democrats seem more guilty of this than
Republicans, and yet more blacks sign up as Democrats. That seems
suicidal to me.

>> Blacks who recently came from Africa or the Caribbean are usually
>> more immediately successful than African Americans with the cultural
>> history. Yesterday, I interacted with an African pharmacist. I was
>> not surprised, but I would have been more surprised by an African
>> American pharmacist. In other words, the problem is not such much the
>> color of their skin, but the color of their mind. After hearing that
>> the "man is going to keep you down" for generations, many African
>> Americans give up. My own African American children don't hear this
>> negative talk, and I fully expect them to succeed in America. It's
>> not genetic, it's cultural.
>
> How much old are they.
> Theory say the older they will be the greater the difference.
> For the sake of the experiment you could sequence their genome when the
> costs will be down in the next few years and look for their real share
> of European, African, whatever genes.
>
> I agree that skin color is a poor proxy for something so complex like
> the genetics of the mind.

Clearly skin color and mental ability are not strongly correlated.

>> Where I live, the most disproportionate homicide is done by
>> undocumented Mexicans. Again, even if the homicide rate nation wide
>> is higher for black on whoever, that doesn't mean it is genetic. It
>> is societal and cultural if that is the case.
>
> As I wrote before, this decade will give up so much genetic data that we
> will be able to know much more about this. Maybe more than many of us
> would know are are able to accept. Reality have many surprises.

I just hope it doesn't lead to a second round of eugenics.

>> They have succeeded. This doesn't make sense. Large changes in the
>> zeitgeist are accomplished all the time. Look at the change in
>> Southern attitudes towards blacks, or the nation's view of
>> homosexuality. They have changed a lot just in my life time.
>
> These are cultural changes of others, not the blacks.

I wasn't talking about blacks. Just how quickly society changes,
compared to the glacial progress of genetics. Tens of years rather
than millions.

>> I have also spent a lot of time in Mexico. It DID work exactly this
>> way. Mexico is 90%+ Catholic to this day. Where are you getting
>> these ideas?
>
> The issue is a bit more complex than formal adhesion to the Catholic
> Church. Local customs and way of thinking resisted the Conquistadors,
> mainly in the rural areas.

For a few generations, I'm sure you are sure.

>> Ok. Here you are talking about real selected genetic difference.
>> Racism in humans is not based on significant genetic differences
>> because humans don't have very significant genetic differences. This
>> is primarily because of the population bottleneck around 600K years
>> ago.
>
> Significant genetic differences must be defined.
> It would be interesting, but not very ethics, to take a group of
> Africans and land them in rural Finland (with enough resources for
> living for a few years and have the chance to adapt) and land a group of
> Finns in rural Africa (with the same resources). Then look ?at how they
> succeed or not. I remember something like this in an old sci-fi book
> (Genoa-Texcoco:0.0) but it was more a testing of economics systems.

Still, whatever success or failure was achieved would be more a
function of how adaptable their culture was than their genetic makeup.

>> Actually, in the US armed forces, minorities and poor are
>> represented in higher proportion than middle class and white. This is
>> because of the financial benefits of joining the ?armed forces are
>> more effective in recruiting people who need those benefits.
>
> I would reconsider this info. Mine is that whites, middle class are the
> majority and overrepresented in the armed forces.
> Minorities are more represented in not combat positions than in combat
> positions.

I do not think you are right, but I'll try to dig up some real numbers later.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 22:00:55 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 16:00:55 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=umroa2iCmS4bxPZ2ispup2O_sYQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/8 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> Maybe substitutions will be found but they wouldn't be a solution
> to global warming; solar cells are black and only about 20% efficient, so
> 80% of the light that would otherwise be reflected back into space is
> converted directly into heat.

John,

  This is a common misconception. The earth is very good at radiating
excess heat into space. The globe hasn't warmed because of the heat
generated by burning fossil fuels, but rather by the changes to the
atmosphere caused by the change to the composition of gases in the
air. So it is solar energy that heats the earth once the composition
of the atmosphere has changed. Likewise, it will not heat up because
some panels get hot.

  Now there is local heating, such as the well documented fact that
cities are a few degrees warmer than the surrounding country side.
This is hardly a climate issue, but more of a local inconvenience.

  For many centuries, they have made ice in Iran by putting water out
in shallow pans in the desert at night. The heat radiates out of the
water into space, and viola, ice.

  As for the materials required to create solar panels, they are
working on many different alternatives. Some of my favorite are
biological, and require no special equipment. I love what you can do
with algae to use solar power to create flammable gases (I think
mostly methane).

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Fri Apr  8 22:09:47 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 16:09:47 -0600
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <006001cbf535$2d454fa0$87cfeee0$@att.net>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>
	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>
	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>
	<D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>
	<013401cbf495$442aa120$cc7fe360$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikErr5FxKbQHbyXbkadWQiYwkmAdQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<006001cbf535$2d454fa0$87cfeee0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikzVFOe4Dy14cynwggJgY-wLWmuUw@mail.gmail.com>

Do you think the future of space is in non-governmental efforts? It
seems so from outside, but I can't be sure.

-Kelly


From spike66 at att.net  Fri Apr  8 22:14:17 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 15:14:17 -0700
Subject: [ExI] new heavy lifter
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikzVFOe4Dy14cynwggJgY-wLWmuUw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <005601cbf3b4$fa71b590$ef5520b0$@att.net>	<494D6619-054D-4CAB-BC32-06BC23100E62@bellsouth.net>	<007601cbf3bc$b0645e00$112d1a00$@att.net>	<D1C1E05A-C598-4F0E-ABF3-FAB90C19AE53@bellsouth.net>	<013401cbf495$442aa120$cc7fe360$@att.net>	<BANLkTikErr5FxKbQHbyXbkadWQiYwkmAdQ@mail.gmail.com>	<006001cbf535$2d454fa0$87cfeee0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikzVFOe4Dy14cynwggJgY-wLWmuUw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <012c01cbf63a$4dfec770$e9fc5650$@att.net>



>...Do you think the future of space is in non-governmental efforts? It
seems so from outside, but I can't be sure.
-Kelly


The future of everything is in non-governmental efforts.  It seems so from
outside.  You can be sure.

spike







From msd001 at gmail.com  Sat Apr  9 03:11:56 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:11:56 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/8 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> And wind power is not inexhaustible, if wind farms become common that 30%
> figure will drop even more; and environmentalists will bitch about
> disrupting wind patterns killing birds looking ugly and making noise.

I'm all for killing ugly birds that make noise.  If birds are anything
like foxes then in as few as 8 generations they'll be more attractive
and quieter.


From spike66 at att.net  Sat Apr  9 04:11:24 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 21:11:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty

2011/4/8 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> >... killing birds looking ugly and making noise.

>...I'm all for killing ugly birds that make noise.  If birds are anything
like foxes then in as few as 8 generations they'll be more attractive and
quieter.



In a few generations, the ugly noisy birds will be afraid of wind turbines,
along with their attractive quiet cousins.

There are some places where wind power definitely does pay and does make
sense.  These are often not near population centers, so the cost of
transporting the power is too great, such as out in Wyoming for instance.
What I envision is that they will be used to do stuff like electroplating
metals out of solution which takes a buttload of energy, or in making
synthetic octane from coal.  I haven't done the numbers on these processes,
so I don't know if it out-pencils.

spike






From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sat Apr  9 04:56:02 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 00:56:02 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 7, 2011, at 4:31 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:

> even terrestrial solar flux is about a factor of 6000 in excess our needs, and 2000 in excess of our
> needs just considered land area.

It's true that the total energy that humans use only accounts to one part in 6000 of the solar energy hitting the planet, but that's still a lot, about 47 terawatts (17 of that from fossil fuels) if you include solar powered green plants that humans use for fuel or food.

Axel Kleidon has calculated the thermodynamic limits of what heat engines and other mechanisms powered by the sun could theoretically produce on the Earth at:
 
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/1103/1103.2014v1.pdf
and
http://www.earth-syst-dynam.net/2/1/2011/esd-2-1-2011.html

The maximum theoretical amount of power you could extract from wind, is in the range of 18?68 TW, and if you took it that far the environmental change caused by disruption of wind patterns would be considerable.  

Next he figured out what you could realistically expect from biofuels given that the overall photosynthetic efficiency of plants is only 3 to 6 percent of the solar radiation they receive. The most you could get is about 215 TW.
 
Gravitational engines, tides caused by the sun and moon, could give you another 5TW.

Geothermal: Given that the heat flux from the interior to the surface is less than 0.1 W m^2 the efficiency would be very low and only about 40 TW of free energy could be obtained.

And given the fact that the population is increasing and the number of people demanding to live a good middle class lifestyle is increasing even faster the 47 terawatts that humans currently use is certain to increase, and increase considerably. Unless we have a technological breakthrough long term nuclear fission is the only technology that is economically and thermodynamically feasible. 

  John K Clark 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110409/0d9170b6/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sat Apr  9 05:03:23 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:03:23 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>
	<017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik92HU-sx41wB6Kn+4kTzMkzkbm=w@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:11 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> There are some places where wind power definitely does pay and does make
> sense. ?These are often not near population centers, so the cost of
> transporting the power is too great, such as out in Wyoming for instance.
> What I envision is that they will be used to do stuff like electroplating
> metals out of solution which takes a buttload of energy, or in making
> synthetic octane from coal. ?I haven't done the numbers on these processes,
> so I don't know if it out-pencils.

I can think of an analogous historical and a current example.

In the 1930s, they build a load of hydroelectric dams in the Tennessee
Valley. In spite of being one of the most socialist and heavy handed
endeavors in US history, it was overall a good project from an
engineering standpoint. The electricity was primarily used to extract
aluminum from bauxite, which takes a LOT of electricity. It was ready
just in time to build the aluminum aircraft that helped to win WWII.
When you can find industries that use a LOT of electricity like this,
and you can locate them close to the source of the electricity, that
is a good thing. I am not a big fan of the social aspects of the TVA
(Tennessee Valley Authority), but it is hard to argue with the success
of the resulting technological achievements.

A few years back, Google built a very large data processing center
right next to one of the really big dams (The Dalles) on the Columbia
river. Considering that Google is a huge user of electricity, and that
electricity is sold at a discount that close to the source, this was a
really good move.

One of the most important high energy processes in the future may be
desalinization of sea water. In some places in the Middle East, I
understand this is done today mostly with petroleum. Too bad they
didn't do more with solar, as it is a very hot very sunny region. I
suspect that in the future more of these projects will be done with
solar power.

One of the windiest places on earth is in Antarctica. There is a
valley there that I understand has six months of just unbelievable
wind nearly constantly. It is a terribly difficult place to build ,
maintain and inhabit. Perhaps this is a good job for specialized
robotics some day... but what could you do with virtually unlimited
electricity in Antarctica that would make it all worth while? Perhaps
extracting gold from sea water? There has to be something.

-Kelly



From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sat Apr  9 05:23:19 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 01:23:19 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=umroa2iCmS4bxPZ2ispup2O_sYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=umroa2iCmS4bxPZ2ispup2O_sYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E52DA0D5-BDC2-4D26-A430-D67F019CE7E2@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 8, 2011, at 6:00 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> Now there is local heating, such as the well documented fact that
> cities are a few degrees warmer than the surrounding country side.
> This is hardly a climate issue

Of course it's a climate issue! If you change the Earth's albedo you change the climate in a fundamental way because you change the amount of energy that drives the entire show, and solar cells are black and only 20% efficient. But to be honest global warming rather bores me, I just enjoy throwing environmental arguments back at people.

> As for the materials required to create solar panels, they are
> working on many different alternatives. Some of my favorite are
> biological, and require no special equipment.

Moonbeams. I'm talking about technologies that we have right now that are ready to take over the MASSIVE job of driving the world's economy from fossil fuels, and like it or not I know of only one, nuclear.

 John K Clark 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110409/f16a09aa/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sat Apr  9 05:46:16 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 22:46:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik92HU-sx41wB6Kn+4kTzMkzkbm=w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>	<BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>	<017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>
	<BANLkTik92HU-sx41wB6Kn+4kTzMkzkbm=w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <019701cbf679$72216ce0$566446a0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
Subject: Re: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 10:11 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> There are some places where wind power definitely does pay and does 
>> make sense. ?These are often not near population centers, so the cost 
>> of transporting the power is too great... do stuff like 
>> electroplating metals out of solution which takes a buttload of 
>> energy...

>...In the 1930s, they build a load of hydroelectric dams in the Tennessee
Valley...

>...One of the windiest places on earth is in Antarctica... Perhaps
extracting gold from sea water? There has to be something. 

> - Kelly

There are ways to use power in large but unsteady quantities.  The places
where wind power can pay off tend to be where there are few or no people:
they don't want to live out there, too windy.  I think of the desert US
west.  Consider China Lake California, the naval base.  There we have vast
stretches of unused land where the wind howls with such ferocity one often
wishes for merciful death to come soon.  The USNavy used it to let the guys
do practice runs in the jets, dogfights, bombing practice, that sort of
thing.  But we really don't need that much anymore.  Modern weapons guide
themselves, they are really accurate and they don't make much of a boom
compared to WW2 and WW3 era weapons.  Modern fighter planes are too
expensive to risk them in a fight anyway.  So now those two big Navy test
ranges can be used for something else.

I can imagine planting huge wind turbines out on those ranges.  No people to
bother, almost no birds out there, too dry.  There would be housing nearby
for the workers to live, in Ridgecrest.  The environmentalists would be
happy, since it would preserve the land for local beasts.  The Navy could
still use it even with a bunch of turbines.  We could do experimental PV
installations near the southern border of the range and use the power
locally and for aluminum and copper production.

Go on Google Maps, enter Ridgecrest California, look around.  In the
summertime you can get scorching sunlight every day for four months in a
row, and good reliable sunlight the rest of the time, as well as crazy wind
for six months.

Nuclear fission isn't the only way to go.

spike









From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sat Apr  9 06:03:38 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 00:03:38 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/8 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> On Apr 7, 2011, at 4:31 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>
> Geothermal: Given that?the heat flux from the interior to the surface is
> less than 0.1 W m^2?the efficiency would be very low and only about 40 TW of
> free energy could be obtained.

In the VERY VERY long term, if we got extremely active and successful
about extracting heat from the earth's core, we might eventually
affect the magnetic fields that protect the earth from solar
radiation. That would make global warming look like a cake walk. :-)
Given that the core is heated by nuclear fission, it would be a long
time before it created huge problems, it would be interesting what it
did to the dynamics of subduction zones too.

> Unless we have a technological breakthrough long
> term nuclear fission is the only technology that is economically and
> thermodynamically feasible.

Well, you didn't mention nuclear fusion. True we can't do it today,
but perhaps someday with a lot of AI we might figure it out. That
would resolve a lot of problems for quite a while.

-Kelly



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Apr  9 15:04:22 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 10:04:22 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Human Enhancement Symposium
Message-ID: <98EF319C71224A4885F9D3205395D1B4@DFC68LF1>

Hi,
 
I will be giving a talk today at the "Exploring Human Enhancement: A
Symposium".  http://www.utdallas.edu/c4v/human-enhancement-symposium/
 
It looks like another academic assessment of some transhumanist ideas.  Here
are some of the abstracts:
http://www.utdallas.edu/c4v/human-enhancement-symposium-abstracts/#wearble  

 

Natasha

 

 <http://www.natasha.cc/> Natasha Vita-More

  PhD Researcher,  <http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/273> Planetary
Collegium, Univ. of Plymouth, UK
Vice Chair <http://humanityplus.org/> : Humanity+


 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110409/7695f4a6/attachment.html>

From eugen at leitl.org  Sat Apr  9 15:45:52 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 17:45:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>
	<017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110409154552.GK23560@leitl.org>

On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 09:11:24PM -0700, spike wrote:

> There are some places where wind power definitely does pay and does make
> sense.  These are often not near population centers, so the cost of
> transporting the power is too great, such as out in Wyoming for instance.

There is another transportation problem of sorts: producing more power
than the grid can be absorbed. At the moment the operators shut down
the turbines, but it would make more sense to dump the surplus into
water electrolysis.

> What I envision is that they will be used to do stuff like electroplating
> metals out of solution which takes a buttload of energy, or in making
> synthetic octane from coal.  I haven't done the numbers on these processes,

If you don't need the energy from coal you do not need the coal
as carbon source, either. Also: peak coal.

> so I don't know if it out-pencils.

-- 
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 stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sat Apr  9 15:47:24 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 17:47:24 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimmso_sQKe9D8X6DD6Bx3pVt6wArg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110406155226.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c713b68474.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTi=3rx1h_5GZqLVWe5ewceUD-kOSxg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimmso_sQKe9D8X6DD6Bx3pVt6wArg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin-UiY4GAM10fk4EQc+TceLoi0h3A@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/7 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> 2011/4/7 Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com>
>>
>> There's evidence of pre-agricultural grain consumption but it's pretty
>> thin. However, a diet that includes occasional *wild* grains would have to
>> qualify as primal/paleo, in my book.
>
> I believe they had to be near starving before they resorted to grains.

Could any of us, today, actually survive, let alone thrive, on wild,
raw, unprocessed grains?

I assume not.

And certainly I am not eager to give it a try.

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From spike66 at att.net  Sat Apr  9 16:39:48 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 09:39:48 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <20110409154552.GK23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<75F7E4DF-5027-4918-9A91-176FF1BBC608@bellsouth.net>	<BANLkTi=p91ciHN9rdy-zP_kpraaLFk6ibg@mail.gmail.com>	<017a01cbf66c$317d7ec0$94787c40$@att.net>
	<20110409154552.GK23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <004601cbf6d4$be9beae0$3bd3c0a0$@att.net>



>...On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
Subject: Re: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.

On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 09:11:24PM -0700, spike wrote:

>> There are some places where wind power definitely does pay and does make
sense...

>There is another transportation problem of sorts: producing more power than
the grid can be absorbed...

I witnessed that on my vacation in Washington state last summer.  We had
several days in a row when the wind was steady and blowing like hell.  The
local newspaper commented that they were running the power wires at about 5%
above maximum design capacity, and they dared not smoke them any higher than
that.  This went on for several days.  We drove west to east through the
Columbia Gorge with a steady 50 mph tailwind.  My wife drove a two axle
trailer at 80 mph and got better fuel economy than the truck normally gets
unburdened.  That day she could have turned off the motor and let the wind
push her down the road.

> At the moment the operators shut down the turbines, but it would make more
sense to dump the surplus into water electrolysis...

Ja, but only if the facilities are in place to use the hydrogen and oxygen
for something.

> ... or in making synthetic octane from coal...

If you don't need the energy from coal you do not need the coal as carbon
source, either. Also: peak coal.

The coal to octane wouldn't need to be a huge operation, or even necessarily
competitive with refined crude.  Where this would come into play is in
taking advantage of existing octane burning infrastructure, and the fact
that octane is easily transported arbitrary distances using existing
infrastructure.  I see it as being used to skim off peak power from PV farms
and large wind installations that are way the hell out from population
centers.  Regarding peak coal: the total amount of coal used is relatively
small if the energy source is supplied by some external source, rather than
burning coal itself to convert coal to octane.

spike







From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sat Apr  9 16:48:59 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 12:48:59 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 9, 2011, at 2:03 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> Given that the core is heated by nuclear fission,

Geothermal heat does not come from nuclear fission, 80% of it comes from the decay of radioactive isotopes, primarily Potassium Uranium and Thorium; the remaining 20% comes from the formation of the Earth when a large cloud of matter was compressed by gravity into a small ball 8000 miles in diameter, all that gravitational potential energy was converted into heat.    

> Well, you didn't mention nuclear fusion.

Because fusion has not yet reached theoretical break-even and produced one watt of usable power (other than in the H bomb), and it is even further from economic break-even.

> True we can't do it today,but perhaps someday with a lot of AI we might figure it out.

Maybe, but we can't base our future on some marvelous new discovery made at some unspecified time that may or may not even happen.

 John K Clark



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110409/6492b0b5/attachment.html>

From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sat Apr  9 17:24:40 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 13:24:40 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org> <4D9E0E24.10906@satx.rr.com>
	<20110407195411.GF23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <CA895C88-8147-4AAC-B388-99FCC2C88710@bellsouth.net>

The trouble with wind farms is that windmills create a wind shadow behind them, the bigger the windmill the bigger the shadow, and that means the further apart you must space your windmills, and that means the more land you must buy, and that means the more expensive it becomes. Nobody would bother building wind farms at all except for the massive tax breaks and other incentives offered by governments; but I think if they're really all hot and bothered over global warming (I'm not) they'd do better forgetting about wind farms and offering tax breaks to people who paint their roofs white and insist that all new highways be constructed using light colored concrete not jet black asphalt.

When and if wind power becomes economical tax breaks will not be needed to bribe people to build windmills.

  John K Clark  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110409/c062aa8c/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Sat Apr  9 18:15:44 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:15:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Tim Minchin video
Message-ID: <BANLkTikVZamK1TVCzrYTfYXUF8FM4xRc=Q@mail.gmail.com>

This was posted to the Extrobritannia list. Just about everyone here will
enjoy it. I can very rarely tolerate watching videos online that are longer
than 2 minutes, but had no problem with this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhGuXCuDb1U&feature=player_embedded

--- Max

-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110409/f2d96b1c/attachment.html>

From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Sat Apr  9 18:48:37 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:48:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1302350401.16350.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <634806.17662.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Mike Dougherty <msd001 at gmail.com> commented

> 2011/4/8 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> > And wind power is not inexhaustible, if wind farms
> become common that 30%
> > figure will drop even more; and environmentalists will
> bitch about
> > disrupting wind patterns killing birds looking ugly
> and making noise.
> 
> I'm all for killing ugly birds that make noise.? If
> birds are anything
> like foxes then in as few as 8 generations they'll be more
> attractive
> and quieter.


LOL. Thanks, Mike.  I've had a shitty day today, but that made me laugh.


Ben Zaiboc


      



From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Sat Apr  9 18:53:39 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 11:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] "Wolfpack" (Transhumanist media intervention team)
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1302350401.16350.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <482186.10562.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Amon Zero <amon at doctrinezero.com> wrote:

> Over a year ago, it was pointed out on the ExtroBritannia
> (H+UK) list that a
> good way to influence public opinion (or at least perceived
> public opinion)
> in favour of transhumanism is to comment on online articles
> - particularly
> in major mainstream publications - and to follow up those
> comments where
> conversations are sparked. The idea is that it doesn't take
> many such
> comments for newspaper editors and the like to realise that
> there is an
> audience with and for pro-tech opinions, which subsequently
> seems to
> influence editorial decisions on which articles to print.
> Most importantly,
> in order to be effective such comments must be intelligent,
> friendly, and
> open-minded.
> 
> Some of us on ExtroB briefly discussed the possibility of
> setting up an H+UK
> "media intervention team", pooling resources in order to
> make such
> interventions most effective. Anders Sandberg even
> suggested using the
> colourful name "Wolfpack" for the team.
> 
...
> I do hope you'll consider making at least one
> comment in favour
> of transhumanism or technology on any media site, and using
> the Wolfpack
> resource in order to make your effort most effective. If
> you document your
> intervention - a simple cut'n'paste which takes a few
> seconds - then you
> will also be helping those who follow in your footsteps.


This sounds like a good way that those of us who aren't scientists, technologists or entrepreneurs, can actually do something that may make a difference, for a change.  I give it a thumbs up.

Ben Zaiboc


      



From msd001 at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 04:43:43 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 00:43:43 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <634806.17662.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302350401.16350.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<634806.17662.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikG25F=KdYD6p0p3fijRQG_x5Tynw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 2:48 PM, Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Mike Dougherty <msd001 at gmail.com> commented
>> 2011/4/8 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
>> > And wind power is not inexhaustible, if wind farms
>> become common that 30%
>> > figure will drop even more; and environmentalists will
>> bitch about
>> > disrupting wind patterns killing birds looking ugly
>> and making noise.
>>
>> I'm all for killing ugly birds that make noise.? If
>> birds are anything
>> like foxes then in as few as 8 generations they'll be more
>> attractive
>> and quieter.
>
>
> LOL. Thanks, Mike. ?I've had a shitty day today, but that made me laugh.
>

That was my intention :)   When Spike responded I wasn't sure if he
knew I was kidding or thought I was a simpleton lacking a clear
understanding of the point being made.  John's lack of punctuation was
an opportunity for mis-parsing the sentence and I found it funnier to
imagine environmentalists applying 'selection pressure' against ugly
and noisy birds.

'Glad you got a chuckle.



From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 10 05:12:29 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 22:12:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikG25F=KdYD6p0p3fijRQG_x5Tynw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302350401.16350.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>	<634806.17662.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTikG25F=KdYD6p0p3fijRQG_x5Tynw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000001cbf73d$e4e46470$aead2d50$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty
...
>
>> LOL. Thanks, Mike. ?I've had a shitty day today, but that made me laugh.
>

{8^D  Ja me too.

>...That was my intention :)   When Spike responded I wasn't sure if he
knew I was kidding or thought I was a simpleton lacking a clear
understanding of the point being made...

Ja I got it, I was playing along.  It's a particular quirky type of humor,
where one treads right on the boundary of absurdity while kinda making a
point at the same time.  I love word play and all the odd humor found in the
ambiguity of language.  I like playing the fool in such a way as to fool the
audience.  If anyone here is old enough to remember the Smothers Brothers,
think Tommy Smothers.

>...'Glad you got a chuckle.

Me too, a chuckle is always welcome.  I am in that time of life when the
previous generation is having one serious health problem after another.  Six
parents, all with life threatening conditions of one type or another, none
into cryonics.  Earlier this evening I got word that a good friend's father
passed away at 84.  The ER docs accidentally killed him.  Oddly enough, they
admitted everything.

Regarding wind power, I will likely do some calcs when I can get to it,
regarding the feasibility of using peak energy when it is available,
comparing processes such as coal to Diesel fuel with electrolyzed water as
the hydrogen source vs coal to Diesel using natural gas.  First I need to
get my friend's wife to the airport.  

spike









From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 10 06:05:05 2011
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2011 23:05:05 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
Message-ID: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>



http://www.greencar.com/articles/vw-polo-bluemotion-tops-70-mpg.php


This?car?runs on diesel, has a top speed of 109 mph, has lower CO2 emissions 
than a Prius,?and gets a 

whopping 70 miles to the gallon.
?
So here is a riddle for you:
?
Why can't we?get this in North America?
?

Stuart LaForge 


"There is nothing wrong with America that faith, love of freedom, intelligence, 
and energy of her citizens cannot cure."- Dwight D. Eisenhower 


      



From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 07:50:57 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 08:50:57 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:05 AM, The Avantguardian  wrote:
>
>
> http://www.greencar.com/articles/vw-polo-bluemotion-tops-70-mpg.php
>
>
> This?car?runs on diesel, has a top speed of 109 mph, has lower CO2 emissions
> than a Prius,on?and gets a whopping 70 miles to the gallon.
>
> So here is a riddle for you:
> Why can't we?get this in North America?
>
>


Because you've been naughty and don't deserve it!     ;)

No, really it is because
1) US gas prices(including tax) need to double to get nearer to
European prices before economical cars become a significant user
demand.
2) The very economical European cars tend to be too small for US preferences.

This article is from 2008 and there are now in 2011 many standard
production European cars (diesel or hybrid) that will get over 70 mpg
on mixed city / freeway driving (called combined cycle mpg). You have
to adjust for US gallons, though, by dividing by 1.2.   So 70 mpg
European = 58.3 mpg US - quite a difference!

Use
<http://carfueldata.direct.gov.uk/search-by-fuel-economy.aspx>
to search for over 50 cars with better than 70 mpg (European).


BillK



From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 09:29:03 2011
From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 11:29:03 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 9:50 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:05 AM, The Avantguardian  wrote:
> >
> >
> > http://www.greencar.com/articles/vw-polo-bluemotion-tops-70-mpg.php
> >
> >
> > This car runs on diesel, has a top speed of 109 mph, has lower CO2
> emissions
> > than a Prius,on and gets a whopping 70 miles to the gallon.
> >
> > So here is a riddle for you:
> > Why can't we get this in North America?
> >
> >
>
>
> Because you've been naughty and don't deserve it!     ;)
>
> No, really it is because
> 1) US gas prices(including tax) need to double to get nearer to
> European prices before economical cars become a significant user
> demand.
> 2) The very economical European cars tend to be too small for US
> preferences.
>
> This article is from 2008 and there are now in 2011 many standard
> production European cars (diesel or hybrid) that will get over 70 mpg
> on mixed city / freeway driving (called combined cycle mpg). You have
> to adjust for US gallons, though, by dividing by 1.2.   So 70 mpg
> European = 58.3 mpg US - quite a difference!
>

This is correct, but note that the greencar.com's article used American
gallons: 3.8 liters/100 km translates to 62 mpg, so the 48 city / 74 highway
is valid for the US. There may be some difference in the standards used to
calculate the fuel consumption, though.
What you call the "European" gallon is actually the UK gallon, which is
unknown to us continental southerners. Actually, most people don't even know
that some kind of gallon is used this side of the atlantic pond :-)



>
> Use
> <http://carfueldata.direct.gov.uk/search-by-fuel-economy.aspx>
> to search for over 50 cars with better than 70 mpg (European).
>
>
> BillK
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20110410/dad167e3/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 10:03:43 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 11:03:43 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=xsKDfc6uW8YhwRLMNr3ODenLV3w@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/10 Alfio Puglisi wrote:
> This is correct, but note that the greencar.com's article used American
> gallons:?3.8 liters/100 km translates to 62 mpg, so the 48 city / 74 highway
> is valid for the US. There may be some difference in the standards used to
> calculate the fuel consumption, though.
> What you call the "European" gallon is actually the UK gallon, which is
> unknown to us continental?southerners. Actually, most people don't even know
> that some kind of gallon is used this side of the atlantic pond :-)
>
>


All the pumps in the UK dispense in litres due to the government
metrication laws, but litres / 100 km is universally ignored by
drivers. Maybe the next UK generation will think in litres /100 km if
they are taught that in school.

Same applies to Kilos versus pounds weight. All hospitals weigh in
kilos and grams which is meaningless to the older generation.

BillK



From amon at doctrinezero.com  Sun Apr 10 10:40:30 2011
From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 11:40:30 +0100
Subject: [ExI] "Wolfpack" (Transhumanist media intervention team)
In-Reply-To: <482186.10562.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302350401.16350.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<482186.10562.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimLWABMck-63S8PJ-w9b26c=g0Pjg@mail.gmail.com>

On 9 April 2011 19:53, Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote:

> This sounds like a good way that those of us who aren't scientists,
> technologists or entrepreneurs, can actually do something that may make a
> difference, for a change.  I give it a thumbs up.
>


Cheers Ben - Always glad to hear positive feedback  :-)

Not my idea originally, of course, but at least it's rolling now...

p.s. As suggested, it is now called "FlashComment", and is here:
https://sites.google.com/site/dimensionzerodmz/home/08-resources/ongoing-projects/flashcomment

OR via here: *http://tinyurl.com/flashcomment*

There is a forward link on the original page.

Best,
A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/531f8ca2/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 11:58:34 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 07:58:34 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikb0gxiaAhVmTF_0XV=k--9pBXpEg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/10 Alfio Puglisi <alfio.puglisi at gmail.com>

> Actually, most people don't even know that some kind of gallon is used this
> side of the atlantic pond :-)


**raises hand** When I hear gallon, I only know of one gallon.  Good piece
of info.  I was under the impression that fuel was sold in liters, versus
gallons overseas, but I didn't know that a Euro gal doesn't equal a US gal.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/73cddb50/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 10 16:02:57 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:02:57 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <005d01cbf798$c2d9e2a0$488da7e0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of The Avantguardian
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America

http://www.greencar.com/articles/vw-polo-bluemotion-tops-70-mpg.php

>...This?car?runs on diesel, has a top speed of 109 mph, has lower CO2
emissions than a Prius,?and gets a 
whopping 70 miles to the gallon.
?
>...So here is a riddle for you:  Why can't we?get this in North America?
?

Stuart LaForge 


Stuart, I am a fan of turbo Diesel, but there is an important subtlety in
the emissions numbers.  Diesel actually does produce less CO2 per kW of
power production, but it emits more carbon particulate.  In the US, CO2
isn't actually considered a pollutant, but carbon soot is definitely a
pollutant.  Modern Diesel engines have a particulate filter, which helps,
but there is some particulate which necessarily escapes.  Changing the
filter is an expense to the owner, so of course they will remove them.
Carbon particulate is bad for humans, whereas carbon dioxide is harmless in
the quantities that cars and trucks make it.  Some will argue carbon dioxide
is bad for the earth, but that is a different question.

That being said, I can envision a two cylinder 20 kW turbo Diesel in a
series hybrid configuration which would beat both BlueMotion and the Prius
in fuel economy and greenness.  It wouldn't be fast.

spike







From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 10 16:11:20 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:11:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=xsKDfc6uW8YhwRLMNr3ODenLV3w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>	<BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=xsKDfc6uW8YhwRLMNr3ODenLV3w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005e01cbf799$ee9302e0$cbb908a0$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America

2011/4/10 Alfio Puglisi wrote:
> ... What you call the "European" gallon is actually the UK gallon, which 
> is unknown to us continental?southerners. Actually, most people don't 
> even know that some kind of gallon is used this side of the atlantic 
> pond :-)

Why O Evolution are we STILL suffering from the absurd English units?

>...Same applies to Kilos versus pounds weight. All hospitals weigh in kilos
and grams which is meaningless to the older generation...BillK

When my son was born almost five years ago, Stanford University recorded his
birth weight in kilos.  It came out to 3.999 grams.  I knew that a standard
sheet of paper is about 6 grams, so I quickly took a paper bill out of my
wallet and dropped it on the scale.  He went to 4.000 kilos.  He was born at
0024 on 6-24-06 at a weight of 4 kilos.

spike








From js_exi at gnolls.org  Sun Apr 10 17:08:10 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 10:08:10 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
Message-ID: <4DA1E3FA.7050708@gnolls.org>

[Another resend: the extropy server apparently hates my mail server.]

On 4/7/11 5:00 AM, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> This is my problem with the Paleo diet.  The archeology does not fit a
> high-fat diet.  Everything I read shows that hunter/gatherers got more
> of their diet from gathering than hunting.

That is a common misconception created by misinterpretations of many of 
the original papers.  Someone, I forget who, classified meat procured by 
fishing, trapping, etc. as "gathering" instead of "hunting" (large 
animals only), someone else took "gathering" to mean "solely plant 
source foods", and an approximate ratio of 2/3 meat to 1/3 everything 
else magically became 1/3 meat to 2/3 everything else.

Yes, this is a modern study, but it's instructive:
"In this review we have analyzed the 13 known quantitative dietary
studies of hunter-gatherers and demonstrate that animal food actually
provided the dominant (65%) energy source, while gathered plant foods
comprised the remainder (35%)."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11965522

The easiest argument against a vegetable-based diet is that it's 
impossible to get enough calories to build and maintain our brains -- 
particularly the long-chain PUFAs EPA and DHA -- without meat.  Read up 
on Kleiber's Law and The Expensive Tissue Hypothesis if you want to 
understand why this is so, while recalling that vegetables have no 
significant digestible calories for humans, who can't digest cellulose. 
  (An asparagus spear has FOUR CALORIES.)

I explain all these issues in detail (including links to the original
papers) here:
http://www.gnolls.org/1763/why-humans-crave-fat/

> Big game meat was not a daily occurrence.

Source?

You might consider reading Dr. Craig Stanford's "Meat-Eating And Human 
Evolution".  And in addition to the above point (no significant calories 
from vegetables), you're going to have to explain multiple continents 
worth of Quaternary megafaunal extinctions that JUST HAPPEN to coincide 
with the arrival of humans.  (Neither do they coincide with ice ages, 
except for North America, and even that begs the question as to why the 
seven previous Ice Ages didn't cause proportionate extinctions.)

The only serious scientific debate at this point is at what point humans 
transitioned from primarily scavenging to primarily hunting, and at what 
point humans controlled fire.  Recent evidence from South Africa 
indisputably indicates that by c. 180 KYa humans were both anatomically 
modern and behaviorally big game hunters/fishers.

"Man the wimpy" was a popular theory for a few years in the early 1990s, 
mostly due to vegetarian and feminist politics...but the continued 
weight of evidence has long since demoted that.

   And even when big game was bagged, it was not
> high-fat as seen in today's deliberately fattened meats.  Therefore, I
> do not believe that high-fat meals are a good emulation of a paleo diet,
> even if eaten rarely.

That's the Cordain theory...and it's bunk, not supported by the
archeology or the biology.  I discuss this subject at great length here:
http://www.gnolls.org/715/when-the-conclusions-dont-match-the-data-even-loren-cordain-whiffs-it-sometimes-because-saturated-fat-is-most-definitely-paleo/
Shortlink: http://www.gnolls.org/?p=715

Here is some first-hand data from someone who butchers free-range bison 
to feed their family:
http://www.archevore.com/panu-weblog/2011/4/6/more-on-grass-fed-bison.html
Here are some pictures of "not high-fat" free-range bison:
http://www.tribeoffive.com/2010/11/just-watch-animals.html
http://www.tribeoffive.com/2011/04/hunting-for-good-food-and-roaming-bison.html

> I also doubt the lack of grains in the diet.  Archeological evidence
> shows that grains were routinely gathered and used in paleo times.

That's another common misconception based on pop science 
misinterpretation of actual science.  Popular articles talk about 
"grains" found on surfaces, and pop-science writers take that to mean 
"cereal grains" -- when actually reading the paper reveals that they're 
talking about grains of starch from *root starches*, like ancestral 
cassava, yam, etc.

The earliest undisputed evidence of regular consumption of cereal grains 
is Ohalo II in Israel, ~21 KYa.  "Archeologists have conducted an 
exhaustive study of Hut 1 at Ohalo II: this hut yielded over 90,000 
seeds. The seeds account for more than 100 species of wild barley and 
fruits."

Recall also that for grains to be a significant contribution to the 
diet, one must also have evidence of grain *storage*.  Grain harvest is 
seasonal, and Paleolithic grains had not yet been selected (as modern 
grains have) for a propensity to not immediately drop their seeds so 
they won't be eaten by birds and insects.  The wild rice harvesting 
window is measured in days.

> So, besides the nutritional objections to the paleo diet, I also object
> to the diet on archeological grounds.  Even if I wanted to emulate a
> paleo diet, it certainly would not be a high-meat or high-fat diet.  And
> it would not exclude grains.  (It might exclude dairy.)

That's your loss :)

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 16:29:16 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 09:29:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <005e01cbf799$ee9302e0$cbb908a0$@att.net>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=xsKDfc6uW8YhwRLMNr3ODenLV3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<005e01cbf799$ee9302e0$cbb908a0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimDXy0zU1mjFwiUomsNEqRKt2BXNw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 9:11 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> When my son was born almost five years ago, Stanford University recorded his
> birth weight in kilos. ?It came out to 3.999 grams.

Or 0.003999 kilograms?  Gives a new meaning to "light as a feather".  ;)



From max at maxmore.com  Sun Apr 10 17:42:15 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 10:42:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <005d01cbf798$c2d9e2a0$488da7e0$@att.net>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>
	<005d01cbf798$c2d9e2a0$488da7e0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=oPpQXp_HsOeEzGoaUKM_xgrx9iw@mail.gmail.com>

On the negative side of diesel, not only is it more expensive -- at least in
the USA; I don't recall the difference the last times I was in Europe -- but
it seems that cars and trucks running on diesel are MUCH noiser. Is this a
necessary feature of diesel. (I find that unlikely.) If not, why does it
seem to be typical? I see and hear small pick-up trucks that sound like
enormous commercial trucks ("lorries" for the UK). Can someone point me to a
*brief* but informative answer?

--- Max

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 9:02 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> Stuart, I am a fan of turbo Diesel, but there is an important subtlety in
> the emissions numbers.  Diesel actually does produce less CO2 per kW of
> power production, but it emits more carbon particulate.  In the US, CO2
> isn't actually considered a pollutant, but carbon soot is definitely a
> pollutant.  Modern Diesel engines have a particulate filter, which helps,
> but there is some particulate which necessarily escapes.  Changing the
> filter is an expense to the owner, so of course they will remove them.
> Carbon particulate is bad for humans, whereas carbon dioxide is harmless in
> the quantities that cars and trucks make it.  Some will argue carbon
> dioxide
> is bad for the earth, but that is a different question.
>
> That being said, I can envision a two cylinder 20 kW turbo Diesel in a
> series hybrid configuration which would beat both BlueMotion and the Prius
> in fuel economy and greenness.  It wouldn't be fast.
>
> spike
>
>
>

-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/4401836d/attachment.html>

From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 10 18:35:09 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 11:35:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Could any of us, today, actually survive, let alone thrive,
> on wild,
> raw, unprocessed grains?
> 
> I assume not.
> 
> And certainly I am not eager to give it a try.


Wild cereal grains are grass seeds.  It is possible to eat grass seeds, and even turn them into a form of bread (I've done it).  Given the effort involved, and the poor results, I'm pretty sure they'd be an emergency resort only.  You'd be better off digging up earthworms (which can be made into a nutritious, if rather gritty, soup, if you're squeamish about just swallowing them whole).

Ben Zaiboc


      



From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 10 19:34:53 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 12:34:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimDXy0zU1mjFwiUomsNEqRKt2BXNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>	<BANLkTim4JpaKyJHfMZ9-5Y32r_H3WL0QVA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=xsKDfc6uW8YhwRLMNr3ODenLV3w@mail.gmail.com>	<005e01cbf799$ee9302e0$cbb908a0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimDXy0zU1mjFwiUomsNEqRKt2BXNw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00ab01cbf7b6$5d9dead0$18d9c070$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
...
> recorded his birth weight in kilos. ?It came out to 3.999 grams.

Or 0.003999 kilograms?  Gives a new meaning to "light as a feather".  ;)


Oooops.  {8^D

Good eye Adrian.  

The Europeans switch their commas and periods, so of course in American I
actually meant 3,999 grams.  Or at least that makes a good story for
covering my error.

{8-]

s




From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 10 19:40:31 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 12:40:31 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=oPpQXp_HsOeEzGoaUKM_xgrx9iw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <812699.70141.qm@web65607.mail.ac4.yahoo.com>	<005d01cbf798$c2d9e2a0$488da7e0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=oPpQXp_HsOeEzGoaUKM_xgrx9iw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 10:42 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America

 

On the negative side of diesel, not only is it more expensive -- at least in
the USA; I don't recall the difference the last times I was in Europe -- but
it seems that cars and trucks running on diesel are MUCH noiser. Is this a
necessary feature of diesel. (I find that unlikely.) If not, why does it
seem to be typical? I see and hear small pick-up trucks that sound like
enormous commercial trucks ("lorries" for the UK). Can someone point me to a
*brief* but informative answer?  Max

 

 

Sure can.  Diesel engines have a higher compression ratio (they need to) in
order to ignite the fuel/air mixture.  At the end of the power stroke, when
the exhaust valve opens, the pressure inside the cylinder is higher in a
Diesel than in an equivalent gasoline engine.  So with identical sound
muffling equipment, the Diesel will be inherently louder, because of the
pressure differential between the exhaust valve and the manifold.  

 

All is not lost.  If we use a small Diesel and a constant speed and constant
load as in a series hybrid, we can design an exhaust system that will hold
the noise level within reason.  Diesel engines are great if they are used
under ideal speed and load.

 

spike

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/b38d8f60/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Apr 10 20:41:48 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 21:41:48 +0100
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Ben Zaiboc wrote:
> Wild cereal grains are grass seeds. ?It is possible to eat grass seeds, and even turn them into
> a form of bread (I've done it). ?Given the effort involved, and the poor results, I'm pretty sure
> they'd be an emergency resort only. ?You'd be better off digging up earthworms
> (which can be made into a nutritious, if rather gritty, soup, if you're squeamish about just
> swallowing them whole).
>
>


Worm stew!  Yummy!

You've nearly persuaded me to the paleo diet. Any other tasty treats?


BillK   ;)



From max at maxmore.com  Sun Apr 10 21:19:35 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 14:19:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTink9vyBk1sk9QVAR3G29bdqbmCBDg@mail.gmail.com>

Yes, Bill. Juicy, bloody, tasty grass-fed beef steaks. If you're lazy or too
busy, grass-fed beef hot dogs from Applegate. Enormous salads in technicolor
with green, yellow, red, and orange peppers with olive oil and balsamic
vinegar. Wild salmon with garlic and your favorite spices.

Or you just eat a bunch of bird seed and diesel fuel.

I'm *loving* my paleo diet. Haven't eaten any worms and haven't seen the
need the need to, but I'm open to nutritional reason. How about you?

--- Max



On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 1:41 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:35 PM, Ben Zaiboc wrote:
> > Wild cereal grains are grass seeds.  It is possible to eat grass seeds,
> and even turn them into
> > a form of bread (I've done it).  Given the effort involved, and the poor
> results, I'm pretty sure
> > they'd be an emergency resort only.  You'd be better off digging up
> earthworms
> > (which can be made into a nutritious, if rather gritty, soup, if you're
> squeamish about just
> > swallowing them whole).
> >
> >
>
>
> Worm stew!  Yummy!
>
> You've nearly persuaded me to the paleo diet. Any other tasty treats?
>
>
> BillK   ;)
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/5c2058cf/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Apr 10 23:55:36 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 18:55:36 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll
Message-ID: <6D3240B85054439E9D30662A74A2AF43@DFC68LF1>

I just voted for Ray.  Here is the link information to cast your vote:
 
Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll, edging out Obama; voting
still open

TIME has announced its
<http://cts.vresp.com/c/?KurzweilAINetworkInc/7eba873c6d/842b8d19e0/16e0635c
28> 2011 TIME 100 Poll, which asks readers to "cast your votes for the
leaders, artists, innovators, icons and heroes that you think are the most
influential people in the world." The Top 100 will be included in TIME's
annual TIME 100 special edition.

As of 5:30 p.m. EDT Sunday April 10, Ray Kurzweil ranks 41, just above U.S.
President Barack Obama.

Voting is open through April 14, 2011, limited to one vote per nominee per
computer per day. To vote: click on the link below, click on the person you
wish to vote for (or against), choose "Yes" or "No"  (influential or not),
and click Submit. You can also share your choice on Facebook or Twitter.

 
<http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2058044_2061021_
2061023,00.html>
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2058044_2061021_2
061023,00.html

 

Natasha

 

 <http://www.natasha.cc/> Natasha Vita-More

  PhD Researcher,  <http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/273> Planetary
Collegium, Univ. of Plymouth, UK
Vice Chair <http://humanityplus.org/> : Humanity+
Fellow:  <http://ieet.org/> Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/24625f93/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Apr 11 00:12:14 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2011 17:12:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll
In-Reply-To: <6D3240B85054439E9D30662A74A2AF43@DFC68LF1>
References: <6D3240B85054439E9D30662A74A2AF43@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <012201cbf7dd$1cda6920$568f3b60$@att.net>

 

 

On Behalf Of Natasha Vita-More
Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll

 

I just voted for Ray.  Here is the link information to cast your vote:

 

Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll, edging out Obama; voting
still open.

Natasha

 

 

I was also pleased to see Christopher Hitchens at number 7.  It worries me
that I have never heard of any of those six above Hitchens, and I am
completely baffled that "Rain" gets over a quarter of a million votes.
Perhaps a pop star?  American Idol winners?

 

Actually this might be saying something important about the poll, if I have
heard of most of them at 7 and below, but none of the top 6.

 

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110410/cc2021e9/attachment.html>

From amon at doctrinezero.com  Mon Apr 11 09:30:28 2011
From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 10:30:28 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll
In-Reply-To: <012201cbf7dd$1cda6920$568f3b60$@att.net>
References: <6D3240B85054439E9D30662A74A2AF43@DFC68LF1>
	<012201cbf7dd$1cda6920$568f3b60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimZboQ=0aS1U+nMQbhsrFRj6aXBaA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/11 spike <spike66 at att.net>

>
>
> I was also pleased to see Christopher Hitchens at number 7.  It worries me
> that I have never heard of any of those six above Hitchens, and I am
> completely baffled that ?Rain? gets over a quarter of a million votes.
> Perhaps a pop star?  American Idol winners?
>


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rain_%28entertainer%29

Not sure what TIME's definition of "influential" was, but by some
definitions, Rain fits. Although in that case there seems to be a
correlation between 'influential' (now) and 'inconsequential' (some months
or years down the line).

This is why a scaled-up Athenian democracy would be a bad, bad idea!   ;-)

- A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/4d051def/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 11:06:33 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:06:33 +0100
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTink9vyBk1sk9QVAR3G29bdqbmCBDg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTink9vyBk1sk9QVAR3G29bdqbmCBDg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim3bb6Yc8LfnF8rgtN01-k4cdcvWw@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/10 Max More wrote>:
> Yes, Bill. Juicy, bloody, tasty grass-fed beef steaks. If you're lazy or too
> busy, grass-fed beef hot dogs from Applegate. Enormous salads in technicolor
> with green, yellow, red, and orange peppers with olive oil and balsamic
> vinegar. Wild salmon with garlic and your favorite spices.
>
> Or you just eat a bunch of bird seed and diesel fuel.
>
> I'm *loving* my paleo diet. Haven't eaten any worms and haven't seen the
> need the need to, but I'm open to nutritional reason. How about you?
>
>

OK, so your paleo diet won't save the world. Too expensive in resource
usage and money.

>From my POV it is just another fad diet, one of thousands. All with
fanatical supporters and just as many critics. Some good points and
some not so good, like all diet plans.

Humans are very adaptable and can live on almost any diet. Many diet
flaws won't show up for ten or twenty years. Loss of bone calcium is a
long term problem for some diets, among others.

A general, mixed diet, with lots of vegetables and avoiding
over-consumption will do just fine.

Attitude seems to have just as much to do with long life as diet (and genetics).
For example,
<http://www.npr.org/2011/04/11/135216852/want-to-live-to-100-try-to-bounce-back-from-stress>
Quote:
So what's going on here? Unusual longevity often has a genetic basis,
and Reichert probably does have a gene that contributes to her unusual
longevity. But she also exhibits a powerful trait geriatricians call
adaptive competence.
I define it loosely as the ability to bounce back from stress. Many
scientists view this solely as biological stress. But many of us who
care for older patients see adaptive competence as psychologically
critical as well.
--------------------

This also seems to be backed up by 'Blue Zone' surveys.


BillK


From painlord2k at libero.it  Mon Apr 11 11:56:22 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:56:22 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Focardi & Rossi Energy Catalyzer
Message-ID: <4DA2EC66.10003@libero.it>

The saga continue:
In the last weeks, the Rossi's device was demonstrated again and again.

Swedish physicists on the E-cat: ?It?s a nuclear reaction?
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3144827.ece

here their detailed report
http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3144960.ece/BINARY/Download+the+report+by+Kullander+and+Ess%C3%A9n+%28pdf%29.

Wikipedia page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossi_Reactor

The most interesting parts, IMHO, until now, is the experiment conducted
in front of the Swedish physicists (one of the just ex-chairman and on
the board of the Skeptic Society of Sweden) that were convinced that
there is "something" nuclear there and excluded any chemical explanation.

In an interview, an Italian physicist that follow the story for the
CICAP (the equivalent of the Skeptic Society in Italy) didn't affirmed
nothing about the experiments, but simply said: "If it is a trick, we
have no idea how he did it and Rossi could surely patent it".


-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>
Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>
*Mirco Romanato*

 <javascript:void(0);>


-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3564 -  Data di rilascio: 10/04/2011



From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 11 14:01:10 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 07:01:10 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1302523201.18349.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <920696.95285.qm@web114409.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

BillK <pharos at gmail.com> asked:

> Worm stew!? Yummy!
> 
> You've nearly persuaded me to the paleo diet. Any other
> tasty treats?

Baked Bullrush roots with your haunch of venison.  Bracket fungus, caterpillars (careful though, some of them are poisonous). Honeycomb with added protein (bee larvae).  Hawthorn berries (you need a lot. Not much flesh on them, but it's tasty).  And if you come across a dead animal that's just too whiffy to stomach, the maggots are usually good.

There's food all over the place, if you're not too fussy, and know which mushrooms/caterpillars/berries *not* to eat.

(btw, in case you were wondering, I do my shopping at the supermarket, same as anyone else)

I can second what Max said, about enjoying food.  I used to enjoy a big slice of fresh-baked bread with butter and honey on it, but that's *nowhere near* as good as a big hunk of medium-rare Bambi.

Come to think of it, it was mostly the butter and honey I liked, anyway!

And no, this can never be a diet for the majority, it wouldn't be sustainable.  The worst thing for people on a palaeo diet would be for loads of people to go on it, driving up the price of meat to insane levels.

Ben Zaiboc


      



From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 15:38:04 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:38:04 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim3bb6Yc8LfnF8rgtN01-k4cdcvWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTink9vyBk1sk9QVAR3G29bdqbmCBDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTim3bb6Yc8LfnF8rgtN01-k4cdcvWw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikp-i3RFHBWjddrhgu_ZnYaAUkBOA@mail.gmail.com>

On 11 April 2011 13:06, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> OK, so your paleo diet won't save the world. Too expensive in resource
> usage and money.
>

There is a reason after all why the neolithic revolution has won. We
accepted, or rather Darwinian forces imposed on survivors, disease and
shorter lives for many of us in exchange for number, power, knowledge (see
under "labour division"), sedentary life, etc.

OTOH, what is transhumanism if not the bold decision to have one's steak and
eat it too? :-)

As a first step it is reasonable that those who are lucky enough to make the
right choice do it. As a second, we know that if we want to extend the
benefits, we need either to alter our genetic make or to alter our food
production technologies.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/b325def1/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 15:30:19 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:30:19 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimjXJMfu-5+hSKfottqh3Vf3yMB9A@mail.gmail.com>

On 10 April 2011 20:35, Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Could any of us, today, actually survive, let alone thrive,
>> on wild,
>> raw, unprocessed grains?
>> I assume not.
>> And certainly I am not eager to give it a try.
>
> Wild cereal grains are grass seeds.  It is possible to eat grass seeds,
and even turn them into a form of bread (I've done it).

... and that would anyway qualify for "cooking" or "processing" in my book.
:-)

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/668634c8/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Mon Apr 11 17:24:52 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 10:24:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim3bb6Yc8LfnF8rgtN01-k4cdcvWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTink9vyBk1sk9QVAR3G29bdqbmCBDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTim3bb6Yc8LfnF8rgtN01-k4cdcvWw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=RHduyt8vPD6K2kHnLcnHcaAvhTA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 4:06 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> OK, so your paleo diet won't save the world. Too expensive in resource
> usage and money.
>
I've never claimed that it will save the world. However, I suspect that it
can be considerably less expensive than you think, both in personal terms
and in terms of resource usage. For instance:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/09/11/animal-vegetable-or-e-o-wilson/


>
> >From my POV it is just another fad diet, one of thousands.


A fad diet that we lived on healthily for over two million years. That's one
enduring fad!



> A general, mixed diet, with lots of vegetables and avoiding
> over-consumption will do just fine.
>
Not if that mix includes plenty of carbohydrates, especially but not only
simple ones such as HFCS. I agree that avoiding overconsumption is crucial.
Modest underconsumption is even better (and keeps the costs of even a
top-class paleo diet down -- no need to eat huge grass-fed steaks or pounds
of salmon).


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/66f0b70c/attachment.html>

From js_exi at gnolls.org  Mon Apr 11 18:22:37 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:22:37 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
Message-ID: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>


Ben Zaiboc said:
> And no, this can never be a diet for the majority, it wouldn't be sustainable.

The same can be said about agriculture, particularly industrial 
agriculture -- which depends on:

-A continual depletion of topsoil and soil nutrients
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/farming/6828878/Britain-facing-food-crisis-as-worlds-soil-vanishes-in-60-years.html
http://www.seattlepi.com/national/348200_dirt22.html
-A continual influx of fossil fuels via the Haber process (which uses 
3-5% of world natural gas production)
-A continual influx of fossil water via depletion of underground 
aquifers (example: Oglalla aquifer), or a continual influx of irrigation 
water, resulting in soil salinization and abandonment
-The complete destruction of whatever biotic community existed previous 
to agriculture

The sustainable carrying capacity of the Earth has little to do with 
energy: it has to do with soil, in which our food grows, and without 
which we don't have any.  Lierre Keith's "The Vegetarian Myth" happens 
to be written as an argument against vegetarianism -- but it's even more 
important for guilty omnivores, who comprise a much larger segment of 
the population.  Its real subject is how food is grown, and how soil is 
created and destroyed -- a subject on which most of us are completely 
ignorant -- and how animals and animal products are an *absolutely 
necessary* part of that cycle.

The upshot is that agriculture is the equivalent of strip-mining, it's 
even more destructive than pastoralism (as can be seen by the current 
condition of, say, the "Fertile Crescent"), and that seven billion 
people is far, far beyond the sustainable population of the Earth even 
if you posit nearly free energy and force everyone to eat corn and soy. 
  I can't stress this enough.

Most of the Earth can't support agriculture, anyway: it can only support 
ruminants grazing on the grasses and other perennials that grow there. 
For example, only ~19% of the United States is arable, most of that due 
to exploitation of fossil water and gigantic, destructive dams that silt 
up anyway.  (Feeding grains to cattle was uneconomical until our massive 
subsidies for destructive, unsustainable industrial grain production.)

I link quite a few references here:
http://www.gnolls.org/1833/we-must-reclaim-human-health-sustainability-environmental-justice-and-morality-from-the-birdseed-brigade/

Here are some more articles of interest:

"Allan Savory won the 2010 Buckminster Fuller Challenge Prize of 
$100,000 for the Africa Center for Holistic Management (ACHM) in 
Zimbabwe by demonstrating that by INCREASING the number of livestock on 
barren land by 400% we can convert it from desert back to productive 
grassland."
http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2011/03/operation-hope-meat-is-medicine-for.html
(Note that Buckminster Fuller was a high-meat, low-carb dieter, and 
lived to age 88.)

"...taking the farm as a whole, the food output per acre from a well-run 
mixed farm was often higher than today's intensive chemical operation."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/05/cereal-crop-farming-wheat-prices

Again, I recommend "The Vegetarian Myth" in order to to understand the 
process by which food is grown and consumed sustainably.  It involves 
animals and animal products, which are necessary to return consumed 
nutrients to the soil so that more plants can grow, and which are 
necessary to consume the foliage that naturally grows but we can't eat.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org

PS: I must point out that the first review on Amazon is a hatchet job 
that makes blatantly false claims about the book: for instance, claiming 
that the fact that ulcers are caused by bacteria counteracts Keith's 
assertion that bacterial digestion does not occur in the human stomach.


From max at maxmore.com  Mon Apr 11 19:23:16 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:23:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] New gasoline engine design
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=8B=tr95vK6aS6LhgPOCpHGuMOQA@mail.gmail.com>

Relevant to recent discussions here:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/11/new-gasoline-engine-design-has-4x-efficiency-of-pistons/


-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/e444d32a/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Apr 11 19:56:14 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:56:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] New gasoline engine design
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=8B=tr95vK6aS6LhgPOCpHGuMOQA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=8B=tr95vK6aS6LhgPOCpHGuMOQA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006801cbf882$8416ba30$8c442e90$@att.net>

 

>. On Behalf Of Max More
Subject: [ExI] New gasoline engine design

 

Relevant to recent discussions here:

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/11/new-gasoline-engine-design-has-4x-effi
ciency-of-pistons/



-- 

Max More

 

 

Cool, but looking at the site, I can't figure out what he is claiming is new
about this design.  Turbines have their uses and may even have value in
automotive use as a series hybrid.  We can harness combustion far more
efficiently if we figure out how to get around the problem of variable speed
and variable load, which you do in series hybrid designs.  

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/3f78aef4/attachment.html>

From thespike at satx.rr.com  Mon Apr 11 21:55:20 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 16:55:20 -0500
Subject: [ExI] and speaking of qualia...
Message-ID: <4DA378C8.6010207@satx.rr.com>

<http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/4215/full>

Centuries-old debate on perception settled
Monday, 11 April 2011

by Marlowe Hood
Agence France-Presse

'Molyneux's question' asks, "if a man born blind can feel the 
differences between shapes such as spheres and cubes, could he similarly 
distinguish those objects by sight if given the ability to see?"

PARIS: A conundrum about human perception has stumped philosophers and 
scientists alike since it was first articulated by an Irish politician 
in a letter to John Locke 323 years ago. But French scientists now claim 
that they have it solved.

Imagine, William Molyneux wrote to the great British thinker, that a man 
blind from birth who has learned to identify objects - a sphere and a 
cube, for example - only through his sense of touch is suddenly able to 
see. The puzzle, he continued, is "Whether he Could, by his Sight, and 
before he touch them, know which is the Globe and which the Cube?"

For philosophers of the time, answering 'Molyneux's question', as it was 
known ever after, would resolve a fundamental uncertainty about the 
human mind.

?Nurture vs. nature?

Empiricists believed that we are born blank slates, and become the sum 
total of our accumulated experience. So-called ?nativists? countered 
that our minds are, from the outset, pre-stocked with ideas waiting to 
be activated by sight, sound and touch.

If a blind man who miraculously recovered his sight could instantly 
distinguish the cube from the globe it would mean the knowledge was 
somehow innate, they argued.

More recently, this ?nurture vs. nature? debate has found its 
counterpart in modern neuroscience. "The beauty of Molyneux's question 
is that it also relates to how representations are formed in the brain," 
said Pawan Sinha, a professor at The Massachusetts Institute of 
Technology (MIT) in Boston and the main architect of the study.

"Do the different modalities, or senses, build up a common 
representation, or are these independent representations that one cannot 
access even though the other modality has built it?" he asked.

Finding the cured blind

Recent studies have suggested that the mental images we accumulate 
through sight and touch do, in fact, form a common pool of impressions 
that can be triggered and retrieved by one sense or the other. But until 
now, no one has been able to design a definitive experiment.

The problem was finding subjects. They would have to have been blind at 
birth and then have had their sight restored, but not until they were 
old enough to reliably participate in tests. Most forms of curable 
congenital blindness, however, are detected and cured in infancy, so 
such individuals are extremely rare.

More precisely, they are rare in rich countries. So in 2003, Sinha set 
up a program in India in cooperation with the Shroff Charity Eye 
Hospital in New Delhi.

Discriminating between similar shapes

Among the many patients he treated, he found five - four boys and one 
girl, aged eight to 17 - who met the criteria for surgery that would 
almost instantly take them from total blindness to fully seeing. Once 
bandages were removed, researchers had to first be sure that the 
volunteers could see well.

Using objects that looked like Lego building blocks, they tested the 
ability to discriminate visually between similar shapes. The subjects 
scored nearly 100%.

They scored nearly as well when it came to telling the difference by 
touch alone, according to the study, published in Nature Neuroscience.

Barely better than a guess

For the critical test, however, in which the children first felt an 
object and then tried to distinguish visually between that same object 
and a similar one, the results were barely better than if they had guessed.

"They couldn't form the connection," said Yuri Ostrovsky, also a 
researcher at MIT and a co-author of the study.

"The conclusion is that there does not seem to be any cross-modal" - 
that is, from one sense to the other - "representation available to 
perform the task," he said.

The answer is 'no'

The answer to Molyneux's question, then, appears to be ?no?: the data 
blind people gather tactically that allows them to identify a cup and a 
vase, and to tell them apart, is not accessible through vision. At least 
not at first.

"From a neuro-scientific point of view, the most interesting finding is 
the rapidity with which this inability was compensated," said Richard 
Held, an emeritus professor at MIT and lead author of the study. "Within 
about a week, it's done - and that is very fast. We were surprised," he 
said.

The overall results suggest that the human brain is more ?plastic?, or 
malleable, longer into childhood than previously thought, the 
researchers said.

"This challenges the dogma of 'critical periods,' the idea that if a 
child has been deprived of vision for the first three or four years of 
life, he or she will be unable to acquire any visual proficiency," Sinha 
said.


From sjatkins at mac.com  Tue Apr 12 00:48:30 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:48:30 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>

On 04/11/2011 11:22 AM, J. Stanton wrote:
>
> Ben Zaiboc said:
>> And no, this can never be a diet for the majority, it wouldn't be 
>> sustainable.
>
> The same can be said about agriculture, particularly industrial 
> agriculture -- which depends on:

Wait a second.  To raise cattle takes a lot of agriculture to grow 
enough vegetable matter to feed the cattle.  The amount of land needed 
for that is roughly 17 times as large as that needed for just growing 
human consumable vegetable matter on the same land.  You don't get away 
from agriculture by having diets with a lot of meat in them.

- samantha


From max at maxmore.com  Tue Apr 12 01:01:40 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:01:40 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
	<4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimEeqE6PkC4dtzn4oZH_j8aBs3aVg@mail.gmail.com>

Samantha: It doesn't seem like you read any of the relevant references J.
Stanton and I provided on this exact point.

--- Max



On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 5:48 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

> On 04/11/2011 11:22 AM, J. Stanton wrote:
>
>>
>> Ben Zaiboc said:
>>
>>> And no, this can never be a diet for the majority, it wouldn't be
>>> sustainable.
>>>
>>
>> The same can be said about agriculture, particularly industrial
>> agriculture -- which depends on:
>>
>
> Wait a second.  To raise cattle takes a lot of agriculture to grow enough
> vegetable matter to feed the cattle.  The amount of land needed for that is
> roughly 17 times as large as that needed for just growing human consumable
> vegetable matter on the same land.  You don't get away from agriculture by
> having diets with a lot of meat in them.
>
> - samantha
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/4e85dd57/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 19:06:13 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (kellycoinguy at gmail.com)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 13:06:13 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <E52DA0D5-BDC2-4D26-A430-D67F019CE7E2@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <4da3aa0e.4581dc0a.230a.69ce@mx.google.com>

Putting solar panels all over Arizona would not change the albedo of the earth very much, if it did you could compensate with lots of white paint... :-)

Are all of the black asphalt roofs changing the albedo substantially? If so then we already have a problem roughly equivqlent.

I like moonbeams... &nbsp;The algae columns are ready for deployment today.

Kelly



-- Sent from my Palm Pre
On Apr 8, 2011 11:43 PM, John Clark &lt;Jonkc at bellsouth.net&gt; wrote: 

On Apr 8, 2011, at 6:00 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
Now there is local heating, such as the well documented fact that
cities are a few degrees warmer than the surrounding country side.
This is hardly a climate issue
Of course it's a climate issue! If&nbsp;you change the Earth's albedo you change the climate in a fundamental way because you change the amount of energy that drives the entire show, and solar cells are black and only 20% efficient. But to be honest global warming rather bores me, I just enjoy throwing environmental arguments back at people.

As for the materials required to create solar panels, they are
working on many different alternatives. Some of my favorite are
biological, and require no special equipment. 
Moonbeams. I'm talking about technologies that we have right now that are ready to take over the MASSIVE job of driving the world's economy&nbsp;from fossil fuels,&nbsp;and like it or not I know of only one, nuclear.
&nbsp;John K Clark&nbsp;



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/adc2a42e/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 18:41:43 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (kellycoinguy at gmail.com)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:41:43 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimZboQ=0aS1U+nMQbhsrFRj6aXBaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4da3a9f4.4581dc0a.230a.69ca@mx.google.com>






2011/4/11 spike &lt;spike66 at att.net&gt;

&nbsp;I was also pleased to see Christopher Hitchens at number 7.&nbsp; It worries me that I have never heard of any of those six above Hitchens

You have not heard of Glenn Beck?

This is why a scaled-up Athenian democracy would be a bad, bad idea! &nbsp;

I have often thought that an Athenian style democracy would work well enough if we each had enough intellectual capacity to fully investigate every issue. Obviously congressmen can not do this as they all require a substantial staff. Maybe some day when we are posthumans we can take another try. Athens worked because there was a match between what they knew and what they needed to know.

Kelly



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/9b6adc0d/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 18:48:37 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (kellycoinguy at gmail.com)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:48:37 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
Message-ID: <4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>

I heard that there is more energy in a gallon of diesel vs. Gasoline. Is that true?

Miles per dollar has always seemed more interesting to me than MPG.

Kelly



-- Sent from my Palm Pre
On Apr 10, 2011 1:55 PM, spike &lt;spike66 at att.net&gt; wrote: 

&nbsp;&nbsp;From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2011 10:42 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America&nbsp;On the negative side of diesel, not only is it more expensive -- at least in the USA; I don't recall the difference the last times I was in Europe -- but it seems that cars and trucks running on diesel are MUCH noiser. Is this a necessary feature of diesel. (I find that unlikely.) If not, why does it seem to be typical?&nbsp;I see and hear small pick-up trucks that sound like enormous commercial trucks ("lorries" for the UK). Can someone point me to a *brief* but informative answer?&nbsp; Max&nbsp;&nbsp;Sure can.&nbsp; Diesel engines have a higher compression ratio (they need to) in order to ignite the fuel/air mixture.&nbsp; At the end of the power stroke, when the exhaust valve opens, the pressure inside the cylinder is higher in a Diesel than in an equivalent gasoline engine.&nbsp; So with identical sound muffling equipment, the Diesel will be inherently louder, because of the pressure differential between the exhaust valve and the manifold.&nbsp; &nbsp;All is not lost.&nbsp; If we use a small Diesel and a constant speed and constant load as in a series hybrid, we can design an exhaust system that will hold the noise level within reason.&nbsp; Diesel engines are great if they are used under ideal speed and load.&nbsp;spike&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/41a12be5/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 11 18:56:11 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (kellycoinguy at gmail.com)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 12:56:11 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimroJ=dkumG_oAErH1iAV2Nb=Gp1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4da3aa05.4581dc0a.230a.69cd@mx.google.com>

I heard recently that part of the reason that oil is cheaper in the US is because the international price is stated in dollars. Also that if we stopped denominating oil in dollars that the price would jump in the us. This seems like a crazy argument to me. Do any of you have any reason to believe it moght be true?

Kelly



-- Sent from my Palm Pre
On Apr 10, 2011 3:29 AM, Alfio Puglisi &lt;alfio.puglisi at gmail.com&gt; wrote: 

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 9:50 AM, BillK &lt;pharos at gmail.com&gt; wrote:

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 7:05 AM, The Avantguardian &nbsp;wrote:

&gt;

&gt;

&gt; http://www.greencar.com/articles/vw-polo-bluemotion-tops-70-mpg.php

&gt;

&gt;

&gt; This&nbsp;car&nbsp;runs on diesel, has a top speed of 109 mph, has lower CO2 emissions

&gt; than a Prius,on&nbsp;and gets a whopping 70 miles to the gallon.

&gt;

&gt; So here is a riddle for you:

&gt; Why can't we&nbsp;get this in North America?

&gt;

&gt;





Because you've been naughty and don't deserve it! &nbsp; &nbsp; ;)



No, really it is because

1) US gas prices(including tax) need to double to get nearer to

European prices before economical cars become a significant user

demand.

2) The very economical European cars tend to be too small for US preferences.



This article is from 2008 and there are now in 2011 many standard

production European cars (diesel or hybrid) that will get over 70 mpg

on mixed city / freeway driving (called combined cycle mpg). You have

to adjust for US gallons, though, by dividing by 1.2. &nbsp; So 70 mpg

European = 58.3 mpg US - quite a difference!

This is correct, but note that the greencar.com's article used American gallons:&nbsp;3.8 liters/100 km translates to 62 mpg, so the 48 city / 74 highway is valid for the US. There may be some difference in the standards used to calculate the fuel consumption, though.
What you call the "European" gallon is actually the UK gallon, which is unknown to us continental&nbsp;southerners. Actually, most people don't even know that some kind of gallon is used this side of the atlantic pond :-)

&nbsp;


Use

&lt;http://carfueldata.direct.gov.uk/search-by-fuel-economy.aspx&gt;

to search for over 50 cars with better than 70 mpg (European).




BillK



_______________________________________________

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/20110411/5e25c1b5/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 12 02:45:58 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:45:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <4da3aa0e.4581dc0a.230a.69ce@mx.google.com>
References: <E52DA0D5-BDC2-4D26-A430-D67F019CE7E2@bellsouth.net>
	<4da3aa0e.4581dc0a.230a.69ce@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <005401cbf8bb$c1738fa0$445aaee0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of kellycoinguy at gmail.com
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 12:06 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.

 

Putting solar panels all over Arizona would not change the albedo of the earth very much, if it did you could compensate with lots of white paint... :-)

Are all of the black asphalt roofs changing the albedo substantially? If so then we already have a problem roughly equivqlent.

I like moonbeams...  The algae columns are ready for deployment today.

Kelly




We suffer from an illusion created by living where there are lots of people, where the natural environment has been changed considerably.  Everywhere we ever go is on a road, with roads everywhere.  Next time you fly, look out the window and estimate the total effect of humanity on albedo.  Or if you don?t want to spend the money on a plane ticket, go into GoogleEarth and look around.  Randomly choose a spot.  Do you see any roads or houses?  

Or do the following BOTEC: the typical house is about 2000 ft^2 and there are? say, ~100 million of them in the US, so just say about 2E11 ft^2 of roof area and a square meter is about ten square feet, so about 2e10 m^2 of roof area, and for estimation purposes the US is close enough to 5e6 by about 3e6 meters, so about 1.5e13 m^2, so all the roof area in the US combined is on the order of around 1 to 1.5 parts per 1000 in area, a tenth of a percent, without looking up anything.  I wouldn?t be a bit surprised if all the road surfaces combined have a similar magnitude or perhaps about a magnitude more road area than roof area, still all told perhaps a few tenths of a percent.

When you finish with that BOTEC, consider most of this globe is ocean.  Roads and roofs are not causing this old planet to warm.

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/0a9db96d/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 12 02:54:08 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:54:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of kellycoinguy at gmail.com
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 11:49 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America

 

I heard that there is more energy in a gallon of diesel vs. Gasoline. Is that true?

Miles per dollar has always seemed more interesting to me than MPG.

Kelly




-- Sent from my Palm Pre

Actually it depends on how the question is stated.  A Diesel engine converts more energy to useful work from a gallon of Diesel fuel than a gasoline engine converts from a gallon of octane, assuming the Diesel is loaded optimally.  Octane burning engines are actually more efficient than Diesel when very lightly loaded.  This is what has me thinking small turbo-Diesel engines spinning generators at constant speed and load to hold them in their most efficient rev band.

spike

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/4089c9bd/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 12 02:50:00 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 19:50:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Ray Kurzweil ranks 41 in TIME's 2011 TIME 100 Poll
In-Reply-To: <4da3a9f4.4581dc0a.230a.69ca@mx.google.com>
References: <BANLkTimZboQ=0aS1U+nMQbhsrFRj6aXBaA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4da3a9f4.4581dc0a.230a.69ca@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <005901cbf8bc$514e57e0$f3eb07a0$@att.net>

2011/4/11 spike <spike66 at att.net>

 

I was also pleased to see Christopher Hitchens at number 7.  It worries me that I have never heard of any of those six above Hitchens


>You have not heard of Glenn Beck?

>This is why a scaled-up Athenian democracy would be a bad, bad idea!  

?

>Kelly

 

The list is changing daily.  Beck wasn?t up there when I looked.  The top 6 were all popular entertainers I think.  In a way this make perfect sense.  When we are young, we are far more influenced by and familiar with popular entertainers.  Now, I don?t know who they are.  I get all my entertainment here, free.  If they are asking who is the most influential, the movie stars and singers, comedians, dancers, models, etc, may be legitimately named, for they influence huge numbers of young people.

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110411/3a8be13e/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 03:19:56 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:19:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Large scale energy sources
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=cO_k3cypMU+CWrCqCy0zRwVSf5A@mail.gmail.com>

Just got back from the Space Access conference.

The most interesting presentation to me was by Reaction Engines on the
big ESA review of the projected performance of the Skylon vehicle.

The conclusion was that the engineering is sound and the vehicle
should meet the performance specifications.

Skylon gets the equal of 10.5 km/s exhaust velocity till it runs out
of air at 26 km and 2000 m/s.

If you want to get space transportation down to where power satellites
make sense, that's a very good start.

If you could get only 8 km/s for the rest of the way to orbit, the
vehicle mass ratio would be 3 and the cost down to well under $100/kg
to LEO and just about $100/kg to GEO.  That is low enough for power
satellites to become the dominate world wide energy source.

Because it offered an even less than SBSP cost, I have spent the last
year working on StratoSolar.  I have not found a showstopper in the
design to date, but it has taken a lot of conceptual design work to
get around the problems in the original design.  It is a difficult
engineering project that is sensitive to peak wind loads.

Keith


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 04:58:50 2011
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:28:50 +0930
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/7 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>
>
>
>
> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More
>
>
>
>>>Some interesting data on the (low) efficiency of wind power:
>
>
>
>>>http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/06/whoa-windfarms-in-uk-operate-well-below-advertised-efficiency/#more-37420
>
> --- Max
>
>
>
>>?? It is something that burned an image into my retinas: most of the time
>> in most of those wind farms, all of the turbines were sitting still and
>> quiet.? spike
>
>
>
>
>
> I gave you some bad news, now I will give you something good.
>
>
>
> This past weekend I was at a class reunion for Shelly?s high school, in
> Caldwell Idaho where she is from.? We went to a big party out north and west
> past Vale Oregon.? Driving out to the ranch of some old friends, I was
> struck by how much land there is where there is insufficient water resources
> to grow much of anything, no civilization, harsh climate, clear, windy most
> of the time, but there is a road and some existing power infrastructure.
> There is no reason whatsoever we couldn?t make a mile wide field of PVs on
> either side of the road going up highway 26 from Vale and out highway 20
> west of Vale, south from Marsing on highway 95, where one goes for hour
> after hour seeing on either side of the road to the horizon, flat unused
> ground, un-farmable, unbuildable.? There is sooooo damn much wide open land
> out there, being used for nothing, useful for nothing else.
>
>
>
> If you have a few days to mess around, I do encourage those who worry about
> mankind?s future energy resources to get in a Detroit and drive out to some
> of these desert wastelands, just to get a feel for how open and vast they
> are.? Go down highway 395 in eastern Oregon and California, or go nearly
> anywhere in Nevada.? Plenty of open space out there, and the land is
> practically free.? We could add enormous power lines, or set up coal to
> octane plants out there to soak up the peak production.? If you don?t have
> time to drive out there, go on Google maps, enter Ontario Oregon, look
> around.
>
>
>
> If we really committed to doing this, we could set up solar panel fabs that
> would produce standardized 1 meter by 1 meter panels in quantities that
> would give manufacturing engineers the tingles.? We would churn out so many
> of these things, we could get very close to lights-out factories.? Over a
> couple decades we could gradually replace so many of the alternative energy
> sources, all of which have their severe shortcomings.? We could end up with
> enough with enough spare energy to use the excess to synthesize ammonium
> nitrate for fertilizers, octane for our Detroits, power air conditioning to
> counteract global warming, all that stuff.
>
>
>
> The wind farms haven?t lived up to their promise, geothermal and falling
> water are nearly completely exploited, oil is in decline, coal is dirty,
> Japanese tsunami generated all that bad press for nuclear power.? Now I am
> convinced to steer my own investment dollars towards advanced domestic PV
> fabs.? After it is all said and done, I am convinced to my own satisfaction
> that PVs are the path forward, with load leveling being largely accomplished
> by using peak power for conversion of coal to octane and for electric
> power-intensive processes such as metal extraction.? Expensive, takes a long
> time to transition, lot of loss in transmission.? But considering all
> alternatives, the downsides don?t seem so far down now.
>
> spike

If you're talking PV, then I agree! Especially since they seem to be
on an exponential improvement path, unlike any other energy technology
(ever?).

But, why would you worry too much about losses in transmission? PV is
a decentralizing technology. Just put it where you need it, the grid
takes a back seat.

Ray K recently put forward a timeframe of 20 years until the world is
100% solar, based on current doubling time of uptake. Certainly, in 20
years there'll be a lot of it. Out the other side of that? Masses of
power, far more than now, with no concept of power use being a bad
thing. Bring it on!

-- 
Emlyn

http://my.syyn.cc - A service for syncing buzz and facebook, posts,
comments and all.
http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built
http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog
Find me on Facebook and Buzz



From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 08:43:50 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 09:43:50 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimEeqE6PkC4dtzn4oZH_j8aBs3aVg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org> <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
	<BANLkTimEeqE6PkC4dtzn4oZH_j8aBs3aVg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik+VqzBB3QrpEyKs3c1eC1pHspZEg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/12 Max More wrote:
> Samantha: It doesn't seem like you read any of the relevant references J.
> Stanton and I provided on this exact point.
>
>


Reading those references doesn't mean that you have to agree with them.  :)
Those references are from paleo enthusiasts looking for an excuse to
farm animals for their steaks.

Sustainable agriculture involves things like crop rotation and
recycling vegetable waste back into the land. Over-application of
animal waste as fertiliser causes pollution problems outside the
farming area.

There may be a case for grazing some animals on very poor pasture
land, but not as a major source of food production.

<https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Sustainable_agriculture>


BillK


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 11:21:41 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:21:41 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=RHduyt8vPD6K2kHnLcnHcaAvhTA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302436801.19523.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<791721.16781.qm@web114402.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BANLkTinxuVgnHOOZHfEnczSR8BZ3dy4=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTink9vyBk1sk9QVAR3G29bdqbmCBDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTim3bb6Yc8LfnF8rgtN01-k4cdcvWw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=RHduyt8vPD6K2kHnLcnHcaAvhTA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=B-Z+QiQmmuDo6Cew-CPkv4SntdQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/11 Max More <max at maxmore.com>:
> Not if that mix includes plenty of carbohydrates, especially but not only
> simple ones such as HFCS. I agree that avoiding overconsumption is crucial.
> Modest underconsumption is even better (and keeps the costs of even a
> top-class paleo diet down -- no need to eat huge grass-fed steaks or pounds
> of salmon).

I suspect however that underconsumption is especially crucial for
neolithic diets.

I believe we all have anecdotical  evidence of how its damages are
positively reduced by mild-to-severe caloric restriction.

-- 
Stefano Vaj


From sparge at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 12:44:06 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 08:44:06 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org> <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin5k1pgY_5PDns2O-Ywr_V_Br4GmA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>
> Wait a second. ?To raise cattle takes a lot of agriculture to grow enough
> vegetable matter to feed the cattle.

Not true. Cattle and other ruminants require no agriculture, just wild
forage. The vast herds of buffalo that used to live in North America,
for example, weren't supported by agriculture. I can raise half a
dozen cattle on my 10 acres of pasture with no agriculture whatsoever.

>?The amount of land needed for that is
> roughly 17 times as large as that needed for just growing human consumable
> vegetable matter on the same land.

Citation required.

-Dave



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Apr 12 14:44:11 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 16:44:11 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <4da3aa0e.4581dc0a.230a.69ce@mx.google.com>
References: <E52DA0D5-BDC2-4D26-A430-D67F019CE7E2@bellsouth.net>
	<4da3aa0e.4581dc0a.230a.69ce@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <20110412144411.GG23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 01:06:13PM -0600, kellycoinguy at gmail.com wrote:

> Putting solar panels all over Arizona would not change 
> the albedo of the earth very much, if it did you could compensate with lots of white paint... :-)

Painting the roofs white has actually been suggested as 
mitigator for climate change. I frankly think it's a drop
in the bucket, with permafrost/clathrate anoxic event 
outgassing and now also fracking.

Besides, everybody knows that we'll burn up the last
little drop and piece of dead dino we can get our hands
on before calling it a day.
 
> Are all of the black asphalt roofs changing the albedo 
> substantially? If so then we already have a problem roughly equivqlent.

Actually, we have.
 
> I like moonbeams... &nbsp;The algae columns are ready for deployment today.

Actually the Moon receives 12.3 PW solar flux, while we only need 
15 TW, so moonbeams are a factor of 1000 in excess of humanity's current
needs.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Tue Apr 12 16:01:00 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:01:00 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power.
In-Reply-To: <005401cbf8bb$c1738fa0$445aaee0$@att.net>
References: <E52DA0D5-BDC2-4D26-A430-D67F019CE7E2@bellsouth.net>
	<4da3aa0e.4581dc0a.230a.69ce@mx.google.com>
	<005401cbf8bb$c1738fa0$445aaee0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110412160100.GK23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 07:45:58PM -0700, spike wrote:

> We suffer from an illusion created by living where there are lots of people, where the natural environment has been changed considerably.  Everywhere we ever go is on a road, with roads everywhere.  Next time you fly, look out the window and estimate the total effect of humanity on albedo.  Or if you don?t want to spend the money on a plane ticket, go into GoogleEarth and look around.  Randomly choose a spot.  Do you see any roads or houses?  
> 
> Or do the following BOTEC: the typical house is about 2000 ft^2 and there are? say, ~100 million of them in the US, so just say about 2E11 ft^2 of roof area and a square meter is about ten square feet, so about 2e10 m^2 of roof area, and for estimation purposes the US is close enough to 5e6 by about 3e6 meters, so about 1.5e13 m^2, so all the roof area in the US combined is on the order of around 1 to 1.5 parts per 1000 in area, a tenth of a percent, without looking up anything.  I wouldn?t be a bit surprised if all the road surfaces combined have a similar magnitude or perhaps about a magnitude more road area than roof area, still all told perhaps a few tenths of a percent.
> 
> When you finish with that BOTEC, consider most of this globe is ocean.  Roads and roofs are not causing this old planet to warm.

About 12% of Germany's surface is altered. If you consider HANPP
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Global_human_appropriation_of_net_primary_production_%28HANPP%29
then we definitely have an impact on Earth's albedo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albedo

There has been some work on putting the numbers on it.

http://www.climatechange.ca.gov/events/2008_conference/presentations/2008-09-09/Hashem_Akbari.pdf

Notice that PV would have very little impact 
http://www.californiavalleysolarranch.com/deir/070710%20Data/Impact%20of%20PV%20Systems%20on%20Local%20Temps%207-6-10%20FINAL.pdf
and more than offset that by being greenhouse-neutral.


-- 
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 hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 17:50:41 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 10:50:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 11:22 AM, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:

I am really getting annoyed at the postings on this list.  I would
think the people who post here should understand Extropy.

snip

>  seven billion people is far, far
> beyond the sustainable population of the Earth even if you posit nearly free
> energy . . . .

That is utter nonsense.  With really low cost energy you can make
fresh water out of salt and pump it inland a thousand miles.

Likewise, you can salvage phosphorous our of sewage and ship it back
to the farms.

Not that this means a lot.  I seriously doubt there will be any
biologically based people left by 2100.

Keith


From atymes at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 18:35:04 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 11:35:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
	<005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin4uZfeZQBBxpp2GfGcX520FxVPZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 11, 2011 7:55 PM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Actually it depends on how the question is stated.  A Diesel engine
converts more energy to useful work from a gallon of Diesel fuel than a
gasoline engine converts from a gallon of octane, assuming the Diesel is
loaded optimally.  Octane burning engines are actually more efficient than
Diesel when very lightly loaded.  This is what has me thinking small
turbo-Diesel engines spinning generators at constant speed and load to hold
them in their most efficient rev band.

Isn't that the basic principle behind many hybrids?

Use the electric motor for fractional power needs, and run the gas engine at
one or a few optimized revs to provide drive power and/or recharge the
batteries.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110412/51e3e716/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Tue Apr 12 19:35:29 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:35:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikFLPZsDWTk7pANvWfpEc_uyeeYFg@mail.gmail.com>

Keith: While I agree with you about that particular shortcoming in J.
Stanton's post, I don't think you should be too annoyed. Although his
assumptions in that respect show a lack of knowledge of what we've discussed
for ages, his posts are otherwise extremely substantial and informative
about issues that directly affect health and longevity right now.

Best,

--- Max



On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 11:22 AM, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:
>
> I am really getting annoyed at the postings on this list.  I would
> think the people who post here should understand Extropy.
>
> snip
>
> >  seven billion people is far, far
> > beyond the sustainable population of the Earth even if you posit nearly
> free
> > energy . . . .
>
> That is utter nonsense.  With really low cost energy you can make
> fresh water out of salt and pump it inland a thousand miles.
>
> Likewise, you can salvage phosphorous our of sewage and ship it back
> to the farms.
>
> Not that this means a lot.  I seriously doubt there will be any
> biologically based people left by 2100.
>
> Keith
>  _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110412/9fe5c95f/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 12 20:34:14 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:34:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin4uZfeZQBBxpp2GfGcX520FxVPZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>	<005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>
	<BANLkTin4uZfeZQBBxpp2GfGcX520FxVPZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003901cbf950$fdc8b440$f95a1cc0$@att.net>

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 11:35 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America

 


On Apr 11, 2011 7:55 PM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> >.  A Diesel engine converts more energy to useful work from a gallon of
Diesel fuel than a gasoline engine converts from a gallon of octane,
assuming the Diesel is loaded optimally.

>.Isn't that the basic principle behind many hybrids?

 

Ja, but the first generation hybrids such as the prius sacrifices efficiency
to some extent for driveability.  Toyota didn't want to get electric hybrids
associated with underpowered lousy performance.  So that generation of
parallel hybrids doesn't get all that much better fuel economy above
straight gasoline, but they aren't slow either.  Nissan's hybrid, the leaf,
is a good performer.  

 

Octane burners are not so great on efficiency, but they beat everybody on
versatility: they do OK over a huge range of speed and load, they are simple
and light, broad power band, we all know how to fix them (we older cats do
anyway.) 

 

If we can tolerate low acceleration, we have a whole bunch of options, such
as series hybrids using a turbo-Diesel.  These have a narrow power and
efficiency band, but with series hybrid, you can take advantage of that, and
even keep it quiet with tuned exhaust.

 

spike  

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110412/3662ebb7/attachment.html>

From sparge at gmail.com  Tue Apr 12 21:06:08 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 17:06:08 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <003901cbf950$fdc8b440$f95a1cc0$@att.net>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
	<005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>
	<BANLkTin4uZfeZQBBxpp2GfGcX520FxVPZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003901cbf950$fdc8b440$f95a1cc0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin5C-OetS-Y_0edJ-_CSmdPX6T8nA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/12 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> Nissan?s hybrid, the leaf, is a good performer.

It's electric, not hybrid.

-Dave



From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 12 21:47:21 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 14:47:21 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin5C-OetS-Y_0edJ-_CSmdPX6T8nA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>	<005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>	<BANLkTin4uZfeZQBBxpp2GfGcX520FxVPZA@mail.gmail.com>	<003901cbf950$fdc8b440$f95a1cc0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTin5C-OetS-Y_0edJ-_CSmdPX6T8nA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006f01cbf95b$346efc20$9d4cf460$@att.net>



2011/4/12 spike <spike66 at att.net>:

>> Nissan's hybrid, the leaf, is a good performer.

>It's electric, not hybrid.

>-Dave


Oops, right, Altima hybrid rather.  The leaf is an all-electric plug-in.  I
rented a hybrid Altima, goes like hell.  Didn't have it long enough to
determine if it gets good fuel economy, but I got it going 80mph on the
freeway, no problem at all.

spike






From lubkin at unreasonable.com  Tue Apr 12 22:49:42 2011
From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 18:49:42 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Yuri
Message-ID: <201104122334.p3CNY77s001980@andromeda.ziaspace.com>

Today is the 50th anniversary of the first manned spaceflight.

Check out google.com, and mouse over the logo.


-- David.



From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Wed Apr 13 01:53:26 2011
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:53:26 -0600
Subject: [ExI] [mta] Vote for Ray Kurzweil!
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinEjN2W3Ac_AVeDnewL+5CCmU_dcA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinEjN2W3Ac_AVeDnewL+5CCmU_dcA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DA50216.7030700@canonizer.com>


Lincoln,

This is great!

You missed appending "per IP address" to that "you can vote once per 
day", so you can vote at home, work, your phone, and any other IP you 
have access to each day.

Does anyone have access to any large blocks of IP addresses?  We could 
probably work up a quick and simple redirection server script serving 
the re-captcha immages to all of us through a proxy, using all of them 
at random or till they are used up that day or something?  Perhaps 
sending out e-mail notifications to these lists with the server links 
till all the IPs were exhausted that today?

And shouldn't the technically expert have more influence on society 
after all?  Oh, wait, I forgot, transhumanists are a bunch of anti 
social lazy buts not interested in organizing or working together to 
influence anything for good like this - certainly nothing like a bunch 
of pre-teen girls getting all their friends  to vote for Justin Bieber 
or something.  Or are they?

Brent Allsop



On 4/12/2011 11:46 AM, Lincoln Cannon wrote:
> Ray Kurweil is making a great showing in Time's poll to identify the 
> persons that influence us most. This is a good opportunity to give 
> Transhumanism more mainstream exposure. You can vote once per day!
>
> http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2058044_2060338_2060189,00.html
>
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> Groups "Mormon Transhumanist Association" group.
> To post to this group, send email to transfigurism at googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
> transfigurism+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at 
> http://groups.google.com/group/transfigurism?hl=en.



From algaenymph at gmail.com  Wed Apr 13 02:23:12 2011
From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:23:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] [mta] Vote for Ray Kurzweil!
In-Reply-To: <4DA50216.7030700@canonizer.com>
References: <BANLkTinEjN2W3Ac_AVeDnewL+5CCmU_dcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA50216.7030700@canonizer.com>
Message-ID: <4DA50910.3060607@gmail.com>

On 4/12/11 6:53 PM, Brent Allsop wrote:
> I forgot, transhumanists are a bunch of anti- social lazy-butts not 
> interested in organizing or working together to influence anything for 
> good like this - certainly nothing like a bunch of pre-teen girls 
> getting all their friends to vote for Justin Bieber or something.

You have my thanks for saying what needs to be said. :)


From sjatkins at mac.com  Wed Apr 13 05:49:28 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:49:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin5k1pgY_5PDns2O-Ywr_V_Br4GmA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org> <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
	<BANLkTin5k1pgY_5PDns2O-Ywr_V_Br4GmA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <F02CCE31-EB81-4756-AF82-1EA73B176599@mac.com>


On Apr 12, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Dave Sill wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Wait a second.  To raise cattle takes a lot of agriculture to grow enough
>> vegetable matter to feed the cattle.
> 
> Not true. Cattle and other ruminants require no agriculture, just wild
> forage.

That is grossly inefficient for the size of the modern appetite for meat.

> The vast herds of buffalo that used to live in North America,
> for example, weren't supported by agriculture. I can raise half a
> dozen cattle on my 10 acres of pasture with no agriculture whatsoever.

Sure.  Now try to scale it up..

> 
>>  The amount of land needed for that is
>> roughly 17 times as large as that needed for just growing human consumable
>> vegetable matter on the same land.
> 
> Citation required.
> 

No, I have better things to do.

-s



From sjatkins at mac.com  Wed Apr 13 05:57:24 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:57:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <4da3aa05.4581dc0a.230a.69cd@mx.google.com>
References: <4da3aa05.4581dc0a.230a.69cd@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <C74C33FD-74ED-4446-AD96-A15AFBB3C41D@mac.com>


On Apr 11, 2011, at 11:56 AM, kellycoinguy at gmail.com wrote:

> I heard recently that part of the reason that oil is cheaper in the US is because the international price is stated in dollars. Also that if we stopped denominating oil in dollars that the price would jump in the us. This seems like a crazy argument to me. Do any of you have any reason to believe it moght be true?
> 

It is denominated in $US and the $US is the world reserve currency.  This generally enables the US to inflate its currency with less blowback and less quick consequences as everyone wants dollars to buy energy and for other reasons.   I am don't see how that keeps the price of oil or gas in the US down by itself though.  We do import a tremendous amount of it and we did put it on the map.  So I think part of it is that we were ass deep it in from the beginning and brokered a lot of favorable deals.  Including things like arming Saudia Arabia to the teeth in what looks a bit like an indirect kickback (to me anyway).   

OTOH I was shocked last week to read that China now buys more oil from Saudi Arabia than we do.  

- samantha



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 13 05:40:36 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 23:40:36 -0600
Subject: [ExI] [mta] Vote for Ray Kurzweil!
In-Reply-To: <4DA50910.3060607@gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinEjN2W3Ac_AVeDnewL+5CCmU_dcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA50216.7030700@canonizer.com> <4DA50910.3060607@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=+Tnkxt0MSDReG+D_ocYkcMzNBTw@mail.gmail.com>

He is up to #30 tonight. I guess transhumanists are not just a bunch
of anti social lazy butts... :-)

-Kelly

On 4/12/11, AlgaeNymph <algaenymph at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/12/11 6:53 PM, Brent Allsop wrote:
>> I forgot, transhumanists are a bunch of anti- social lazy-butts not
>> interested in organizing or working together to influence anything for
>> good like this - certainly nothing like a bunch of pre-teen girls
>> getting all their friends to vote for Justin Bieber or something.
>
> You have my thanks for saying what needs to be said. :)
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 13 06:49:10 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 00:49:10 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <F02CCE31-EB81-4756-AF82-1EA73B176599@mac.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org> <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
	<BANLkTin5k1pgY_5PDns2O-Ywr_V_Br4GmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<F02CCE31-EB81-4756-AF82-1EA73B176599@mac.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimk7gupHVGU3+8T5HjbXtbMwh8v2w@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 11:49 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>>> ?The amount of land needed for that is
>>> roughly 17 times as large as that needed for just growing human consumable
>>> vegetable matter on the same land.
>>
>> Citation required.
>
> No, I have better things to do.

To risk jumping in for Samantha...

I believe the above number is true (or close to true) when you take
into account that cattle spend the last weeks of their lives in feed
lots eating huge amounts of corn (mixed with molasses, etc.). While
this is not "necessary" in the sense that cattle can be raised just on
grass, it is just not what is actually typically done in America
today.

An old rule of thumb is that it requires 50 bushels of grain to finish
an animal in a feedlot.  There are 56 pounds of corn in a bushel, for
example, so you will need around 2,800 pounds of corn (and other
grain) to produce an animal that weighs 1,250 to 1,350 pounds. Some
cattle sent to feedlots young and lighter consume about 3,500 pounds.
(http://www.greerfarm.com/cattle/beef.html)

You can raise about 183 bushels of corn per acre, at least in Iowa.
(http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_bushels_of_corn_can_you_get_from_an_acre_of_corn)

By way of comparison, the average American consumes something around
1500 pounds of corn a year...
http://fatknowledge.blogspot.com/2007/04/average-american-consumes-1500-pounds.html

The cows spend much less than a year in the feed lot... so people
don't eat quite like a cow :-)

Anyway, if you eat a pound of meat, you're eating a couple of pounds
of corn, and whatever grass and other things it ate prior to getting
to the feed lot.

In addition to all of this... cows fart a lot. Methane is a green
house gas that is 20 times more effective at greenhousing (neologism)
than CO2. (http://www.epa.gov/outreach/). A cow has a more negative
greenhouse effect than driving an SUV.
(http://openthefuture.com/cheeseburger_CF.html)

Bottom line, you just can't win. :-)

-Kelly



From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Wed Apr 13 06:28:08 2011
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 00:28:08 -0600
Subject: [ExI] [mta] Vote for Ray Kurzweil!
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinKyY86c1p-AQLqy4+LXdPePa4spw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinEjN2W3Ac_AVeDnewL+5CCmU_dcA@mail.gmail.com>	<4DA50216.7030700@canonizer.com>
	<BANLkTinKyY86c1p-AQLqy4+LXdPePa4spw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DA54278.5070709@canonizer.com>


Hi Giovanni,

Yea, but notice the count on the server side doesn't increment each time 
you do that, unlike if you do it on a different IP, or a different day.

Brent Allsop

On 4/12/2011 11:43 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote:
> Simply clean the cache and reload the page and vote again and again...
> very simple on firefox
> Giovanni
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 8:53 PM, Brent Allsop
> <brent.allsop at canonizer.com>  wrote:
>> Lincoln,
>>
>> This is great!
>>
>> You missed appending "per IP address" to that "you can vote once per day",
>> so you can vote at home, work, your phone, and any other IP you have access
>> to each day.
>>
>> Does anyone have access to any large blocks of IP addresses?  We could
>> probably work up a quick and simple redirection server script serving the
>> re-captcha immages to all of us through a proxy, using all of them at random
>> or till they are used up that day or something?  Perhaps sending out e-mail
>> notifications to these lists with the server links till all the IPs were
>> exhausted that today?
>>
>> And shouldn't the technically expert have more influence on society after
>> all?  Oh, wait, I forgot, transhumanists are a bunch of anti social lazy
>> buts not interested in organizing or working together to influence anything
>> for good like this - certainly nothing like a bunch of pre-teen girls
>> getting all their friends  to vote for Justin Bieber or something.  Or are
>> they?
>>
>> Brent Allsop
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/12/2011 11:46 AM, Lincoln Cannon wrote:
>>> Ray Kurweil is making a great showing in Time's poll to identify the
>>> persons that influence us most. This is a good opportunity to give
>>> Transhumanism more mainstream exposure. You can vote once per day!
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,2058044_2060338_2060189,00.html
>>>
>>> --
>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>>> "Mormon Transhumanist Association" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to transfigurism at googlegroups.com.
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> transfigurism+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/transfigurism?hl=en.
>> _______________________________________________
>> extropy-chat mailing list
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>



From js_exi at gnolls.org  Wed Apr 13 07:00:33 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 00:00:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability, again
Message-ID: <4DA54A11.9000305@gnolls.org>

> On Apr 12, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Dave Sill wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
>>> Wait a second.  To raise cattle takes a lot of agriculture to grow enough
>>> vegetable matter to feed the cattle.
>>
>> Not true. Cattle and other ruminants require no agriculture, just wild
>> forage.
>
> That is grossly inefficient for the size of the modern appetite for meat.

I do not think the word "efficient" means what you think it means.

Recall that the USA (one of the most productive nations in the world) is 
only 19% arable, and much of that only due to massive 
government-subsidized dams and irrigation projects.  It is maximally 
efficient to graze animals on land that cannot grow crops.

Also, I think Dave knows more about cattle than you or I do :)  I 
learned that lesson earlier.

>> The vast herds of buffalo that used to live in North America,
>> for example, weren't supported by agriculture. I can raise half a
>> dozen cattle on my 10 acres of pasture with no agriculture whatsoever.
>
> Sure.  Now try to scale it up..

Attempting to "scale up" food production is the cause of most of our 
problems.  It is most efficient and least damaging to grow and consume 
local food grown appropriate to the water, soil, exposure, and shade 
conditions of the land (see: "permaculture").  Yet we heavily subsidize 
industrial-scale farming that strip-mines topsoil, pollutes water, and 
requires massive energy input both for fertilizer and transportation.

Factory farming is destructive whether it produces cows or soybeans.

>>>  The amount of land needed for that is
>>> roughly 17 times as large as that needed for just growing human consumable
>>> vegetable matter on the same land.
>>
>> Citation required.
>
> No, I have better things to do.

Then I have better things to do than read your posts.

You might consider that what vegetarian propaganda calls the 
"inefficiency" of animals grazing is, in reality, nutrients being 
returned to the land in the form of dung -- which actually *increases* 
the fertility and productivity of the soil vs. the dry, dead grass that 
would otherwise build up...

...and versus human consumption of grains and vegetables, which results 
in those nutrients being flushed into the nearest body of water.

Yes, properly managed grazing *creates* topsoil...which should be common 
sense, or the Serengeti and Great Plains would have blown away into dust 
tens of millions of years ago.  We're currently living on the drawdown 
of the accumulated capital of millions of years of grazing (among other 
things).

Again:
http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2011/03/operation-hope-meat-is-medicine-for.html 


JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From js_exi at gnolls.org  Wed Apr 13 07:11:20 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 00:11:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability, yet again
Message-ID: <4DA54C98.9070702@gnolls.org>

Keith Henson wrote:
>>  seven billion people is far, far
>> beyond the sustainable population of the Earth even if you posit nearly free
>> energy . . . .
>
> That is utter nonsense.  With really low cost energy you can make
> fresh water out of salt and pump it inland a thousand miles.

See: soil salinization.

"Estimates indicate that roughly one-third of the irrigated land in the 
major irrigation countries is already badly affected by salinity or is 
expected to become so in the near future.  Present estimates for India 
range from 27% to 60% of the irrigated land, Pakistan 14%, Israel 13%, 
Australia 20%, China 15%, Iraq 50%, Egypt 30%."
http://134.121.74.103/newsletter/fall2001/IrrImpact2.pdf

> Likewise, you can salvage phosphorous our of sewage and ship it back
> to the farms.

Plants are not made entirely of ammonium nitrate, potash, and phosphate. 
  Just to choose one example:
http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/pdf/Mineral_Depletion_of_Foods_1940_2002.pdf

Also see: giant dead zones (larger than Connecticut) in river deltas due 
to fertilizer runoff.
http://serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/topics/deadzone/

I'm not sure your understanding is at a level that allows you to throw 
around terms like "nonsense".  Cheap energy doesn't solve the problems 
of agriculture any more than cheap caffeine solves the problems of sleep.

Frankly, this is a self-cancelling argument.  If anyone is worried about 
the impact of eating meat (or anything else), then by definition these 
are issues of concern.

There's a reason most of us go into technology or theoretical 
disciplines: it allows us to work on well-constrained problems in a 
restricted space.  These are not such problems.  Soil alone is a complex 
biological system -- let alone entire ecosystems of which it is but one 
part.  There's a reason I posted the references I did: most people have 
no concept at all of the realities of the cycle of life, and either 
romanticize it, oversimplify it, or ignore it because its constraints 
are momentarily inconvenient.  And we're still a long way from free energy.

 > I am really getting annoyed at the postings on this list.  I would
 > think the people who post here should understand Extropy.

Tirelessly working to overcome limits is more productive than ignoring 
them, wishing them away, or claiming they don't exist.

It's easy for all of us to see the fallacies in attitudes such as 
Singularity Utopia's, because that's our field of expertise.  It's 
harder for us to see the fallacies in our own attitudes as applied to 
fields that are much more messy and complicated -- and generally outside 
our expertise.

Finally, recall that it's only the educated middle-class and above that 
advances knowledge: filling the world with poor people whose entire life 
is devoted to simple survival doesn't accomplish anything but making 
more people poor in a vicious positive feedback loop.  There's a reason 
we don't see headlines like "New Cancer Treatment Discovered by 
Illiterate Liberian Slum-Dweller" or "Bangladeshi Subsistence Farmer 
Invents More Efficient Refrigerator, Production to Begin In 2012".

I'm inclined to drop this subject now, because it is not terribly 
germane to the purpose of this list, and it's unlikely to win me any 
friends or allies.  However, I do ask that people keep in mind the 
degree of irritation they justifiably evince when someone who knows 
little about spaceflight or computation makes sweeping generalizations 
-- and that it is possible to be on the other end of that particular 
equation.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org

PS: As a reward for slogging through all this, here's a delicious recipe 
that even the worst kitchen klutz can make:
http://www.gnolls.org/1887/the-best-gravlax-recipe-on-the-internet/



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr 13 10:36:46 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:36:46 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <006f01cbf95b$346efc20$9d4cf460$@att.net>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
	<005e01cbf8bc$e561e7d0$b025b770$@att.net>
	<BANLkTin4uZfeZQBBxpp2GfGcX520FxVPZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003901cbf950$fdc8b440$f95a1cc0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTin5C-OetS-Y_0edJ-_CSmdPX6T8nA@mail.gmail.com>
	<006f01cbf95b$346efc20$9d4cf460$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110413103646.GU23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 02:47:21PM -0700, spike wrote:
> 
> 
> 2011/4/12 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> 
> >> Nissan's hybrid, the leaf, is a good performer.
> 
> >It's electric, not hybrid.
> 
> >-Dave
> 
> 
> Oops, right, Altima hybrid rather.  The leaf is an all-electric plug-in.  I
> rented a hybrid Altima, goes like hell.  Didn't have it long enough to
> determine if it gets good fuel economy, but I got it going 80mph on the
> freeway, no problem at all.

The advantage of straight EV or advanced hybrids that they need only
to handle cruise, as peak comes from spike cache. Plus, regenerative
braking, smaller gear to no gears (hub motor, can be done with low
unsprung mass), advanced control with power electronics driven by
software, drive by wire, including ability to integrate powerful 
computers for future autonomous navigation, and so on.

As soon as sufficiently reliable batteries get sufficiently cheap
the ICE is effectively finished, at least for commute and short
cruises. Current stock diesel cars do >1000 km on a single tank,
no way to do that with even advanced unobtainium batteries unless
in flimsy ultralites. 

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr 13 14:31:01 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:31:01 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 02:28:50PM +0930, Emlyn wrote:
> 2011/4/7 spike <spike66 at att.net>:

> If you're talking PV, then I agree! Especially since they seem to be
> on an exponential improvement path, unlike any other energy technology
> (ever?).
> 
> But, why would you worry too much about losses in transmission? PV is
> a decentralizing technology. Just put it where you need it, the grid
> takes a back seat.
> 
> Ray K recently put forward a timeframe of 20 years until the world is
> 100% solar, based on current doubling time of uptake. Certainly, in 20

If you need to substitute 20 TW in 20 years, that's a conversion rate
of 1 TW/year, linearly. This might look superficially nice: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:WorldWindPower.png
but this definitely doesn't: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_energy_usage_width_chart.svg

See "fake fire brigade", parts 1 to 4: http://www.theoildrum.com/tag/fake_fire_brigade

Unlike Moore's law, making solar cells smaller doesn't double
the power. The opposite, in fact. And surface doesn't install 
itself, magically connect to the grid, while upgrading it in 
the process, and building these extremely large and expensive
slow-to-build synfuel plants, or substitutes infrastructure 
by increasing electrification.

> years there'll be a lot of it. Out the other side of that? Masses of

Germany doubled PV from 1% to 2% total within about a year. Doubling
very little should be easy, but it was very expensive even for a
renewable world leader -- now think about the world. If anything,
the doubling times will increase as the converted volume has to 
increase. We have done it before when we converted to fossil, but
it took a long time, and it resulted in innovation we haven't been
able to improve upon yet. Carnot-driven turbines are firmly with us.

And of course now the volume is one order of magnitude larger,
while we have much less time. At which point extremely popular
words like demand destruction, frugality and austerity come in.

> power, far more than now, with no concept of power use being a bad
> thing. Bring it on!

-- 
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 pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr 13 15:07:36 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:07:36 +0100
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinyjeDEYQku9r9CPrAEJHQGqpJPuA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:31 PM, Eugen Leitl  wrote:
<snip>
> Germany doubled PV from 1% to 2% total within about a year. Doubling
> very little should be easy, but it was very expensive even for a
> renewable world leader -- now think about the world. If anything,
> the doubling times will increase as the converted volume has to
> increase. We have done it before when we converted to fossil, but
> it took a long time, and it resulted in innovation we haven't been
> able to improve upon yet. Carnot-driven turbines are firmly with us.
>
> And of course now the volume is one order of magnitude larger,
> while we have much less time. At which point extremely popular
> words like demand destruction, frugality and austerity come in.
>


<http://www.gizmag.com/google-invests-168-million-in-solar-power-tower/18383/>

Google invests US$168 million in world?s largest solar power tower plant
By Darren Quick    April 13, 2011

Overshadowing the 20 MW PS20 solar power tower plant in Spain, the
scale of ISEGS can't be overstated. It will be the first large-scale
solar power tower plant built in the U.S. in nearly two decades and
will single-handedly almost double the amount of commercial solar
thermal electricity produced in the U.S. today and nearly equal the
amount of total solar installed in the U.S. in 2009 alone.

The entire complex will consist of three separate plants developed by
BrightSource Energy that will be built in phases between 2010 and
2013. The energy generated from all three plants will be enough to
supply more than 140,000 homes in California during peak usage hours,
with the project contracted to provide 1,300 MW to Southern California
Edison and 1,310 MW to Pacific Gas and Electric Company.
-----------------


So large solar power stations will be developed as well as individual
solar self-sufficient houses and offices.

BillK



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Apr 13 16:11:29 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:11:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability, yet again
In-Reply-To: <4DA54C98.9070702@gnolls.org>
References: <4DA54C98.9070702@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimZez85wZ6+A5sp+A4PKjeE4KSUcw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:11 AM, J. Stanton <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote:
> Keith Henson wrote:
>>>
>>> ?seven billion people is far, far
>>> beyond the sustainable population of the Earth even if you posit nearly
>>> free
>>> energy . . . .
>>
>> That is utter nonsense. ?With really low cost energy you can make
>> fresh water out of salt and pump it inland a thousand miles.
>
> See: soil salinization.

> "Estimates indicate that roughly one-third of the irrigated land in the
> major irrigation countries is already badly affected by salinity or is
> expected to become so in the near future. ?Present estimates for India range
> from 27% to 60% of the irrigated land, Pakistan 14%, Israel 13%, Australia
> 20%, China 15%, Iraq 50%, Egypt 30%."
> http://134.121.74.103/newsletter/fall2001/IrrImpact2.pdf

And with lot of energy, i.e., lots of pure water available, it's easy
to reverse.

>> Likewise, you can salvage phosphorous our of sewage and ship it back
>> to the farms.
>
> Plants are not made entirely of ammonium nitrate, potash, and phosphate.
> ?Just to choose one example:
> http://www.mineralresourcesint.co.uk/pdf/Mineral_Depletion_of_Foods_1940_2002.pdf

I made up hydroponics solutions in junior high school and grew a
(small) greenhouse full of plants in it.

Nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, sulfur and magnesium, traces
of iron, boron, manganese, zinc, molybdenum, copper, cobalt, chlorine,
selenium and silicon.

> Also see: giant dead zones (larger than Connecticut) in river deltas due to
> fertilizer runoff.
> http://serc.carleton.edu/microbelife/topics/deadzone/
>
> I'm not sure your understanding is at a level that allows you to throw
> around terms like "nonsense".

?Closed Ecosystems of High Agricultural Yield,? H.K. Henson, C. Meinel
Henson, Proceedings of the Space Manufacturing Facilities (Space
Colonies) Princeton/AIAA/NASA Conference, May 7-9, 1975.

Have you done all the steps from planting wheat to baking bread?

Have you lived for years on meat you raised yourself?

I have done both.

> Cheap energy doesn't solve the problems of
> agriculture any more than cheap caffeine solves the problems of sleep.
>
> Frankly, this is a self-cancelling argument. ?If anyone is worried about the
> impact of eating meat (or anything else), then by definition these are
> issues of concern.
>
> There's a reason most of us go into technology or theoretical disciplines:
> it allows us to work on well-constrained problems in a restricted space.
> ?These are not such problems. ?Soil alone is a complex biological system --
> let alone entire ecosystems of which it is but one part.

So what?  Tomatoes, for example, are largely grown in *sand.*

> There's a reason I
> posted the references I did: most people have no concept at all of the
> realities of the cycle of life, and either romanticize it, oversimplify it,
> or ignore it because its constraints are momentarily inconvenient. ?And
> we're still a long way from free energy.

Sunlight is free.  Collecting it and putting it in a useful form isn't.

>> I am really getting annoyed at the postings on this list. ?I would
>> think the people who post here should understand Extropy.
>
> Tirelessly working to overcome limits is more productive than ignoring them,
> wishing them away, or claiming they don't exist.
>
> It's easy for all of us to see the fallacies in attitudes such as
> Singularity Utopia's, because that's our field of expertise. ?It's harder
> for us to see the fallacies in our own attitudes as applied to fields that
> are much more messy and complicated -- and generally outside our expertise.

You obviously don't know who you are responding to.  I have spent the
last year working on www.stratosolar.com, the three years before that
working out a way to get the cost of space based solar energy down to
where it could displace coal by under pricing it.

As for the singularity . . . it's very much of a mixed bag, and in the
_best_ case it is the end of the human race as we know it.

http://www.terasemjournals.org/GNJournal/GN0202/henson1.html

> Finally, recall that it's only the educated middle-class and above that
> advances knowledge: filling the world with poor people whose entire life is
> devoted to simple survival doesn't accomplish anything but making more
> people poor in a vicious positive feedback loop.

A self perpetuating underclass is a very recent (last 200 years)
anomaly in human history.  I have been talking about this *on this
list* for more than three years.

***************
The upshot of his research was that in the Mathusian era in England
people with the personality characteristics to become well off
economically had at least twice as many surviving children as those
in the lower economic classes--who were not replacing
themselves.  This, of course, led to "downward social mobility,"
where the numerous sons and daughters of the rich tended to be less
well off (on average) than their parents.  But over 20 generations
(1200-1800) it did spread the genes for the personality
characteristics for accumulating wealth through the entire population.

	"In the institutional and technological context of these societies,
a new set of human attributes mattered for the only currency
that mattered in the Malthusian era, which was reproductive
success. In this world literacy and numeracy, which were irrelevant
before, were both helpful for economic success in agrarian
pre-industrial economies. Thus since economic success was
linked to reproductive success, facility with numbers and wordswas
pulled along in its wake. Since patience and hard work found
a new reward in a society with large amounts of capital, patience
and hard work were also favored."

****************

http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2007-December/039363.html

> There's a reason we don't
> see headlines like "New Cancer Treatment Discovered by Illiterate Liberian
> Slum-Dweller" or "Bangladeshi Subsistence Farmer Invents More Efficient
> Refrigerator, Production to Begin In 2012".

> I'm inclined to drop this subject now, because it is not terribly germane to
> the purpose of this list, and it's unlikely to win me any friends or allies.
> ?However, I do ask that people keep in mind the degree of irritation they
> justifiably evince when someone who knows little about spaceflight or
> computation makes sweeping generalizations -- and that it is possible to be
> on the other end of that particular equation.

Yes.  Often.

**********
H. Keith Henson: Beamed Energy and the Economics of Space Based Solar
Power, Beamed Energy Propulsion: 6th International Symposium, American
Inst. of Physics, 2010 ISBN 978-0735407749

Power Satellites, Carbon Dioxide, Synthetic Fuel, Sequestering Carbon
as Synthetic Oil and Fresh Water from Seawater
Keith Henson, H.

BEAMED ENERGY PROPULSION: 6th International Symposium. AIP Conference
Proceedings, Volume 1230, pp. 348-352 (2010).

    A small number of people have been working for the past year on
ways to reduce the cost of power from space to the point that it could
entirely displace fossil fuels and even put carbon dioxide back in
empty oil fields as synthetic oil. The challenging part is reducing
the cost of transport to GEO by a factor of ~200 discussed in another
paper in this volume. Given low cost power, synthetic fuels, carbon
sequestration, and fresh water from seawater become economical.
**********

What have you been doing?

Keith

PS.  You might want to read back into the archives of this list.



From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 13 21:18:41 2011
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:18:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] FRIDA- a new industrial robot
Message-ID: <BANLkTimmreS9b_J6PB4widZwR1HH6fRtWQ@mail.gmail.com>

What do you think of this robotic system?  And where do you think it will be
in ten years?

http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/13/frida-concept-robot-will-solve-all-of-foxconns-problems-by-re/

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110413/cb729c4f/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr 13 21:50:39 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:50:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Grass-fed vs. grain-fed beef
Message-ID: <BANLkTimv4iRTqU2U8ub1vVsSCqnqLZ5tBQ@mail.gmail.com>

A timely piece by one of the most popular (and non-dogmatic) paleo
proponents on aspects of a topic we're currently discussing:

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-differences-between-grass-fed-beef-and-grain-fed-beef/

-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110413/5f869bcd/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 03:11:36 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 20:11:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] FRIDA- a new industrial robot
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimmreS9b_J6PB4widZwR1HH6fRtWQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimmreS9b_J6PB4widZwR1HH6fRtWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinZFsH+gMjiZtAmqY5-miUvbFEGMQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/13 John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>:
> What do you think of this robotic system?? And where do you think it will be
> in ten years?
>
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/13/frida-concept-robot-will-solve-all-of-foxconns-problems-by-re/

Issue one: can they get it cheap?

Issue two: no, *really* cheap, to where it really does compete with
barely-trained third world labor?

Still, it's a promising start.



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 13:01:54 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 06:01:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>

Years ago I (partly) joked about a sign of the singularity being
immanent being that someone could start a company at breakfast have it
be worth a billion dollars by noon and bankrupt by dinner.

This is not that fast, but it's certainly getting faster.

"Rutkowski cited the company Zynga that created Farmville as being
worth almost $12 billion now and it ?didn?t even exist 18 months ago?.

http://www.techworld.com.au/article/383125/facebook_biggest_bank_by_2015/?fp=2&fpid=1

Economics 2.0 anyone?

Keith



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 14 14:01:39 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 07:01:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <01bc01cbfaac$7a4f7e20$6eee7a60$@att.net>


>"Rutkowski cited the company Zynga that created Farmville as being worth
almost $12 billion now and it "didn't even exist 18 months ago".

http://www.techworld.com.au/article/383125/facebook_biggest_bank_by_2015/?fp
=2&fpid=1

Keith


That silly game came out of nowhere and has millions of people playing it.
Oddly enough, it may have caused the value of farmland to go crazy, because
a million amateur farmers want to try their hand at the real thing.  I am
sorely tempted to try to subdivide my folks' farm into about 40 one-hectare
lots and sell them for 30k each, while offering a standing crew which does
in real life what Farmvillers do in  the virtual world.  Imagine all those
contiguous postage stamp hobby farms being run by people with desk jobs in
the city, what could possibly go wrong?

spike



From rpwl at lightlink.com  Thu Apr 14 14:15:36 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:15:36 -0400
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>

Keith Henson wrote:
> Years ago I (partly) joked about a sign of the singularity being
> immanent being that someone could start a company at breakfast have it
> be worth a billion dollars by noon and bankrupt by dinner.
> 
> This is not that fast, but it's certainly getting faster.
> 
> "Rutkowski cited the company Zynga that created Farmville as being
> worth almost $12 billion now and it ?didn?t even exist 18 months ago?.
> 
> http://www.techworld.com.au/article/383125/facebook_biggest_bank_by_2015/?fp=2&fpid=1
> 
> Economics 2.0 anyone?

You have got to be kidding.

The millionaires' gambling casino known as the "free market" got faster 
betting machinery, so it could speculate harder and faster and bigger 
... and this has how much to do with the singularity?

Stock market gambling thrives on *gradients* in the curves.  Static, 
orderly pricing is a hideous disease threat to that kind of gambling, so 
it has to be eliminated wherever possible.  The drive toward volatility 
in the trading systems creates opportunities for the gamblers, so they 
promote it like crazy.



Richard Loosemore




From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 15:46:44 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:46:44 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <F02CCE31-EB81-4756-AF82-1EA73B176599@mac.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org> <4DA3A15E.1040600@mac.com>
	<BANLkTin5k1pgY_5PDns2O-Ywr_V_Br4GmA@mail.gmail.com>
	<F02CCE31-EB81-4756-AF82-1EA73B176599@mac.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=Qn6TZvyFcd6=v--KKhinOOp3F1g@mail.gmail.com>

On 13 April 2011 07:49, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:

>
> On Apr 12, 2011, at 5:44 AM, Dave Sill wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 8:48 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Wait a second.  To raise cattle takes a lot of agriculture to grow
> enough
> >> vegetable matter to feed the cattle.
> >
> > Not true. Cattle and other ruminants require no agriculture, just wild
> > forage.
>
> That is grossly inefficient for the size of the modern appetite for meat.
>
>
The "modern appetite for meat" of course depends on the growing number of
people to feed, and on their natural demand for a better, more satisfactory
nutrition.

The cheapest meat used to be that of animals on a different food chain. If
we have deliberately moved those animals on our own, this would appear to
mean that it is more economically efficient to do so than sparing their food
or keeping them out of it.

Of course, this need not mean that it is also the best possible nutritional
choice. Nor that we cannot try and have our steak and eat it too by applying
technology to the problem of producing high-quality meat in the most
efficient possible way, perhaps doing it without full-fledged animals
altogether.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110414/364dd984/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 15:36:57 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:36:57 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin2i1jdCq7SnXVLUC5LB9ZNKcQ3YA@mail.gmail.com>

On 12 April 2011 19:50, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> That is utter nonsense.  With really low cost energy you can make
> fresh water out of salt and pump it inland a thousand miles.

I am pretty much convinced myself that given a sufficient quantity of energy
(and of information one can do more or less anything at all.

What about reorganising the matter in the solar system into a Dyson sphere
around our star? Such solution would certainly sustain a much larger
population than six, or sixty, billion people for a rather long time,
including in the framework of very inefficient food-production choices.

Nevertheless, I think that J. Stanton may have a point as far as more
immediate scenarios are concerned.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110414/7704375e/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 14 16:17:53 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 09:17:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <002d01cbfabf$82145820$863d0860$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Richard Loosemore
...

>...Stock market gambling thrives on *gradients* in the curves.  Static,
orderly pricing is a hideous disease threat to that kind of gambling, so it
has to be eliminated wherever possible.  The drive toward volatility in the
trading systems creates opportunities for the gamblers, so they promote it
like crazy...Richard Loosemore


But saying that way almost makes it sound like a bad thing.

spike








From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 16:46:22 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:46:22 +0100
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <002d01cbfabf$82145820$863d0860$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>
	<002d01cbfabf$82145820$863d0860$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimG+WxfinxCDRH=-KyeNZPdP032XA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:17 PM, spike  wrote:
>
>>... On Behalf Of Richard Loosemore
>>...Stock market gambling thrives on *gradients* in the curves. ?Static,
>> orderly pricing is a hideous disease threat to that kind of gambling, so it
>> has to be eliminated wherever possible. ?The drive toward volatility in the
>> trading systems creates opportunities for the gamblers, so they promote it
>> like crazy...Richard Loosemore
>
>
> But saying that way almost makes it sound like a bad thing.
>
>


If you've just seen your pension fund disappear while the gamblers
traded it back and forth raking in commissions, I think you might also
consider it a bad thing.


BillK



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 14 16:53:40 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 18:53:40 +0200
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimG+WxfinxCDRH=-KyeNZPdP032XA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>
	<002d01cbfabf$82145820$863d0860$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimG+WxfinxCDRH=-KyeNZPdP032XA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110414165340.GJ23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 05:46:22PM +0100, BillK wrote:

> If you've just seen your pension fund disappear while the gamblers
> traded it back and forth raking in commissions, I think you might also
> consider it a bad thing.

Pension? You actually believe in these things?


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 21:27:14 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:27:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin2i1jdCq7SnXVLUC5LB9ZNKcQ3YA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTin2i1jdCq7SnXVLUC5LB9ZNKcQ3YA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinFX8a5KgF_796WFjq=i09eM_FB4A@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/14 Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com>:

snip

> What about reorganising the matter in the solar system into a Dyson sphere
> around our star? Such solution would certainly sustain a much larger
> population than six, or sixty, billion people for a rather long time,
> including in the framework of very inefficient food-production choices.

By the time we *could* do that, it's not obvious we would be eating
food rather than using energy directly.

How many people equivalent intelligences could a Dyson sphere support?
 The area at 1.5 x 10^8 km is about 2.8 x 10^23 square meters.  A
biological human intelligence runs on about 20 watts, even low
efficiency PV would give 200 watts per square meter.  So it would be
at least one per square meter or 4.7 x 10^14 times the current
population.

> Nevertheless, I think that J. Stanton may have a point as far as more
> immediate scenarios are concerned.

That's true.  On *current* technology we can't sustain the food supply
for as many people as exist now and are projected to exist in a few
decades.  But just *identifying* an obvious problem isn't enough on
this list.  You need to propose some way around the problem, even if
it is of the Dyson Sphere or flying pig class.

Keith


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 21:34:30 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:34:30 -0700
Subject: [ExI] More singularity run up.
Message-ID: <BANLkTinViT0y49yw0qW1UwAbCsGWFDsqUQ@mail.gmail.com>

Wow.  Charles Stross' Cop Space already.

http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-04/brazilian-cops-get-glasses-can-pick-guilty-faces-out-crowd

Keith


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 14 21:55:58 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:55:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <01bc01cbfaac$7a4f7e20$6eee7a60$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<01bc01cbfaac$7a4f7e20$6eee7a60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik-QBhba7=-FSf6OBoqmAdAmh-oRw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 7:01 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

snip
>
> That silly game came out of nowhere and has millions of people playing it.
> Oddly enough, it may have caused the value of farmland to go crazy, because
> a million amateur farmers want to try their hand at the real thing. ?I am
> sorely tempted to try to subdivide my folks' farm into about 40 one-hectare
> lots and sell them for 30k each, while offering a standing crew which does
> in real life what Farmvillers do in ?the virtual world. ?Imagine all those
> contiguous postage stamp hobby farms being run by people with desk jobs in
> the city, what could possibly go wrong?

It actually might be a good idea.

I don't know how much Farmville demonstrates it, but evolution has
almost certainly selected for sets of genes that make people _like_ to
farm.  In western Europe people who stayed on the farms had kids in
excess of the number who could farm when their parents died.  The ones
who didn't want to farm went off to the exciting cities, where the bad
sanitation killed most of them generation after generation.

The current farmers are the residual of that process.  Farming, even
with lots of machines to help, still hard dangerous work that requires
a lot of insight and willingness to invest current efforts in
anticipation of a future crop.

So could you tap this genetically entrained yearn to farm?  (And make
money on it?)

Probably.  The question is how.

We should talk about this offline.

Keith



From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Thu Apr 14 21:54:39 2011
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 14:54:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 10:56:43PM +0100, BillK wrote:

> So fewer traffic deaths has multiple reasons.  No magic bullet here.

I can't help noting that if all those cars were replaced by bus and rail
transit, those 32,000/year deaths would drop to somewhere between 300
and 3000, based on relative safety rates.

-xx- Damien X-) 


From amon at doctrinezero.com  Thu Apr 14 22:15:46 2011
From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:15:46 +0100
Subject: [ExI] More singularity run up.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinViT0y49yw0qW1UwAbCsGWFDsqUQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinViT0y49yw0qW1UwAbCsGWFDsqUQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinPapjWDVt85g34a8NooDwb+HrHVQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 14 April 2011 22:34, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:

> Wow.  Charles Stross' Cop Space already.
>
>
> http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-04/brazilian-cops-get-glasses-can-pick-guilty-faces-out-crowd
>
> Keith



Second that wow! It's weird, even when you see something coming, I'm still
amazed at the reality of it when innovations like this stroll nonchalantly
into real life. Every time I see this kind of thing  it feels like I've been
given a slap and told "remember transhumanism? keep paying attention!".

- A
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110414/13d45da3/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 14 22:35:28 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 15:35:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimG+WxfinxCDRH=-KyeNZPdP032XA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>	<002d01cbfabf$82145820$863d0860$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimG+WxfinxCDRH=-KyeNZPdP032XA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00a001cbfaf4$41880ab0$c4982010$@att.net>

... On Behalf Of BillK
...

>> But saying that way almost makes it sound like a bad thing.



>...If you've just seen your pension fund disappear while the gamblers
traded it back and forth raking in commissions, I think you might also
consider it a bad thing...BillK


BillK, that's why pension funds go into stable value funds.  If you had your
pensions in the high fliers, you are one of the gamblers.

spike








From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 14 23:30:12 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:30:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of Damien Sullivan
Subject: Re: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low

On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 10:56:43PM +0100, BillK wrote:

>>... So fewer traffic deaths has multiple reasons.  No magic bullet here.

>...I can't help noting that if all those cars were replaced by bus and rail
transit, those 32,000/year deaths would drop to somewhere between 300 and
3000, based on relative safety rates.  -xx- Damien X-)



Damien, compare this site:

http://www.good.is/post/the-worst-cities-for-walking/

with this site:

http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1008/dead-walking/flat.html

Find the same city in both, and ask yourself, Why is it that the fatalities
of pedestrians per 100,000 differ in some cases by a factor of 8?

Answer: it's all in how it is counted.

It isn't entirely clear how it should be counted.  Note I am not endorsing
one over the other, just suggesting comparison.

For instance, if a pedestrian is slain crossing a street, that counts, but
what if that pedestrian is fleeing from a gang when she crosses in panic?
Does that still count?  What if a pedestrian is shot for insufficient
alacrity in giving up her purse?  What if she is struck by a skateboarder on
the sidewalk, breaks a hip and perishes in agony?  Heart attack while
walking, count or no count?  Liquor store robber shot by owner while fleeing
on foot, pedestrian fatality?  To explain the wide disparity in the cited
statistics, I would suggest that one site counts everyone who is on foot
when they perish for any reason, and the other disregards as a crime
anything other than an accidental meeting of Detroit and flesh.

In the same mindset, do we not count the train passenger who is slain by
another train passenger?  How do we count the train passenger who is a crime
victim while at the station waiting for the train?  How do we count the
train passenger who is savagely beaten either on the train or waiting for
the train, then later perishes in the hospital?  Do we count the train
passenger who is followed out of the train terminal and assaulted, perhaps
fatally, in the parking lot?  Do we count only the exceedingly rare case of
those who perish in an actual train collision?   Why?  Do we count as
traffic fatalities caused by alcohol?  Do we count as traffic fatalities the
stupid proles who go off the road while racing motorcycles?  Why?

We create an illusion by counting as traffic fatalities *anyone* who
perishes in any Detroit for any reason, while treating as a crime (and as
not applicable) those who perish in most any public transit related
circumstance.

I would argue that we should count all fatalities that would not have
occurred had the person not risked mass transit.  Now assume one does not
drive drunk or stoned, does not race motorcycles, does not race any road
vehicle, does not drive tired, and isn't stupid, then cars are safer than
mass transit.  Our cars are our rubber and steel war horses, our rolling
suit of armor.  We have the option of carrying our 38 caliber lance tucked
down between the seats.  Even if that isn't safer, it sure as hell feels
safer.

spike






From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Thu Apr 14 23:59:46 2011
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 16:59:46 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 04:30:12PM -0700, spike wrote:

> I would argue that we should count all fatalities that would not have
> occurred had the person not risked mass transit.  Now assume one does not
> drive drunk or stoned, does not race motorcycles, does not race any road
> vehicle, does not drive tired, and isn't stupid, then cars are safer than
> mass transit.  Our cars are our rubber and steel war horses, our rolling

"cars are safer than mass transit"

Are they?  What's the evidence?  You typed a lot of FUD about mass
transit crime risks, but no numbers.  You're bringing it up, so how many
people do die due to taking mass transit for reasons not captured in the
accident statistics?

I note that while deaths due to cars are 32,000, I see 15,000-18,000 for
murder or homicide rates.

> suit of armor.  We have the option of carrying our 38 caliber lance tucked
> down between the seats.  Even if that isn't safer, it sure as hell feels
> safer.

"Damn the facts, I feel better!"

Your "rolling suit of armor" is an enemy tank in someone else's hands.

-xx- Damien X-) 


From msd001 at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 02:22:22 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 22:22:22 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Paleo diet and sustainability
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinFX8a5KgF_796WFjq=i09eM_FB4A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DA346ED.4060108@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTikUtA=55bmXi5MR3yAWs9PTZxc9BA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTin2i1jdCq7SnXVLUC5LB9ZNKcQ3YA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinFX8a5KgF_796WFjq=i09eM_FB4A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikBDUWuW4QAUA1JgCCt3+OuF_ijuw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> decades. ?But just *identifying* an obvious problem isn't enough on
> this list. ?You need to propose some way around the problem, even if
> it is of the Dyson Sphere or flying pig class.

how many people can you feed with flying pigs?

(I'm assuming dirigible-sized swine)



From atymes at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 04:34:25 2011
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:34:25 -0700
Subject: [ExI] The run up to the singularity
In-Reply-To: <00a001cbfaf4$41880ab0$c4982010$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTinTr+qs3O_ZN5CipFx2AOYdvYEBrA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=Mz+srWTxpyN4BccKTWNCCMe+xxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=w2ZiZ9RHHJxwuWgn0AaUNpOVsiQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA70188.7010802@lightlink.com>
	<002d01cbfabf$82145820$863d0860$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimG+WxfinxCDRH=-KyeNZPdP032XA@mail.gmail.com>
	<00a001cbfaf4$41880ab0$c4982010$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinfM=n7fZSyPWnET8Z=hfCmTXk9bw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 3:35 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>...If you've just seen your pension fund disappear while the gamblers
> traded it back and forth raking in commissions, I think you might also
> consider it a bad thing...BillK
>
>
> BillK, that's why pension funds go into stable value funds. ?If you had your
> pensions in the high fliers, you are one of the gamblers.

Unless you had no say in this, and someone else traded your pension
fund back and forth and raked in the commissions.

Of course, if you had little enough control for that to happen, it wasn't
really "your" pension fund in any meaningful sense to begin with.



From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Fri Apr 15 05:39:05 2011
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:39:05 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Is techno trans music artist Stefan Persson, a transhumanist?
Message-ID: <4DA7D9F9.5040001@canonizer.com>



Extropians,

I'd love to know how many of you enjoy techno trance music.  My recently 
discovered favorite artist in this genre is Stefan Persson at Imphenzia 
(see: http://music.imphenzia.com for free music).  Does anyone else like 
him like I do?

I figure he must be some kind of transhumanist, given the names of many 
of his tracks including  "Mind Machine" 
http://music.imphenzia.com/tracks/mind-machine-hibernation-edit.html ,  
"Duplicate My Soul" 
http://music.imphenzia.com/tracks/duplicate-my-soul-piano.html , "False 
Awakening" http://music.imphenzia.com/tracks/false-awakening.html , 
"Evolution" http://music.imphenzia.com/tracks/evolution-extended.html ,  
"Beautiful Sin" http://music.imphenzia.com/tracks/beautiful-sin.html and 
one of my favorites: "Natural Perception" 
http://music.imphenzia.com/tracks/natural-perception.html ...

I just wonder if any of you know Stefan or any more about his beliefs or 
philosophy.

Brent Allsop











From spike66 at att.net  Fri Apr 15 06:40:05 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 23:40:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of Damien Sullivan
Subject: Re: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low

On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 04:30:12PM -0700, spike wrote:

>> I would argue that we should count all fatalities that would not have 
> occurred had the person not risked mass transit...  Our cars are our
rubber and steel war 
> horses, our rolling

>"cars are safer than mass transit"

>...Are they?  What's the evidence?  You typed a lot of FUD about mass
transit crime risks, but no numbers.  You're bringing it up, so how many
people do die due to taking mass transit for reasons not captured in the
accident statistics?...

The point of my bringing in the two websites citing numbers disparate by a
factor of 8 is that the numbers you ask for are elusive.  They depend on how
you count.  There isn't a clear right or wrong way to reduce messy human
interactions to numbers.  Even counting homicides doesn't completely get at
the problem, because plenty of what are defined as traffic fatalities are
actually homicides.  Do they get double counted?  There isn't a clear answer
to this one.

>...I note that while deaths due to cars are 32,000, I see 15,000-18,000 for
murder or homicide rates...

Ja.  If someone is driving drunk and manages to slay themselves and their
passengers, how is that counted?  Why is that counted?  I would consider it
a suicide.  If racing triple digits on a motorcycle, how?  I can give a
personal example of a colleague who perished just that way, and that one was
ruled a suicide for insurance purposes and a traffic fatality for legal
purposes.


>> suit of armor.  We have the option of carrying our 38 caliber lance 
> tucked down between the seats.  Even if that isn't safer, it sure as 
> hell feels safer.

>..."Damn the facts, I feel better!"

If this could be reduced to numbers I would do it.  Driving risk can be
enormously reduced by taking a few simple precautions, very simple ones.
Similarly, risk of homicide can be greatly reduced just by staying out of
that section of town where they happen.  Do you not know where that is?
Visit the local police station, likely they have a map with pins in there.
Note how tightly they cluster.  Stay out of there.

>...Your "rolling suit of armor" is an enemy tank in someone else's hands...
-xx- Damien X-)

Enemy tank, cool, I like that.  {8^D  

Just this evening, I was trying to find the Palace of Fine Arts in San
Francisco.  I thought I was close, but I was lost.  I saw a street called
Broderick, stopped to take a picture for my own friend and your namesake.
Broke down and suffered the excruciating humiliation of asking directions.
The guy told me I should leave my car where it was and walk the rest of the
way, a couple blocks.  Found it, loved the show.

Afterwards, coming back at about 1030 PM, I was in the city in a
neighborhood I didn't know, at night.  I breathed a long sigh of relief when
I could slam the door on my Detroit, lock it and reach for Sir Remington,
just to know it is there.  I guess that would be my turret in your apt
analogy.  That was another case where the statistics are not clear, but it
sure felt safer.

spike







From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 07:30:50 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 08:30:50 +0100
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 7:40 AM, spike  wrote:
> The point of my bringing in the two websites citing numbers disparate by a
> factor of 8 is that the numbers you ask for are elusive. ?They depend on how
> you count. ?There isn't a clear right or wrong way to reduce messy human
> interactions to numbers. ?Even counting homicides doesn't completely get at
> the problem, because plenty of what are defined as traffic fatalities are
> actually homicides. ?Do they get double counted? ?There isn't a clear answer
> to this one.


Spike,

80% of traffic fatalities are people in the vehicle. (Driver or passengers).
Roughly another 10% are motorcyclists and the other 10% are pedestrians.

Traffic fatalities are roughly 50% Urban and 50% Rural.
(Possibly surprising considering the difference in population size
between Rural and Urban).


Mass transit would not reduce the 50% Rural fatalities because the
population is too low to support mass transit, Rural people have to
drive themselves,


BillK




>
>>...I note that while deaths due to cars are 32,000, I see 15,000-18,000 for
> murder or homicide rates...
>
> Ja. ?If someone is driving drunk and manages to slay themselves and their
> passengers, how is that counted? ?Why is that counted? ?I would consider it
> a suicide. ?If racing triple digits on a motorcycle, how? ?I can give a
> personal example of a colleague who perished just that way, and that one was
> ruled a suicide for insurance purposes and a traffic fatality for legal
> purposes.
>
>
>>> suit of armor. ?We have the option of carrying our 38 caliber lance
>> tucked down between the seats. ?Even if that isn't safer, it sure as
>> hell feels safer.
>
>>..."Damn the facts, I feel better!"
>
> If this could be reduced to numbers I would do it. ?Driving risk can be
> enormously reduced by taking a few simple precautions, very simple ones.
> Similarly, risk of homicide can be greatly reduced just by staying out of
> that section of town where they happen. ?Do you not know where that is?
> Visit the local police station, likely they have a map with pins in there.
> Note how tightly they cluster. ?Stay out of there.
>
>>...Your "rolling suit of armor" is an enemy tank in someone else's hands...
> -xx- Damien X-)
>
> Enemy tank, cool, I like that. ?{8^D
>
> Just this evening, I was trying to find the Palace of Fine Arts in San
> Francisco. ?I thought I was close, but I was lost. ?I saw a street called
> Broderick, stopped to take a picture for my own friend and your namesake.
> Broke down and suffered the excruciating humiliation of asking directions.
> The guy told me I should leave my car where it was and walk the rest of the
> way, a couple blocks. ?Found it, loved the show.
>
> Afterwards, coming back at about 1030 PM, I was in the city in a
> neighborhood I didn't know, at night. ?I breathed a long sigh of relief when
> I could slam the door on my Detroit, lock it and reach for Sir Remington,
> just to know it is there. ?I guess that would be my turret in your apt
> analogy. ?That was another case where the statistics are not clear, but it
> sure felt safer.
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu  Fri Apr 15 08:49:20 2011
From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 01:49:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110415084920.GA17823@ofb.net>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:30:50AM +0100, BillK wrote:

> Traffic fatalities are roughly 50% Urban and 50% Rural.
> (Possibly surprising considering the difference in population size
> between Rural and Urban).

Is that rural as in rural residents, or does it include highways between
cities?  The latter would boost the reference population, as well as be
readily divertible by good intercity bus and rail options.

-xx- Damien X-) 


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 09:27:27 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 11:27:27 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Grass-fed vs. grain-fed beef
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimv4iRTqU2U8ub1vVsSCqnqLZ5tBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimv4iRTqU2U8ub1vVsSCqnqLZ5tBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinBYcNOQ2VFhB=ZRj=rUk9q6Y6=hg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/13 Max More <max at maxmore.com>

> A timely piece by one of the most popular (and non-dogmatic) paleo
> proponents on aspects of a topic we're currently discussing:
>
>
> http://www.marksdailyapple.com/the-differences-between-grass-fed-beef-and-grain-fed-beef/
>

"When making the transition into the Primal way of life, a lot of people get
tripped up on the question of grass-fed beef. Is it necessary? (No.)"

I suspect he may be right. But of course this is much more debatable if one
had in mind a paleo-diet  *for cows*. :-)))

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110415/fe74330d/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 13:08:28 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:08:28 +0100
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <20110415084920.GA17823@ofb.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110415084920.GA17823@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikK6P+oVbc08e7jkWyYgD9FV0pF0w@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Damien Sullivan  wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 08:30:50AM +0100, BillK wrote:
>
>> Traffic fatalities are roughly 50% Urban and 50% Rural.
>> (Possibly surprising considering the difference in population size
>> between Rural and Urban).
>
> Is that rural as in rural residents, or does it include highways between
> cities? ?The latter would boost the reference population, as well as be
> readily divertible by good intercity bus and rail options.
>
>

Rural as in non-freeway country roads.

Freeways are the safest roads. No crossroads or sharp bends, contra
flow traffic separated by crash barriers.

BillK



From spike66 at att.net  Fri Apr 15 14:28:01 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:28:01 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002401cbfb79$538634f0$fa929ed0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 7:40 AM, spike  wrote:
>> The point of my bringing in the two websites citing numbers disparate 
> by a factor of 8 is that the numbers you ask for are elusive. ?They 
> depend on how you count...


>Spike,

>80% of traffic fatalities are people in the vehicle. (Driver or
passengers).
Roughly another 10% are motorcyclists and the other 10% are pedestrians.

>Traffic fatalities are roughly 50% Urban and 50% Rural.
(Possibly surprising considering the difference in population size between
Rural and Urban)...BillK


Thanks BillK, but again it isn't as clear as that.  Sure we can compare
numbers and we have lots of good mathematical tools for doing that.  But the
question remains, which are counted and why?  We saw in the pedestrian
fatalities statistics a factor of 8 disagreement based on how they are
counted.  Which is right?  When we see numbers like those above, are we free
to assume a factor of 8 uncertainty?  Plenty of cases are unambiguous, but
many are debatable how they should be counted.  

This uncertainty may get worse as the population ages and cars actually get
safer and better.  Driver has heart attack, drives into a tree.  Perhaps the
driver was dead on impact, but it isn't worth doing an autopsy to find out.
Counted as a traffic fatality?  Would not that driver have had a heart
attack anyway?  Driver has heart attack, crosses centerline, slays an
oncoming prole.  One traffic fatality or two?

spike







From spike66 at att.net  Fri Apr 15 14:45:26 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:45:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
Message-ID: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>

Kurzweil's movie Transcendent Man was shown at a premier last night at the
SF Palace of Fine Arts.  I liked it!  Some minor complaints, but overall I
would rate it very good to low end of the excellent range, certainly worth
my time.  I saw a lot of familiar faces in the movie from years of hanging
out with that crowd.  One scene, Kurzweil is conversing with William
Shatner.  In the background of that scene was a person looking the other way
whose hair looked like Max More's.  Right at the end of that scene, Ray and
Bill look at the camera and Max turns facing the camera, between the other
two, perhaps 10 feet behind them.  Biggest complaint: why the hell didn't
they have interviews with Max?

 

There are several people who hang out at Eliezer's singularity events in
there, such as Ben Goertzel and others.  Ben is interviewed at length,
wearing his trademark black and white tiger hat.  What's up with that?

 

Summary of complaints: missing interviews or scenes with major players in
the field, too much of several minor players, too many references to
religion and Ray's father, no mention of cryonics, no sufficient explanation
of the modern version of uploading.

 

Good clean fun however.

 

More commentary later, on my way out.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110415/ea0c0352/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 15:21:06 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 16:21:06 +0100
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <002401cbfb79$538634f0$fa929ed0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<002401cbfb79$538634f0$fa929ed0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimtcTsup=P7WMTjMCpcUxSC_=jc7A@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:28 PM, spike  wrote:
> Thanks BillK, but again it isn't as clear as that. ?Sure we can compare
> numbers and we have lots of good mathematical tools for doing that. ?But the
> question remains, which are counted and why? ?We saw in the pedestrian
> fatalities statistics a factor of 8 disagreement based on how they are
> counted. ?Which is right? ?When we see numbers like those above, are we free
> to assume a factor of 8 uncertainty? ?Plenty of cases are unambiguous, but
> many are debatable how they should be counted.
>


There is no discrepancy between the two sites that you quoted.

They are both interpreting the same study.

One is quoting pedestrian fatalities per 100,000 residents and the
other (quoting from the actual study) is quoting the Pedestrian Danger
Index.  The Index is a calculated figure and has no direct connection
with the number of fatalities.
Quote:
Researchers at the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership in the
1990s developed the Pedestrian Danger Index (PDI) in order to
establish a level playing field for comparing metropolitan areas based
on the danger to pedestrians. The PDI corrects for the fact that the
cities where more people walk on a daily basis are likely to have a
greater number of pedestrian fatalities, by computing the rate of
pedestrian deaths relative to the amount of walking residents do on
average.
-------------------


> This uncertainty may get worse as the population ages and cars actually get
> safer and better. ?Driver has heart attack, drives into a tree. ?Perhaps the
> driver was dead on impact, but it isn't worth doing an autopsy to find out.
> Counted as a traffic fatality? ?Would not that driver have had a heart
> attack anyway? ?Driver has heart attack, crosses centerline, slays an
> oncoming prole. ?One traffic fatality or two?
>
>


Heart attacks while driving are a tiny factor in the total carnage
figures. But, even so they should still be included as a pointer to
the need to make car crashes more survivable. If the driver has a
heart attack it would be nice if crumple zones, airbags, safety belts,
and other measures mean that all the passengers survive.


BillK



From spike66 at att.net  Fri Apr 15 16:08:49 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 09:08:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimtcTsup=P7WMTjMCpcUxSC_=jc7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>	<002401cbfb79$538634f0$fa929ed0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimtcTsup=P7WMTjMCpcUxSC_=jc7A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002401cbfb87$6863f890$392be9b0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 3:28 PM, spike  wrote:
> >... the pedestrian fatalities statistics a factor of 8 disagreement based

> on how they are counted. ?Which is right? ?When we see numbers like 
> those above, are we free to assume a factor of 8 uncertainty? ?Plenty 
> of cases are unambiguous, but many are debatable how they should be
counted.

>...There is no discrepancy between the two sites that you quoted.  They are
both interpreting the same study.

Indeed?  Their interpretations disagree by a factor of 8? 

>...One is quoting pedestrian fatalities per 100,000 residents and the other
(quoting from the actual study) is quoting the Pedestrian Danger Index.  The
Index is a calculated figure and has no direct connection with the number of
fatalities...

Hmmm.  I fail to see what value is that index.  On the contrary, I see
negative value: it is misleading.

>...Quote:
Researchers at the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership in the 1990s
developed the Pedestrian Danger Index (PDI) in order to establish a level
playing field for comparing metropolitan areas based on the danger to
pedestrians. The PDI corrects for the fact that the cities where more people
walk on a daily basis are likely to have a greater number of pedestrian
fatalities, by computing the rate of pedestrian deaths relative to the
amount of walking residents do on average.
-------------------

OK, well then.  I do urge a bit of intuition.  One of the sites was using
the pedestrian deaths to urge greater investment in better sidewalks and
crosswalks.  I saw four of the cities listed as the worst for walking.  I
have been in all four of those Florida cities.  My intuition is that better
sidewalks and crosswalks would do little or nothing to improve the
situation.  In the areas I suspect their pedestrian fatalities were
occurring, the ambiguity comes from something else entirely.  For instance,
if a prole drives into a neighborhood to purchase drugs, gets out of her
Detroit to complete the transaction, is shot by the competing pharmacist
next door and perishes on the sidewalk, is that a pedestrian fatality?  If
she manages to get back into her car and bleeds out while searching for a
medic, is that a traffic fatality?  If she perishes en route, crosses the
centerline and hits pedestrians, would better sidewalks have helped?

If one is in a neighborhood where one KNOWS one has no business being and
gets slain, is not that a suicide?  And if one actually lives in that
neighborhood, clearly that person does have business being in there, so is
that counted differently?  In those places where there are many homeless,
and they perish of exposure in the night, is that a pedestrian fatality?

Often we see public transit proposed as a solution, yet the local homeless
people use those as rolling shelters: they get aboard in the morning, ride
around all day, collect alms from the rich, enjoy the warmth of the very
expensive steam belching clean vehicle.

>> This uncertainty may get worse as the population ages and cars actually
get safer and better...

>Heart attacks while driving are a tiny factor in the total carnage figures.
But, even so they should still be included as a pointer to the need to make
car crashes more survivable. If the driver has a heart attack it would be
nice if crumple zones, airbags, safety belts, and other measures mean that
all the passengers survive...BillK

Heart attack while driving is an extreme example of something far more
common and becoming more so: driving while impaired by any medication or
medical condition.

spike





From stathisp at gmail.com  Fri Apr 15 20:30:12 2011
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 06:30:12 +1000
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <002401cbfb87$6863f890$392be9b0$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<002401cbfb79$538634f0$fa929ed0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimtcTsup=P7WMTjMCpcUxSC_=jc7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<002401cbfb87$6863f890$392be9b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim9LEFD+HJpp8chj64DC93EPApNvg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 2:08 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> Heart attack while driving is an extreme example of something far more
> common and becoming more so: driving while impaired by any medication or
> medical condition.

There won't be any accidents if driver, vehicle and road are all
functioning perfectly, but the point is that that can't be guaranteed.
Even if you do everything within your control there are all the other
drivers out there.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sat Apr 16 04:30:18 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 21:30:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
Message-ID: <20110415213018.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.2e6b6cd813.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"J. Stanton" <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote,
> "Man the wimpy" was a popular theory for a few years in the early 1990s, 
> mostly due to vegetarian and feminist politics...but the continued 
> weight of evidence has long since demoted that.

So now we replace it with "Man the macho" as a popular theory mostly due
to and industrialist and neocon politics.

Sadly, the truth turns out to be "Man the hungry" who ate whatever he
could find whether it was animal or vegetable.  It's an opportunistic
diet that doesn't promote any political ideology.






From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sat Apr 16 05:59:38 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 22:59:38 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>

Skylon can boost a 30 ton payload to 157 km and 6966 m/s. see page 10 of

http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/downloads/SKYLON_User_%20Manual_rev1%5B3%5D.pdf

That's well short of LEO and 3286 m/s short of GTO. ?However, any
acceleration over 2 m/s^2 has enough time to put the second stage
payload in orbit. ?(It falls slowly because the local g at this
velocity is around 2 m/s^2)

There are limits on how long you can accelerate with a laser because
you have to keep the vehicle in view of the bounce mirror.

GTO velocity is around 10252 m/s ?To circularize the orbit at GEO
would take 1630 .m/s more or a total delta V of 11, 682 m/s.
Together, 4916 m/s which is about half the exhaust velocity leading to
a mass ratio of ~1.7 ? Either constant acceleration or constant heater
temperature are options. ?Constant heater temperature gets the higher
ISP. Both accelerations can't take more than 20 minutes together to
get a transfer rate of 3 flights per hour.

It turns out (from a spread sheet I ran off) that 400 MW and a flow of
8.33 kg/s of hydrogen results in a constant heater temperature of 3000
deg K and an initial acceleration of 2.721 m/s^2.

The vehicle enters GTO downrange 7743 km at 970 seconds with 21,900 kg
of mass remaining. ?Because thrust is constant as mass is used up
acceleration goes up to 3.727 m/s^2.

It takes until1206 seconds to reach GTO insertion, i.e., a second burn
5 or 15 hours later of 236 seconds. ?For a first pass this is close
enough to 20 minutes.

The peak acceleration at the end of circularizing at GEO is just over
4 m/s^2 (all really low accelerations). ?There is almost 20,000 kg
(19937 kg) left. ?I.e., 20 tons gets to GEO per Skylon flight. ?The
assumption is that everything going to GEO gets turned into power
satellites. ?(Even the sandwich wrappers for 500-1000 workers at GEO)

Conventional use of Skylon will deliver about 6 tons per flight to
GEO. ?For a 3 per hour flight rate, that's 18 tons per hour. ?By
adding $4 B of lasers (and the GEO bounce mirrors) laser boosting a
suborbital payload will put 60 tons per hr in GEO, slightly in excess
of 3X.

Operated 90% of the time, that would be 8000h x60 t/h or 480,000 t per
year. ?That would support a substantial power satellite production, at
5 kg/kW, 5000 t/GW, 96 per year. ?At a rock bottom price of $1.6 B/GW
(2 cents per kWh paid off over ten years) the revenue stream would be
over $150 B.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
To put these numbers in context, for the SKYLON case where all costs
are being recovered, the cost of launching 150,000 tonnes into orbit
at $200/kg is $30,000 million per year.

This compares with a cost of about $3 trillion per year ($3,000,000
million) if expendable launch vehicles were to be used (although this
flight rate is unachievable with expendable rockets).

This clearly illustrates the point that a reusable spaceplane system
is an essential, enabling part of implementing a solar power satellite
infrastructure.

http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/downloads/ssp_skylon_ver2.pdf

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

?I have assumed 5000 t per GW, the Skylon analysis assumed 3000.

To put the addition of laser powered rockets in context, the same
flight rate would allow over three times as much cargo to GEO for the
same cost in Skylon launches. ?The cost to *GEO* would come down to
under $100/kg, which is the magic number for two cent per kWh power,
i.e., half the price of coal.

So at least from the physics of rockets and the economics of power
satellites, it seems to be possible to have a world with plenty of low
cost energy.

This is by no means a fully worked out proposal. ?For example, I don't
know exactly how to get the Skylons back to their launch site.

But it is possible (with some more work) that the entire project to
profitability might come in around $20 B. ?If that's the case, it's
less than the Chunnel or Three Gorges Dam in current dollars.

Keith

PS.  If there is anyone besides Spike who can grok physics and spread
sheets, be happy to send you a copy.



From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Sat Apr 16 14:08:59 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 07:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

"Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> observed:
> "J. Stanton" <js_exi at gnolls.org>
> wrote,
> > "Man the wimpy" was a popular theory for a few years
> in the early 1990s, 
> > mostly due to vegetarian and feminist politics...but
> the continued 
> > weight of evidence has long since demoted that.
> 
> So now we replace it with "Man the macho" as a popular
> theory mostly due
> to and industrialist and neocon politics.
> 
> Sadly, the truth turns out to be "Man the hungry" who ate
> whatever he
> could find whether it was animal or vegetable.? It's
> an opportunistic
> diet that doesn't promote any political ideology.

<Like>

Harvey, that strikes me as being right on the money.  The question is, how can modern humans best approximate the diet that our bodies are evolved for?  (in the absence of gene tweaks that can make us optimally healthy on vegetarian or vegan diets, or any other kind of sustainable diet, for that matter).

Modern (western/'first world') humans hunt and scavenge in supermarkets and shops.  These outlets don't really cater for the kind of diet that our evolutionarily significant ancestors ate.  So those of us who buy into the whole palaeo diet idea need to adapt our diet to whatever we can approximate to the original palaeolithic diet. Bugs are pretty much out, so are plants that aren't on the modern menu (try and find Bullrush roots in your supermarket), but we can do pretty well if we concentrate on meat high in saturated fat, Omega 3s, and avoid wheat in particular, and most grains. This hasn't been too difficult in my experience, and I can confirm (so far, one-mouse-experiment warning applies) that it seems to be beneficial: More energy, slow but steady weight-loss, general feeling of well-being, *much* greater appreciation of my food, diminished cravings, increased inclination to exercise, changing muscle:fat ratio (in favour of muscle!), and the
 occasional day when I just feel on top of the world.  

It's really something that makes you take notice if, in your fifties, a regimen makes you feel like a teenager again!

Ben Zaiboc



From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Apr 16 14:52:53 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 09:52:53 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>

Ben Zaiboc wrote:

"Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> observed:
 
> Sadly, the truth turns out to be "Man the hungry" who ate whatever he 
> could find whether it was animal or vegetable.? It's an opportunistic 
> diet that doesn't promote any political ideology.

<Like>

"Harvey, that strikes me as being right on the money.  The question is, how
can modern humans best approximate the diet that our bodies are evolved for?
(in the absence of gene tweaks that can make us optimally healthy on
vegetarian or vegan diets, or any other kind of sustainable diet, for that
matter)."

This diet works for me to some extent. The problem with it for me is 2-fold:
I do not want to loose weight and I do not want to eat animals.  Making sure
I get enough calories each day to keep weight on is difficult. [My
aesthetics does not favor with CR at all. I love human bodies that are
svelte with muscles, curves and sex appeal.] The second part is that I do
not want to or enjoy eating dead animals. 

It seems that there is a solution though. Rather than breeding and killing
animals, we should be harvesting meat that has the best health benefits (and
enough calories) for the bio-body. 


Natasha

Natasha Vita-More

  PhD Researcher, Planetary Collegium, Univ. of Plymouth, UK
Vice Chair: Humanity+
Fellow: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
Visiting Scholar: 21st Century Medicine
Advisor: Policy, Law & Ethics Track, Singularity University




From agrimes at speakeasy.net  Fri Apr 15 23:18:55 2011
From: agrimes at speakeasy.net (Alan Grimes)
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 19:18:55 -0400
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
Message-ID: <4DA8D25F.4030207@speakeasy.net>

> Summary of complaints: missing interviews or scenes with major players
> in the field, too much of several minor players, too many references to
> religion and Ray?s father, no mention of cryonics, no sufficient
> explanation of the modern version of uploading.

Just what, precisely, is the "modern version of uploading"?

ps: I think there is a killbot on the mail server that is deleting my
messages before you, or probably anyone, gets a chance to look at
them... =\


-- 
IMPEACH OBAMA NOW.
Presidents cannot be allowed to start wars.
Powers are not rights.



From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sat Apr 16 16:19:38 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 12:19:38 -0400
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <4DA8D25F.4030207@speakeasy.net>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
	<4DA8D25F.4030207@speakeasy.net>
Message-ID: <156AD2B3-5E0A-4186-9A30-7F9501CD63C9@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 15, 2011, Alan Grimes wrote:
> 
> Just what, precisely, is the "modern version of uploading"?


You've been on this list for over a decade, why now do you feel the need to ask that question?

> I think there is a killbot on the mail server that is deleting my messages before you, or probably anyone, gets a chance to look at them

Sinister forces are afoot.  

  John K Clark

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110416/5743f43e/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sat Apr 16 17:20:56 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 10:20:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <156AD2B3-5E0A-4186-9A30-7F9501CD63C9@bellsouth.net>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
	<4DA8D25F.4030207@speakeasy.net>
	<156AD2B3-5E0A-4186-9A30-7F9501CD63C9@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinGJUfqqERnaMST4=fgh6ojX6YTaA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/16 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> On Apr 15, 2011, Alan Grimes wrote:
>
> Just what, precisely, is the "modern version of uploading"?
>
> You've been on this list for over a decade, why now do you feel the need to
> ask that question?

I am not exactly sure myself, though the fully reversible kind worked
into "the clinic seed" might qualify.

Sneaky, sneaky, AI.  Subverts human primate into transcending.

Keith


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Apr 16 17:42:57 2011
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 13:42:57 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>

Natasha wrote:
> It seems that there is a solution though. Rather than breeding and killing
> animals, we should be harvesting meat that has the best health benefits (and
> enough calories) for the bio-body.

This would suit me too, although I'm quite willing to eat dead animals. If the
"vat-grown meat" would have similar taste and texture to  animal meat, that would be
fine.

Does anyone else remember the McRib from McDonalds? That was a pre-formed pasty
sandwich filling patty porkish thing (with extra sweet fake barbecue sauce).  If
that is what "vat-grown meat" is like it will, IMHO, fail, badly.

Regards.
MB



From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sat Apr 16 17:36:57 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 13:36:57 -0400
Subject: [ExI] A Heartless God
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinGJUfqqERnaMST4=fgh6ojX6YTaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
	<4DA8D25F.4030207@speakeasy.net>
	<156AD2B3-5E0A-4186-9A30-7F9501CD63C9@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinGJUfqqERnaMST4=fgh6ojX6YTaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <817ED973-0F95-48E9-AF7F-F5647CDCB8C8@bellsouth.net>

http://www.theonion.com/audio/video-game-character-wonders-why-heartless-god-alw,19890/

  John K Clark






-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110416/cf9b8f2c/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Sat Apr 16 19:17:05 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 14:17:05 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org><39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
	<c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>
Message-ID: <00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>

For marketing purposes, "vat grown meat" does not sound or look tasty.  I
don't remember the McRib because I would never eat such a thing.

Cloned animal cells for harvesting meat would best to described as:
"Organically Grown Cells" and the byline: "Our meat is specifically grown
and harvested to provide the bio-identical proteins for sustaining health
and longevity".  

This covers the "organic" section of the market and the hormone replacement
savvy buyers who look for bio-identical hormones, Peta supporters, and
environmentalists. Of course, vegetarians would not like this, but they
would purchase "Organically Grown Proteins" with the byline: "Our proteins
are specially grown and harvested for a greener tomorrow".

Best,
Natasha 



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of MB
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 12:43 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again

Natasha wrote:
> It seems that there is a solution though. Rather than breeding and 
> killing animals, we should be harvesting meat that has the best health 
> benefits (and enough calories) for the bio-body.

This would suit me too, although I'm quite willing to eat dead animals. If
the "vat-grown meat" would have similar taste and texture to  animal meat,
that would be fine.

Does anyone else remember the McRib from McDonalds? That was a pre-formed
pasty sandwich filling patty porkish thing (with extra sweet fake barbecue
sauce).  If that is what "vat-grown meat" is like it will, IMHO, fail,
badly.

Regards.
MB

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



From rpwl at lightlink.com  Sat Apr 16 19:41:34 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 15:41:34 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>


Did this one slip by me unnoticed ... Hugo de Garis decided to call it 
quits on AGI?

This is from his H+ article at
http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/04/15/friendly-ai-a-dangerous-delusion/

> One of the reasons I stopped my brain-building work was that I got
> bored evolving neural net modules for artificial brains. These
> modules were a black box to me. They worked because they were
> evolved, but I had no scientific understanding as to why they worked.
> I was doing great engineering but lousy science. After 20 years of
> it, I finally got fed up and turned to other research topics that
> taxed my own biological human brain more, such as pure math and
> mathematical physics.

Last time I talked to him he was gung-ho about getting a full-scale AGI
up and running with those neural nets.  Now he says he got bored and
abandoned that and went back to physics and math.

Hnnnh.



Richard Loosemore




From pharos at gmail.com  Sat Apr 16 19:57:55 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 20:57:55 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimOr4cQau2ZYiMxWr1mtNA1x8Gqkg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote:
>
> Did this one slip by me unnoticed ... Hugo de Garis decided to call it quits
> on AGI?
>
>


See:
<http://www.kurzweilai.net/hugo-de-garis>

This claims it is more like retired from wage-slavery.  :)

Quote:
He continues to live in China, where his U.S. savings go 7 times
further, given China?s much lower cost of living. He spends his
afternoons in his favorite (beautiful) park, and his nights in his
apartment, intensively studying PhD-level pure math and mathematical
physics to be able to write books on topics such as femtometer scale
technology (?femtotech?), topological quantum computing (TQC), as well
as other technical and sociopolitical themes.

He labels his new lifestyle ?ARCing? (After-Retirement Careering),
feeling freed from wage slavery, spending (probably) the remaining 30
years of his life pursuing with passion those deep and interesting
topics that truly fascinate him, without having to waste huge amounts
of time writing an endless stream of relatively unread, un-meaningful,
short-horizon scientific papers or research grant proposals just to
receive a salary. He feels liberated from all that, and can recommend
ARCing to anyone with sufficient savings (i.e.. to take up ?wage free
careering in the third of life?).

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


BillK



From steinberg.will at gmail.com  Sat Apr 16 20:00:46 2011
From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 15:00:46 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
	<c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>
	<00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinAwsOw9C=JhA+aZwfeof8K=g9-Mw@mail.gmail.com>

Eat bugs!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110416/0a167a45/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Sat Apr 16 20:32:26 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 16:32:26 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinAwsOw9C=JhA+aZwfeof8K=g9-Mw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
	<c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>
	<00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>
	<BANLkTinAwsOw9C=JhA+aZwfeof8K=g9-Mw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=xD6nJJ3_Jz8uG18vc-UH1j6G=ZA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/16 Will Steinberg <steinberg.will at gmail.com>:
> Eat bugs!

And Daffy!


From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sat Apr 16 21:28:19 2011
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:28:19 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org><39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com><2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
	<c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>
	<00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <b4fb5ac5b08dafd2953cb473a71d27be.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>


Natasha wrote:
> For marketing purposes, "vat grown meat" does not sound or look tasty.  I
> don't remember the McRib because I would never eat such a thing.
>

Yes, "vat-grown meat" is not a good marketing slogan. :)))  But that's what it would
*be*, right?

The McRib - I only tried it once (must have been 20 years ago) - a waste of money,
even with the coupon!  It soon disappeared from the menu.  Maybe it has improved, it
was advertised again not long ago. Didn't bother testing it! ;) Don't go to McD's
any longer.

Regards,
MB






From jrd1415 at gmail.com  Sat Apr 16 22:24:09 2011
From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 16:24:09 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinVSa6L_7L=ZnBO5gD-Q-Ljv5wx7w@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/11 kellycoinguy at gmail.com <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>:

> Miles per dollar has always seemed more interesting to me than MPG.

Indeed.  And what I want to know is how does miles per dollar of
gasoline in a gas vehicle compare to miles per dollar of electricity
in an electric vehicle?

Anyone?

Best, Jeff Davis

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


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Apr 17 01:07:58 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:07:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
Message-ID: <20110416180758.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.2876978916.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"MB" <mbb386 at main.nc.us> wrote,
> Does anyone else remember the McRib from McDonalds? That was a pre-formed pasty
> sandwich filling patty porkish thing (with extra sweet fake barbecue sauce).  If
> that is what "vat-grown meat" is like it will, IMHO, fail, badly.

I remember that abomination.  I ate it before I turned vegetarian in
1986.  (I wonder if there is a connection.)  But I think taste is a
matter of expectation and category.

When I eat a soy steak with A1 sauce, I might be tempted to think,
"Worst steak I ever tasted!"  Until I remember that I am eating
soybeans, and then I think, "Best salad I ever tasted!"

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Apr 17 01:32:07 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:32:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
Message-ID: <20110416183207.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.d30f709f69.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"Natasha Vita-More" <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote,
> <Like>

<Thanks>

> "Harvey, that strikes me as being right on the money.  The question is, how
> can modern humans best approximate the diet that our bodies are evolved for?
> (in the absence of gene tweaks that can make us optimally healthy on
> vegetarian or vegan diets, or any other kind of sustainable diet, for that
> matter)."

> This diet works for me to some extent. The problem with it for me is 2-fold:
> I do not want to loose weight and I do not want to eat animals.  Making sure
> I get enough calories each day to keep weight on is difficult. [My
> aesthetics does not favor with CR at all. I love human bodies that are
> svelte with muscles, curves and sex appeal.] The second part is that I do
> not want to or enjoy eating dead animals. 

Eating meat is totally unnecessary with modern technology.  There are
dairy or vegetarian sources of protein and fat.  Even saturated fat if
you want.  So the nutrient content of any diet can be simulated from
other sources.  We don't get the same meat that primative people did, so
even eating meat might not recreate the same balance of protein and fats
of the animals they ate.  So I like to try to choose a diet based
macronutrients desired, and then choose foods to obtain them in the
right proportion.  And I believe either meat-based or veggie-based diets
can approximate proetin/fat ratios and types as desired.

(I think I choose more long-chain carbs and less saturated fats than
some here.  But all combinations of high/low carbs/proteins/fats can be
combined from vegetarian sources.)

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From mbb386 at main.nc.us  Sun Apr 17 02:53:21 2011
From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 22:53:21 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <20110416180758.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.2876978916.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110416180758.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.2876978916.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <855904860eaa02eafe8aa5654787e2a2.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>



> "MB" <mbb386 at main.nc.us> wrote,
>> Does anyone else remember the McRib from McDonalds? That was a pre-formed pasty
>> sandwich filling patty porkish thing (with extra sweet fake barbecue sauce).  If
>> that is what "vat-grown meat" is like it will, IMHO, fail, badly.
>
> I remember that abomination.  I ate it before I turned vegetarian in
> 1986.  (I wonder if there is a connection.)


Heh. I can see why you might wonder! :))) I only tried McRib once. Yuk. Vat-grown
meat has *got* to be better, much better, or it will never get market share!

>
> When I eat a soy steak with A1 sauce, I might be tempted to think,
> "Worst steak I ever tasted!"  Until I remember that I am eating
> soybeans, and then I think, "Best salad I ever tasted!"

Fresh green soybeans are delicious, used to grow them in my veggie garden, but now
must steer clear of soy, it conflicts with my thyroid med. :(

I was vegetarian for some years, but really do like meat. Never stopped missing it,
dreamed about it. And when the $$ came back the meat came back into my diet.

Regards,
MB



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Apr 17 02:58:13 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 19:58:13 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
Message-ID: <20110416195813.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c2d6e543ac.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote,
> There are a range of opinions about this in the paleo community. As a
> 30-year advocate of low-fat eating, I have made a huge shift in deciding
> that animal fats are not a bad thing (so long as they are not combined with
> high levels of carbohydrates).

I personally don't believe in low-carb.  Almost everything bad about
carbs is skewed toward sugar and short-chain quickly digested carbs. 
That is, foods with a high glycemic load.  Longer-chain carbs that are
digested slowly seem a lot safer and healther.  That is, foods with a
low glycemic load.  So instead of being "low-carb", I try to be
"slow-carb".  But in my opinion, the human mitochondria and human brain
seem to efficient at utilizing carbs to eliminate them as totally
unnecessary.  I think we are too efficient and need to slow down and
temper our carb intake, but I still see it as a primary energy source. 

I also still think saturated fats are bad.  But I temper this opinion
with the knowledge that mammals create our own saturated fat.  Even if I
don't supplement my diet with extra saturated fat, my body will make its
own, and I still get plenty in the modern American diet even if I don't
want it.  However, the body needs a lot of essential fatty acids, even
if I want to avoid saturated fat.  So in the realm of fat, I am not
"low-fat".  I am "unsaturated-fat".

I think both "low-fat" and "low-carb" are confusing terms and don't
distinguish between good carbs and fats versus bad carbs and fats.  And
studies that look at "low-fat" and "low-carb" versus "high-fat" and
"high-carb" also are of little use if they don't distinguish between. 
So a high saturated fat diet of meat would be lumped with a high
olive-oil diet in statistical analysis of "high-fat" diets, and the
conclusions would be unclear about what to eat.  The same is true with
"high-carb" diets of pure sugar lumped with whole grains as if they are
similar diets.  So again, I think the studies are hard to interpret. 
(Old cholesterol studies have the same problem, not distinguishing
between "good" HDL and "bad" LDL cholesterol.  A study of
"high-cholesterol" isn't clear what they raised or lowered compared to
the control group.)

So for me, as I said in another post, I like to be more specific as to
which macronutrients I want to minimize or maximize for my diet.  And
then I choose foods related to those.  It is less important to me
whether they are meat-based or veggie-based.

My current dietary evolution is toward:
- more mono-unsaturated fats, same poly-unsaturated fats, less saturated
fats
- more fiber, more long-chain carbs/whole grains, less short-chain
carbs/sugar
- more protein

> Have you read[....]

I have not read these source  A very quick (and unfair) review seems to
show that they present ideas I have already seen before as I studied
these dietary issues.  So I do not expect them to change my mind, to be
honest.  But I want to take more time to look at these and become more
knowledgeable about them.

I don't want to step on anybody's toes, but thus far, I am not convinced
that Paleos ate "low-carb".  Evidence for grain use is admittedly weak,
but that could easily be because grains don't survive archaeological
timeframes as easily as animal bones.  And I certainly don't believe in
a vegetarian primative civilization as some have imagined.

> > I also doubt the lack of grains in the diet.  Archeological evidence
> > shows that grains were routinely gathered and used in paleo times.
> 
> That contradicts everything I've seen. I'd be interested in the evidence
> that you mention. We had this discussion a few months back. The skeptics of
> paleo could only come up with rather weak evidence of apparently rare
> consumption of any kind of grains.

- Gorham Cave in Gibraltar contained fossilized grains in the habitat
and feces of Neanderthals from 40,000 years ago. 
<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090202140046.htm>

- Shanidar Cave in Iraq and Spy Cave in Belgium contained Neanderthal
fossils with tooth tartar containing plants, legumes, and grains.  They
prove that the foods were cooked by Neanderthals.  And they chose
multi-latitudinal sites to demonstrate the use of cooked grains as a
wide-spread phenomenon. 
<http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/12/17/1016868108>

- A supporting pdf shows pictures and catalogs a dozen different starch
grains found that were used to prove that the grains were cooked by
Neanderthals!
<http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2010/12/19/1016868108.DCSupplemental/pnas.201016868SI.pdf>

> Whatever our differences on these issues, can I assume that you would agree
> that the vast increase in consumption over the last few decades of refined
> carbohydrates -- especially high-fructose corn syrup -- is a very bad thing
> for health?

Oh, very definitely!  I totally agree with this.  I am very much trying
to eat much lower on the glycemic index.  But in keeping with the above
evidence of a Paleo diet, I am including whole grains in my
lower-glycemic diet.

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP






From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Apr 17 03:22:35 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 20:22:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
Message-ID: <20110416202235.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.e6dcf50ae1.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote,
> I can confirm (so far, one-mouse-experiment warning applies) that it
> seems to be beneficial: More energy, slow but steady weight-loss,
> general feeling of well-being, *much* greater appreciation of my food,
> diminished cravings, increased inclination to exercise, changing
> muscle:fat ratio (in favour of muscle!), and the occasional day when
> I just feel on top of the world.  
> 
> It's really something that makes you take notice if, in your fifties,
> a regimen makes you feel like a teenager again!

Nice!  Unfortunately, I had the opposite experience.  I tried to go
low-carb for over a year.  I had zero energy and couldn't think
straight.  I felt like I was walking around in a fog all the time.  I
decreased my ability to lift weights, and saw my performance go downhill
all year.  I just couldn't do as many reps, and I kept having to
decrease my weights.

When I started eating low-glycemic whole-grain carbs again, I felt
wonderful.  I did double the reps my first gym session.  And I started
thinking clearly again, and made a tremendous breakthrough at work
during my first week back on carbs.  I had even tried eating more cheese
and saturated fats, even though I did not believe in the nutritional
validity of this.

Low-carb just didn't work for me.  And I did stubbornly stick with it
long-term.  Any weight-lifters have good experiences on low-carb?  I
keep reading that carb-loading is required for enough energy to get
through multiple reps, and that digesting protein and fat just can't
release energy fast enough to keep up with peak demand.

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From natasha at natasha.cc  Sun Apr 17 04:17:37 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 23:17:37 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <20110416183207.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.d30f709f69.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110416183207.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.d30f709f69.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <4FE82C9C5B6649AEB93DBFB20D612D36@DFC68LF1>

Hi Harvey,

I think Max is spot on with his research and that meat is crucial for many
humans. As a former vegetarian who has survived cancer 2x and has had other
serious diseases, I think I will try meat for a decade or longer.

Best,

Natasha

 

Natasha Vita-More

  PhD Researcher, Planetary Collegium, Univ. of Plymouth, UK
Vice Chair: Humanity+
Fellow: Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies
Visiting Scholar: 21st Century Medicine
Advisor: Policy, Law & Ethics Track, Singularity University


-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Harvey Newstrom
Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 8:32 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again

"Natasha Vita-More" <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote,
> <Like>

<Thanks>

> "Harvey, that strikes me as being right on the money.  The question 
> is, how can modern humans best approximate the diet that our bodies are
evolved for?
> (in the absence of gene tweaks that can make us optimally healthy on 
> vegetarian or vegan diets, or any other kind of sustainable diet, for 
> that matter)."

> This diet works for me to some extent. The problem with it for me is
2-fold:
> I do not want to loose weight and I do not want to eat animals.  
> Making sure I get enough calories each day to keep weight on is 
> difficult. [My aesthetics does not favor with CR at all. I love human 
> bodies that are svelte with muscles, curves and sex appeal.] The 
> second part is that I do not want to or enjoy eating dead animals.

Eating meat is totally unnecessary with modern technology.  There are dairy
or vegetarian sources of protein and fat.  Even saturated fat if you want.
So the nutrient content of any diet can be simulated from other sources.  We
don't get the same meat that primative people did, so even eating meat might
not recreate the same balance of protein and fats of the animals they ate.
So I like to try to choose a diet based macronutrients desired, and then
choose foods to obtain them in the right proportion.  And I believe either
meat-based or veggie-based diets can approximate proetin/fat ratios and
types as desired.

(I think I choose more long-chain carbs and less saturated fats than some
here.  But all combinations of high/low carbs/proteins/fats can be combined
from vegetarian sources.)

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com> CISSP CISA
CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP



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



From micheals at msu.edu  Sat Apr 16 21:09:29 2011
From: micheals at msu.edu (salvatore micheal / sam iam)
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 17:09:29 -0400
Subject: [ExI] skylon, peds vs traffic deaths, paleo diet, sb-solar, frida,
	trance music, ..
Message-ID: <F1D3BCD7-3A5E-43B5-826C-A93830E0CFF9@msu.edu>

for some reason, recent posts on extropy have Resonated with me, inspiring me to reach out and commend :)

first i want to thank all recent contributors for impressing me with your depth of contemplation, insights, data analysis, and latitude of consideration :)
truly commendable :)
thx Brent for posting that music .. i think we sometimes forget how important music is for a balanced and fully human life :) (no matter how transhuman we'd like to think of ourselves;)
...
the post on frida was interesting considering the potential impacts on human manufacturing..
some immediate concerns: can the bots do more than assembly? i tried to find out on the manufacturer websites..
they'd be more useful if they could also do detailed fabrication such as the hand-work i recently performed in a Thai sweat-shop (see http://my.nowpublic.com/world/work-units-and-uniform-wage-scales )
the manufacturer seemed more conventionally obsessed with customer perceptions of safety and robotic acceptance while i would have gone for functionality and diverse applications ^^
.. the impact on manufacturing nations is an interesting consideration.
...
sb-solar was raised indirectly by Keith H by providing a ref for skylon which i'll get to later..
sb-solar, after looking at http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/ 's version of it, looks a LOT more tempting if we put it in the context of skylon
...
paleo-diet is relevant to 'how we got here' but a little irrelevant about 'where we're going' in terms of diet..
if it was efficient, tolerable, and tasty, we could eat blood-red meat 3Xs a day .. or soy-based protein .. or solient-green (or yellow or..;)
i think you get my pt .. if we had food synthesizers that took some base protein, say soy, and shaped/colored/textured it to anything desirable, say a dripping 'hamburger' with all the 'toppings' (again - soy based protein made to look like toppings), many on this list would accept (i'm guessing) that food source - as long as the source protein was environmentally sound, sustainable, and robust (and manufactured/texturized in like ways) .. so .. let's research into texturing existing environmentally sound sustainable robust proteins so we can 'all' (those of us who crave it) have our slobbery dripping (tho fake and actually healthy) hamburger. 8))::::
...
as the recent discussion on ped vs traffic fatalities has evinced, this can be a convoluted topic depending on how you'd like to spin the statistics
but since that was my major in university and one favorite expression of my late father was: "you can massage data to 'prove' any hypothesis", let's take the red pill and see just how far the rabbit hole goes:
most every city wants to be perceived as 'ped safe' - so they'll massage the data to appear safe
traffic fatalities can indeed be complex with multiple causes .. a friend of the family recently complained about a driver who had a heart attack:
"i can't believe he still had a license! they should have taken that away from him!"
but if they took away your license for a medical condition and possibility of negative incident, i think you'd object (even for national safety)
for Americans, freedom (and privileges such as driving) is paramount compared to potential negative impacts (see http://my.nowpublic.com/world/thousands-march-slutwalk-rally )
(this article is about the freedom of 'sluts' to dress any way they like irregardless of potential rapists lurking about slobbering over their next victim .. scroll to the bottom to see my comment)
.. to reiterate my late father: data can be massaged to 'prove' any hypothesis .. so we must look at everyone's 'punch line' / bottom line to see what they're arguing for in order to understand why they spin data a particular way.
...
skylon - i saved the 'best' for last because this concept has the greatest potential to improve/impact future human society.
we .. need .. cheap (and safe) .. orbital .. lift capacity (if we're to 'live the dream' we saw glimpses back in the 60s).
was it only me who was disillusioned by our lack of vision after those years???
was it only me who was disappointed by our diminishing lack of interest (much like a john's hard interest goes limp when he finds the price of the trick;) in space ventures???
if indeed American space efforts back then were mostly based on "let's beat the Russkies!", i pity Americans!
.. our space initiatives must be: enduring, thrust for meaning, enhance overall capacities, and preferably indicate a paradigm shift (as with skylon required technologies).
.. i'm not all (-) about our space initiatives .. skylon, if properly backed/funded/endorsed, could be that next paradigm shift required to lift us to the stars :)
we need to focus, as national priorities, on dependent technology: sabre and 'skylon skin' (exterior surface) prototypes and manufacturing essentials
so any industrial, mechanical, and materials engineers reading this post should 'get a move on' and volunteer (at least) for this project.
any investors should get involved likewise.
...
if we want to 'bootstrap ourselves' (lift ourselves out of the quagmire we've created for humanity), we need an objective and doable plan which differs distinctly from the human-earth focused perspective prevalent today.
we cannot 'save ourselves' by focusing only on human problems (or human created problems such as the ozone hole) .. our destiny is not on this planet Earth.
our destiny is 'out there'..

sam iam / Salvatore G. Micheal
plz visit the following websites when u have time:
https://www.msu.edu/~micheal/before-2012.pdf
https://www.msu.edu/~micheal/BW-docs.pdf
https://www.msu.edu/~micheal/WfM.pdf
https://www.msu.edu/~micheal/resume.pdf
Iam University
Plz protect, cherish, and cultivate innocence everywhere everywhen.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110416/e993b3a1/attachment.html>

From Jonkc at bellsouth.net  Sun Apr 17 13:26:46 2011
From: Jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 09:26:46 -0400
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinGJUfqqERnaMST4=fgh6ojX6YTaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
	<4DA8D25F.4030207@speakeasy.net>
	<156AD2B3-5E0A-4186-9A30-7F9501CD63C9@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinGJUfqqERnaMST4=fgh6ojX6YTaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3A173726-766B-49AF-A421-A78BBE2E1E8A@bellsouth.net>

On Apr 16, 2011, at 12:46 PM, Alan Grimes wrote:
> 
>> You've been on this list for over a decade, why now do you feel the need
>> to ask that question?
> 
> It only seems like I've been on the list for that long, I actually
> joined only about five months ago.

You're right, I was thinking of the old Transhuman list, is that thing still around? At any rate I know that you have been exposed to the concept of uploading before, although as I recall your views and mine were not identical on the subject.

  John K Clark



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110417/08532413/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 15:48:42 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 09:48:42 -0600
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=xVBonYarPXkWQ7fZ0+XU_zvDsBg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/15 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
> Kurzweil?s movie Transcendent Man was shown at a premier last night at the
> SF Palace of Fine Arts.? I liked it!? Some minor complaints, but overall I
> would rate it very good to low end of the excellent range, certainly worth
> my time.? I saw a lot of familiar faces in the movie from years of hanging
> out with that crowd.? One scene, Kurzweil is conversing with William
> Shatner.? In the background of that scene was a person looking the other way
> whose hair looked like Max More?s.

I also loved the movie and give it 5 stars! I have been a RK fan for
many years, since way before he wrote the Age of Intelligent
Machines... (I read his technical papers on character recognition back
in 1985 or so.)

The think that was most disappointing to me, and it could have been
just how the movie was edited, was just how deeply tragic the death of
his father was portrayed. It leaves Ray coming across as a kind of
"poor me" because his father died early. Almost to the point of being
kind of mental over the issue. If that is an accurate portrayal of his
personality, that's kind of an odd driving force. If it's not
accurate... why show it that way?

Whatever drives him, I really like what he's doing and what he's done.
I wish they had spent more time with Stevie Wonder, and the
synthesizer stuff, although it admittedly would have detracted from
the main theme a bit. Good stuff.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 16:02:33 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 10:02:33 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/9 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
> On Apr 9, 2011, at 2:03 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
> Given that the core is heated by nuclear fission,
>
> Geothermal heat does not come from nuclear fission, 80% of it comes from the
> decay of radioactive isotopes, primarily Potassium Uranium and Thorium; the
> remaining 20% comes from the formation of the Earth when a large cloud of
> matter was compressed by gravity into a small ball 8000 miles in diameter,
> all that gravitational potential energy was converted into heat.

Thank you very much for this clarification. I somehow missed the
difference between fission and nuclear decay. Lord Kelvin estimated
the age of the earth at something around 8000 years based on the
cooling without the nuclear component... what is science's best guess
as to when the decay of isotopes will stop? Is it before or after we
are swallowed by the sun? I ask because it seems bad things happened
to Mars after it's core became more solid and it lost it's
magnetosphere.

I would add that a lot of the initial heat in the formation of the
earth came from the impacts of comets and asteroids into the earth.
This may be what you meant by gravitational potential energy converted
into heat, but the picture is so much more vivid when you look at
comets slamming into a molten orb at 20,000 MPH! :-) That's a LOT of
heat, although assuming Kelvin was right about that part, it seems not
to account for the majority of the heat over the eons... but I don't
know if Kelvin was correct even on that point. He may have just been
trying to match the Biblical numbers with pseudo science.

-Kelly


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 16:02:52 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 18:02:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110416195813.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c2d6e543ac.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110416195813.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c2d6e543ac.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinQc9w-NHSnt1um=ZWRF-0oi5L4Qw@mail.gmail.com>

On 17 April 2011 04:58, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:

> I personally don't believe in low-carb.  Almost everything bad about
> carbs is skewed toward sugar and short-chain quickly digested carbs.
> That is, foods with a high glycemic load.  Longer-chain carbs that are
> digested slowly seem a lot safer and healther.
>

Yes, we agree that if must have carbs at all long-chain, hi-fiber, diluted,
carbs, in a caloric restriction framework, are a lot safer and healthier.

This is also true for heroin, however, and it could be contended that a
heroin flash is more satisfactory to many people. :-)

--
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110417/0964ca64/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 16:06:30 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 18:06:30 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimVLqTkL-=Tkbkrv61smr1701w0bg@mail.gmail.com>

On 16 April 2011 16:52, Natasha Vita-More <natasha at natasha.cc> wrote:

> The second part is that I do
> not want to or enjoy eating dead animals.
>


Have you tried eating them alive? :-)

More seriously, what about eggs and/or animals without a nervous system to
speak of or without an "animal" appearance?

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110417/32267328/attachment.html>

From rpwl at lightlink.com  Sun Apr 17 16:27:16 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:27:16 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth  [WAS  Re:  Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>

Kelly Anderson wrote:
> 2011/4/9 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
>> On Apr 9, 2011, at 2:03 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>
>> Given that the core is heated by nuclear fission,
>>
>> Geothermal heat does not come from nuclear fission, 80% of it comes from the
>> decay of radioactive isotopes, primarily Potassium Uranium and Thorium; the
>> remaining 20% comes from the formation of the Earth when a large cloud of
>> matter was compressed by gravity into a small ball 8000 miles in diameter,
>> all that gravitational potential energy was converted into heat.
> 
> Thank you very much for this clarification. I somehow missed the
> difference between fission and nuclear decay. Lord Kelvin estimated
> the age of the earth at something around 8000 years based on the
> cooling without the nuclear component... what is science's best guess
> as to when the decay of isotopes will stop? Is it before or after we
> are swallowed by the sun? I ask because it seems bad things happened
> to Mars after it's core became more solid and it lost it's
> magnetosphere.
> 
> I would add that a lot of the initial heat in the formation of the
> earth came from the impacts of comets and asteroids into the earth.
> This may be what you meant by gravitational potential energy converted
> into heat, but the picture is so much more vivid when you look at
> comets slamming into a molten orb at 20,000 MPH! :-) That's a LOT of
> heat, although assuming Kelvin was right about that part, it seems not
> to account for the majority of the heat over the eons... but I don't
> know if Kelvin was correct even on that point. He may have just been
> trying to match the Biblical numbers with pseudo science.

Gravitational PE converting to heat is really a continuous process, 
which applies to everything from individual atoms to entire 
planetesimals falling down Earth's potential well.  Drop a ham sandwich 
onto the ground right now and it will warm the planet up just a little.

So, the Earth was already bleeping hot before anything recognizable as 
comets started raining down on the surface.

I am guessing that the half life of the Earth's heat would be determined 
by the isotope with the longest half life, which would be Thorium at 
about 14 billion years.  Comparable to the Sun's lifetime, and well 
before I plan to move to another solar system, so there is no need to 
worry yet.


Richard Loosemore




From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 17:10:51 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 11:10:51 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 7:05 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:

Sorry for the late reply; I think this is still an important issue and
it has taken some time to get through Dr. Clark's paper.

> Yes, you can get serious population average shifts if
> the selection pressure is high enough.

Granted. But is that what happened to bring about the Industrial
Revolution in England? If it did, was it the major factor?

> Now Dr. Gregory Clark, in one of those huge efforts that lead to
> breakthroughs, has produced a study that makes a strong case for
> recent ?(last few hundred years) and massive changes in population
> average psychological traits.
>
> http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf
>
> "Genetically Capitalist? The Malthusian Era, Institutions and the
> Formation of Modern Preferences."

I finally read through this whole paper. It was a bit of a slog in
that it wasn't written in a very entertaining fashion. I haven't read
his entire book, and don't especially plan to. I did learn a lot of
things from reading this paper, and I am glad that I took the time. I
remain, however, unconvinced that genetics played a major role in the
Industrial Revolution. I also have reached the conclusion that Gregory
Clark himself is not concluding that this is a very strong thesis, but
only a small part of the overall story (which it could be, VERY
SMALL).

Dr. Clark does make a very strong argument that the rich reproduced
more successfully than the poor. He doesn't make as strong an argument
that the rich had genes that the poor lacked.

He starts out explaining and justifying his belief in the Malthusian
trap. I judge that he did a very good job of explaining the trap, and
showing that all pre-industrial societies were equally caught in the
trap. Point made and accepted.

He then goes through a rather tedious review of English wills. It does
make the point that the rich reproduced more successfully than the
poor. The graph labeled Figure 8 on page 22 says it all (and the rest
could have been left on the editing room floor for my tastes). I grant
this point as well, although I don't see how it supports his
conclusions all that well.

Finally, at the end of page 36, he gets on to more interesting points
about Interest Rates, Literacy and numeracy, Work hours, and
interpersonal violence.

He states that during the period of the Malthusian trap, that "Thrift,
prudence, negotiation and hard work were imbuing themselves into
communities that had been spendthrift, violent, impulsive and leisure
loving."

He then states,
  "A plausible source of this seeming evolution of human preferences
is the survival of the richest that is evident in pre-industrial
England. The arrival of institutionally stable agrarian economies with
the Neolithic Agricultural Revolution of as early as 6,000-7,000 BC,
gradually molded human behavior, probably mostly culturally, but also
potentially genetically."

  I will not be critical of this statement in that it is his
hypothesis. You are allowed in the scientific method to state a
hypothesis without proof, and that is what he is doing at this point
in the paper IMHO. Look at the soft words like plausible and
potentially. I don't think he's saying "This is the truth!" only that
"This is a hypothesis that is well worth looking into."

He further states,
"The exact date and trigger of the Industrial Revolution may remain a
mystery, but its probability was increasing over time in the
environment of institutionally stable Malthusian
economies."

This statement boggles my mind. Of course there is no exact date as it
was a process over a period of decades from the 1780s to the 1830s...
one major trigger was, I believe, the steam engine. I refer you to:
The Most Powerful Idea in the World: A Story of Steam, Industry, and Invention
by William Rosen

Rosen's work is entertaining, informative and most of all persuasive,
at least to me. He makes the argument that the invention of invention
itself, with supporting legal, intellectual property concepts and
implementations (patents), led directly to the evolution of the steam
engine over a period of decades. The steam engine led to woolen mills,
and the need for coal, as well as coal mine water pumps and finally to
Rocket, the first workable steam locomotive that carried coal from the
mines to the woolen mills. I VERY highly recommend this book as I
believe it presents an extremely strong hypothesis, and convincing
evidence of that hypothesis.

Dr Clark then talks about "future beliefs" (Page 42) and continues
tediously about interest rates, then makes his best argument of the
entire paper...

"The Pirah?, a forager group in the Brazilian Amazon, are an extreme
example of this. They have only the number words ?h?i? (roughly one),
?ho?? (roughly two), and ?aibaagi? (many). On tests they could not
reliably match number groups beyond 3. Once the number of objects
reached as large as 9, they could almost never match them.49 Yet the
Pirah? perform very well as hunters, and in tests of spatial and other
abilities. Similarly the number vocabulary of many surviving forager
societies encompasses only the numbers 1, 2 and many. So forager
society must thus have had no selective pressures towards the kinds of
attitudes and abilities that make an Industrial Revolution."

Here he makes the argument that there is a genetic basis for counting
beyond low numbers, and that this evolutionary change occurred around
the time of the agrarian revolution. That is a believable evolutionary
time period (10,000 years) and the selective pressure isn't hard to
imagine. If you can't count beyond 3, it would be hard to figure out
inventory, how much to plant and so forth. I can see that being
selected for. I can also see the case for future thinking having a
genetic component.

Then at the top of page 54, he states,
"Thus it is plausible that through the long agrarian passage leading
up to the Industrial Revolution man was becoming biologically more
adapted to the modern economic world."

Again with the soft words. Is this still just a hypothesis? I accept
that important genetic changes occurred between the Neolithic
Revolution and the Industrial Revolution. He hasn't made the case for
genetic changes being a big factor between 1250 and 1800. In fact, he
doesn't strongly claim it. (in the paper, maybe he does in the book)

If I had his facts, my thesis would be:
"Sufficient money increases your chances of surviving and reproducing
and keeping children safe into adulthood."

It does this by the reproduction of "success" memes. When a rich
literate father ensures that his son also becomes literate, he further
insures his "success". When a rich mother encourages thrift in her
daughter, she reproduces the "sacrifice today for success tomorrow"
meme which leads out of poverty. If these memes don't reproduce in a
Malthusian trap, then the next generation is more likely to become
poor.

His facts fit the memetic evolution much better in my mind than the
genetic evolution. He doesn't state what the rich traits are, except
in memetic terms. "Thrift, prudence, negotiation and hard work" are,
after all, primarily memetic.

So, in conclusion, I don't find the hypothesis of Dr. Clark to be
supported by his facts, because there is an alternative hypothesis
that fits his data even better. Again, I strongly encourage you to
read Rosen's book.

-Kelly



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Sun Apr 17 18:02:47 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 11:02:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
Message-ID: <20110417110247.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.0970fbc76f.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote,
> Yes, we agree that if must have carbs at all long-chain, hi-fiber, diluted,
> carbs, in a caloric restriction framework, are a lot safer and healthier.
> 
> This is also true for heroin, however, and it could be contended that a
> heroin flash is more satisfactory to many people. :-)

This is merely an assertion that carbs are as bad as heroin.  There is
no evidence here for me to refute.  Do you have any evidence that carbs
are not required for human nutrition?  Because I have plenty of evidence
that they are.

Every cell of our body has mitochondria churning away at the Krebs Cycle
to process carbs for energy.  Every muscle in our body burns carbs to
move.  Our brain requires carbs to function.  We store carbs (as fat)
for later use.  We retrieve this fat storage to convert back into carbs
when we don't eat enough carbs.  If we don't get carbs, we go into
ketosis to convert fat into carbs.  Everything about our body is design
to use carbs for energy.

Fat is a secondary source of energy.  It must first be converted to
carbs before it can be used for energy.  The body cannot use the fat
as-is but must have carbs.  Burning fats for energy is actually the
initial stage of starvation, wherein one starts to lose weight. 
(Burning protein for energy is the end stage of starvation, wherein one
starts to lose core muscle mass.)

A low-carb high-fat diet forces the body into ketosis where it starts
burning fat to create carbs.  It does this in excess to counter the carb
starvation, such that it actually raises blood sugar levels higher than
before carbs were eliminated from the diet.  Switching to a low-carb,
high-fat diet actually increases blood sugar levels in the body.  If one
is trying to get rid of carbs, I am not sure why one would choose to do
that.

Given all this, it is clear that the body evolved to eat carbs for
energy.  Eating anything else is just an inefficient way to get carbs
for energy.  Nothing else can provide any energy without first being
converted to carbs.  Therefore, it is ludicrous to deny that carbs are
the primary macronutrient for human nutrition.

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP






From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 18:26:39 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 12:26:39 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 02:28:50PM +0930, Emlyn wrote:
>> 2011/4/7 spike <spike66 at att.net>:
>> Ray K recently put forward a timeframe of 20 years until the world is
>> 100% solar, based on current doubling time of uptake. Certainly, in 20
>
> Unlike Moore's law, making solar cells smaller doesn't double
> the power. The opposite, in fact.

Just to be crystal clear... Ray K's application of the Law of
Accelerating Returns is to the Price of a Watt of Solar Panel, not to
it's size. The period of halving the price is estimated at around 3
years.

-Kelly


From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Apr 17 18:42:34 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 20:42:34 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:26:39PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> > Unlike Moore's law, making solar cells smaller doesn't double
> > the power. The opposite, in fact.
> 
> Just to be crystal clear... Ray K's application of the Law of
> Accelerating Returns is to the Price of a Watt of Solar Panel, not to

Yes, I know. I pointed out the reason why Moore scales that way
and why solar doesn't. USD/Wp is subject to world demand, USD/Wp
installed is a lot higher, since inverters don't follow the same
price curve, installation costs are basically constant, and grid
upgrade costs are also nothing like that.

Kurzweil said he expects 100% of renewable *total* power, 
world wide. This means a substitution rate of 1 TW/year, for
the next 20 years. As the current substution rate is negligible,
and he believes in linear semilog plots, this means most of
substution will happen in the last 1-2 years.

> it's size. The period of halving the price is estimated at around 3
> years.

Germany doubled PV from 1% to 2% within about a year. Will this year
double it to 4%? Unfortunately, probably not. Will the next year see it
to 8%? Definitely not. The year after to 16%? The next, to 32%? And then,
to 64%, and then to 128%?

Singularity is sure quicker, but Singularity in 20 years? It's always
20, 30 years away.


From eugen at leitl.org  Sun Apr 17 18:44:52 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 20:44:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <20110417184452.GJ23560@leitl.org>

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 03:41:34PM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote:
>
> Did this one slip by me unnoticed ... Hugo de Garis decided to call it  
> quits on AGI?
>
> This is from his H+ article at
> http://hplusmagazine.com/2011/04/15/friendly-ai-a-dangerous-delusion/
>
>> One of the reasons I stopped my brain-building work was that I got
>> bored evolving neural net modules for artificial brains. These
>> modules were a black box to me. They worked because they were
>> evolved, but I had no scientific understanding as to why they worked.

Duh, what else did he expect? General theory of AI? There isn't any.

>> I was doing great engineering but lousy science. After 20 years of
>> it, I finally got fed up and turned to other research topics that
>> taxed my own biological human brain more, such as pure math and
>> mathematical physics.
>
> Last time I talked to him he was gung-ho about getting a full-scale AGI
> up and running with those neural nets.  Now he says he got bored and
> abandoned that and went back to physics and math.
>
> Hnnnh.

Another one bites the dust.

-- 
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 kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 19:00:21 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 13:00:21 -0600
Subject: [ExI] US traffic deaths dropped to new low
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim9LEFD+HJpp8chj64DC93EPApNvg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=O0Z4+AK58b0ZqnQ_RKsjLMrtVKA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=6n9t8ZgV=7wRzuFfKJPko4r6ccQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110414215439.GA22832@ofb.net>
	<00bc01cbfafb$e7333820$b599a860$@att.net>
	<20110414235946.GA7999@ofb.net>
	<004401cbfb37$f4bf4560$de3dd020$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9_ve9QMgs_t6PMeHffuKqxSq9zw@mail.gmail.com>
	<002401cbfb79$538634f0$fa929ed0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTimtcTsup=P7WMTjMCpcUxSC_=jc7A@mail.gmail.com>
	<002401cbfb87$6863f890$392be9b0$@att.net>
	<BANLkTim9LEFD+HJpp8chj64DC93EPApNvg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimuEz2v91MVzFdLV56NRrbYQbrqdQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 2:30 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
> There won't be any accidents if driver, vehicle and road are all
> functioning perfectly, but the point is that that can't be guaranteed.
> Even if you do everything within your control there are all the other
> drivers out there.

Thus my proposed solution. Get rid of all drivers. Replace with
robotics. ASAP. :-)

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Sun Apr 17 19:16:17 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 13:16:17 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
> Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>
>> 2011/4/9 John Clark <Jonkc at bellsouth.net>:
>>>
>>> On Apr 9, 2011, at 2:03 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>>
>>> Given that the core is heated by nuclear fission,
>>>
> Gravitational PE converting to heat is really a continuous process, which
> applies to everything from individual atoms to entire planetesimals falling
> down Earth's potential well. ?Drop a ham sandwich onto the ground right now
> and it will warm the planet up just a little.

Yes, just a little... :-)

> So, the Earth was already bleeping hot before anything recognizable as
> comets started raining down on the surface.

Yes, substitute anything moving at supersonic speeds for "comet" in my
previous post...

> I am guessing that the half life of the Earth's heat would be determined by
> the isotope with the longest half life, which would be Thorium at about 14
> billion years. ?Comparable to the Sun's lifetime, and well before I plan to
> move to another solar system, so there is no need to worry yet.

Will it make any difference if we get efficient at stealing heat from
the earth's core? When will we experience Peak geothermal energy? :-)
Heck, we'll probably have the dang fusion and flying cars before
that's a problem...

-Kelly



From rpwl at lightlink.com  Sun Apr 17 20:29:41 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 16:29:41 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <20110417184452.GJ23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>
	<20110417184452.GJ23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4DAB4DB5.8050709@lightlink.com>

Eugen Leitl wrote:
> Hugo de Garis wrote:
>>> One of the reasons I stopped my brain-building work was that I got
>>> bored evolving neural net modules for artificial brains. These
>>> modules were a black box to me. They worked because they were
>>> evolved, but I had no scientific understanding as to why they worked.
> 
> Duh, what else did he expect? General theory of AI? There isn't any.

Says who?

Just because Hugo decided his approach was not getting anywhere, it does 
not follow that there is never going to be a general theory of AI.

I am not surprised that Hugo's approach ended up disappointing him.  I 
saw what he was doing just before he left for China, and my feeling at 
the time was that he would hit a wall.  What I didn't expect was that 
he'd just give up completely.

But then, he's that kind of guy.



Richard Loosemore



From rpwl at lightlink.com  Sun Apr 17 20:33:03 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 16:33:03 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>

Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
>> I am guessing that the half life of the Earth's heat would be determined by
>> the isotope with the longest half life, which would be Thorium at about 14
>> billion years.  Comparable to the Sun's lifetime, and well before I plan to
>> move to another solar system, so there is no need to worry yet.
> 
> Will it make any difference if we get efficient at stealing heat from
> the earth's core? When will we experience Peak geothermal energy? :-)
> Heck, we'll probably have the dang fusion and flying cars before
> that's a problem...

Stealing heat through geothermal will make no appreciable impact, even 
over the course of a few million years.  Plenty of time to develop the 
fusion, flying cars, space elevators sending down truckloads of 
high-density energy collected in space......



Richard Loosemore




From brentn at freeshell.org  Sun Apr 17 21:32:51 2011
From: brentn at freeshell.org (Brent Neal)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 17:32:51 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1A3EF359-88BC-4A0D-95A9-CEA2378C623E@freeshell.org>



On 16 Apr, 2011, at 1:59, Keith Henson wrote:

> Skylon can boost a 30 ton payload to 157 km and 6966 m/s. see page 10 of
> 

> PS.  If there is anyone besides Spike who can grok physics and spread
> sheets, be happy to send you a copy.
> 


Keith, I'd like to see the spreadsheets, if you don't mind.

B

--
Brent Neal, Ph.D.
http://brentn.freeshell.org
<brentn at freeshell.org>







From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 17 22:40:58 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 15:40:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
Message-ID: <022c01cbfd50$8ea0e070$abe2a150$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Natasha Vita-More
...

>...My aesthetics does not favor with CR at all. I love human bodies that
are svelte with muscles...

Tissue chauvinism.  The best I can do is being svelte with bones.  


> curves...

Hey we CR types have curves.  Sorta.  They have very small radii, but they
are still curves, by the strict mathematical definition.


>... and sex appeal...

Hmmm, well OK, I am definitely busted there.


>... The second part is that I do not want to or enjoy eating dead
animals...

Something I have wondered about, being a sushi lover: can it be arranged to
devour the beasts so fresh they are still alive?

 

>...It seems that there is a solution though. Rather than breeding and
killing animals, we should be harvesting meat that has the best health
benefits (and enough calories) for the bio-body. ...Natasha

Ja.  I am still hoping for figuring out how to create meat without the rest
of the beast.

spike








From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 17 23:39:11 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 16:39:11 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimOr4cQau2ZYiMxWr1mtNA1x8Gqkg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>	<4DA9F0EE.9040409@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTimOr4cQau2ZYiMxWr1mtNA1x8Gqkg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <023901cbfd58$b0beba30$123c2e90$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of BillK

Subject: Re: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 8:41 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote:

>>... Hugo de Garis decided to call it  quits on AGI?



>See:
><http://www.kurzweilai.net/hugo-de-garis>

>This claims it is more like retired from wage-slavery.  :)

Quote:
>...He continues to live in China...BillK

De Garis was in the Kurzweil movie a lot.  He had nearly as much face time
as anyone outside the main character.

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Sun Apr 17 23:43:14 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 16:43:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=xD6nJJ3_Jz8uG18vc-UH1j6G=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>	<c65bdbda31ab12938300b50fa3f5eaed.squirrel@www.main.nc.us>	<00FADE2FB6CA4CA7B74EDF377CDD7448@DFC68LF1>	<BANLkTinAwsOw9C=JhA+aZwfeof8K=g9-Mw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=xD6nJJ3_Jz8uG18vc-UH1j6G=ZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <023a01cbfd59$40af0640$c20d12c0$@att.net>


2011/4/16 Will Steinberg <steinberg.will at gmail.com>:

> Eat bugs!

Objection your honor!  Otherwise compassionate people who will not devour
cattle, sheep and swine will sometimes suggest this solution, but bugs are
people too.  A single cow can feed dozens of proles for weeks, but a single
prole would need to devour hundreds if not thousands of bugs just to exist.
Where is the compassion in that?

spike








From spike66 at att.net  Mon Apr 18 00:01:07 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 17:01:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
...

>...Thank you very much for this clarification. I somehow missed the
difference between fission and nuclear decay. Lord Kelvin estimated the age
of the earth at something around 8000 years based on the cooling without the
nuclear component...-Kelly
_______________________________________________


Reference please, but I very much disagree.  For history of science fans,
this is an interesting chapter.  Before anyone heard of radioactivity, the
devout Christian Lord Kelvin had done a calculation that showed the earth
was at least 20 million years old.  That piece of mathematics was
*remarkably* sophisticated.  I went through that analysis line by line in my
misspent youth, learned about Bessel functions that way.

spike






From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 00:31:50 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 17:31:50 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:

snip

> If I had his facts, my thesis would be:
> "Sufficient money increases your chances of surviving and reproducing
> and keeping children safe into adulthood."
>
> It does this by the reproduction of "success" memes. When a rich
> literate father ensures that his son also becomes literate, he further
> insures his "success". When a rich mother encourages thrift in her
> daughter, she reproduces the "sacrifice today for success tomorrow"
> meme which leads out of poverty. If these memes don't reproduce in a
> Malthusian trap, then the next generation is more likely to become
> poor.

On average, the next generation of rich parents *was* poorer.
Whatever exceptional characteristics the parents have, chances are
that the average of the next generation will suffer "regression to the
mean."  Not to mention the well known business of a worthless playboy
who through impulsive acts burns through the money he inherited.  A
person I know is from a family that was very wealthy a century or so
ago.  As he put it, his branch was into fast women and slow horses.
So whatever memes and genes they started with, they didn't stay
wealthy.

"You know," said Arthur, "it's at times like this, when I'm trapped in
a Vogon airlock with a man from Betelgeuse, and about to die of
asphyxiation in deep space that I really wish I'd listened to what my
mother told me when I was young."
[Ford Prefect:] "Why, what did she tell you?"
[Arthur:] "I don't know, I didn't listen."

:-)  So much for memes.  You need a personality to pay attention to
them as well as a source.  (Not that I don't appreciate memes.  Google
memetics "keith henson")

> His facts fit the memetic evolution much better in my mind than the
> genetic evolution. He doesn't state what the rich traits are, except
> in memetic terms. "Thrift, prudence, negotiation and hard work" are,
> after all, primarily memetic.

I *very* much doubt it.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study
Personality characteristics are very much determined by genes as you
can see by how similar raised apart identical twins are.   Also see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nurture_Assumption  Memes don't
particularly come from parents.

> So, in conclusion, I don't find the hypothesis of Dr. Clark to be
> supported by his facts, because there is an alternative hypothesis
> that fits his data even better. Again, I strongly encourage you to
> read Rosen's book.

I have read dozens of books on the rise of technology during that
time.  It's a major hobby of mine.

But Clark's hypothesis can and almost certainly will be verified at
the genetic level.

We can get DNA out of bones thousands of years old, and there are lots
of old human bones in the UK.  The detailed changes in the variations
of genes will be plotted over the centuries.  If there are changes in
genes over the centuries that relate to human personality
characteristics we will figure them out.

About in time for it to have very little application.

Keith


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 01:09:14 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 18:09:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=xHe_crYTZxwnUCBsTip4NY2xfng@mail.gmail.com>

As a matter of fact, there are people who think the center of the
earth is a ball of uranium that periodically goes critical at times.

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

I have not put in enough study to have an opinion.

Keith


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Apr 18 02:15:35 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:15:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Neanderthals ate cooked grains and lentils
Message-ID: <20110417191535.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.853ee7de6f.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

(Sorry if this is a repeat.  I see posts claiming that the list eats
messages.  I did not see these refs come back at me.  So I am posting
again in a new thread, just to make sure they get through.)

- Gorham Cave in Gibraltar contained fossilized grains in the habitat
and feces of Neanderthals from 40,000 years ago.
<http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090202140046.htm>;

- Shanidar Cave in Iraq and Spy Cave in Belgium contained Neanderthal
fossils with tooth tartar containing plants, legumes, and grains.
The multi-latitudinal sites demonstrate that this was a wide-spread
activity for Neanderthals.
<http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/12/17/1016868108>;

- A supporting pdf shows pictures, catalogs a dozen different starch
grains in the diet.  They even demonstrate that the grains were cooked.
<http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2010/12/19/1016868108.DCSupplemental/pnas.201016868SI.pdf>;

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP>
> I also doubt the lack of grains in the 




From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Apr 18 02:19:02 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 19:19:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
Message-ID: <20110417191902.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.fed5515549.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"spike" <spike66 at att.net> asked,
> Something I have wondered about, being a sushi lover: can it be arranged to
> devour the beasts so fresh they are still alive?

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

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 02:15:48 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 20:15:48 -0600
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinQc9w-NHSnt1um=ZWRF-0oi5L4Qw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110416195813.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c2d6e543ac.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTinQc9w-NHSnt1um=ZWRF-0oi5L4Qw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=MQd+ZFi_cS09SqsUYYiTCCb4RYg@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/17 Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com>:
> This is also true for heroin, however, and it could be contended that a
> heroin flash is more satisfactory to many people. :-)

The paleo-Leary diet... that could be the next big thing ;-)

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 03:55:14 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 21:55:14 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikzejj2x9CxFhgP9H_j0jfRoMPYiw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:01 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
> ...
>
>>...Thank you very much for this clarification. I somehow missed the
> difference between fission and nuclear decay. Lord Kelvin estimated the age
> of the earth at something around 8000 years based on the cooling without the
> nuclear component...-Kelly
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Reference please, but I very much disagree. ?For history of science fans,
> this is an interesting chapter. ?Before anyone heard of radioactivity, the
> devout Christian Lord Kelvin had done a calculation that showed the earth
> was at least 20 million years old. ?That piece of mathematics was
> *remarkably* sophisticated. ?I went through that analysis line by line in my
> misspent youth, learned about Bessel functions that way.

I will learn some day not to put anything in my posts that I don't
look up. You are of course correct. I guess I got my Christian
creationist apologist stories cross linked.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 04:04:22 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 22:04:22 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 12:26:39PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
>> > Unlike Moore's law, making solar cells smaller doesn't double
>> > the power. The opposite, in fact.
>>
>> Just to be crystal clear... Ray K's application of the Law of
>> Accelerating Returns is to the Price of a Watt of Solar Panel, not to
>
> Yes, I know.

I hoped that was the case.

> I pointed out the reason why Moore scales that way
> and why solar doesn't. USD/Wp is subject to world demand, USD/Wp
> installed is a lot higher, since inverters don't follow the same
> price curve, installation costs are basically constant, and grid
> upgrade costs are also nothing like that.

Agreed. Nanosolar takes the position that solar installations should
not be per house, but per neighborhood or small city, thus reducing
the per household cost of the inverters. I disagree that installation
costs are constant, particularly with the Nanosolar approach of using
farming implements to install huge arrays of PV panels at the speed of
plowing. That would be MUCH cheaper than putting solar panels on each
roof. Installation costs in space are also much different set of cats
to skin than one per roof.

> Kurzweil said he expects 100% of renewable *total* power,
> world wide. This means a substitution rate of 1 TW/year, for
> the next 20 years. As the current substution rate is negligible,
> and he believes in linear semilog plots, this means most of
> substution will happen in the last 1-2 years.

Yeah, RK has trouble sometimes differentiating between PURE
information technologies, and those that are also tied to
infrastructure. His continued failure to predict when we all talk to
our computers rather than type is typical of this blind spot. Not
everyone has four walls around them, or is comfortable talking to
their machine.

>> it's size. The period of halving the price is estimated at around 3
>> years.
>
> Germany doubled PV from 1% to 2% within about a year. Will this year
> double it to 4%? Unfortunately, probably not. Will the next year see it
> to 8%? Definitely not. The year after to 16%? The next, to 32%? And then,
> to 64%, and then to 128%?

RK's halving claim is only the price of the PV, I don't think it has
anything to do with the installation rate, unless I missed that claim.
I suppose that he believes if it is cheaper, it will be installed
quickly, which has a certain logic, but we can't all become solar
installers unless the installation process becomes much easier.
Perhaps RK thinks all the solar will be installed by robots... :-)

> Singularity is sure quicker, but Singularity in 20 years? It's always
> 20, 30 years away.

Depends on which definition of Singularity you choose, I suppose. If
your definition is the year that without computers we would have
something close to an extinction event for humanity, then perhaps we
are already there... ;-)

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 07:32:58 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 01:32:58 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikLHbo6ndUkAX4qTzLs4a58+f2puw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On average, the next generation of rich parents *was* poorer.

Yes, because of the Malthusian trap. The resources didn't grow for
society as a whole, and with the rich reproducing more than the poor,
it is obvious that many of the rich produced poorer offspring. I
understood this from the paper and it is a very interesting fact.

> Whatever exceptional characteristics the parents have, chances are
> that the average of the next generation will suffer "regression to the
> mean." ?Not to mention the well known business of a worthless playboy
> who through impulsive acts burns through the money he inherited. ?A
> person I know is from a family that was very wealthy a century or so
> ago. ?As he put it, his branch was into fast women and slow horses.
> So whatever memes and genes they started with, they didn't stay
> wealthy.

An old and common story. Now we know why at a little bit deeper level.

> "You know," said Arthur, "it's at times like this, when I'm trapped in
> a Vogon airlock with a man from Betelgeuse, and about to die of
> asphyxiation in deep space that I really wish I'd listened to what my
> mother told me when I was young."
> [Ford Prefect:] "Why, what did she tell you?"
> [Arthur:] "I don't know, I didn't listen."

:-)

> :-) ?So much for memes. ?You need a personality to pay attention to
> them as well as a source. ?(Not that I don't appreciate memes. ?Google
> memetics "keith henson")

Memetics sometimes suffer bad press, but I think they are pretty
powerful as a way to comprehend the world.

>> His facts fit the memetic evolution much better in my mind than the
>> genetic evolution. He doesn't state what the rich traits are, except
>> in memetic terms. "Thrift, prudence, negotiation and hard work" are,
>> after all, primarily memetic.
>
> I *very* much doubt it. ?See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_study
> Personality characteristics are very much determined by genes as you
> can see by how similar raised apart identical twins are. ? Also see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Nurture_Assumption ?Memes don't
> particularly come from parents.

I am somewhat familiar with these studies and what they imply. I'm
just unconvinced that the selection pressure in England really
selected for thrift, prudence, negotiation and hard work, even if
these are ultimately based in genetics. I see the point, I get the
hypothesis, I simply don't see it as convincing over and above the
memes that were towering over the country.

>> So, in conclusion, I don't find the hypothesis of Dr. Clark to be
>> supported by his facts, because there is an alternative hypothesis
>> that fits his data even better. Again, I strongly encourage you to
>> read Rosen's book.
>
> I have read dozens of books on the rise of technology during that
> time. ?It's a major hobby of mine.

Then I think you would really enjoy Rosen's book. It's written in such
an entertaining way as well. Another really nicely written book is
Frozen Desire, which is a history of money.

> But Clark's hypothesis can and almost certainly will be verified at
> the genetic level.

I can't wait to be proven wrong. At least that way I'm learning something.

> We can get DNA out of bones thousands of years old, and there are lots
> of old human bones in the UK. ?The detailed changes in the variations
> of genes will be plotted over the centuries. ?If there are changes in
> genes over the centuries that relate to human personality
> characteristics we will figure them out.

Sounds fascinating. I'm still hanging with the meme hypothesis at this time.

> About in time for it to have very little application.

Don't we want AGIs with prudence, negotiation and hard work? :-)

> Keith



From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 09:32:55 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 11:32:55 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=xHe_crYTZxwnUCBsTip4NY2xfng@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=xHe_crYTZxwnUCBsTip4NY2xfng@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110418093255.GL23560@leitl.org>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 06:09:14PM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:
> As a matter of fact, there are people who think the center of the
> earth is a ball of uranium that periodically goes critical at times.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georeactor
> 
> I have not put in enough study to have an opinion.

Uranium is lithophile, so unlikely.

-- 
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 pharos at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 09:42:29 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 10:42:29 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110418093255.GL23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=xHe_crYTZxwnUCBsTip4NY2xfng@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418093255.GL23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikcCrkc3XLZqkKXhRWn4TGv4KK8dA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Eugen Leitl  wrote:
> Uranium is lithophile, so unlikely.
>
>

Can you expand this?  Meaning is unclear.

uranium -  A heavy silvery-white metallic element.

Lithophiles are micro-organisms that can live within the pore
interstices of sedimentary and even igneous (if they are cracked?no
natural space in igneous) rocks to depths of several kilometres


BillK



From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 10:23:09 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:23:09 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Efficiency of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikcCrkc3XLZqkKXhRWn4TGv4KK8dA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<024101cbfd5b$c252f920$46f8eb60$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=xHe_crYTZxwnUCBsTip4NY2xfng@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418093255.GL23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikcCrkc3XLZqkKXhRWn4TGv4KK8dA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110418102309.GN23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:42:29AM +0100, BillK wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Eugen Leitl  wrote:
> > Uranium is lithophile, so unlikely.
> >
> >
> 
> Can you expand this?  Meaning is unclear.
> 
> uranium -  A heavy silvery-white metallic element.
> 
> Lithophiles are micro-organisms that can live within the pore
> interstices of sedimentary and even igneous (if they are cracked?no
> natural space in igneous) rocks to depths of several kilometres

According to the Goldschmidt classification:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldschmidt_classification

Nor uranior nor thorium are siderophile, hence there
is little of it in Earth's iron/iron sulfide core.

-- 
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 mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Apr 18 09:57:00 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 02:57:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
Message-ID: <20110418025700.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.e32d4fc00a.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote,
> 2011/4/17 Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com>:
> > This is also true for heroin, however, and it could be contended that a
> > heroin flash is more satisfactory to many people. :-)
> 
> The paleo-Leary diet... that could be the next big thing ;-)

"Turn on, tune in, chow down."  :-)

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 12:05:42 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:05:42 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:04:22PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> > I pointed out the reason why Moore scales that way
> > and why solar doesn't. USD/Wp is subject to world demand, USD/Wp
> > installed is a lot higher, since inverters don't follow the same
> > price curve, installation costs are basically constant, and grid
> > upgrade costs are also nothing like that.
> 
> Agreed. Nanosolar takes the position that solar installations should
> not be per house, but per neighborhood or small city, thus reducing
> the per household cost of the inverters. I disagree that installation

Inverters are still power electronics, and inverters don't upgrade
the grid so it can deal with multiple, variable points of power
injection. It is the grid that is keeping us down at the moment.
Alternatively, large scale electrochemical energy storage, which
allows to keep the power local so the grid needs less capacity.

> costs are constant, particularly with the Nanosolar approach of using
> farming implements to install huge arrays of PV panels at the speed of
> plowing. That would be MUCH cheaper than putting solar panels on each
> roof. Installation costs in space are also much different set of cats

Roofs need to be put up no matter what. Factoring in PV at
design stage results only in minor incremental costs.

> to skin than one per roof.

In densely populated places free space is a premium.
 
> > Kurzweil said he expects 100% of renewable *total* power,
> > world wide. This means a substitution rate of 1 TW/year, for
> > the next 20 years. As the current substution rate is negligible,
> > and he believes in linear semilog plots, this means most of
> > substution will happen in the last 1-2 years.
> 
> Yeah, RK has trouble sometimes differentiating between PURE

Sometimes always.

> information technologies, and those that are also tied to
> infrastructure. His continued failure to predict when we all talk to
> our computers rather than type is typical of this blind spot. Not
> everyone has four walls around them, or is comfortable talking to
> their machine.
> 
> >> it's size. The period of halving the price is estimated at around 3
> >> years.
> >
> > Germany doubled PV from 1% to 2% within about a year. Will this year
> > double it to 4%? Unfortunately, probably not. Will the next year see it
> > to 8%? Definitely not. The year after to 16%? The next, to 32%? And then,
> > to 64%, and then to 128%?
> 
> RK's halving claim is only the price of the PV, I don't think it has

No, Ray claims that in 20 years the world will be powered by 100%
solar energy, total.

http://www.psfk.com/2011/02/kurzweil-predicts-100-solar-power-in-20-years.html

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_energy_usage_width_chart.svg

It's 100x since 1970 for sure, but it's still only 0.04% of total.
So if it doubles every two years, that's

2010 0.04%
2012 0.08%
2014 0.16%
2016 0.32%
2018 0.64%
2020 1.28%
2022 2.56%
2024 5.12%
2026 10.2%
2028 20.5%
2030 51.2%
2032 100%

Total demand should be a lot more than 15 TW by then, but
that's close enough. Just check above numbers ever two years,
and see how the prediction fares.

> anything to do with the installation rate, unless I missed that claim.
> I suppose that he believes if it is cheaper, it will be installed
> quickly, which has a certain logic, but we can't all become solar
> installers unless the installation process becomes much easier.
> Perhaps RK thinks all the solar will be installed by robots... :-)

It's pretty much how it has to happen in order for it to become
reality. Including robotic electricians upgrading the grid.
 
> > Singularity is sure quicker, but Singularity in 20 years? It's always
> > 20, 30 years away.
> 
> Depends on which definition of Singularity you choose, I suppose. If
> your definition is the year that without computers we would have
> something close to an extinction event for humanity, then perhaps we
> are already there... ;-)

The interesting threshold is when people cease to matter, both
as planners and as executing agents.

Schedule an gedanken rapture every year, how long until everything
grinds to a halt? We know we're making progress if the clock continues
ticking longer and longer every year.

Needless to say, right now we don't look very good.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 12:32:45 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 14:32:45 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fuel efficient car for anywhere but America
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinVSa6L_7L=ZnBO5gD-Q-Ljv5wx7w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ac01cbf7b7$2736cdd0$75a46970$@att.net>
	<4da3a9fe.4581dc0a.230a.69cb@mx.google.com>
	<BANLkTinVSa6L_7L=ZnBO5gD-Q-Ljv5wx7w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110418123245.GU23560@leitl.org>

On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 04:24:09PM -0600, Jeff Davis wrote:
> 2011/4/11 kellycoinguy at gmail.com <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>:
> 
> > Miles per dollar has always seemed more interesting to me than MPG.
> 
> Indeed.  And what I want to know is how does miles per dollar of

See "The MPG Illusion"

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/320/5883/1593.full?sid=e2da957f-14a4-438b-8a32-ac65f1c9c924

> gasoline in a gas vehicle compare to miles per dollar of electricity
> in an electric vehicle?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptera_Motors sez 300 mpg (0.78 l/100 km).

Aptera Type-1e was 52 Wh/km (1 kWh = 19.2 km)

http://apteraforum.com/showthread.php?t=231

The new one should be lots better, somebody do the math.

(By integrating thin-film PV you could probably limp along on
solar power alone, augment during cruise or recharge when 
parked, though here you typically use the carport roof to 
recharge).
 
> Anyone?

-- 
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 js_exi at gnolls.org  Mon Apr 18 12:46:51 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 05:46:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
Message-ID: <4DAC32BB.5000003@gnolls.org>

[Once again, this reply disappeared.  Resending.  I believe the pattern 
is that if I haven't posted in a day or two, the list eats my first 
message but posts subsequent ones.]

I'm very busy right now and owe a couple other replies, but I couldn't
let this go by:

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> Given all this, it is clear that the body evolved to eat carbs for
> energy.  Eating anything else is just an inefficient way to get carbs
> for energy.  Nothing else can provide any energy without first being
> converted to carbs.

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

Please have some understanding of basic metabolic pathways before making 
such pronouncements.

Therefore, it is ludicrous to deny that carbs are
> the primary macronutrient for human nutrition.

Recall that the amount of glucose in your bloodstream at any one time is
about a teaspoon. Much less and your cells die for lack of energy: much
more and they're slowly poisoned (the complications of diabetes are
simply long-term glucose poisoning of your tissues).

Therefore, unless your high-carbohydrate diet is based on an intravenous
glucose drip carefully metered to keep exactly a teaspoon in 
circulation, it is clear that most of the 'carbohydrates' (sugars) you 
eat will be converted either to glycogen or to palmitic acid before you 
use them.

As the glycogen reserves of sedentary people tend to be full, most 
dietary carbohydrate is converted to palmitic acid -- a horrible, evil, 
artery-clogging saturated fat!  And fructose is either converted 
directly to liver glycogen or to fat.

A high-carb diet is a high-fat diet.



My approach is to eat an amount of glucose more proportional to my
body's actual use for it: ~20% of calories, more if I'm doing hard
aerobic work. Much of the remainder is fat, which is both the body's
most efficient energy source and a necessary delivery matrix for crucial
fat-soluble vitamins like A, D, E, and K2...not to mention choline and
other important nutrients in which most of us are deficient.

Also keep in mind that glycemic index is far more dependent on the fat
content of the meal than on the "complexness" of the carbohydrate:
http://www.gnolls.org/1029/fat-and-glycemic-index-the-myth-of-complex-carbohydrates/
Shortlink: http://www.gnolls.org/?p=1029

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 18 13:39:39 2011
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 06:39:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

I was disappointed to read this:

"Ask yourself how it?s possible for a creature of a given intelligence level to be able to design a creature of greater intelligence. Designing a creature of superior intelligence requires a level of intelligence that the designer simply does not have. Therefore, it is logically impossible to use the traditional blueprint-design approach to create a creature of superior intelligence"


So it's 'logically impossible', because designing a creature of superior intelligence requires a level of intelligence that the designer simply does not have??

Answering the question with a simple "No", with no actual reason given, other than "because it's impossible", is not acceptable.  He's saying "just because".

The best you can say is "I don't know".  There is absolutely no proof that a given intelligence can't design a superior one.  I expect most of the people reading this could think of at least one way of increasing their own intelligence, if we only had the tools.  I can think of 3 without even trying, and I'm far from very bright.

The other disturbing thing about the article is the assumption that if you don't understand every detail about how something works, you shouldn't use it.  Not to mention the implicit assumption that just because you use an evolutionary algorithm to design something, it's *inherently* non-understandable.


Ben Zaiboc



From painlord2k at libero.it  Mon Apr 18 13:41:29 2011
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 15:41:29 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikLHbo6ndUkAX4qTzLs4a58+f2puw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikLHbo6ndUkAX4qTzLs4a58+f2puw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAC3F89.5030604@libero.it>

Il 18/04/2011 9.32, Kelly Anderson ha scritto:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Keith Henson
> <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Kelly Anderson
>> <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote: On average, the next generation of
>> rich parents *was* poorer.


> I am somewhat familiar with these studies and what they imply. I'm 
> just unconvinced that the selection pressure in England really 
> selected for thrift, prudence, negotiation and hard work, even if 
> these are ultimately based in genetics. I see the point, I get the 
> hypothesis, I simply don't see it as convincing over and above the 
> memes that were towering over the country.

It selected for the same in other places of Europe also.
The advantage of England was/is to be an island, so it was safe from
foreign invasions that could have slowed the coming of the Industrial
Revolution as they slowed or stopped it in Holland and Italy.

-- 
Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog <http://extropolitca.blogspot.com/>

Leggimi su Estropico Blog <http://estropico.blogspot.com/>

*Mirco Romanato*




-----
Nessun virus nel messaggio.
Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com
Versione: 10.0.1209 / Database dei virus: 1500/3580 -  Data di rilascio: 17/04/2011



From rpwl at lightlink.com  Mon Apr 18 13:59:54 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 09:59:54 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4DAC43DA.3080206@lightlink.com>

Ben Zaiboc wrote:
> I was disappointed to read this:
> 
> "Ask yourself how it???s possible for a creature of a given
> intelligence level to be able to design a creature of greater
> intelligence. Designing a creature of superior intelligence requires
> a level of intelligence that the designer simply does not have.
> Therefore, it is logically impossible to use the traditional
> blueprint-design approach to create a creature of superior
> intelligence"
> 
> 
> So it's 'logically impossible', because designing a creature of
> superior intelligence requires a level of intelligence that the
> designer simply does not have??
> 
> Answering the question with a simple "No", with no actual reason
> given, other than "because it's impossible", is not acceptable.  He's
> saying "just because".
> 
> The best you can say is "I don't know".  There is absolutely no proof
> that a given intelligence can't design a superior one.  I expect most
> of the people reading this could think of at least one way of
> increasing their own intelligence, if we only had the tools.  I can
> think of 3 without even trying, and I'm far from very bright.
> 
> The other disturbing thing about the article is the assumption that
> if you don't understand every detail about how something works, you
> shouldn't use it.  Not to mention the implicit assumption that just
> because you use an evolutionary algorithm to design something, it's
> *inherently* non-understandable.

I agree completely.  I can think of many ways to boost the intelligence 
beyond human level, so Hugo's comment is outright silly.


Richard Loosemore




From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 14:01:15 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:01:15 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 06:39:39AM -0700, Ben Zaiboc wrote:
> I was disappointed to read this:
> 
> "Ask yourself how it?s possible for a creature of a given intelligence level to be able to design a creature of greater intelligence. Designing a creature of superior intelligence requires a level of intelligence that the designer simply does not have. Therefore, it is logically impossible to use the traditional blueprint-design approach to create a creature of superior intelligence"

He sounds like a creationist.
 
-- 
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 pharos at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 14:12:15 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 15:12:15 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <4DAC32BB.5000003@gnolls.org>
References: <4DAC32BB.5000003@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikwxb12-qY935bu9dzVuBZ1g7MiGg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:46 PM, J. Stanton  wrote:
<snip>
> My approach is to eat an amount of glucose more proportional to my
> body's actual use for it: ~20% of calories, more if I'm doing hard
> aerobic work. Much of the remainder is fat, which is both the body's
> most efficient energy source and a necessary delivery matrix for crucial
> fat-soluble vitamins like A, D, E, and K2...not to mention choline and
> other important nutrients in which most of us are deficient.
>
> Also keep in mind that glycemic index is far more dependent on the fat
> content of the meal than on the "complexness" of the carbohydrate:
> http://www.gnolls.org/1029/fat-and-glycemic-index-the-myth-of-complex-carbohydrates/
> Shortlink: http://www.gnolls.org/?p=1029
>
>


It is rather worrying when I see people who know far more than me
about human metabolism seemingly arguing for completely opposite
points of view.  To me it indicates that the science is not yet clear
enough or thoroughly understood.

I certainly would not be prepared to gamble my health and possible
future medical problems on one particular subset of the ongoing
arguments.


BillK


From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 14:33:13 2011
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 00:03:13 +0930
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>

On 18 April 2011 21:35, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:04:22PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>
>> > I pointed out the reason why Moore scales that way
>> > and why solar doesn't. USD/Wp is subject to world demand, USD/Wp
>> > installed is a lot higher, since inverters don't follow the same
>> > price curve, installation costs are basically constant, and grid
>> > upgrade costs are also nothing like that.
>>
>> Agreed. Nanosolar takes the position that solar installations should
>> not be per house, but per neighborhood or small city, thus reducing
>> the per household cost of the inverters. I disagree that installation
>
> Inverters are still power electronics, and inverters don't upgrade
> the grid so it can deal with multiple, variable points of power
> injection. It is the grid that is keeping us down at the moment.
> Alternatively, large scale electrochemical energy storage, which
> allows to keep the power local so the grid needs less capacity.

The grid is a centralising, industrial age technology, solar isn't.
Surely we'll see solar uptake largely in a decentralised setting
(householders, business), with the grid eventually reforming into
something useful in that context, but some time after.

Meanwhile, for storage, isn't it more likely we'll see super/ultra
caps than conventional batteries?

-- 
Emlyn

http://my.syyn.cc - A service for syncing buzz and facebook, posts,
comments and all.
http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built
http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog
Find me on Facebook and Buzz


From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 15:20:02 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 17:20:02 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:03:13AM +0930, Emlyn wrote:

> The grid is a centralising, industrial age technology, solar isn't.

Which is why the grid has so much pain dealing with it.
Can't be helped.

> Surely we'll see solar uptake largely in a decentralised setting
> (householders, business), with the grid eventually reforming into
> something useful in that context, but some time after.

The time is now. 17 GW of peak solar nevermind wind are bringing
the grid to the limits, and our grid is in slightly better shape
than elsewhere. The problem is both capacity, which is easy, but
also moving away from central control. Long-term, it may go DC
or offer galvanic separation (pipes for gases or liquids).
 
> Meanwhile, for storage, isn't it more likely we'll see super/ultra
> caps than conventional batteries?

Supercaps are great for providing peak current. Not quite enough
to reach even today's lithium-ion energy density. You will not
see conventional batteries, but large and very lage scale
installations built on cheap, durable, nontoxic electrochemistries.

This is a field in flux, but not done yet. Luckily, we don't
have to solve that immediately, provided we can upgrade the grid.

-- 
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 anders at aleph.se  Mon Apr 18 17:07:26 2011
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 18:07:26 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <4DAC3F89.5030604@libero.it>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTikLHbo6ndUkAX4qTzLs4a58+f2puw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAC3F89.5030604@libero.it>
Message-ID: <4DAC6FCE.8020607@aleph.se>

Mirco Romanato wrote:
> It selected for the same in other places of Europe also.
> The advantage of England was/is to be an island, so it was safe from
> foreign invasions that could have slowed the coming of the Industrial
> Revolution as they slowed or stopped it in Holland and Italy.
>   

Hmm, Romans, Vikings, Saxons, Normans, the Dutch.... Britain has 
probably been invaded and taken over more often than than the average 
European country.

-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute
Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University 



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 17:38:11 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 10:38:11 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <4DAC3F89.5030604@libero.it>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikLHbo6ndUkAX4qTzLs4a58+f2puw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAC3F89.5030604@libero.it>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=4QJReGkTwNZXq7P9muLm7nvhYZw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> wrote:

snip

> It selected for the same in other places of Europe also.
> The advantage of England was/is to be an island, so it was safe from
> foreign invasions that could have slowed the coming of the Industrial
> Revolution as they slowed or stopped it in Holland and Italy.

Clark comments in his work that the same genetic selection was going
on over much of western Europe.  From his viewpoint the advantage of
the UK was the old probate records where he could show that generation
after generation the rich left more children than the poor.  :-)

Keith


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 18:21:55 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:21:55 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinTm-F+MXM33mo8kdkBWg+De-hozA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 6:05 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:04:22PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> Inverters are still power electronics, and inverters don't upgrade
> the grid so it can deal with multiple, variable points of power
> injection.

Eugen, I apparently have a huge hole in my understanding of the grid
here, so be gentle with me. When we do net metering, we run the meter
backwards and the electricity goes out on the grid. To me this is just
the "magic" of the grid, that it somehow balances and moves the
electricity to where it needs to be. I have always assumed that this
is possible somehow because of AC. I assume that if everyone in an
area is running their meters backwards, that it would be a problem...
I don't assume that it would pump water back up the dam... So how does
it work? I guess you're saying that the problem is that it doesn't
work. I read the Wikipedia articles, and didn't get any understanding
from there. So what is the problem with the current grid, exactly. It
would seem that as long as the Demand Response can shut down unneeded
power sources on a sunny day, why doesn't it work?

> It is the grid that is keeping us down at the moment.
> Alternatively, large scale electrochemical energy storage, which
> allows to keep the power local so the grid needs less capacity.

Yes, I can see that this keeps the electricity from flowing too far
upstream, and moving electricity around loses power because of the
inefficiency. Transmitting electricity in power lines causes a heat
loss, I get that part. I feel kind of dumb about this because I
studied Electrical Engineering for a couple of years, and it SEEMS
like I should understand this.

>> costs are constant, particularly with the Nanosolar approach of using
>> farming implements to install huge arrays of PV panels at the speed of
>> plowing. That would be MUCH cheaper than putting solar panels on each
>> roof. Installation costs in space are also much different set of cats
>
> Roofs need to be put up no matter what. Factoring in PV at
> design stage results only in minor incremental costs.

Why do you need a roof? Can't you just create a stand in a field? This
doesn't make sense. The problem as I see it is inverters and batteries
in every single house because there is no efficiency of scale.

>> to skin than one per roof.
>
> In densely populated places free space is a premium.

Yes, but we can hardly believe that enough sunlight falls on New York
to meet their power needs in any case. We'll always have the need to
import concentrated power (hydrogen, gasoline, whatever).

>> Yeah, RK has trouble sometimes differentiating between PURE
>
> Sometimes always.
>
>> information technologies, and those that are also tied to
>> infrastructure. His continued failure to predict when we all talk to
>> our computers rather than type is typical of this blind spot. Not
>> everyone has four walls around them, or is comfortable talking to
>> their machine.
>>
>> >> it's size. The period of halving the price is estimated at around 3
>> >> years.
>> >
>> > Germany doubled PV from 1% to 2% within about a year. Will this year
>> > double it to 4%? Unfortunately, probably not. Will the next year see it
>> > to 8%? Definitely not. The year after to 16%? The next, to 32%? And then,
>> > to 64%, and then to 128%?
>>
>> RK's halving claim is only the price of the PV, I don't think it has
>
> No, Ray claims that in 20 years the world will be powered by 100%
> solar energy, total.

This is the closest thing to this claim from TSIN:

"As I discussed in chapter 5, nanotechnology-based designs for
virtually all applications?computation, communication, manufacturing,
and transportation?will require substantially less energy than they do
today. Nanotechnology will also facilitate capturing renewable energy
sources such as sunlight. We could meet all of our projected energy
needs of thirty trillion watts in 2030 with solar power if we captured
only 0.03 percent (three tenthousandths) of the sun's energy as it hit
the Earth. This will be feasible with extremely inexpensive,
lightweight, and efficient nanoengineered solar panels together with
nano-fuel cells to store and distribute the captured energy." - Ray K.

Granted there is a "could" and an "if" in there... but I don't see
anything about 100% of energy. Do you have another reference for this
claim? I can't imagine any future with just one energy source. That
doesn't make any sense at all.

> http://www.psfk.com/2011/02/kurzweil-predicts-100-solar-power-in-20-years.html

The context is kind of important here. Ray, on a radio show says:
"In 20 years we?ll be meeting all of our energy needs with solar,
based on this trend which has already been under way for 20 years."

I think if he thought about it, he would not state it in exactly these
terms. Just because you could afford solar, doesn't mean you'll
instantly replace everything with it. I think this was just an off the
cuff remark that was talking about the cost of it. If he had said in
twenty years all new power production will be met with solar, I might
go along with that a little easier. RK seems to get carried away with
things. Just because it's cheaper/better to run a car than a horse
doesn't mean nobody rides horses anymore.

> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:World_energy_usage_width_chart.svg
>
> It's 100x since 1970 for sure, but it's still only 0.04% of total.
> So if it doubles every two years, that's
>
> 2010 0.04%
> 2012 0.08%
> 2014 0.16%
> 2016 0.32%
> 2018 0.64%
> 2020 1.28%
> 2022 2.56%
> 2024 5.12%
> 2026 10.2%
> 2028 20.5%
> 2030 51.2%
> 2032 100%
>
> Total demand should be a lot more than 15 TW by then, but
> that's close enough. Just check above numbers ever two years,
> and see how the prediction fares.

It will be interesting to see how RK does with this prediction. I
don't think he's terribly far off, especially given the political
climate (hehe) today. It will be interesting to see what us tea party
folks do with solar and wind if we get a new president and senate in a
couple of years. However, this isn't a US thing, it's a world wide
trend that is important. Africa needs solar, and they may have it
first, just like they got cell phones before they had land lines.

> It's pretty much how it has to happen in order for it to become
> reality. Including robotic electricians upgrading the grid.

It's all part of Ray's grand vision... :-)

>> > Singularity is sure quicker, but Singularity in 20 years? It's always
>> > 20, 30 years away.
>>
>> Depends on which definition of Singularity you choose, I suppose. If
>> your definition is the year that without computers we would have
>> something close to an extinction event for humanity, then perhaps we
>> are already there... ;-)
>
> The interesting threshold is when people cease to matter, both
> as planners and as executing agents.

First US president that is non-organic?

> Schedule an gedanken rapture every year, how long until everything
> grinds to a halt? We know we're making progress if the clock continues
> ticking longer and longer every year.

I'm not sure I'm following your question here, could you rephrase?

> Needless to say, right now we don't look very good.

If there is one thing that seems to be the case, it is that you are
more pessimistic than I am. Perhaps you've spent too much time in
Europe... :-)

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 18:39:28 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:39:28 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Recent human evolution repost
In-Reply-To: <4DAC6FCE.8020607@aleph.se>
References: <BANLkTim5ia3rog7QZzLJARLLWSXvqqFXzw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=NTrj-9Mz4vJziR+HLA4xbtmGiQQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikdx3n3kBUte4zOE=b+WOQso1_cTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikLHbo6ndUkAX4qTzLs4a58+f2puw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAC3F89.5030604@libero.it> <4DAC6FCE.8020607@aleph.se>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim+J+rJBQ4TqKjfBkWPkCmUUzNRbA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> Mirco Romanato wrote:
>>
>> It selected for the same in other places of Europe also.
>> The advantage of England was/is to be an island, so it was safe from
>> foreign invasions that could have slowed the coming of the Industrial
>> Revolution as they slowed or stopped it in Holland and Italy.
>
> Hmm, Romans, Vikings, Saxons, Normans, the Dutch.... Britain has probably
> been invaded and taken over more often than than the average European
> country.

<tongue firmly in cheek>
If you were going to make an argument about Vikings, English and
genetics... One of the strongest arguments you would be able to make
is that based upon centuries of Vikings kidnapping the prettiest
English girls... that Iceland has beautiful women and England, well,
draw your own conclusions.
http://www.9uy.info/2009/08/beautiful-icelandic-women.html
</tongue firmly in cheek>

This hypothesis seems as worthy of study as the other to me. It
probably would be even more fun to study than digging through
thousands of dusty old wills..,. ;-)

-Kelly


From sjatkins at mac.com  Mon Apr 18 19:43:24 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 12:43:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>

On 04/18/2011 07:01 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 06:39:39AM -0700, Ben Zaiboc wrote:
>> I was disappointed to read this:
>>
>> "Ask yourself how it?s possible for a creature of a given intelligence level to be able to design a creature of greater intelligence. Designing a creature of superior intelligence requires a level of intelligence that the designer simply does not have. Therefore, it is logically impossible to use the traditional blueprint-design approach to create a creature of superior intelligence"
> He sounds like a creationist.
>
Actually, what was said is exactly correct.  We can't fully spec out an 
AGI ("traditional blueprint").  It must recursively self-improve.  I 
thought this was and has been accepted information in these circles for 
a very long time now.

- s


From eugen at leitl.org  Mon Apr 18 20:33:36 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 22:33:36 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org> <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:43:24PM -0700, Samantha Atkins wrote:
>> He sounds like a creationist.
>>
> Actually, what was said is exactly correct.  We can't fully spec out an  
> AGI ("traditional blueprint").  It must recursively self-improve.  I  
> thought this was and has been accepted information in these circles for  
> a very long time now.

My beef was with the idea that a more advanced system is
required to produce a less advanced. This is trivially
untrue, because darwinian evolution is extremely stupid,
yet since you can read this message it most assuredly
does work.

I have never believed into recursive self-improvement.
Nobody is that smart. You just bump up the boundary 
condition, and let emergence handle the rest. 

-- 
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 mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 20:09:24 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:09:24 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin5FpXe-Xo7EdwF4h2NjMydfYfNiA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com>wrote:

> Will it make any difference if we get efficient at stealing heat from
>> the earth's core? When will we experience Peak geothermal energy? :-)
>> ...<snip>
>>
>
I've wondered this very same thing.  Especially considering Jevons paradox,
population growth, etc.


>
> Stealing heat through geothermal will make no appreciable impact, even over
> the course of a few million years.  Plenty of time to develop the fusion,
> flying cars, space elevators sending down truckloads of high-density energy
> collected in space......


Unintended consequences?  Is the geo-loop's depth/usage so minuscule as to
seriously not even warrant consideration?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110418/2fd9b0d5/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 20:39:24 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 16:39:24 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikwxb12-qY935bu9dzVuBZ1g7MiGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4DAC32BB.5000003@gnolls.org>
	<BANLkTikwxb12-qY935bu9dzVuBZ1g7MiGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikfxaMLHvnpRgC5yNXQoONDAJ8xOQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:12 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> It is rather worrying when I see people who know far more than me
> about human metabolism seemingly arguing for completely opposite
> points of view.
>

J. Stanton knows his stuff...imho.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110418/3a0571d6/attachment.html>

From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Mon Apr 18 22:02:59 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 15:02:59 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
Message-ID: <20110418150259.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.8ee8d04033.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"J. Stanton" <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote,
> A high-carb diet is a high-fat diet.

And I was trying to explain how a high-fat diet is the same as a
high-carb diet.  Maybe we are not in as much disagreement as I had
thought.

> My approach is to eat an amount of glucose more proportional to my
> body's actual use for it: ~20% of calories, more if I'm doing hard
> aerobic work.

I thought you were arguing *against* eating carbs for your energy needs.
 But now it looks like you prefer to get your primary energy needs from
carbs, as long as you don't overdo it by eating more carbs than needed
for energy.

That's the same as I do in my diet.  Only instead of eating ~20% of my
calories from glucose, I could eat ~80% of my calories from fructose. 
Since fructose has 25% of the glycemic index as glucose, you and I would
be experiencing the same glycemic load, even though you would call your
diet "low-carb" and call my diet "high-carb".

> Also keep in mind that glycemic index is far more dependent on the fat
> content of the meal than on the "complexness" of the carbohydrate

You eat high-fat to lower your glycemic load.  I eat more complex
carbohydrates to lower my glycemic load.  I don't think it matters which
factor is "more" of an influence, if the resulting glycemic load is the
same.

I think the real point of contention was *why* modern humans need to
stop eating too many carbs.  I was saying that we are so well adapted
(or evolved) to be so efficient at absorbing carbs that we get too much
of it.  You seemed to be saying that we are so maladapted (or unevolved)
at absorbing carbs that we get too much of it.  We agree on the outcome,
but I still think my evolutionary reason makes more explanatory sense. 
(Especially given my other posting showing that Neanderthals had a
history of eating cooked grains.)

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP






From sparge at gmail.com  Mon Apr 18 23:43:48 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 19:43:48 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <20110418150259.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.8ee8d04033.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110418150259.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.8ee8d04033.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikxxBLuWiicJJUcuZXPaTtW=wicYg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 6:02 PM, Harvey Newstrom
<mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> "J. Stanton" <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote,
>
>> My approach is to eat an amount of glucose more proportional to my
>> body's actual use for it: ~20% of calories, more if I'm doing hard
>> aerobic work.
>
> I thought you were arguing *against* eating carbs for your energy needs.

You were apparently wrong. I can't speak for J., but I think he's
arguing for a low carb, high saturated fat diet that doesn't include
grains/seeds or seed oils.

> ?But now it looks like you prefer to get your primary energy needs from
> carbs, as long as you don't overdo it by eating more carbs than needed
> for energy.

20% of calories from carbs isn't satisfying his "primary energy
needs", it's only satisfying one fifth of them. And he's not getting
them from sucrose, fructose, HFCS, etc., he's getting them from fruits
and vegetables, which have lower glycemic indices than refined
sweeteners.

> That's the same as I do in my diet. ?Only instead of eating ~20% of my
> calories from glucose, I could eat ~80% of my calories from fructose.
> Since fructose has 25% of the glycemic index as glucose, you and I would
> be experiencing the same glycemic load, even though you would call your
> diet "low-carb" and call my diet "high-carb".

Methinks you're putting to much faith in glycemic index. Have you read
Gary Taubes' "Is Sugar Toxic?" from the NYT Magazine last week? If
not, you should:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/magazine/mag-17Sugar-t.html

> (Especially given my other posting showing that Neanderthals had a
> history of eating cooked grains.)

Sorry, but that's very thin evidence for grain consumption. I have no
doubt whatsoever that some grains were eaten, but I have real doubts
that it was widespread and/or represented a significant fraction of
the seasonal or annual diet. And in one of those finds, the "grains"
referred to are particles of cassava or some other starchy tuber, not
grass seeds.

-Dave



From emlynoregan at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 02:03:28 2011
From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:33:28 +0930
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>

On 19 April 2011 00:50, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 12:03:13AM +0930, Emlyn wrote:
>
>> The grid is a centralising, industrial age technology, solar isn't.
>
> Which is why the grid has so much pain dealing with it.
> Can't be helped.
>

Well, yeah. Inverters, mentioned earlier, are only necessary if you're
going to use AC. Inside a dwelling or business, if you convert to DC
throughout (9V?), solar becomes a lot simpler. Appliances/electronics
get much easier (just chuck the power pack and plug it straight in,
they'll disappear eventually). Washing machines and such are tougher,
but solvable.

So then it (solar) looks like a technology which will make the most
sense on buildings to power themselves, to begin with, with industrial
scale stuff on the old system for a while. The grid then needs to turn
inside out; rather than a system for broadcasting mass power from
central places, and have conversion losses at the point of
consumption, you need a system for sharing locally produced power,
with conversion losses in the grid here and there where you want to
bump the power up to a distance transmittable form; eg: a DC local
network, with suburban subs providing inverters to jump it up to high
voltage AC for shipping elsewhere, where appropriate.

I guess what'll happen is we'll have both grids for a while - the high
voltage "broadcast" one and an emerging inside-out local power DC
network, which can be a lot more ad hoc because it's just about
shipping around surplus where it exists.

-- 
Emlyn

http://my.syyn.cc - A service for syncing buzz and facebook, posts,
comments and all.
http://www.blahblahbleh.com - A simple youtube radio that I built
http://point7.wordpress.com - My blog
Find me on Facebook and Buzz


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 03:04:56 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:04:56 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimtJxRjzn=WwvN35bBiaO4FxQpbDw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Emlyn <emlynoregan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, yeah. Inverters, mentioned earlier, are only necessary if you're
> going to use AC. Inside a dwelling or business, if you convert to DC
> throughout (9V?), solar becomes a lot simpler. Appliances/electronics
> get much easier (just chuck the power pack and plug it straight in,
> they'll disappear eventually). Washing machines and such are tougher,
> but solvable.

The only problem with DC is that (in my experience) you can't buy
decent appliances that run off of DC at this point. If you do find
something, it's twice the money and half the size. Economies of scale
might help, but I don't expect that any time soon. So to have decent
appliances, at this point you need inverters.

-Kelly


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 03:52:00 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 21:52:00 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTin5FpXe-Xo7EdwF4h2NjMydfYfNiA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik5FV9n3E=HFLYVsQsMUg2==xhYZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<011401cbf490$c94dfaf0$5be9f0d0$@att.net>
	<20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTin5FpXe-Xo7EdwF4h2NjMydfYfNiA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikN26LZBvrLNAEM3vT-PJ5LYOCpkA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/18 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> Unintended consequences? ?Is the geo-loop's depth/usage so?minuscule?as to
> seriously not even warrant consideration?

It would be very good if we could figure out how to steal heat from
the hot spot under Yellowstone to the point of putting off the next
eruption of the super volcano... Probably a more potent risk than
asteroids, but fixing the problem seems significantly more difficult.

-Kelly



From eugen at leitl.org  Tue Apr 19 11:15:31 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:15:31 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:33:28AM +0930, Emlyn wrote:

> Well, yeah. Inverters, mentioned earlier, are only necessary if you're
> going to use AC. Inside a dwelling or business, if you convert to DC

I like DC a lot, but due to infrastructure lock-in changing it
will be tough. Due to ohmic losses you want to go to a higher
voltage, e.g. the new automotive 42 V 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42-volt_electrical_system
which is still reasonably safe (or 110 or 230 V DC to
make use of existing wiring while increasing shock hazard) 
and higher DC still if you want to go residential microgrid.

In general I'm nervous about lots of galvanically linked
power electronics which default failure mode is expensive
smoke. Black swans are rare, but you can count on them landing
eventually. E.g. next solar superstorm would tough
to harden against.

I would be much, much happer about using hydrogen or
methane for galvanic separation of invididual installations.

> throughout (9V?), solar becomes a lot simpler. Appliances/electronics
> get much easier (just chuck the power pack and plug it straight in,
> they'll disappear eventually). Washing machines and such are tougher,
> but solvable.

There are DC motors and there are smart DC motors which use
power electronics driven by microcontrollers.
 
> So then it (solar) looks like a technology which will make the most
> sense on buildings to power themselves, to begin with, with industrial

I agree.

> scale stuff on the old system for a while. The grid then needs to turn

Right now the industry does profit from grid-tied small scale
installations. Most of these 17 GW peak are residential small
plants.

> inside out; rather than a system for broadcasting mass power from
> central places, and have conversion losses at the point of

In a network of sources and sinks most of the power doesn't
travel far. As power is fungible, you can think of it as
power peering. It doesn't matter for a network segment if 
ingress and egress are roughly balanced. We already have
realtime power markets, the interesting part is making the
markets sufficiently small scale that individual households
and even appliances can participate in bids. This is easy,
as even small embeddeds can carry the full stack and enough
CPU power for running bidding algorithms. You can have a large
local buffer using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery
trading cheap peak juice with expensive nightime juice, 
load-leveling in the process.

> consumption, you need a system for sharing locally produced power,
> with conversion losses in the grid here and there where you want to
> bump the power up to a distance transmittable form; eg: a DC local
> network, with suburban subs providing inverters to jump it up to high
> voltage AC for shipping elsewhere, where appropriate.

Already long-distance are HVDC. I'm not sure you can go up
from 100 V to high kV and MV without some losses. You might
have to take an electrochemical converter road.
 
> I guess what'll happen is we'll have both grids for a while - the high
> voltage "broadcast" one and an emerging inside-out local power DC
> network, which can be a lot more ad hoc because it's just about
> shipping around surplus where it exists.

There is some work being done (unfortunately, kraut)
for deal with load difference for large scale
http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/34/34475/1.html

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Tue Apr 19 11:23:55 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:23:55 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikN26LZBvrLNAEM3vT-PJ5LYOCpkA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTin5FpXe-Xo7EdwF4h2NjMydfYfNiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikN26LZBvrLNAEM3vT-PJ5LYOCpkA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110419112355.GS23560@leitl.org>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:52:00PM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:
> 2011/4/18 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
> > Unintended consequences? ?Is the geo-loop's depth/usage so?minuscule?as to
> > seriously not even warrant consideration?
> 
> It would be very good if we could figure out how to steal heat from
> the hot spot under Yellowstone to the point of putting off the next
> eruption of the super volcano... Probably a more potent risk than
> asteroids, but fixing the problem seems significantly more difficult.

Geothermal is a niche. It can be an important niche for some
locations, but in the great total it doesn't matter that much.

You can also deplete the local reservoir very easily and/or
cause earthquakes and ground sinking if you don't know where
you're doing. E.g. my place is tapping the Malm karst 
geothermal aquifer, which is somewhat anomalously high
http://www.liag-hannover.de/fileadmin/produkte/20070713113243.pdf
and uses to adjacent well to reinject the Kalina cycle-depleted water,
causing a cooler plume dowstream so you must take care with
well spacing and alignment.

-- 
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 mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Apr 19 11:21:45 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 07:21:45 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikxxBLuWiicJJUcuZXPaTtW=wicYg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110418150259.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.8ee8d04033.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTikxxBLuWiicJJUcuZXPaTtW=wicYg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <000b01cbfe83$fa68e3a0$ef3aaae0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Dave Sill wrote,
> Methinks you're putting too much faith in glycemic index. Have you read
Gary Taubes' "Is Sugar Toxic?" from the NYT Magazine last week? If not, you
should:
> 
> Methinks you're putting too much faith in glycemic index. Have you read
Gary Taubes' "Is Sugar Toxic?" from the NYT Magazine last week? If not, you
should:

No faith at all.  I look at the scientific evidence.  

This article looks like hand-waving and denialism to me.  It argues maybe
the scientists are wrong.  Maybe animal experiments don't apply to humans.
Maybe the lab doesn't represent the real world.  Maybe more research is
required.  Maybe.

If we don't use current science or current experimental results or the
scientific method, what do we base our nutritional opinions upon?  

> > (Especially given my other posting showing that Neanderthals had a 
> > history of eating cooked grains.)
>
> Sorry, but that's very thin evidence for grain consumption

Did you read the same references I gave?  Multiple historical sites?
Wide-spread geography? Different latitudes?  A dozen different grains
cataloged?  Proof of widespread cooking of grains?  Fossils in teeth and
excrement and storage of grains?  

What part of all of this are you calling "thin evidence"?   What more could
you possible want as evidence?
 




From sparge at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 14:26:11 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:26:11 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <000b01cbfe83$fa68e3a0$ef3aaae0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110418150259.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.8ee8d04033.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTikxxBLuWiicJJUcuZXPaTtW=wicYg@mail.gmail.com>
	<000b01cbfe83$fa68e3a0$ef3aaae0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikjwwz_Vo5YcJjsJwJPR2n_FPPHzQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 19, 2011 8:23 AM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
>
> No faith at all.  I look at the scientific evidence.

OK, then what scientific evidence do you have that your diet is healthy? Has
it even been studied?

> This article looks like hand-waving and denialism to me.  It argues maybe
> the scientists are wrong.  Maybe animal experiments don't apply to humans.
> Maybe the lab doesn't represent the real world.  Maybe more research is
> required.  Maybe.

I don't think Taubes argues that *maybe* more research it's
required...clearly he thinks it is required.

> If we don't use current science or current experimental results or the
> scientific method, what do we base our nutritional opinions upon?

How about (1) knowledge of human biochemistry and (2) knowledge of the diets
that our species evolved under?

> Did you read the same references I gave?

Yeah, I read then when I posted them here back in round 1 of the
paleo/primal discussion.

> Multiple historical sites?
> Wide-spread geography? Different latitudes?  A dozen different grains
> cataloged?  Proof of widespread cooking of grains?  Fossils in teeth and
> excrement and storage of grains?
>
> What part of all of this are you calling "thin evidence"?

That's less than half a dozen examples of wild grain consumption. Compare
that to the thousands of sites with evidence of meat consumption.

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/39ae1110/attachment.html>

From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 15:31:39 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:31:39 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <20110419112355.GS23560@leitl.org>
References: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTin5FpXe-Xo7EdwF4h2NjMydfYfNiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikN26LZBvrLNAEM3vT-PJ5LYOCpkA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419112355.GS23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikcKCXbNOdpDyCcAbefHBhDhUambw@mail.gmail.com>

> Kelly Anderson:> It would be very good if we could figure out how to steal
> heat from
> > the hot spot under Yellowstone to the point of putting off the next
> > eruption of the super volcano... Probably a more potent risk than
> > asteroids, but fixing the problem seems significantly more difficult.
>

**nods** I've thought of this very same thing.  If we could somehow draw
away some of that heat safely, we could prevent the super-volcano from
sending us into the history books.  The problem is, we like to take the
easy/cheap way, instead of the long-term responsible way...so we'd pollute
the area, and destroy the balance; because it was cheaper.


>
> Eugen: Geothermal is a niche. It can be an important niche for some
> locations, but in the great total it doesn't matter that much.
>

What about ground loops, versus wells.  5-8' deep loops, 100's or 1000's of
meters in length, acting as the 'heatsink'.  I'm thinking of geo in terms of
a supplementation to home heating/cooling solutions.  Granted, some areas
don't have open space to trench in this manner, but I've heard that
lakes/ponds are also good sources.


>
> You can also deplete the local reservoir very easily and/or
> cause earthquakes and ground sinking if you don't know where
> you're doing. E.g. my place is tapping the Malm karst
> geothermal aquifer, which is somewhat anomalously high
> http://www.liag-hannover.de/fileadmin/produkte/20070713113243.pdf
> and uses to adjacent well to reinject the Kalina cycle-depleted water,
> causing a cooler plume dowstream so you must take care with
> well spacing and alignment.
>

Yeah, see I'm thinking more along the lines of using the top layer of ground
to act as a heat-sink for our homes...not so much tapping into giant
geo-thermal geysers n' such.
In winter I'd only need to heat from 55-70 or so, so approx 15degrees of
difference, which would come by way of a high efficiency natural gas boiler.
 During summer, the geo would MORE than cool the home enough, requiring no
supplementation.  Certainly the energy savings from this setup would
be sizable.  If millions of homes across the globe did this, that'd be a lot
of coal/oil not being burned.

Once the loops are ran/connected, there's no reason we can't use the land
for other purposes right?  We could still grow crops over them, have animals
graze, etc.

I see what you're saying though, it's a regional thing.  Not everywhere is
suited for this type of system.  But isn't it a good idea to implement it in
the areas where we can?  It's nothing but some trenches, and tubing, some
anti-freeze and plumbing equipment etc.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/8975f94b/attachment.html>

From patrick at patrickmclaren.com  Sun Apr 17 12:59:00 2011
From: patrick at patrickmclaren.com (Patrick McLaren)
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 22:59:00 +1000
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110416195813.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c2d6e543ac.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110416195813.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.c2d6e543ac.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <20110417125900.GA4223@patrickmclaren.network>

On Apr 16 07:58 PM, Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> - Gorham Cave in Gibraltar contained fossilized grains in the habitat
> and feces of Neanderthals from 40,000 years ago. 
> <http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090202140046.htm>
> 
> - Shanidar Cave in Iraq and Spy Cave in Belgium contained Neanderthal
> fossils with tooth tartar containing plants, legumes, and grains.  They
> prove that the foods were cooked by Neanderthals.  And they chose
> multi-latitudinal sites to demonstrate the use of cooked grains as a
> wide-spread phenomenon. 

One problem I have when considering high-carb in context of the paleo diet is the ability to *satisfy* caloric requirements when eating unprocessed plants, legumes, and grains.

I'll take our modern day office-bound vegetable as an example. The "average adult diet" is 8700Kj, or ~2175 calories. If we say that around about 60% of total calories is considered "high-carb" then we're looking at ~1300 calories recieved from carbs. Personally, I find it hard to intake this amount of *plain* carbs. Note, I'm a bodybuilder, so when I say plain, I don't mean plain with a drizzle of syrup.

Now, paleo man trying to satisfy his guestimated intake ~1300 calories of carbs probably wouldn't consider pasta or jasmine white rice but let's just use these as an example because they are *highly* loaded with carbs, a best case scenario.

Noting the nutritional information from the pasta packet in my kitchen, you'll need 650g of uncooked pasta to get 1300 calories from carbs. That is, 650g of pasta = 325g of carbs = 1300 calories. Although 650g of pasta is actually greater than 1300 total calories. Eating 650g of carbs a day is hard work. You'll feel extremely bloated and definitely not in the mood to go hunting for the rest of your nutritional requirements. Looking away from pasta and rice, you'll be hard pressed to find a widely available sustainable high carb source that matches the earlier macronutrient ratio. Removing the macronutrient ratio restriction to consider other carb sources and the carb-weight ratio is only going to increase. Increasing food intake to account for lower available carbs and paleo man is now eating plants, legumes and grains in the *kilos*. 

At this point paleo man will be reaching for the prune juice. Eating such a significant amount of unhusked material and the digestive system will begging for a break.

Sure setting the requirement at 1300 calories might be a bit steep. Even at 40% of calories, he's still eating 435g of mini bowtie pasta. However, decrease calories from carbs again and soon we won't be even on a high-carb diet.

Although if he ate fruit, he'd probably get there quite easily... Hmm.


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Apr 19 17:03:18 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:03:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
Message-ID: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote,
> On Apr 19, 2011 8:23 AM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
> >
> > No faith at all.  I look at the scientific evidence.
> 
> OK, then what scientific evidence do you have that your diet is healthy? Has
> it even been studied?

You're joking, right?  Just read all the sources you are pointing me
toward.  They are full of refutations of the current scientific thinking
that high-fat is bad.  They explain why all the doctors are wrong, why
the scientific studies are wrong, why the glycemic index is an
inaccruate measure, why bloodtests are an inaccurate measure, why animal
studies don't apply to people, why paleontologists are misinterpretting
the data, etc., etc.  There is no doubt that this stuff has been
scientifically studied.  Nor is there any doubt what the current
standard scientific consensus is.  The paleo diet hypothesis is still in
the minority opinion among professionals and research, whether you like
it or not.  It's ludicrous to ask if anybody has studied this stuff yet.

> > This article looks like hand-waving and denialism to me.  It argues maybe
> > the scientists are wrong.  Maybe animal experiments don't apply to humans.
> > Maybe the lab doesn't represent the real world.  Maybe more research is
> > required.  Maybe.
> 
> I don't think Taubes argues that *maybe* more research it's
> required...clearly he thinks it is required.

"More research required" = FUD.  It's all fine to doubt all the existing
evidence.  But eventually there has to be evidence on your own side.  If
the fossilized evidence of grain use by Neanderthals is wrong, then
where do you get an accurate picture of Neanderthal diet?  If glycemic
index is an inaccurate, then how do you measure sugar impact?  If blood
tests are wrong, than how do you determine blood cholesterol and sugar
levels?  If researchers are misinterpreting reports, scientists are
misreading results, and doctors are promoting propaganda, then where do
we get reliable information?  Low-carb diets are not a new hypothesis
anymore.  We have decades of research and results now.  The request for
"more research required" cannot be continued indefinitely, just because
previous research failed to produce the desired results.

> > If we don't use current science or current experimental results or the
> > scientific method, what do we base our nutritional opinions upon?
> 
> How about (1) knowledge of human biochemistry and (2) knowledge of the diets
> that our species evolved under?

I tried that.  Paleos either "disbelieve" the results, accuse the
researchers of conspiracy, or claim the archaelogical evidence is
undefineably "thin".  I've show my evidence.  Seriously, what additional
evidence would convince you?  How about showing some evidence *for* the
Paleo theory instead of merely asserting that prevalent theories are
wrong.

> > Multiple historical sites?
> > Wide-spread geography? Different latitudes?  A dozen different grains
> > cataloged?  Proof of widespread cooking of grains?  Fossils in teeth and
> > excrement and storage of grains?
> >
> > What part of all of this are you calling "thin evidence"?
> 
> That's less than half a dozen examples of wild grain consumption. Compare
> that to the thousands of sites with evidence of meat consumption.

A lack of evidence is not evidence of lack.  Yes, I gave a small number
of sites where fossilied teeth and feces were examined for diet.  That's
because that's all I know about that have examined teeth and feces to
determine what the diet was.  Yet they all came up with grains.  Do you
have ANY examples where teeth and feces were found to be lacking grains?
100% seems like a good success rate to me.





From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Tue Apr 19 17:19:44 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:19:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
Message-ID: <20110419101944.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.cded2fd617.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

Patrick McLaren <patrick at patrickmclaren.com> wrote,
> One problem I have when considering high-carb in context of the paleo diet is the ability to *satisfy* caloric requirements when eating unprocessed plants, legumes, and grains.

Thanks for your complicated nutritional calculations.  You are
absolutely correct, and I agree with your analysis.

To be clearer:  I am not denying that Paleos ate meat, vegetables and
fruit.  You are absolutely correct that grains couldn't fulfill most of
the diet.  I am merely arguing that neopaleos shouldn't avoid whole
grains based on a mistaken believe that early paleos didn't eat grain. 
They also ate legumes.  They also cooked them.  And even though I am
personally vegetarian, there is no doubt that Paleos ate meat.  Claims
to the contrary have no historical basis.

My personal diet does not fit the common definition of low-fat or
high-fat, because it's low-saturated-fat with high-monounsaturated-fat. 
My personal diet does not fit the common definition of low-carb or
high-carb, because it's low-sugar with high-complex-carbs.  My personal
diet is vegetarian, but it is not low-protein.

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 17:25:38 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:25:38 -0400
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>

Did any of you happen to catch this yet?...

http://michigantoday.umich.edu/2011/04/story.php?id=7980&tr=y&auid=8154157

The light must be shone through a material that does not conduct
> electricity, such as glass. And it must be focused to an intensity of 10
> million watts per square centimeter.


How difficult a task is this?  Are the optics required difficult to come
by/produce?

I think I saw somewhere in the article 10% efficiency.  What are current
solar panels rated at?  What efficiency do we need to attain to make solar
ubiquitous?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/fa35cba7/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 17:40:10 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:40:10 +0100
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110419101944.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.cded2fd617.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110419101944.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.cded2fd617.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikmAhApC2mkYqoZksz8LqC-DdjePA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Harvey Newstrom  wrote:
> To be clearer: ?I am not denying that Paleos ate meat, vegetables and
> fruit. ?You are absolutely correct that grains couldn't fulfill most of
> the diet. ?I am merely arguing that neopaleos shouldn't avoid whole
> grains based on a mistaken believe that early paleos didn't eat grain.
> They also ate legumes. ?They also cooked them. ?And even though I am
> personally vegetarian, there is no doubt that Paleos ate meat. ?Claims
> to the contrary have no historical basis.
>
>

Sounds pretty much like what I would call a balanced diet.

Meat, veg, grain and fruit.  What's not to like?

Though paleos probably had to exercise a lot more than modern man to get it.
Compare their lifestyle with driving the SUV to the supermarket.

And they probably had to survive on a lot less than modern man, with
intermittent fasting / starvation.

BillK



From sparge at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 17:27:10 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:27:10 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 19, 2011 1:05 PM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
>
> Dave Sill <sparge at gmail.com> wrote,
> > On Apr 19, 2011 8:23 AM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
wrote:
> > >
> > > No faith at all.  I look at the scientific evidence.
> >
> > OK, then what scientific evidence do you have that your diet is healthy?
Has
> > it even been studied?
>
> You're joking, right?

No, I'm dead serious. You've come up with your own 'slow carb' diet based on
your own research and experience, and I'm sure you think it's super awesome,
but has that diet been subjected to long-term clinical trails? I don't think
so.

I'd like to see long-term trials of paleo/primal diets, too, but none have
been conducted, yet, to my knowledge.

> Just read all the sources you are pointing me
> toward.  They are full of refutations of the current scientific thinking
> that high-fat is bad.  They explain why all the doctors are wrong, why
> the scientific studies are wrong, why the glycemic index is an
> inaccruate measure, why bloodtests are an inaccurate measure, why animal
> studies don't apply to people, why paleontologists are misinterpretting
> the data, etc., etc.  There is no doubt that this stuff has been
> scientifically studied.  Nor is there any doubt what the current
> standard scientific consensus is.  The paleo diet hypothesis is still in
> the minority opinion among professionals and research, whether you like
> it or not.  It's ludicrous to ask if anybody has studied this stuff yet.

Can I ask what the heck that rant has to with my question?

> > I don't think Taubes argues that *maybe* more research it's
> > required...clearly he thinks it is required.
>
> "More research required" = FUD. ...

OK, cool. You clearly have an axe to grind. Knock yourself out, but I'm not
going to help you.

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/e8387e7b/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 19 18:09:29 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 11:09:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest
	who	survive.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikmAhApC2mkYqoZksz8LqC-DdjePA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110419101944.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.cded2fd617.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTikmAhApC2mkYqoZksz8LqC-DdjePA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007a01cbfebc$ee19dc10$ca4d9430$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
survive.

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Harvey Newstrom  wrote:
>> To be clearer: ?I am not denying that Paleos ate meat, vegetables and 
>> fruit. ?You are absolutely correct that grains couldn't fulfill most 
>> of the diet...


>Sounds pretty much like what I would call a balanced diet.

>Meat, veg, grain and fruit.  What's not to like?...BillK


The paleo diet is based on the notion that we should eat in accordance with
the way we evolved.  Humans radiated out of Africa long enough ago that they
would have been time for digestive systems to evolve variations dependent on
where the genetically isolated subgroups of humans evolved.  For instance,
the Inuits have developed the ability to subsist entirely on meat, whereas
the Europeans tend to develop gout and ketosis if we try that.  We suspect
that some groups of humans can subsist entirely on diets that apparently
lack one or two essential amino acids.  Some humans have cow's milk
allergies, others do not.  The examples are plentiful and informative.

Since humans are suddenly no longer reproductively isolated, my notion is
that human digestive systems have wide diversity today even within
genetically related groups.  Everyone must discover for themselves what
works and what doesn't.  Universal rules need not apply.  If such were
universally applicable, there would be little debate: we would have
discovered all of them long ago.

My intuition from half a century of experimentation: eat light, get
sufficient fat from both plant and animal sources, go easy on the sugar and
alcohol, fast occasionally, devour sushi at every opportunity.

spike







From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 20:17:14 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:17:14 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>

I have not been commenting here lately.  But after reading this
thread, and the lack of critical comment, I have concluded I am the
only person on the list who has designed power supplies for commercial
products.

Keith


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Apr 19 20:44:04 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 13:44:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org> <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>
	<20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimeNRBaZwoo1tPh6JD6Ei_gawgFCg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:43:24PM -0700, Samantha Atkins wrote:
>>> He sounds like a creationist.
>>>
>> Actually, what was said is exactly correct. ?We can't fully spec out an
>> AGI ("traditional blueprint"). ?It must recursively self-improve. ?I
>> thought this was and has been accepted information in these circles for
>> a very long time now.
>
> My beef was with the idea that a more advanced system is
> required to produce a less advanced. This is trivially
> untrue, because darwinian evolution is extremely stupid,
> yet since you can read this message it most assuredly
> does work.

That's because the present NI (natural intelligences) come in two
parts, a hardware that self extracts from the genome, and a knowledge
base/software that gets loaded from past evolutionary accumulations of
culture.  Both are needed.

> I have never believed into recursive self-improvement.
> Nobody is that smart. You just bump up the boundary
> condition, and let emergence handle the rest.

View as a whole, recursive self-improvement is exactly what culture
has been doing since the days when chipping rocks was high tech.

And, yes, the number of people in a culture makes a big difference in
the boundary conditions.

Keith



From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 19 22:37:31 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 15:37:31 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
	of	wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=doUkF1im0Tjf-GigC620ZMakaFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=doUkF1im0Tjf-GigC620ZMakaFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00e801cbfee2$5fd8f870$1f8ae950$@att.net>

...
From: Giovanni Santostasi [mailto:gsantostasi at gmail.com] 
...
Subject: Re: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
of wind power

>...So what do you think about this stuff, is too good to be true?

I am a hard core optimist.  I see it not so much too good to be true. Rather
too false to be true.

>...Is this all bogus?

I think so.  Read on:

>http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-italian-scientists-cold-fusion-video.ht
ml

>...Giovanni

...
 Comment that raises immediate suspicion:

"...Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi of the University of Bologna announced
that they developed a cold fusion device capable of producing 12,400 W of
heat power with an input of just 400 W..."

Hmmm.  This version of the experimental description has enough numbers in it
for us to evaluate.  But for now, read on.

"...Rossi and Focardi say that, when the atomic nuclei of nickel and
hydrogen are fused in their reactor, the reaction produces copper and a
large amount of energy..."

No!  You guys make me work so hard to remember my college physics!  But it's
OK, I enjoyed it in my misspent youth, now it's fun to relearn it.

Let us ignore the nucleon energy argument for the moment, since we are
talking weird physics here.

If I am reading my chart correctly (do feel free to refute, you won't hurt
my feelings {8-]) there are only four isotopes of nickel that could form
copper by proton absorption (the others are by beta decay, which I refuted
last week): 51Ni, 52Ni, 53Ni, and 54Ni.  When these undergo proton
absorption (which is what these guys are claiming) you get 52Cu, 53Cu, 54Cu
and 55Cu, respectively.  Otherwise you would see betas like crazy, and they
don't say that, and if there were beta decays, the experiment wouldn't do
this anyways.

Note these guys are specifically claiming copper from nickel by proton
absorption, rather than by beta decay of any kind.

The respective half lives of those last three copper isotopes are less than
300 nanoseconds, 75 nanoseconds, 40 milliseconds.  Regarding 52Cu, no one is
claiming to know the halflife of that stuff, but it doesn't matter because
there isn't enough 51Ni to worry about in any case.

Out of all this, I thought of a hell of a clever physics joke we could play
on the undergrads on April 1.  We could get some ordinary stable copper (63
and 65), in granular form, flash plate it with nickel (nickel will
electroplate directly onto a chemically excited copper surface, I can show
you how.)  Then we give it to the undergrads, who fail to notice it's
density is very slightly higher than it should be.  They couldn't be faulted
for that, the density is very nearly identical for those two, right around
8.9 g/cm^3.  In granular form, they would never notice, no one would.  Then
we give them this setup with a phony input but which chemically dissolves
the nickel, making it look like they have created copper.  Since the
resulting copper is stable with no observed beta decay, they would go to the
chalk board and theorize some previously-unknown proton absorption.  The
electroplating process requires energy input: it comes back out when the
nickel flash coating dissolves, heating the water.  Undergrads go crazy, we
laugh our asses off.  That would be a kick, we could have such fun!

Oh wait.  Do you suppose the undergrads thought of this trick, and slipped
some nickel plated copper into the lab (labeled pure nickel) when the
professors weren't looking?

spike






From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Tue Apr 19 21:51:23 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:51:23 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Dave Sill wrote,
> No, I'm dead serious. You've come up with your own 'slow carb'
> diet based on your own research and experience, and I'm sure
> you think it's super awesome, but has that diet been subjected
> to long-term clinical trails? I don't think so.

Google the terms "glycemic index" and "glycemic load".  Some carbs are
simply slower to absorb than others.  I'm not making any of this stuff up by
myself.  This is standard nutritional science.  Nothing new here.  There has
been plenty of long-term clinical trials about the benefits of eating more
complex carbohydrates and less sugar.

> Can I ask what the heck that rant has to with my question?

I was describing the failings of the references you thought proved your
point.  I am glad that you recognized the content as "ranting".  But I am
waiting for you to realize that it was not "my" rant, but your own sources
that I was describing.


> > "More research required" = FUD. ...
> OK, cool. You clearly have an axe to grind. Knock yourself out, but I'm
not going to help you.

I did not mean the term "FUD" as an insult.  I meant it calmly and
literally.  The sources you referenced do not present evidence for their own
position.  Instead, they try to develop fear of the other side, uncertainty
about the other side, and doubt about the other side.  Literally, "FUD"
*against* a position, not evidence *for* a position.





From spike66 at att.net  Tue Apr 19 23:03:18 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:03:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of	wind power
In-Reply-To: <00e801cbfee2$5fd8f870$1f8ae950$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>	<BANLkTi=doUkF1im0Tjf-GigC620ZMakaFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<00e801cbfee2$5fd8f870$1f8ae950$@att.net>
Message-ID: <00ef01cbfee5$f924de60$eb6e9b20$@att.net>

Giovanni wrote:

>>So what do you think about this stuff, is too good to be true? Is this all
bogus?

>>http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-01-italian-scientists-cold-fusion-video.h
tml

>>Giovanni


>... On Behalf Of spike
...

>...We could get some ordinary stable copper (63 and 65), in granular form,
flash plate it with nickel (nickel will electroplate directly onto a
chemically excited copper surface, I can show you how.) ... Oh wait.  Do you
suppose the undergrads thought of this trick, and slipped some nickel plated
copper into the lab (labeled pure nickel) when the professors weren't
looking?...spike


Alternate scenario, to avoid looking like the whole Piltdown Man conspiracy
theorist:

Member of sorority Pi Delta Pi leaves boyfriend, leader of jock frat Alpha
Betas, takes up with a geek from Lambda Lambda Lambda.  In revenge, the
Alpha Betas come over and beat the tri-lambs beyond recognition.  As they
bandage their wounds while studying for a physics test, a tri-lamb thinks of
a perfect nerd revenge and comments: Bwaaaaahahahahahahaaaaaa (sinisterly).
Plotting, scheming using their chemistry expertise, they flash plate the
copper with a few thousand angstroms of nickel, put it in the nickel
container, hoping to screw with the Alpha Betas in the lab the next day.  

But something goes terribly wrong, as something always does in these
scenarios: two physics professors get ahold of the fake nickel!  They do the
experiment, they unsuspectingly conclude an unknown proton absorption has
taken place, they plaster the results out there for the world to see,
unknowing!  The tri-Lambs panic and flee.  The professors are heading for
destruction, for no one, not even they, will be able to reproduce the
results once the nickel plated copper is used up.  The professors
reputations are ruined.  The tri-lambs are never seen again.  The girlfriend
from Pi Delta Pi is already sleeping with a Gamma Tau.  The jocks in Alpha
Beta struggle to master their multiplication tables.

spike






From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 01:36:35 2011
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:36:35 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 10 things killed by the smartphone
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=iov11Fgcj4aK-K3ORh48-w=CTwQ@mail.gmail.com>

I had fun reading over this list...

http://www.pcworld.com/article/225372/10_things_killed_by_the_smartphone.html#tk.nl_dnx_t_crawl

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/a6631f32/attachment.html>

From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 01:28:20 2011
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:28:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>

A not very kind review...

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/sc-mov-0413-atlas-shrugged-20110415-33,0,179159.story

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/439e1911/attachment.html>

From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 01:31:41 2011
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:31:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Brain nerve stimulation may boost learning capacities
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=or7QmRfu9BCEiq5Mkfnojf3=LAA@mail.gmail.com>

This makes me think of the classic science fiction image of a scientist
wearing a brain enhancing helmet...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110413171327.htm

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/e8bda374/attachment.html>

From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 01:34:48 2011
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 18:34:48 -0700
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
Message-ID: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>

This is perhaps a baby step toward uploading...

http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/04/worlds-first-human-brain-map-u.html

John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/e9ab7726/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr 20 02:03:43 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 19:03:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:51 PM, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>wrote:

>
> Google the terms "glycemic index" and "glycemic load".  Some carbs are
> simply slower to absorb than others.  I'm not making any of this stuff up
> by
> myself.  This is standard nutritional science.  Nothing new here.  There
> has
> been plenty of long-term clinical trials about the benefits of eating more
> complex carbohydrates and less sugar.
>

Harvey, it seems like you think paleo advocates reject the concepts of
glycemic index and load. Where did you get that idea? I would say that the
vast majority of paleos that I've read (which is quite a few by now) find
glycemic index of very limited value but find glycemic load to be quite
valuable. The paleo argument is that, glycemic index/load aside, even
complex carbs can be problematic because most of us (to widely varying
degrees) find other problems with them, including reactions to gluten and
other substances in grains, and reduced nutrient absorption due to
anti-nutrients.

The Gary Taubes article cited was far from his best material. It was merely
suggestive. I would strongly recommend his book, Good Calories, Bad
Calories. You'll find ample evidence in favor of higher-fat diets and
against the American orthodoxy, as you requested.

--- Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/ac5d7b51/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr 20 02:10:52 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 19:10:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimnGV0=gD4hkOwLZsF7nbdCpXaRwA@mail.gmail.com>

I'm sure not very kind reviews will be easy to find.

I saw it on Sunday. The audience seemed to enjoy it. For a low-budget movie
($15m -- a pittance in these days) I thought it was okay, not great, not
bad. Taylor Schilling played Dagny Taggart very well (a point on which
almost all reviews I've seen agreed). I also liked Grant Bowler as Hank
Rearden (oddly, he played "Captain Gault" in Lost!). Michael Lerner was
pretty good as Wesley Mouch.

The book itself is often criticized for including too many long speeches
(including one REALLY long one). Ironically, I thought the movie suffered
from not allowing the characters to speak the philosophy at sufficient
length. It was only about an hour-an-a-half movie; they could have allowed a
bit more speechifying.

It was good enough, in my view, that I'd like to see it do well enough to
justify funding parts II and III.

--- Max



2011/4/19 John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>

> A not very kind review...
>
>
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/sc-mov-0413-atlas-shrugged-20110415-33,0,179159.story
>
> John
>
>
>
> --
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/0f82ef29/attachment.html>

From steinberg.will at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 02:06:41 2011
From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 21:06:41 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Brain nerve stimulation may boost learning capacities
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=or7QmRfu9BCEiq5Mkfnojf3=LAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=or7QmRfu9BCEiq5Mkfnojf3=LAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin335k6jbFd5P6U6+KWvidNp0igAA@mail.gmail.com>

Puttin' on my thinking cap

On Apr 19, 2011 9:01 PM, "John Grigg" <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com> wrote:

This makes me think of the classic science fiction image of a scientist
wearing a brain enhancing helmet...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110413171327.htm

John

_______________________________________________
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/20110419/5047c098/attachment.html>

From ismirth at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 02:09:49 2011
From: ismirth at gmail.com (Isabelle Hakala)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:09:49 -0400
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin1KbKzWBWDprHBELRPNpce6cTKQw@mail.gmail.com>

I haven't read much Ayn Rand. I have only read Atlas Shrugged, which I felt
was a good explanation of the extremes. I found the book to be compelling in
a way towards self-understanding of what my views are.

The film version left out every single bit of intensity possible. I was
literally  *bored* while watching it. I was aghast because I have listed to
it as an audio book at least 20 times. This LA times review really hits it
on the head. I feel that the director missed every single point that was
made. The movie was dumbed down so much that there was literally nothing
left to comprehend. If you had not read the book first I doubt you would
have any idea what was going on in the film.

On Apr 19, 2011 9:52 PM, "John Grigg" <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com> wrote:

A not very kind review...

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/sc-mov-0413-atlas-shrugged-20110415-33,0,179159.story

John

_______________________________________________
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/20110419/242503f7/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr 20 03:01:18 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:01:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimnGV0=gD4hkOwLZsF7nbdCpXaRwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTimnGV0=gD4hkOwLZsF7nbdCpXaRwA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimYa_qYSoOdxNJk4OCEjX7uVXrJHQ@mail.gmail.com>

I should have added: The fellow playing John Galt (who is also the director)
was very weak. Although seen only in shadows, his voice and presence were
far too weak for that character. Since we haven't seen his face in Part I,
perhaps they can replace him. I hope so.

--- Max

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 7:10 PM, Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:

> I'm sure not very kind reviews will be easy to find.
>
> I saw it on Sunday. The audience seemed to enjoy it. For a low-budget movie
> ($15m -- a pittance in these days) I thought it was okay, not great, not
> bad. Taylor Schilling played Dagny Taggart very well (a point on which
> almost all reviews I've seen agreed). I also liked Grant Bowler as Hank
> Rearden (oddly, he played "Captain Gault" in Lost!). Michael Lerner was
> pretty good as Wesley Mouch.
>
> The book itself is often criticized for including too many long speeches
> (including one REALLY long one). Ironically, I thought the movie suffered
> from not allowing the characters to speak the philosophy at sufficient
> length. It was only about an hour-an-a-half movie; they could have allowed a
> bit more speechifying.
>
> It was good enough, in my view, that I'd like to see it do well enough to
> justify funding parts II and III.
>
> --- Max
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/2174482a/attachment.html>

From Frankmac at ripco.com  Wed Apr 20 03:25:42 2011
From: Frankmac at ripco.com (Frank McElligott)
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:25:42 -0400
Subject: [ExI] the time and the brain
Message-ID: <000601cbff0a$a6943e00$854ba243@sx28047db9d36c>

Following John Grigg's link to information concerning getting smarter I thought  a link to the "NEWYORKER" piece on the brain and time would be a nice addition to the discussion.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/04/25/110425fa_fact_bilger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110419/8045ce11/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 06:23:31 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:23:31 -0600
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>

What else would you expect from the LA Times? Like nearly every other
paper in America, it is terribly liberal in it's views. Hollywood in
general despises Rand, even though she got her big break in Hollywood.
The critic seemed to attack Rand first, and the movie second.

I haven't yet seen the movie, but I plan to. Atlas Shrugged is an
awfully big book to try and shoehorn into a movie, and I'm sure that
Rand fans will find plenty to be unhappy about, just as the typical
comic book fan hates most comic book movies...

-Kelly

2011/4/19 John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>:
> A not very kind review...
>
> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/sc-mov-0413-atlas-shrugged-20110415-33,0,179159.story
>
> John


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 06:59:04 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:59:04 -0600
Subject: [ExI] FRIDA- a new industrial robot
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimmreS9b_J6PB4widZwR1HH6fRtWQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimmreS9b_J6PB4widZwR1HH6fRtWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=N3nU4fBFJRhy0CoyL2R+nY-sqAQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/13 John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>:
> What do you think of this robotic system?? And where do you think it will be
> in ten years?
>
> http://www.engadget.com/2011/04/13/frida-concept-robot-will-solve-all-of-foxconns-problems-by-re/

I finally had time to look into this little fellow... it's a
prototype, but a very interesting one. For those who haven't seen it,
it has shoulders, two arms and is roughly the size of a human being
and is extremely articulate. It is not terribly fast, at least in the
videos I have seen.

The article indicated that they wanted to sell them to Foxconn, where
the Chinese put together iPods, iPads, cell phones, etc. in huge
Boeing sized rooms full of folks directly from the Chinese country
side. Wired had an article on Foxconn a couple of months back,
emphasizing the human cost of humans working in these environments.
Nevertheless, compared to trudging around in rice fields, these are
very good jobs that a lot of people compete for. We tend to forget
that here in America, and merely feel sorry for the people working in
these factories. This is unjust poppycock, as our grandparents did
similar work for Henry Ford. It's just time shifted.

The folks at ABB (who make FRIDA) apparently have a vision of these
guys sitting in between the former peasants at Foxconn, being
interchangeable when, for example, the work order changes and the
robot hasn't had time to be programmed, a person could step in until
the robot had been programmed for the new task. This is an interesting
proposal, robots side by side with former rice farmers. Unfortunately,
I don't think this model will initially be very successful for very
human reasons. I suspect that the humans will revert to Luddite
behavior that has always accompanied this kind of incursion on what
was formerly a humans only endeavor. I suspect that the nets around
Foxcon will end up full of more FRIDAS than suicidal workers, at least
for a while. Perhaps there is some part of the Chinese ethos that will
make this concern moot, but if they follow the textile workers of
England, I fear for the little automatons. With time it will work out
when the technology has been perfected.

The other problem is that at least with the prototype, the robot moves
much more slowly than the humans at Foxconn. I saw a video of a lady
assembling an electrical breaker that was just amazing on a TED video!
The little robot could not possibly keep up with her, at least as it
was shown. They will have to work a lot on total cost of ownership,
because programming the little beasties could be much more expensive
than just importing more former rice farmers... it will be interesting
to see how it all plays out over both the short and long term.

-Kelly



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Wed Apr 20 07:46:21 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 02:46:21 -0500
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>

On 4/20/2011 1:23 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> What else would you expect from the LA Times? Like nearly every other
> paper in America, it is terribly liberal in it is views.

Like that notorious flaming Red, P. J. O'Rourke:

<http://blogs.wsj.com/ideas-market/2011/04/06/atlas-shrugged-and-so-did-i/>



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr 20 08:39:54 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 10:39:54 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110420083953.GI23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 01:25:38PM -0400, Mr Jones wrote:
> Did any of you happen to catch this yet?...
> 
> http://michigantoday.umich.edu/2011/04/story.php?id=7980&tr=y&auid=8154157

Yes.
 
> The light must be shone through a material that does not conduct
> > electricity, such as glass. And it must be focused to an intensity of 10
> > million watts per square centimeter.
> 
> 
> How difficult a task is this?  Are the optics required difficult to come
> by/produce?

Nanometamaterials/photonic crystal patterning are hard problems on
their own. Semiconductors, particularly in quantum dot form can
be pretty cheap and made from nonscarce/nontoxic elements.

Long-term we're likely to see interesting new approaches (e.g. rectennas
scaled into VIS/NIR) with quantitative efficiency, but we're again
looking at fabrication issues. This will be probably done by autoassembly
or outright machine-phase which are both comfortably far off.
 
> I think I saw somewhere in the article 10% efficiency.  What are current
> solar panels rated at?  What efficiency do we need to attain to make solar
> ubiquitous?

In PV you're looking at ROI and EROEI integrated over lifetime.
Efficiency is typically negatively correlated to that, so as long
as you're above some minimal (~2-5%) efficiency with all other factors
compensating for it you're in the clear.

Best commercial efficiencies are ~20% IIRC, best lab is approaching
50%, but that's concentrated multujunction/tuned bandgap stacks made
from unobtainium.

Trend see http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/74/PVeff%28rev100921%29.jpg

-- 
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 giulio at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 08:18:51 2011
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 10:18:51 +0200
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikNn-9wEPkgP6XngdnrW4WatJUndg@mail.gmail.com>

I look fwd to watching the movie, but I hope it is better done than
Rand's books. My problem with Rand is not her ideology, which I find
extreme but often refreshing in its unPCness, but the fact that she is
an awfully boring writer. I am a very avid reader of everything,
novels, SF, thrillers, literature, philosophy, science and everything
else, but I am afraid I never managed to finish a Rand novel. Just too
boring.

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> What else would you expect from the LA Times? Like nearly every other
> paper in America, it is terribly liberal in it's views. Hollywood in
> general despises Rand, even though she got her big break in Hollywood.
> The critic seemed to attack Rand first, and the movie second.
>
> I haven't yet seen the movie, but I plan to. Atlas Shrugged is an
> awfully big book to try and shoehorn into a movie, and I'm sure that
> Rand fans will find plenty to be unhappy about, just as the typical
> comic book fan hates most comic book movies...
>
> -Kelly
>
> 2011/4/19 John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>:
>> A not very kind review...
>>
>> http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/sc-mov-0413-atlas-shrugged-20110415-33,0,179159.story
>>
>> John
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 09:03:24 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 10:03:24 +0100
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Damien Broderick  wrote:
> On 4/20/2011 1:23 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>> What else would you expect from the LA Times? Like nearly every other
>> paper in America, it is terribly liberal in it is views.
>
> Like that notorious flaming Red, P. J. O'Rourke:
> <http://blogs.wsj.com/ideas-market/2011/04/06/atlas-shrugged-and-so-did-i/>
>
>


The comments (pro and against) are also fun to read.

Quote:
    * Nergol wrote:

?There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s
life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish
fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its
unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially
crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of
course, involves orcs.? ? John Rogers
--------------


BillK



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr 20 10:58:12 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:58:12 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110420105812.GJ23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 01:17:14PM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:
> I have not been commenting here lately.  But after reading this
> thread, and the lack of critical comment, I have concluded I am the
> only person on the list who has designed power supplies for commercial
> products.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

-- 
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 mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 12:06:09 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:06:09 -0400
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
	<BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=6GrQA9OxZs+TVDR=L6yJVqmv9vQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 5:03 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> ?There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s
> life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish
> fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its
> unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially
> crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of
> course, involves orcs.? ? John Rogers
>

Love it!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/b81fe16a/attachment.html>

From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Apr 20 11:13:51 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:13:51 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005101cbff4c$09c1bc00$1d453400$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Max More wrote,
> Harvey, it seems like you think paleo advocates reject the concepts of
glycemic index and load. Where did you get that idea?

Those comments were directed at Dave Sill, who seemed to think it was a
wacky idea that I personally made up.

Dave Sill said,
> You've come up with your own 'slow carb' diet based on your own research
and experience, and I'm sure you think it's super awesome
[....]
> Methinks you're putting to much faith in glycemic index.
[....]
> Has it even been studied?





From mrjones2020 at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 12:17:45 2011
From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:17:45 -0400
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim7kBhs+xtYKrbxhpvPPduExdh=OA@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/19 John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com>

> This is perhaps a baby step toward uploading...


Are you familiar with http://www.humanconnectomeproject.org/

Exciting stuff, mapping the brain.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/ef6efd5e/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Wed Apr 20 12:19:37 2011
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:19:37 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Brain nerve stimulation may boost learning capacities
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=or7QmRfu9BCEiq5Mkfnojf3=LAA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=or7QmRfu9BCEiq5Mkfnojf3=LAA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAECF59.7050002@aleph.se>

Sounds a bit similar to how vagus nerve stimulation improves learning.

However, the paper in the link stimulates the nucleus basalis to release 
acetylcholine in the right part of the cortex. The title in the 
sciencedaily article is misleading - this is no mere nerve, this is a 
deep part of the brain:
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Nucleus_basalis_of_Meynert

There is earlier work by Michael Merzenich's team on using it to gate 
cortical plasticity.

-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute 
James Martin 21st Century School 
Philosophy Faculty 
Oxford University 



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr 20 12:22:16 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 14:22:16 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <00e801cbfee2$5fd8f870$1f8ae950$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=doUkF1im0Tjf-GigC620ZMakaFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<00e801cbfee2$5fd8f870$1f8ae950$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110420122216.GK23560@leitl.org>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 03:37:31PM -0700, spike wrote:

> Oh wait.  Do you suppose the undergrads thought of this trick, and slipped
> some nickel plated copper into the lab (labeled pure nickel) when the
> professors weren't looking?

"The professors" are crooks. Much simpler explanation

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=198040

(notice the thread has 14 pages)


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Apr 20 11:22:21 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:22:21 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005201cbff4d$3a087ab0$ae197010$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Max More wrote,
> The Gary Taubes article cited was far from his best material. It was
merely suggestive. 
>I would strongly recommend his book, Good Calories, Bad Calories. You'll
find ample
> evidence in favor of higher-fat diets and against the American orthodoxy,
as you requested.

I have not gotten that book yet.  But I am afraid it will be a more polished
version of the same.





From js_exi at gnolls.org  Wed Apr 20 12:47:22 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 05:47:22 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
Message-ID: <4DAED5DA.2030707@gnolls.org>


I'll get back to Harvey's stuff in a bit, but:

Spike wrote:
> Humans radiated out of Africa long enough ago that they
> would have been time for digestive systems to evolve variations dependent on
> where the genetically isolated subgroups of humans evolved.  For instance,
> the Inuits have developed the ability to subsist entirely on meat, whereas
> the Europeans tend to develop gout and ketosis if we try that.

I love you, Spike, but there are a couple problems here.

First, the idea that meat (or purines in general) cause gout is an old 
myth.  Fructose is the primary driver of blood uric acid, and, 
therefore, gout:
http://paleozonenutrition.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/gout-and-fructose/

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7219473.stm
"Men who consume two or more sugary soft drinks a day have an 85% higher 
risk of gout compared with those who drink less than one a month, a 
study suggests." ... "Diet soft drinks did not increase the risk of gout 
but fruit juice and fructose rich fruits (apples and oranges) were 
associated with a higher risk, the researchers said."

And an excellent overview of the real issues, which are fructose, 
***high insulin***, and underhydration (includes links/references):
http://www.emotionsforengineers.com/2009/09/causes-of-gout.html

A severe gout sufferer I know said that he has not had a single gout 
attack -- not even a tingle -- since going on a high-fat paleo diet.

Second, the idea that there is a special Inuit adaptation to meat-based 
diets is unsupported by any evidence with which I'm familiar.  The ApoE 
variation that allows us to process dietary fat much better than 
chimpanzees is millions of years old:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15101252

Pardon the website, but here's another instructive article about 
non-Inuit eating meat-based diets (the magazine it's from is otherwise 
behind a paywall), i.e. Vilhjalmur Stefansson:
http://www.biblelife.org/stefansson1.htm

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 14:17:50 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 15:17:50 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <4DAED5DA.2030707@gnolls.org>
References: <4DAED5DA.2030707@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=LZkfRnqr1B1OtZ1Bk-1ddDtDupA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 1:47 PM, J. Stanton  wrote:
> First, the idea that meat (or purines in general) cause gout is an old myth.
> ?Fructose is the primary driver of blood uric acid, and, therefore, gout:
> http://paleozonenutrition.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/gout-and-fructose/
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7219473.stm
> "Men who consume two or more sugary soft drinks a day have an 85% higher
> risk of gout compared with those who drink less than one a month, a study
> suggests." ... "Diet soft drinks did not increase the risk of gout but fruit
> juice and fructose rich fruits (apples and oranges) were associated with a
> higher risk, the researchers said."
>
> And an excellent overview of the real issues, which are fructose, ***high
> insulin***, and underhydration (includes links/references):
> http://www.emotionsforengineers.com/2009/09/causes-of-gout.html
>
>


These articles don't say that fructose causes gout.

They say that fructose might be one of many factors that aggravate gout.

I prefer to believe what sites like WebMD say, rather than paleo
support sites where almost everything can apparently be cured by a
paleo diet.

Gout often has nothing at all to do with diet. Genetics, obesity,
alcohol consumption, enzyme deficiency or even some medications can
cause or aggravate the condition.

BillK



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 14:52:39 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 07:52:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>

I had two people who asked for the path into space graph and the
spread sheet to check my "rocket science" math and one who complained
in private email that the Skylon/laser/power sat posting I made
recently was incomprehensible.

So here is another shot at it:

It's been known for decades that solar power satellites *can* send
energy to the earth.  After all, communication satellites do it every
day, just not at levels useful for power.

The question is cost, and that's almost all due to the high cost of
rockets to get millions of tons of power satellite parts to GEO.

If you want to sell power on earth in serious competition with coal,
the economics indicates you need to reduce the cost of getting parts
to GEO by a factor of around 200.  That's $20,000 per kg down to
$100/kg.

Unfortunately, the chemical energy in rocket fuel vs. the physics
energy it takes to get to orbit just won't do it.  Round numbers, the
Falcon Heavy will put 50 tons in LEO or 25 tons in GEO for a cost of
$100 M.  That's a reduction to $4000/kg, a factor 5 but not enough.
Launching one every hour might get the price down to $1000/kg which is
still too high by five times.

Skylon, the proposed rocket plane from Reaction Engines, at several
flights per hour is expected to put 10 tons in LEO and 5 tons in GEO
for a cost of $1.5 M or $300/kg.  *Still* too high.

A brand new concept starts with the sub orbital maximum load of 30
tons for a Skylon then uses 400 MW of laser power to get 10km/s
exhaust velocity from a second stage.  This will get 20 tons to GEO
per flight.  The estimated capital cost of the lasers ($4 B or $400
M/year) is under $2/kg.  Spread over 480,000 tons per year it drives
the lift cost for parts down to $100/kg.

If we can get the lift cost down that far, a power satellite comes in
at $1600/kW or $1.6 B/GW.  At that capital cost, energy from space
could sell for substantially less than energy from coal.

The development could come in as low as $20 B, maybe less.  The profit
after this was going is up in the hundred billion a year class rapidly
growing into the trillions--enough to cope with social security and
the other cost of government.

Not that the US is likely to do it, but whoever does it will put a cap
on energy cost

Keith

On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Skylon can boost a 30 ton payload to 157 km and 6966 m/s. see page 10 of
>
> http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/downloads/SKYLON_User_%20Manual_rev1%5B3%5D.pdf
>
> That's well short of LEO and 3286 m/s short of GTO. ?However, any
> acceleration over 2 m/s^2 has enough time to put the second stage
> payload in orbit. ?(It falls slowly because the local g at this
> velocity is around 2 m/s^2)
>
> There are limits on how long you can accelerate with a laser because
> you have to keep the vehicle in view of the bounce mirror.
>
> GTO velocity is around 10252 m/s ?To circularize the orbit at GEO
> would take 1630 .m/s more or a total delta V of 11, 682 m/s.
> Together, 4916 m/s which is about half the exhaust velocity leading to
> a mass ratio of ~1.7 ? Either constant acceleration or constant heater
> temperature are options. ?Constant heater temperature gets the higher
> ISP. Both accelerations can't take more than 20 minutes together to
> get a transfer rate of 3 flights per hour.
>
> It turns out (from a spread sheet I ran off) that 400 MW and a flow of
> 8.33 kg/s of hydrogen results in a constant heater temperature of 3000
> deg K and an initial acceleration of 2.721 m/s^2.
>
> The vehicle enters GTO downrange 7743 km at 970 seconds with 21,900 kg
> of mass remaining. ?Because thrust is constant as mass is used up
> acceleration goes up to 3.727 m/s^2.
>
> It takes until1206 seconds to reach GTO insertion, i.e., a second burn
> 5 or 15 hours later of 236 seconds. ?For a first pass this is close
> enough to 20 minutes.
>
> The peak acceleration at the end of circularizing at GEO is just over
> 4 m/s^2 (all really low accelerations). ?There is almost 20,000 kg
> (19937 kg) left. ?I.e., 20 tons gets to GEO per Skylon flight. ?The
> assumption is that everything going to GEO gets turned into power
> satellites. ?(Even the sandwich wrappers for 500-1000 workers at GEO)
>
> Conventional use of Skylon will deliver about 6 tons per flight to
> GEO. ?For a 3 per hour flight rate, that's 18 tons per hour. ?By
> adding $4 B of lasers (and the GEO bounce mirrors) laser boosting a
> suborbital payload will put 60 tons per hr in GEO, slightly in excess
> of 3X.
>
> Operated 90% of the time, that would be 8000h x60 t/h or 480,000 t per
> year. ?That would support a substantial power satellite production, at
> 5 kg/kW, 5000 t/GW, 96 per year. ?At a rock bottom price of $1.6 B/GW
> (2 cents per kWh paid off over ten years) the revenue stream would be
> over $150 B.
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> To put these numbers in context, for the SKYLON case where all costs
> are being recovered, the cost of launching 150,000 tonnes into orbit
> at $200/kg is $30,000 million per year.
>
> This compares with a cost of about $3 trillion per year ($3,000,000
> million) if expendable launch vehicles were to be used (although this
> flight rate is unachievable with expendable rockets).
>
> This clearly illustrates the point that a reusable spaceplane system
> is an essential, enabling part of implementing a solar power satellite
> infrastructure.
>
> http://www.reactionengines.co.uk/downloads/ssp_skylon_ver2.pdf
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> ?I have assumed 5000 t per GW, the Skylon analysis assumed 3000.
>
> To put the addition of laser powered rockets in context, the same
> flight rate would allow over three times as much cargo to GEO for the
> same cost in Skylon launches. ?The cost to *GEO* would come down to
> under $100/kg, which is the magic number for two cent per kWh power,
> i.e., half the price of coal.
>
> So at least from the physics of rockets and the economics of power
> satellites, it seems to be possible to have a world with plenty of low
> cost energy.
>
> This is by no means a fully worked out proposal. ?For example, I don't
> know exactly how to get the Skylons back to their launch site.
>
> But it is possible (with some more work) that the entire project to
> profitability might come in around $20 B. ?If that's the case, it's
> less than the Chunnel or Three Gorges Dam in current dollars.
>
> Keith
>
> PS. ?If there is anyone besides Spike who can grok physics and spread
> sheets, be happy to send you a copy.
>



From eugen at leitl.org  Wed Apr 20 15:12:10 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:12:10 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 07:52:39AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:

> The question is cost, and that's almost all due to the high cost of
> rockets to get millions of tons of power satellite parts to GEO.

The question is not just cost (by the way, have a look at
http://www.fastcompany.com/1745113/what-happens-when-solar-power-is-as-cheap-as-coal )
the problem is EROEI.

When we're looking at kW/kg, we shouldn't forget that the 
kg is at ~Mach 25, and it came from the bottom of the gravity
well which taxes your EROEI -- unless it came from lunar material.
 
-- 
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 kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 15:15:11 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:15:11 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Heat of the Earth [WAS Re: Efficiency of wind power]
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikcKCXbNOdpDyCcAbefHBhDhUambw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110407083103.GB23560@leitl.org>
	<6592456A-FFA4-4EED-B0DD-AA94B1E9AB20@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTi=AxKRw8qjEdtA-O_8ax8wLeNtUYw@mail.gmail.com>
	<75AB4B33-32D8-4576-929E-4FE4B712C7B0@bellsouth.net>
	<BANLkTinWscKJG_DoHGk3ZbPn-KfiKJWd1A@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB14E4.2080504@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=MKHOwWSiYGo3WKaQLocuFOVz+Qg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAB4E7F.7050506@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTin5FpXe-Xo7EdwF4h2NjMydfYfNiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikN26LZBvrLNAEM3vT-PJ5LYOCpkA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419112355.GS23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikcKCXbNOdpDyCcAbefHBhDhUambw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimN_+NBA=rY9NuCDNOuW8kxNA=cdQ@mail.gmail.com>

2011/4/19 Mr Jones <mrjones2020 at gmail.com>:
>> Kelly Anderson:> It would be very good if we could figure out how to steal
>> heat from
>> > the hot spot under Yellowstone to the point of putting off the next
>> > eruption of the super volcano... Probably a more potent risk than
>> > asteroids, but fixing the problem seems significantly more difficult.
>
> **nods** I've thought of this very same thing. ?If we could somehow draw
> away some of that heat safely, we could prevent the?super-volcano?from
> sending us into the history books.

Not that there would be any history books. :-)

> The problem is, we like to take the
> easy/cheap way, instead of the long-term responsible way...so we'd pollute
> the area, and destroy the balance; because it was cheaper.

If we could do it at all, that might still be a long term good
trade-off. Geothermal itself is relatively clean, though what you do
with it might not be. If you could steal enough energy to make a
difference, it would be a huge power source. The environmental damage
of a super volcanic eruption (which could lead to a 90% reduction in
the overall population of people world wide) seems more than any
industrial complex I can imagine.

Parenthetically... why do we even have a hot spot under Yellowstone?
It has been there for a very long time. I have heard a hypothesis for
the hot spot under Hawaii... but that theory doesn't fit for
Yellowstone. The Hawaiian hypothesis noted that the hot spot now under
the new underwater island near the big island is at the same place on
our planet as the great spot on Jupiter. Perhaps the same fluid
dynamics that cause the great spot are at work in the magma under the
earth's surface? It's an interesting theory, but I don't know if
serious scientists give it the time of day. It could just be a strange
coincidence, with the Yellowstone hot spot being contrary evidence...
I haven't heard if there is a similar hot spot under Tambora
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqpOTJAAwBU), or the Kamchatka
peninsula (which has similar geothermal properties to Yellowstone). I
actually got very side tracked here, as there is apparently a newly
discovered (2006) supervolcano in Kamchatka, but it isn't widely
known. More on this later.

>> Eugen: Geothermal is a niche. It can be an important niche for some
>> locations, but in the great total it doesn't matter that much.
>
> What about ground loops, versus wells. ?5-8' deep loops, 100's or 1000's of
> meters in length, acting as the 'heatsink'. ?I'm thinking of geo in terms of
> a supplementation to home heating/cooling?solutions. ?Granted, some areas
> don't have open space to trench in this manner, but I've heard that
> lakes/ponds are also good sources.

Lakes and ponds have convection currents that allow them to dissipate
heat in just the way that in ground systems take advantage of. So I
would assume that water based systems wouldn't work quite as well as
underground systems since they generally change temperature more with
the seasons.

I did a lot of caving in my youth, and was always impressed that while
it was ten degrees outside, it was always comfortable in the cave.

I have always had my doubts about these in ground systems, in that the
sizing of the system to prevent the slow cooling of the ground in the
winter would have to be very large, making them expensive. Basically,
it is a heat pump that takes advantage of the constant 55 degree
temperature of the underground below a certain depth. The heat pump
has to work much less to extract heat from 55 degrees than from 10
degrees.

>> You can also deplete the local reservoir very easily and/or
>> cause earthquakes and ground sinking if you don't know where
>> you're doing. E.g. my place is tapping the Malm karst
>> geothermal aquifer, which is somewhat anomalously high
>> http://www.liag-hannover.de/fileadmin/produkte/20070713113243.pdf
>> and uses to adjacent well to reinject the Kalina cycle-depleted water,
>> causing a cooler plume dowstream so you must take care with
>> well spacing and alignment.
>
> Yeah, see I'm thinking more along the lines of using the top layer of ground
> to act as a?heat-sink?for our homes...not so much tapping into giant
> geo-thermal geysers n' such.
> In winter I'd only need to heat from 55-70 or so, so approx 15degrees of
> difference, which would come by way of a high efficiency natural gas boiler.
> ?During summer, the geo would MORE than cool the home enough, requiring no
> supplementation.

There are issues of condensation and humidity to be dealt with in such
systems. These are not insurmountable problems, but they do require a
bit of additional energy to be introduced into the system. I tried to
talk my in floor heating guy into circulating cold water through the
in floor heating system in the summer, and he was very much against it
on these grounds.

>?Certainly the energy savings from this setup would
> be?sizable. ?If millions of homes across the globe did this, that'd be a lot
> of coal/oil not being burned.

Once again it is the short term capital vs the long term cost. Same
economics as PV panels and wind turbines. Also, you need a particular
geology to make the excavation pay off. Too much rock, and it just
doesn't pay.

> Once the loops are ran/connected, there's no reason we can't use the land
> for other purposes right? ?We could still grow crops over them, have animals
> graze, etc.

Yes, but the systems aren't all that big...

> I see what you're saying though, it's a regional thing. ?Not everywhere is
> suited for this type of system. ?But isn't it a good idea to implement it in
> the areas where we can? ?It's nothing but some trenches, and tubing, some
> anti-freeze and plumbing equipment etc.

Yes, conceptually it is pretty simple, but in practice it is a bit
more complex. The trenches have to be pretty deep, repairing leaks is
very difficult so you have to design so that there aren't likely to be
any, you have to deal with ground water and condensation in various
parts of the system. Almost anything is simpler in theory than in
practice, so don't let me discourage you. It has been done
successfully. It is not cheap. It is not easy. Unless you compare it
to something like orbiting solar power satellites or nuclear power
plants... :-)

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 15:32:54 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:32:54 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have not been commenting here lately. ?But after reading this
> thread, and the lack of critical comment, I have concluded I am the
> only person on the list who has designed power supplies for commercial
> products.

I sure haven't! I flunked out of EE and fell to the dark side of
Computer Science. All I have is a crappy little PV solar system that
is constantly giving me trouble...  I'd like a better one please. :-)

-Kelly



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr 20 15:32:30 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:32:30 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was
	RE:	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110420122216.GK23560@leitl.org>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>	<BANLkTi=doUkF1im0Tjf-GigC620ZMakaFw@mail.gmail.com>	<00e801cbfee2$5fd8f870$1f8ae950$@att.net>
	<20110420122216.GK23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <005d01cbff70$29fc6d20$7df54760$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
Subject: Re: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
of wind power

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 03:37:31PM -0700, spike wrote:

>> Oh wait.  Do you suppose the undergrads thought of this trick, and 
>> slipped some nickel plated copper into the lab (labeled pure nickel) 
>> when the professors weren't looking?

>"The professors" are crooks. Much simpler explanation

>http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=198040


OK thanks Eugen.

I am interested in how these kinds of things can be done from a technology
point of view: all the many anti-gravity machines for instance, that draw a
bunch of gullible investors from a demonstration, after which the inventor
flees with the money, or perhaps is involved in a terrible and suspicious
accident, in which the body is never found, that sort of thing.  I am old
enough to have seen plenty of these over the years.

I did some looking at nucleon energies of nickel and copper.  If someone is
starting with a clean sheet of paper to convince investors they had figured
out cold fusion, those two metals would be the chosen ones.  Nickel is super
abundant and cheap.  It doesn't take much of it to create a lot of energy if
you could somehow get muon-catalyzed proton capture to work.  

Nickel and copper are chemically compatible enough that one can electroplate
nickel onto copper granules and *I think* copper could be plated onto nickel
granules.  I have never tried to copper plate nickel, but we used to flash
nickel onto copper surfaces in order to make gold/lead/tin interfaces which
minimize galvanic action in high-reliability electrical interconnects in
satellites.  I know that copper and nickel like each other.

When these "professors" get caught, I hope the technical details come out:
did they bother with copper plating nickel?  Or did they nickel plate
copper, then use the device to dissolve the plating?  The trick is that
copper plated nickel would be durn near impossible to distinguish
non-destructively from pure copper granules.  Similarly, nickel plated
copper would be near impossible to distinguish from pure nickel.

I still never did figure out how they suggested any *stable* copper isotope
could be formed by proton capture from any nickel isotope common enough to
be relevant.  Perhaps they are hoping we have forgotten how to read our
nucleon charts?  I haven't forgotten.  General rule: if you look anywhere on
the periodic table, choose any element and take the stable isotope with the
most neutrons.  Add one proton (by some mysterious means), moving one
position to the right on that table.  The resulting isotope will in general
be radioactive, or almost certainly less stable than the previous nucleus.
But don't worry, muons don't live long enough to reach out and grab a
proton.  Too bad for us. 

spike






From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 15:47:38 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:47:38 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:12 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> When we're looking at kW/kg, we shouldn't forget that the
> kg is at ~Mach 25, and it came from the bottom of the gravity
> well which taxes your EROEI -- unless it came from lunar material.

How much of the material necessary to create solar power satellites is
easily obtainable from the moon?

Also, the rocket that runs from a laser based on the ground... could
that work from the moon just as well? What would the propellant be?
Since there are no airplanes on the moon, it seems like a bit
safer/easier place for that system.

I assume the water from the moon topic has been done here.
http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_stone_explores_the_earth_and_space.html

-Kelly


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr 20 15:39:33 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:39:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <4DAED5DA.2030707@gnolls.org>
References: <4DAED5DA.2030707@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <005e01cbff71$25c536a0$714fa3e0$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of J. Stanton
...
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
...

Spike wrote:
>> Humans radiated out of Africa long enough ago that they would have 
> been time for digestive systems to evolve variations dependent on 
> where the genetically isolated subgroups of humans evolved.  For 
> instance, the Inuits have developed the ability to subsist entirely on 
> meat, whereas the Europeans tend to develop gout and ketosis if we try
that.

>...I love you, Spike, but there are a couple problems here.

>...First, the idea that meat (or purines in general) cause gout is an old
myth.  Fructose is the primary driver of blood uric acid, and, therefore,
gout:
http://paleozonenutrition.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/gout-and-fructose/...JS


Cool thanks J. 

What do you think of my notion that human groups radiated long enough ago
that some (limited) digestive system adaptations and genetic drift have had
time to occurr, which allow some humans to do things with their diet that
others cannot do?  Seems like there should be plenty of documentation on
variation of digestive system anatomy within the species.

spike






From rpwl at lightlink.com  Wed Apr 20 15:55:23 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:55:23 -0400
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>

Kelly Anderson wrote:
> What else would you expect from the LA Times? Like nearly every other
> paper in America, it is terribly liberal in it's views. 

Oh god not this again.

The idea that the press is "liberal" is so manifesty false that it is 
not worth arguing with anyone who would argue otherwise.

Only in a country in which the right defines the word "liberal" to be 
synonymous with "questioning an extreme right-wing position in any way 
whatsoever", can the newspapers be considered "liberal".

The Guardian is liberal.  The Morning Star is extreme liberal/communist. 
  Anything to the right of those is either centrist (The Independent) or 
slightly right of center (New York Times) or further to the right.



Richard Loosemore



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr 20 15:56:03 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 08:56:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson

>...All I have is a crappy little PV solar system that is constantly giving
me trouble...  I'd like a better one please. :-)

-Kelly


Kelly that one offhanded comment has my full and undivided attention.  I
have always assumed any rooftop PV system is pay the initial cost, install,
forget.  Now you have me worried.  Do feel free to elaborate in arbitrary
detail.  Did you keep records on what went wrong when, and how much it cost
to fix, and did you personally have the tech expertise to repair it
yourself, or did you need to call in proles to help?  

I have a friend who is installing a hundred kWh peak on a ranch in Oregon to
run pumps.  I am concerned, his brother is worried, he is terrified.

spike






From rpwl at lightlink.com  Wed Apr 20 15:57:29 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:57:29 -0400
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
	<BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF0269.5010907@lightlink.com>

BillK wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:46 AM, Damien Broderick  wrote:
>> On 4/20/2011 1:23 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote:
>>> What else would you expect from the LA Times? Like nearly every other
>>> paper in America, it is terribly liberal in it is views.
>> Like that notorious flaming Red, P. J. O'Rourke:
>> <http://blogs.wsj.com/ideas-market/2011/04/06/atlas-shrugged-and-so-did-i/>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> The comments (pro and against) are also fun to read.
> 
> Quote:
>     * Nergol wrote:
> 
> ?There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s
> life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish
> fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its
> unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially
> crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of
> course, involves orcs.? ? John Rogers

Ack!!  This cheered up a gloomy morning.  :-)

Thanks!


Richard Loosemore




From rpwl at lightlink.com  Wed Apr 20 15:59:29 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:59:29 -0400
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com>

John Grigg wrote:
> This is perhaps a baby step toward uploading...
>  
> http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/04/worlds-first-human-brain-map-u.html

My only problem with this is that it is only really a kind of map .... 
as far as I can make out it tells a lot about gene expression, but not 
about connectivity, and unfortunately the gene expression story is 
several steps removed from telling me anything about functionality.



Richard Loosemore


From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr 20 16:03:34 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:03:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
References: <Acv7eiSngck+FQ6KRRq8qQqMVcAhSA==>
	<002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinZ6sYPUup5cRLdarm_4V02uv3U6w@mail.gmail.com>

Spike: Yes, I was a little surprised at not being interviewed for the film.
I presume it's either because I'm not famous enough (most likely) or because
I'm a Singularity skeptic (but didn't the director include others?).

The shots of Ray, Shatner, and me (Natasha was also nearby) were taken at
the reception after Shatner's very entertaining and remarkably well-informed
talk at the Chicago TransVision conference in 2007. (If it's online and you
haven't seen it, I recommend watching it.)

--- Max

2011/4/15 spike <spike66 at att.net>

>  Kurzweil?s movie Transcendent Man was shown at a premier last night at
> the SF Palace of Fine Arts.  I liked it!  Some minor complaints, but overall
> I would rate it very good to low end of the excellent range, certainly worth
> my time.  I saw a lot of familiar faces in the movie from years of hanging
> out with that crowd.  One scene, Kurzweil is conversing with William
> Shatner.  In the background of that scene was a person looking the other way
> whose hair looked like Max More?s.  Right at the end of that scene, Ray and
> Bill look at the camera and Max turns facing the camera, between the other
> two, perhaps 10 feet behind them.  Biggest complaint: why the hell didn?t
> they have interviews with Max?
>
>
>
> There are several people who hang out at Eliezer?s singularity events in
> there, such as Ben Goertzel and others.  Ben is interviewed at length,
> wearing his trademark black and white tiger hat.  What?s up with that?
>
>
>
> Summary of complaints: missing interviews or scenes with major players in
> the field, too much of several minor players, too many references to
> religion and Ray?s father, no mention of cryonics, no sufficient explanation
> of the modern version of uploading.
>
>
>
> Good clean fun however.
>
>
>
> More commentary later, on my way out.
>
>
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/188898ec/attachment.html>

From steinberg.will at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 16:11:36 2011
From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:11:36 -0500
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DAF0269.5010907@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
	<BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF0269.5010907@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTiktipywW4hU+czso9R7DChcWmcXDg@mail.gmail.com>

>
> BillK wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> The comments (pro and against) are also fun to read.
>>
>> Quote:
>>    * Nergol wrote:
>>
>> ?There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s
>> life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish
>> fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its
>> unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially
>> crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of
>> course, involves orcs.? ? John Rogers
>>
>
Absolutely fantastic.  Too many of my peers think objectivism is a tenable
worldview...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/3f293153/attachment.html>

From rpwl at lightlink.com  Wed Apr 20 16:23:58 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:23:58 -0400
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTiktipywW4hU+czso9R7DChcWmcXDg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>	<BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF0269.5010907@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTiktipywW4hU+czso9R7DChcWmcXDg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF089E.3060208@lightlink.com>

Will Steinberg wrote:
>     BillK wrote:
>         ?There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s
>         life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish
>         fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its
>         unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially
>         crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The
>         other, of
>         course, involves orcs.? ? John Rogers
> 
> Absolutely fantastic.  Too many of my peers think objectivism is a 
> tenable worldview... 

Orcs, on the other hand, are only too real.  They make up at least 50% 
of the population of internet mailing lists....

:-)


Richard Loosemore




From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Apr 20 16:03:15 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:03:15 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Reminder: Humanity+ @ Parsons The New School for Design - May
	14-15 New York City
Message-ID: <CDABB7DFF8BC4378AABDAEAC5E05A5F2@DFC68LF1>


http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Human
ity+ at Parsons_NYC_PressRelease-1.pdf
 
How will world class designers such as Vivian Rosenthal
<http://www.tronicstudio.com/>  , Scott Draves <http://scottdraves.com/>  ,
Benjamin Bratton <http://bratton.info/>  , address transhumanism and how
will transhumanists approach design?  What new ideas will emerge when
"Transhumanism Meets Design"?
 
-- Come and see!
 
Register here!  http://www.eventbrite.com/event/1089760503
 
Venue, travel, etc.:  http://humanityplus.org/conferences/parsons/logistics/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/6b90914f/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: H+ at ParsonsWebsiteHomePageI copy.PNG
Type: image/png
Size: 20539 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/6b90914f/attachment.png>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 16:46:34 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:46:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:12 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 07:52:39AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:
>
>> The question is cost, and that's almost all due to the high cost of
>> rockets to get millions of tons of power satellite parts to GEO.
>
> The question is not just cost (by the way, have a look at
> http://www.fastcompany.com/1745113/what-happens-when-solar-power-is-as-cheap-as-coal )
> the problem is EROEI.

I looked at this in some detail from the perspective of a moving cable
(loop) space elevator.  That's the gold standard for lifting stuff to
GEO, being slightly more than 100% efficient.  (Ask if you can't
figure out why.)

Takes (round numbers) 15 kWh per kg.  Reasonable number for power sat
mass is 5 kg/kW.  A good way to look at energy return on energy
invested is how long it takes to get a payback.  For ground solar or
wind it's measured in years.

For a power satellite made with stuff brought up by elevator, 5 kg
will take 75 kWh to lift it.  The 5 kg makes 1 kw, so the payback time
is just over *3 days.*

Chemical rockets are around 2.5% efficient so the payback time is 40
times that long or about 120 days.

For the laser part, it draws around a GW to send 60 t/h to GEO.
(Starting from a sub orbital boost by the Skylon.)  1 M kW/60,000kg is
17 kWh/kg

The Skylon phase burns 66807 kg of hydrogen per launch.  The energy
content for three per hour would be 14029470 kWh (at 70 kW/kg), or 233
kWh/kg.

Together, 250 kWh/kg, (6% efficient) so material for a kW of
production would take 1250 kWh to lift--which gives an energy payback
time of around 52 days.

By renewable energy standards, that's amazingly good.

See any problems with the logic or math?

> When we're looking at kW/kg, we shouldn't forget that the
> kg is at ~Mach 25, and it came from the bottom of the gravity
> well which taxes your EROEI -- unless it came from lunar material.

Later in power sat production it's worth going after lunar material
just so you don't need to be flying so often.  But the way to go after
lunar material is with a moving cable elevator out through L1.  It
takes an investment of around 100,000 tons and pays back the
investment at around a 1000 tons per day (pays back in mass in 100
days).

But you really need big lift capacity from the earth before you go
after lunar materials.

Keith


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 16:53:38 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 09:53:38 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin6J2oLujbybX5DqjjF0kc0jYmuDw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:

snip

> How much of the material necessary to create solar power satellites is
> easily obtainable from the moon?

100% after a few decades of building up an industrial base.

20-30% with minimal processing to make heat sink fluid (grind to find
dust) and none for space anchors where you can use any mass.

> Also, the rocket that runs from a laser based on the ground... could
> that work from the moon just as well? What would the propellant be?
> Since there are no airplanes on the moon, it seems like a bit
> safer/easier place for that system.

>From the moon you use a loop elevator.  It's a much better approach.

> I assume the water from the moon topic has been done here.
> http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_stone_explores_the_earth_and_space.html

The problem is the water is at the poles and the elevator comes down
in the center of the near side (500 km or so radius around the center
should work).

Trucks or railroads might work.

Keith


From max at maxmore.com  Wed Apr 20 17:10:24 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 10:10:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] NASA's future depends on spaceflight neophytes
Message-ID: <BANLkTikz+DvUMr97Bog6pLHCB7QkVrBZEw@mail.gmail.com>

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42667942/ns/technology_and_science-space/

Opinions on the author's slant? Spike? Others?

--- Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/4710b445/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 18:03:52 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 20:03:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Meat and the paleo diet, again
In-Reply-To: <022c01cbfd50$8ea0e070$abe2a150$@att.net>
References: <mailman.1.1302955201.837.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<39468.96191.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<2AB51CE68FC94BE383CA9A49653AE2B9@DFC68LF1>
	<022c01cbfd50$8ea0e070$abe2a150$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=ZmX11fTo7JXPEiYBUPeBe5zYwSA@mail.gmail.com>

On 18 April 2011 00:40, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> Something I have wondered about, being a sushi lover: can it be arranged to
> devour the beasts so fresh they are still alive?
>

Raw shellfish, say, oysters, are routinely eaten alive even in the west. As
for Japan, I have been served with live lobster, and with live fish in beer.

Then there is monkey brain eaten from the animal in India...


> >...It seems that there is a solution though. Rather than breeding and
> killing animals, we should be harvesting meat that has the best health
> benefits (and enough calories) for the bio-body. ...Natasha
>
> Ja.  I am still hoping for figuring out how to create meat without the rest
> of the beast.
>

Yes. This is also a terrible waste. As far as I know, we are by now able to
produce a kind of low-quality hamburger, and not on industrial scale, but I
am sure things will improve.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/43f8dda9/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr 20 18:32:13 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 11:32:13 -0700
Subject: [ExI] NASA's future depends on spaceflight neophytes
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikz+DvUMr97Bog6pLHCB7QkVrBZEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikz+DvUMr97Bog6pLHCB7QkVrBZEw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <004e01cbff89$4548ea40$cfdabec0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org
[mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More
Subject: [ExI] NASA's future depends on spaceflight neophytes

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42667942/ns/technology_and_science-space/

 

Opinions on the author's slant? Spike? Others?

 

--- Max



Max, do let me preface my comments here by saying I have been a Jay Barbree
follower for a long time, since my childhood.  He goes back that far. 

 

I think Jay has it right here, with a few exceptions, which I will note.
Earlier today we saw Keith and Kelly commenting on lunar manufacturing.  We
are still lacking *some* of the necessary control technology to do something
like that, but in the long run, I see most of the interesting space
infrastructure construction needing advanced robotics.  Reasoning: if we
make launchers man-rated, we need to give away too much payload to increased
safety margins.  

 

We have man-rated vehicles, but they are inherently expensive.  If we are
willing to go with non-man-rated launchers, I can imagine something like a
four-stage all-solid rocket, and yes I know solids are dirty and low tech
and we space guys are supposed to hate them, but do read on.

 

We can piggy-back off of the Trident nuke delivery system, so the
manufacturing process is already in place (Morton Thiokol), we can stack two
Trident first stages and use a beefed-up first to second interstage without
a lot of redesign, plus the tooling to make these already exists, the
tooling and facilities to make the huge aluminum billets is already in
place, everything needed to carve the billet into an interstage exists in
Sunnyvale California in building 181, grinding away 24/7, software already
written to do all that, we already have all the hoisting and logistics
infrastructure for those Trident first stages and all the other smaller
stages in Utah, we have launch facilities at Vandenberg for high latitude
orbits and at Cape Canaveral for low latitude, we have the most of the
control algorithms to keep such a thing flying pointy end first, we have all
this stuff already and plenty of guys who will work their asses off, eagerly
at reasonable cost to make it all happen.

 

But much of that doesn't apply to man-rated vehicles.  

 

So my notion is this: rig up a four stage all-solid with something like a
Mercury capsule on top if we feel we really must carry an ape, with one of
those emergency egress towers on top, and recognize that this venture is
risky as hell, probably not as risky as climbing Mount Everest which doesn't
accomplish a damn thing, good luck and evolution speed, let's light this
candle.

 

Better still, do everything will completely autonomous contructobots.

 

spike

 

 

 

.

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/68d842d6/attachment.html>

From js_exi at gnolls.org  Wed Apr 20 20:02:41 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:02:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Digestive adaptations
In-Reply-To: <mailman.232.1303317008.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.232.1303317008.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <4DAF3BE1.7030300@gnolls.org>


Spike wrote:
> What do you think of my notion that human groups radiated long enough ago
> that some (limited) digestive system adaptations and genetic drift have had
> time to occurr, which allow some humans to do things with their diet that
> others cannot do?  Seems like there should be plenty of documentation on
> variation of digestive system anatomy within the species.

You're absolutely correct -- just in regard to different issues.

Classic example 1 is celiac.  There is genetic evidence for this in the 
MHC gene complex: the HLA haplotypes associated with celiac are less 
common among populations that have been agriculturalists for longer.
Simoons, F. J. 1981. Celiac disease as a geographic problem. In Food, 
nutrition and evolution, ed. D. N. Walcher and N. Kretchmer, pp. 179?99 
(unfortunately not available online in any form I can find)

Classic example 2 is lactase persistence, i.e. the ability to 
enzymatically digest lactose through adulthood.  (Note that most people 
can digest small amounts of lactose via bacteria in the colon.)  Lactose 
intolerance varies by population from a few percent to basically 100%.

(There is also speculation that an ability to deal well with a 
high-carbohydrate diet is genetically determined to some degree, based 
on the prevalence of obesity and diabetes in recently 'civilized' 
traditional cultures.  However, I'm unaware of any research that 
pinpoints a genetic difference, and many of these effects are also 
epigenetically effected.)

However, as far as ability to digest fat, the obvious counterexamples 
are the aforementioned Inuit (already mentioned) and the Maasai (an 
African tribe of pastoralists who live almost entirely on milk, meat, 
and cow's blood).  In both cases, when traditional Inuit or Maasai move 
to 'civilization' and begin eating Western foods, they suffer 
atherosclerosis and heart disease.

Another example is Australian aboriginals on a Western diet, who have 
one of the worst rates of heart disease in the world despite one of the 
lowest blood cholesterol levels.

JS
http//www.gnolls.org


From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Wed Apr 20 20:35:44 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:35:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
Message-ID: <20110420133544.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.99b1891822.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"J. Stanton" <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote,
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7219473.stm
> "Men who consume two or more sugary soft drinks a day have an 85% higher 
> risk of gout compared with those who drink less than one a month, a 
> study suggests." ... "Diet soft drinks did not increase the risk of gout 
> but fruit juice and fructose rich fruits (apples and oranges) were 
> associated with a higher risk, the researchers said."

That study is outdated.  It only found a correlation.  But correlation
is not causation.  Follow-up experiments to test actual causation showed
that increased fructose intake does not increase uric acid or cause
gout.  <http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/7/1/16>.

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From sparge at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 20:46:52 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:46:52 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=tesunzEZGCgKSboFGaNpZsZrZTg@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 20, 2011 4:36 PM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
>
> That study is outdated.  It only found a correlation.  But correlation
> is not causation.  Follow-up experiments to test actual causation showed
> that increased fructose intake does not increase uric acid or cause
> gout.  <http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/7/1/16>.

Seriously? The author of that paper is a full-time employee of Archer
Daniels Midland.

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/8bb81ca6/attachment.html>

From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Wed Apr 20 20:48:23 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:48:23 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
Message-ID: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote,
> What do you think of my notion that human groups radiated long enough ago
> that some (limited) digestive system adaptations and genetic drift have had
> time to occurr, which allow some humans to do things with their diet that
> others cannot do?  Seems like there should be plenty of documentation on
> variation of digestive system anatomy within the species.
> 
> spike

This is absolutely correct.  The best know example is, of course,
lactose intolerance.  Early Africans could not digest lactose, but the
European population quickly spread the ability to digest lactose.

They didn't necessarily develop the ability from scratch.  It might have
been a pre-existing ability in a small percent of the population. 
However, those with that ability thrived over the generations and spread
this genetic ability fairly quickly in the European environment.

People often confuse the speed of individual mutations with the speed of
population adaptation.  Developing a mutation to digest lactose may have
taken a long time.  But spreading that mutation once it became
advantageous could occur very quickly.

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From js_exi at gnolls.org  Wed Apr 20 20:58:40 2011
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:58:40 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and primary sources
In-Reply-To: <mailman.232.1303317008.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.232.1303317008.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <4DAF4900.5060604@gnolls.org>


BillK wrote:

> These articles don't say that fructose causes gout.
> They say that fructose might be one of many factors that aggravate gout.

They also show that fructose consumption is much more strongly 
associated with gout than meat consumption.  (And I can't figure out if 
the studies that show gout correlated with meat control for sugar or 
alcohol intake...this is the problem with associational studies.  Red 
meat and alcohol consumption correlate reasonably well AFAIK.)

However, it is most important to understand the mechanisms by which gout 
occurs.  The body retains uric acid in the blood because it's a powerful 
antioxidant: high uric acid levels are associated with oxidative stress. 
  Further in support of its protective role, uric acid levels correlate 
with lifespan in primates:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6532339

Dietary purine is mostly a red herring: more purines in = more uric acid 
excreted.  The important question is "What causes the body to retain 
uric acid?"  And an important part of that is most likely that fructose 
is tremendously reactive in vivo (~10x more than glucose) and the body 
retains uric acid in the presence of fructose in order to reduce 
oxidative stress.  This is a perfectly reasonable response in an 
evolutionary milieu that lacks refined sugar, HFCS, and fruits bred to 
contain pathological quantities of fructose.

> I prefer to believe what sites like WebMD say, rather than paleo
> support sites where almost everything can apparently be cured by a
> paleo diet.

I have no interest in "believing" anything.  I want to know how things 
work, or admit that I don't.  As one of the foundational principles of 
any reasonable paleo diet is to greatly reduce fructose intake, it is 
unsurprising that gout is a solvable problem via eating paleo.

Moving on:

Both the articles I linked feature plenty of primary source citations.

WebMD is not a primary source.  It is an advertising-sponsored, 
for-profit institution.  And their articles don't appear to ever cite 
any primary sources.

WebMD doesnt provide a list of sponsors, but here are some I found by 
removing my ad-blocker and clicking on sponsored articles:
Forest Laboratories
Procter & Gamble
Eli Lilly
Cephalon
Amgen
Pfizer
In other words, 100% of their sponsors are drug companies.

I prefer to get information from peer-reviewed and unsponsored sources 
that cite and link their primary sources.

> Gout often has nothing at all to do with diet. Genetics, obesity,
> alcohol consumption, enzyme deficiency or even some medications can
> cause or aggravate the condition.

Obviously there is variation in susceptibility to gout!  However, it is 
trivially untrue to say it has nothing to do with diet (of which alcohol 
consumption is a known part).

JS
http://www.gnolls.org


From anders at aleph.se  Wed Apr 20 21:08:37 2011
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:08:37 +0100
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinZ6sYPUup5cRLdarm_4V02uv3U6w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <Acv7eiSngck+FQ6KRRq8qQqMVcAhSA==>	<002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
	<BANLkTinZ6sYPUup5cRLdarm_4V02uv3U6w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF4B55.2030905@aleph.se>

Max More wrote:
> Spike: Yes, I was a little surprised at not being interviewed for the 
> film. I presume it's either because I'm not famous enough (most 
> likely) or because I'm a Singularity skeptic (but didn't the director 
> include others?).

Overall, the filmmaker seemed to choose people according to some 
non-obvious scheme. I think few good arguments were shown from critics 
or supporters, yet he had apparently filmed a whole host of people who 
did not even appear in the film. But I suspect he was less interested in 
a talking heads movie where people give firm arguments and rebuttals, 
and more a movie about the grand circle around Ray.


>  
> The shots of Ray, Shatner, and me (Natasha was also nearby) were taken 
> at the reception after Shatner's very entertaining and remarkably 
> well-informed talk at the Chicago TransVision conference in 2007. (If 
> it's online and you haven't seen it, I recommend watching it.)
>  
I recognized it, and was pretty amused by knowing that I was indirectly 
in the movie, only visible in reflections in wine glasses and 
chandeliers :-)


-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute 
James Martin 21st Century School 
Philosophy Faculty 
Oxford University 



From anders at aleph.se  Wed Apr 20 21:11:15 2011
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:11:15 +0100
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
In-Reply-To: <4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <4DAF4BF3.3010404@aleph.se>

Richard Loosemore wrote:
> John Grigg wrote:
>> This is perhaps a baby step toward uploading...
>>  
>> http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/04/worlds-first-human-brain-map-u.html 
>>
>
> My only problem with this is that it is only really a kind of map .... 
> as far as I can make out it tells a lot about gene expression, but not 
> about connectivity, and unfortunately the gene expression story is 
> several steps removed from telling me anything about functionality.

The real use is for figuring out chemical and developmental modularity, 
which we can then use for drug or nanoparticle targeting. The real fun 
starts when we have this, the connectome and some close-up studies of 
how different expression patterns correlate with neuron types.

-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute 
James Martin 21st Century School 
Philosophy Faculty 
Oxford University 



From mail at harveynewstrom.com  Wed Apr 20 20:51:24 2011
From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 13:51:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
Message-ID: <20110420135124.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.ff6fcb941e.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>

"J. Stanton" <js_exi at gnolls.org> wrote,
> I'll get back to Harvey's stuff in a bit

No hurry.  I understand that you are busy.  And people want me to read
some books and websites before continuing.  (I get the impression that
this topic keeps coming around, anyway.)

--
Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Wed Apr 20 22:52:25 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:52:25 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=tesunzEZGCgKSboFGaNpZsZrZTg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=tesunzEZGCgKSboFGaNpZsZrZTg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <003301cbffad$a0bf2e60$e23d8b20$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Dave Sill wrote,
> On Apr 20, 2011 4:36 PM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com>
wrote:
> >
> > That study is outdated. ?It only found a correlation. ?But correlation
> > is not causation. ?Follow-up experiments to test actual causation showed
> > that increased fructose intake does not increase uric acid or cause
> > gout. ?<http://www.nutritionandmetabolism.com/content/7/1/16>.
> 
> Seriously? The author of that paper is a full-time employee of Archer
Daniels Midland.

Yes.  And he did a wonderful job establishing correlation and proposing a
hypothesis.  But that's not a conclusion, according to the scientific
method.  The scientific method requires hypotheses to be tested
experimentally.  When we did that, we determined that fructose intake does
not raise uric acid levels.

This in no way detracts from this guy's career.  He did good science.  It's
just that you shouldn't be referencing his intermediate correlations or
hypothesis while ignoring the experimental results.  By doing so, you are
referring to outdated data when later date further along the scientific
sequence is available.

So if you don't agree with my representation of the scientific method,
steps, and conclusion, enlighten me.  What sequence of steps did you use to
determine that the original hypothesis is correct and the experimental test
of it was incorrect?  Because you are clearly implying that I am somehow
mistaken.  But you have not clearly articulated any reason why.







From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Apr 20 22:56:19 2011
From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 18:56:19 -0400
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
In-Reply-To: <4DAF4BF3.3010404@aleph.se>
References: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com> <4DAF4BF3.3010404@aleph.se>
Message-ID: <20110420185619.ypg7pertsk44sowc@webmail.natasha.cc>

Quoting Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se>:

> Richard Loosemore wrote:
>> John Grigg wrote:
>>> This is perhaps a baby step toward uploading...
>>> http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/04/worlds-first-human-brain-map-u.html
>>
>> My only problem with this is that it is only really a kind of map   
>> .... as far as I can make out it tells a lot about gene expression,  
>>  but not about connectivity, and unfortunately the gene expression   
>> story is several steps removed from telling me anything about   
>> functionality.
>
> The real use is for figuring out chemical and developmental modularity,
> which we can then use for drug or nanoparticle targeting. The real fun
> starts when we have this, the connectome and some close-up studies of
> how different expression patterns correlate with neuron types.

What is the "leading edge technology" that was used to create this  
computerized brain map?  Does this mean that the combination of MRI,  
DTI, microarry and ISH, form this leading edge technology?

But then it says it this is a "gene map" and that RNA was obtained  
through slicing and dicing.

Are there two projects here?










From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Apr 20 23:10:16 2011
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:10:16 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Gout and primary sources
In-Reply-To: <4DAF4900.5060604@gnolls.org>
References: <mailman.232.1303317008.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4DAF4900.5060604@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikEzx_Gfa6mRj-tSd1+fyG4XQCW+w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:58 PM, J. Stanton  wrote:
>
> WebMD is not a primary source. ?It is an advertising-sponsored, for-profit
> institution. ?And their articles don't appear to ever cite any primary
> sources.
>

I only mentioned WebMD because it is the biggest US medical website.
And yes, they probably will advertise pills to cure medical
conditions. But their medical descriptions and symptom checker are as
good as you'll get anywhere.
But all the reputable medical sites agree that fructose doesn't cause gout.
Try the Mayo clinic if you prefer. Google will provide plenty more
sites to check with.

You know, of course, that gout was a common disease of the rich
Victorians in the UK.
And they certainly didn't have fructose drinks available then.

>
> Obviously there is variation in susceptibility to gout! ?However, it is
> trivially untrue to say it has nothing to do with diet (of which alcohol
> consumption is a known part).
>

I didn't say that gout was *never* caused by diet. I said that often
it had little to do with diet.


>From the Mayo Clinic:

You're more likely to develop gout if you have high levels of uric
acid in your body. Factors that increase the uric acid level in your
body include:

    * Lifestyle factors. Choices you make in your everyday life may
increase your risk of gout. Excessive alcohol use ? generally more
than two drinks a day for men and more than one for women ? increases
the risk of gout.

    * Medical conditions. Certain diseases and conditions make it more
likely that you'll develop gout. These include untreated high blood
pressure (hypertension) and chronic conditions such as diabetes, high
levels of fat and cholesterol in the blood (hyperlipidemia), and
narrowing of the arteries (arteriosclerosis).

    * Certain medications. The use of thiazide diuretics ? commonly
used to treat hypertension ? and low-dose aspirin also can increase
uric acid levels. So can the use of anti-rejection drugs prescribed
for people who have undergone an organ transplant.

    * Family history of gout. If other members of your family have had
gout, you're more likely to develop the disease.

   * Age and sex. Gout occurs more often in men than it does in women,
primarily because women tend to have lower uric acid levels than men
do. After menopause, however, women's uric acid levels approach those
of men. Men also are more likely to develop gout earlier ? usually
between the ages of 40 and 50 ? whereas women generally develop signs
and symptoms after menopause.
---------------

(Note - no mention of fructose drinks).

BillK



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr 20 23:12:50 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:12:50 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Digestive adaptations
In-Reply-To: <4DAF3BE1.7030300@gnolls.org>
References: <mailman.232.1303317008.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<4DAF3BE1.7030300@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <004201cbffb0$7923afe0$6b6b0fa0$@att.net>

... On Behalf Of J. Stanton
Subject: [ExI] Digestive adaptations


Spike wrote:

>> What do you think of my notion that human groups radiated long enough 
>> ago that some (limited) digestive system adaptations and genetic drift
have had time to occur...

>...You're absolutely correct -- just in regard to different issues.

>...Classic example 1 is celiac.  There is genetic evidence for this in the
MHC gene complex: the HLA haplotypes associated with celiac are less common
among populations that have been agriculturalists for longer...JS


Cool thanks J.

You, Harvey, Max More and others here are my new food hipsters.  One of
these days I will say to myself something like the classic "If I had known I
was going to live this long, I would have taken better care of myself."

spike









From spike66 at att.net  Wed Apr 20 23:26:05 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 16:26:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Harvey Newstrom
Subject: Re: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations

"spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote,
> What do you think of my notion that human groups radiated long enough 
> ago that some (limited) digestive system adaptations ...
> 
> spike

>...This is absolutely correct.  The best know example is, of course,
lactose intolerance.  Early Africans could not digest lactose, but the
European population quickly spread the ability to digest lactose...Harvey
Newstrom...


Cool thanks Harvey.  One of these days I plan to get serious on studying
what the heck it is I am eating.  But not now, I have family emergencies
stacked high, plenty to last for the next few months if not 3 to 5 years.
When that all blows over I will still be young enough to repent of a
lifetime of intemperance, ignorance and outright disregard of reasonable
health principles.

That being said, I will make this observation.  When I was a teenager I was
eating to maximize athletic performance (cross country) and to some extent
to spare as many beasts as practical.  From a health standpoint I
experimented much.  My intuition from that was that it matters less what one
eats than how much one eats.  I figured at the time to just hold to
moderation and balance, keep the total calories such that I look like...
well... like we do.  {8^D  Seems to have worked.  The rest of my family all
have diabetes, I don't.  I don't push my luck: I can easily imagine
developing it.

I can still do several pull ups at age 50, and I can still run like the
wind.  Well, rather I should say, run like the breeze.  On a really calm
day.  Perhaps like a still and sultry, overcast day.  Ummm...  I can still
do pull ups.    

{8-]

spike






From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 00:16:26 2011
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:16:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] kurzweil movie
In-Reply-To: <4DAF4B55.2030905@aleph.se>
References: <002501cbfb7b$c296e810$47c4b830$@att.net>
	<BANLkTinZ6sYPUup5cRLdarm_4V02uv3U6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF4B55.2030905@aleph.se>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=py44f+tUYKnRNQGLuXKE57J5O1w@mail.gmail.com>

Max More wrote:
The shots of Ray, Shatner, and me (Natasha was also nearby) were taken at
the reception after Shatner's very entertaining and remarkably well-informed
talk at the Chicago TransVision conference in 2007. (If it's online and you
haven't seen it, I recommend watching it.)
>>>

Anders Sandberg replied:
I recognized it, and was pretty amused by knowing that I was indirectly in
the movie, only visible in reflections in wine glasses and chandeliers :-)
>>>

Anders, this is in itself reflective of how you seem to desire a
relatively low profile within your professonal and personal life!  What
would Freud, Rogers, or Jung have to say?

John  : )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/01e34e09/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr 21 00:18:54 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 17:18:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinqHMqPAzQhcKdLg0OBdAzsZv42=g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Damien Broderick <thespike at satx.rr.com>wrote:

> Like that notorious flaming Red, P. J. O'Rourke:
>
> <http://blogs.wsj.com/ideas-market/2011/04/06/atlas-shrugged-and-so-did-i/>
>
>
>

I've enjoyed PJ, but I thought his review was very weak. The only point that
resonated with me is that those who should shrug are not just the
super-wealthy businesspeople, but the producers at every level.

A more insightful and surprisingly balanced (given that it's a Rand fan)
review is linked from the PJ review comments:

http://hustlebear.com/2011/02/28/im-so-relieved-the-atlas-shrugged-movie-was-fantastic/

If they do part 2, they MUST find someone else to play Galt...

--- Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/da90cd8e/attachment.html>

From sjatkins at mac.com  Thu Apr 21 02:00:49 2011
From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:00:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org> <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>
	<20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <4DAF8FD1.8010502@mac.com>

On 04/18/2011 01:33 PM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 12:43:24PM -0700, Samantha Atkins wrote:
>>> He sounds like a creationist.
>>>
>> Actually, what was said is exactly correct.  We can't fully spec out an
>> AGI ("traditional blueprint").  It must recursively self-improve.  I
>> thought this was and has been accepted information in these circles for
>> a very long time now.
> My beef was with the idea that a more advanced system is
> required to produce a less advanced. This is trivially
> untrue, because darwinian evolution is extremely stupid,
> yet since you can read this message it most assuredly
> does work.
>
> I have never believed into recursive self-improvement.
> Nobody is that smart. You just bump up the boundary
> condition, and let emergence handle the rest.
>

Well, ok, partially.   To assume that even an AGI will not be smart 
enough to self-improve on purpose seems like a stretch.

Surely evolution is not the only way to get to improvements.

- samantha


From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Apr 21 02:44:41 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:44:41 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>
References: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>
Message-ID: <000c01cbffce$134cb090$39e611b0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

"spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote,
> That being said, I will make this observation.  When I was a teenager
> I was eating to maximize athletic performance (cross country) and to
>  some extent to spare as many beasts as practical.

Good for you!  That's probably why you are as young as you are.

> My intuition from that was that it matters less what one eats than how
> much one eats.  I figured at the time to just hold to moderation and
> balance, keep the total calories such that I look like...
> well... like we do.  {8^D  Seems to have worked.  The rest of my family
> all have diabetes, I don't.  I don't push my luck: I can easily imagine
developing it.

Despite "Good Calories, Bad Calories", you are right again.  This is what
all the studies show.  Calories are calories.  It doesn't matter the source.


> I can still do several pull ups at age 50, and I can still run like the
wind.
> Well, rather I should say, run like the breeze.  On a really calm day.
> Perhaps like a still and sultry, overcast day.  Ummm...  I can still do
pull ups.    

I'm close to 50.  I use my Soloflex machine regularly.  I try to eat right.
And I follow all the latest scientific studies on health.  It's not really
that difficult.  And it's not really as complex or as conflicted as people
make out.  Although the media likes to tout the underdog, present "both"
sides of every issue, and make a controversy out of everything, there really
is a consistent understanding of most things in science.

We know what we know.  We know what we don't know.  And we know how our
understanding has changed over the years as we grow to learn more.  I would
say that most "controversies" have 99% of the scientists on one side, and 1%
of fringe conspiracy theorists on the other.  As real science progresses,
real scientists constantly update their position with new data.  It really
is not the rollercoaster ride of back-and-forth opinions as portrayed in the
media.

--
Harvey Newstrom <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP




From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr 21 04:43:00 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 21:43:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <000c01cbffce$134cb090$39e611b0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>
	<000c01cbffce$134cb090$39e611b0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=_-+QagQBZrkm50xru=PbRuEvKdQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 7:44 PM, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com>wrote:

> "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote,
> > That being said, I will make this observation.  When I was a teenager
> > I was eating to maximize athletic performance (cross country) and to
> >  some extent to spare as many beasts as practical.
>
> Good for you!  That's probably why you are as young as you are.
>
No doubt eating less has been good for Spike. Paleo approaches frequently
praise intermittent fasting.


>
> Despite "Good Calories, Bad Calories", you are right again.  This is what
> all the studies show.  Calories are calories.  It doesn't matter the
> source.
>

I couldn't disagree more. Apparently haven't yet read "Good Calories, Bad
Calories", so I don't understand why you make your "despite" comment here.
That book, in my reading, utterly and totally demolished the idea that
"calories are calories". (Or, to draw on another thread, as Rand would say:
"A is A".) Carbohydrates are metabolized differently than protein and fat.
Taubes is very far from the only person to demonstrate this, but his book is
the magnum opus on the topic.

Aside from different health effects, abundant evidence exists for the
greater effectiveness of low-calorie diets in achieving reduction in body
fat. Those results cannot be explained on the assumption that "a calorie is
a calorie".

BTW, your previous comments about sugars being essential for energy
contradict not only what I've read but  also my experience. This morning I
did a session of high-intensity interval training (and yesterday I did a
weights workout), with my fast periods at a pace of 6:15 min/mile. I didn't
lack for energy, despite being close to zero-carbs over the last few days.
(Breakfast today was zero carbs; dinner the night before had just a very few
carbs in my spring mix salad.) After switching to a low-carb version of
paleo (many paleo variants include considerably more carbs from fruit and
some vegetables that I eat), my energy levels are much more stable -- I no
longer have the familiar mid-afternoon crash.

--- Max
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110420/77fee7c6/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 05:02:17 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:02:17 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <4DAF8FD1.8010502@mac.com>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org> <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>
	<20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org> <4DAF8FD1.8010502@mac.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikgPNiJF_V-NevpNUuPUz74y=C9WA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 8:00 PM, Samantha Atkins <sjatkins at mac.com> wrote:
> Well, ok, partially. ? To assume that even an AGI will not be smart enough
> to self-improve on purpose seems like a stretch.
>
> Surely evolution is not the only way to get to improvements.

There seems to be a philosophical position on the part of some that
you can't design intelligence that is more intelligent than yourself.
I think that is just a ridiculous position. Just having an
intelligence with the same structure as ours, but on a better
substrate, or larger than a physical skull would result in higher
intelligence rather trivially. Add a computer type memory without the
fuzziness of human memory and you would get better processing. I have
never understood the argument that the brain is insufficiently bright
to understand itself, since we work in groups... it just confuses me
that anyone would take this position. It seems like saying one person
could never design a mission to land men on the moon. That may be
true, but it is also entirely irrelevant to whether we can accomplish
it as a species.

-Kelly



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 05:12:41 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 22:12:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Self improvement was Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
Message-ID: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thought experiment.

Build an AI.  Put a clock rate control in that it can mess with.

If it is measuring it's performance against an outside clock, it is
going to notice that it does better with the clock rate on fast.

So it sets it's clock rate to fast, effectively becoming smarter.

Seems to me this is self improvement.

Keith


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 05:16:48 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:16:48 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:56 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>...All I have is a crappy little PV solar system that is constantly giving
> me trouble... ?I'd like a better one please. :-)
>
> -Kelly
>
> Kelly that one offhanded comment has my full and undivided attention. ?I
> have always assumed any rooftop PV system is pay the initial cost, install,
> forget.

I had a boss who once said "Do not confuse sale with install." The
sale is the install and forget it model. The install is a bit more
complicated.

> Now you have me worried. ?Do feel free to elaborate in arbitrary
> detail. ?Did you keep records on what went wrong when, and how much it cost
> to fix, and did you personally have the tech expertise to repair it
> yourself, or did you need to call in proles to help?

I have not had the expertise to fix things myself, other than very
simple things like putting water into batteries. The major problem is
that since solar is so new, the people who are installing and
maintaining it are rank amateurs, and usually get it wrong. In my
first system, they didn't put in a ground, and that made various
electronic equipment fail mysteriously until we figured it out after
hiring an electrician that actually knew his head from a hole in the
ground.

Imagine yourself in 1906 trying to find a reliable automobile
mechanic. That is the situation today with solar. The guy who
installed my second system (I wasn't here when it was actually
installed) has a day job as an emergency room nurse. Sigh. And he's
one of the better ones around. The best guy lives three and a half
hours away.

One of the trickier bits is getting things set up so that the
generator is turned on automatically by the system when the batteries
need a charge and aren't getting anything from the PV panels. This is
important because if you wait for the batteries to run down
completely, then turn the generator on manually when the lights go
out, you are deep cycling the batteries which leads to short battery
life. The system won't work without batteries, so now I'm in the
position of waiting until we can afford new batteries before we can
use the PV system. I'm running the generator 24/7 until I can put the
money together for the new batteries (about $3000). My batteries are
only three years old, even though they supposedly can last as much as
six years. Keeping them full of water has been a challenging
maintenance issue.

Before that, I was having to go downstairs and reset the inverter at
least a couple of times a week as it would crash for no apparent
reason. Blown fuses have also been common with our system.

Add to that the normal maintenance of scraping the snow off the roof
where the panels are, and it is a significant time investment. You
have to like doing it to do this sort of thing. If you live off the
road like I do, it is also very difficult to get electricians to come
up during the winter. Most don't have their own snow machines, so you
have to shuttle them up, etc. But this isn't going to be a problem for
people living in town.

> I have a friend who is installing a hundred kWh peak on a ranch in Oregon to
> run pumps. ?I am concerned, his brother is worried, he is terrified.

If the system runs when it is sunny, and doesn't run when it is not
sunny, has no batteries and runs on DC, then it probably isn't so bad.
Just get a VERY good electrician, which is very hard to find. Maybe an
investment in Angie's list??

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 05:26:38 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:26:38 -0600
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
> Kelly Anderson wrote:
> The idea that the press is "liberal" is so manifesty false that it is not
> worth arguing with anyone who would argue otherwise.
>
> Only in a country in which the right defines the word "liberal" to be
> synonymous with "questioning an extreme right-wing position in any way
> whatsoever", can the newspapers be considered "liberal".
>
> The Guardian is liberal. ?The Morning Star is extreme liberal/communist.
> ?Anything to the right of those is either centrist (The Independent) or
> slightly right of center (New York Times) or further to the right.

UCLA is not exactly a bastion of conservatism, but they found it was real...

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx

I think the New York Times is very left leaning from the stuff I have
read there, but that's just my personal opinion rather than science.
The Washington Times is right leaning, as of course is Fox.

I'm not going to argue this to death, because I know I won't get
anywhere. I am simply stating my own opinion that people who are
journalists naturally have a left leaning view of the world. They vote
Democrat MUCH more than Republican. That's just a simple fact.

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 05:44:42 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 23:44:42 -0600
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=WLnFNzS9fcc=CJz4Xvz8==qT83w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> But you really need big lift capacity from the earth before you go
> after lunar materials.

As I understand it, we have the material science to build a space
elevator from the moon with current technology, where the space
elevator from earth has to be built with a stronger belt than we can
currently produce. That might serve as the basis for an argument to do
things from the moon first.

-Kelly


From msd001 at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 07:11:34 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 03:11:34 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Self improvement was Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinzDENqKuC=v81w4y_MEU4WFBgGUQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:12 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thought experiment.
>
> Build an AI. ?Put a clock rate control in that it can mess with.
>
> If it is measuring it's performance against an outside clock, it is
> going to notice that it does better with the clock rate on fast.
>
> So it sets it's clock rate to fast, effectively becoming smarter.
>
> Seems to me this is self improvement.

I think that's self-evident if we agree on the definition and
measurement of "smarter"

I'd say your own ability to solve any arbitrary engineering problem is
sufficiently beyond my own that even with my local clock running at 2X
you'd still be smarter than me.  So I think the definition of smarter
(especially in light of self-control of clock rate) must include some
normalizing factor such that "smarter" measures useful/effective
output per 'clock.'

I think it would be a good realization for the AI to turn the clock
all the way up - at least to the optimum of physical constraints such
as heat dissipation and energy consumption.  Intentionally consuming
short-term smart-drugs with the long term effect of destroying the
brain is not smart overall.



From moulton at moulton.com  Thu Apr 21 07:16:07 2011
From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 00:16:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAFD9B7.2050803@moulton.com>


Before we go round and round on this issue of identifying media as
liberal or whatever can I suggest we slow down and recognize a few things:

1.  The meaning of terms like liberal and conservative vary by time and
place.   Personally I find these terms usually useless in political
discourse and more often than not a hindrance to communication and
understanding.  Similarly with the terms "left" and "right".

2. Political positions tend not to fit well on a line.  A two
dimensional chart is arguably better however it is still woefully
inadequate.

3.  Does this mean that discussion of media and political positions
comes to a halt?  No.  What is required is to look at a media
organization and determine the political positions it takes on a wide
variety of issues and attempt to understand what reasons are behind the
positions.  The positions might be the result of long deliberation or it
might be the result of the latest opinion poll for boosting circulation
and it is quite possible that persons outside the media outlet will not
be able to tell the difference.

4.  Having a familiarity with a variety of sources is helpful in
understanding different perspectives.  For example consider magazines; I
find it helpful to subscribe to The Economist, Reason and Mother Jones. 

5.  As far as I can tell every media outlet has a bias; sometimes
conscious, sometimes not; sometimes explicit, sometimes not.  The point
is try to determine the bias and then view the contents of that media
outlet with the bias in mind. 

6. Do not forget to be self-referential; we all need to examine our own
individual biases.

Fred



From msd001 at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 07:21:26 2011
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 03:21:26 -0400
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikN2YopX77481MYb6uXcmNj6KW6gQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:16 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> hiring an electrician that actually knew his head from a hole in the ground.

That sounds like a joke: electrician... hole in the ground...  sorry,
couldn't quite put it into a punchline.


Have you calculated ROI on your PV setup compared to lugging
electricity in from the grid?  I've lived in the northeast megalopolis
my whole life; I share a well with my neighbors but I have difficulty
imagining non-grid electricity.

(upon re-read before send, I realized "Lugging electricity" is the
same accidental word play as I quoted from your post)


From anders at aleph.se  Thu Apr 21 08:42:16 2011
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:42:16 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Self improvement
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DAFEDE8.4040803@aleph.se>

It is easy to see an example of self-improving piece of software. Take 
an optimizing compiler's source code, compile it with optimization using 
a version that was not compiled in an optimized way, and voila! You have 
self-improvement. Except that it stops there.

It is also easy to make a piece of software that can self-improve by any 
measurable metric: just generate random variations, measure how well 
they do, and select the best. This works, but tends to be completely 
impractical.

In the literature we have examples such as AIXI(tl) (potentially 
unlimited, but in practice too slow) and G?del machines (definitely 
self-improving, implementable, but likely too slow to matter and 
possibly limited by what it can prove).

So the real question ought to be: can we produce self-improving software 
that improves *fast*, along an *important* metric and in an *unlimited* 
way? Getting just two of these will not matter much (with the possible 
exception of fast but limited improvement along an important metric). We 
need a proper theory for this! So far the results in theoretical AI have 
put some constraints on it (e.g. see Shane Legg's "Machine 
Superintelligence"), but none that seems to matter for the rather 
pertinent question of whether rapid takeoffs are possible.

-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute 
James Martin 21st Century School 
Philosophy Faculty 
Oxford University 



From anders at aleph.se  Thu Apr 21 08:49:53 2011
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:49:53 +0100
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
In-Reply-To: <20110420185619.ypg7pertsk44sowc@webmail.natasha.cc>
References: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com>
	<4DAF4BF3.3010404@aleph.se>
	<20110420185619.ypg7pertsk44sowc@webmail.natasha.cc>
Message-ID: <4DAFEFB1.9040408@aleph.se>

natasha at natasha.cc wrote:
>
> What is the "leading edge technology" that was used to create this 
> computerized brain map?  Does this mean that the combination of MRI, 
> DTI, microarry and ISH, form this leading edge technology?
>
> But then it says it this is a "gene map" and that RNA was obtained 
> through slicing and dicing.

The Allen brain map is one project, and they are using anatomical 
sampling from two human brains. Not the complete slice and dice I would 
favor, but taking a sample from roughly every region and measuring what 
genes are expressed.

http://human.brain-map.org/content/WholeBrainMicroarray_WhitePaper_March2011.pdf?1301097406


The conenctome project is separate.
http://iic.seas.harvard.edu/research/the-connectome/


-- 
Anders Sandberg,
Future of Humanity Institute 
James Martin 21st Century School 
Philosophy Faculty 
Oxford University 



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 09:03:20 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:03:20 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110421090319.GQ23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:47:38AM -0600, Kelly Anderson wrote:

> How much of the material necessary to create solar power satellites is
> easily obtainable from the moon?

There are multiple ISRU projects under way:

http://www.cam.uh.edu/SpaRC/ISRU%202p%20v1%20022007.pdf

http://www.highfrontier.org/Archive/Jt/s5.05b.Ignatiev%20Moon%20Base%20Conf%2010-05.pdf

etc.
 
> Also, the rocket that runs from a laser based on the ground... could
> that work from the moon just as well? What would the propellant be?

On the Moon, you can use linear motor/magnetic levitation launches.
http://www.physorg.com/news91272157.html

You ideally start at one of the poles, creating annular structures
to make use of 24/7/365 insolation, and then progressively working yourself
towards the equator, building high-voltage transmission to provide
power to the night side to avoid shutting down for two weeks.

> Since there are no airplanes on the moon, it seems like a bit
> safer/easier place for that system.

The whole idea is to tap extraterrestrial materials and energy
sources to escape the limits of a crowded planet and a vulnerable
biosphere.
 
> I assume the water from the moon topic has been done here.
> http://www.ted.com/talks/bill_stone_explores_the_earth_and_space.html

You don't need much water for ISRU producing materials and launch
facilities.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 09:13:40 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:13:40 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110421091340.GS23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:56:03AM -0700, spike wrote:

> I have a friend who is installing a hundred kWh peak on a ranch in Oregon to

100 kWp is a reasonably big installation for a residential
one. What was the price tag, if it's not a secret? Which
company did it, and does he have 30+ years manufacturer's warranty,
and does the installation company offer warranty of their own?

> run pumps.  I am concerned, his brother is worried, he is terrified.

Current commercial systems are turnkey and give zero trouble.
The worst that could happen is hail damage. Is his system insured, and
up to which hail grain size? Make sure he's covered.


From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 09:24:38 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:24:38 +0200
Subject: [ExI] World's biggest human brain map unveiled
In-Reply-To: <4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTik0+FPTz-V5qskoHR9gy_GNCNpimw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF02E1.4040703@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <20110421092438.GT23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:59:29AM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote:
> John Grigg wrote:
>> This is perhaps a baby step toward uploading...
>>   
>> http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2011/04/worlds-first-human-brain-map-u.html
>
> My only problem with this is that it is only really a kind of map ....  

It's only one stage of the project:

http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/04/the-human-brain-atlas/

"Jones: Next up for the Allen Institute is a project that focuses 
on the wiring of the brain in the mouse; we?ll again take our 
industrial approaches to build out a highway map of the brain.  
We?re also excited to have recently brought on board our new 
Chief Scientific Officer, Dr. Christof Koch.  With him, we?re 
going to be figuring out some future strategies for tackling 
some of the really hard problems in neuroscience related to 
the encoding of information."

> as far as I can make out it tells a lot about gene expression, but not  
> about connectivity, and unfortunately the gene expression story is  
> several steps removed from telling me anything about functionality.

Oh, I disagree. Observing the genetic expression pattern
over space and time tells you a lot about the according
molecular and ultrascale machinery.

You need this information to be able to make sense from
structure. The other part of the puzzle is from in vivo
recording.

You need all of these to have a chance to succeed.

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 09:30:49 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:30:49 +0200
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DAF089E.3060208@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAE8F4D.3090909@satx.rr.com>
	<BANLkTi=8c-M3QAUMNCESTM7dFrkn00o_+Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF0269.5010907@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTiktipywW4hU+czso9R7DChcWmcXDg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF089E.3060208@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <20110421093049.GU23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 12:23:58PM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote:

> Orcs, on the other hand, are only too real.  They make up at least 50%  
> of the population of internet mailing lists....

Here be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)


From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 10:03:42 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 12:03:42 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Self improvement
In-Reply-To: <4DAFEDE8.4040803@aleph.se>
References: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAFEDE8.4040803@aleph.se>
Message-ID: <20110421100342.GY23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 09:42:16AM +0100, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> It is easy to see an example of self-improving piece of software. Take  
> an optimizing compiler's source code, compile it with optimization using  
> a version that was not compiled in an optimized way, and voila! You have  
> self-improvement. Except that it stops there.

Ah, but it doesn't actually enhance your program. Apart from making it
run faster, which is a trivial modification. Applied on itself, it
doesn't extend the language. It won't rewrite itself or your code
to make use of new hardware features, e.g. parallelism, detected
at runtime (yes, there's some OpenCL JIT which kinda, sorta
does it, but not really). 

> It is also easy to make a piece of software that can self-improve by any  
> measurable metric: just generate random variations, measure how well  
> they do, and select the best. This works, but tends to be completely  
> impractical.
>
> In the literature we have examples such as AIXI(tl) (potentially  
> unlimited, but in practice too slow) and G?del machines (definitely  
> self-improving, implementable, but likely too slow to matter and  
> possibly limited by what it can prove).
>
> So the real question ought to be: can we produce self-improving software  
> that improves *fast*, along an *important* metric and in an *unlimited*  
> way? Getting just two of these will not matter much (with the possible  
> exception of fast but limited improvement along an important metric). We  
> need a proper theory for this! So far the results in theoretical AI have  

I am willing to bet good money that there is none. You can use
it as a diagnostic: whenever the system starts doing something
interesting your analytical approaches start breaking down.
Consider an oscillator. A system of coupled oscillators. A system
of coupled oscillators using positive-feedback loops. A system
of coupled oscillators using negative-feedback loops. A system
of oscillators using positive-feedback *and* negative-feedback
loops. Oops.

Consider formal proofs. It's an infinitely powerful tool, unfortunately
of infinitesimal reach.

The interesting part is that people continue to be in awe and in
great expectation of analystical methods, just because they
have been extremely effective in some areas. Which is pretty
unreasonable.

As long as we continue to treat artificial intelligence as
a scientific domain instead of "merely" engineering, we won't 
be making progress.

> put some constraints on it (e.g. see Shane Legg's "Machine  
> Superintelligence"), but none that seems to matter for the rather  
> pertinent question of whether rapid takeoffs are possible.

Of course rapid takeoffs are possible. I can draw you a blueprint
of hardware which will accelerate neural processes by a factor
of at least 10^6. The physical limit is somewhere at 10^9.

A human civilisation will produce something interesting in a
megayear, even if the rate of matter manipulation is limited.

And of course you can just look at differences in really
effective ultra-high IQ individuals and merely us at 
arbitrary detail (virtual systems are arbitrarily inspectable), 
and figure out what the relevant delta is, and instantiate
more of these for a particular task.

All of this is engineering. 

-- 
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 eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 10:16:40 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 12:16:40 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikN2YopX77481MYb6uXcmNj6KW6gQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikN2YopX77481MYb6uXcmNj6KW6gQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110421101640.GZ23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 03:21:26AM -0400, Mike Dougherty wrote:

> Have you calculated ROI on your PV setup compared to lugging
> electricity in from the grid?  I've lived in the northeast megalopolis

That would seem to be beyond 100 kUSD, depending on distance
which needs to be covered.

> my whole life; I share a well with my neighbors but I have difficulty
> imagining non-grid electricity.

I don't. It's not cost-effective for most locations yet, but it has
been done. You see many insular systems every day, without recognizing
them as such, unless you're looking out for these.

With each passing year the spatial, temporal and design niches can
only grow. The nonrenewable only shrink.

What I find strange is how few people are being unenthusiastic or
outright sceptical about these.

Decentral energy production cannot be controlled by monopolies,
and they're a key requirement for decentral fabrication, and such
basics like extraterrestrial resource utilization. The solid-state
revolution never ended. It will continue all the way to machine-phase.


From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 10:44:18 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 12:44:18 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110421104418.GA23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:46:34AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:

> I looked at this in some detail from the perspective of a moving cable
> (loop) space elevator.  That's the gold standard for lifting stuff to
> GEO, being slightly more than 100% efficient.  (Ask if you can't
> figure out why.)

This is all very well, but we don't have such elevators, and
the number of launches required to build such an elevator, even
if we had theoretical-strength SWNT ribbons (which we don't)
would seem enough to wreck major havoc on this planet (look
at the environmental footprint of the Shuttle, and Russians
are only slightly better).

Meanwhile, on the Moon you only need commercial aramide.
 
> Takes (round numbers) 15 kWh per kg.  Reasonable number for power sat
> mass is 5 kg/kW.  A good way to look at energy return on energy
> invested is how long it takes to get a payback.  For ground solar or
> wind it's measured in years.

EPBT for current CIGS or CdTe is under a year (EROEI is 40:1 at the
moment). The trend is is of course towards better, though it will
turn asymptotic at some point.
 
> For a power satellite made with stuff brought up by elevator, 5 kg
> will take 75 kWh to lift it.  The 5 kg makes 1 kw, so the payback time
> is just over *3 days.*
> 
> Chemical rockets are around 2.5% efficient so the payback time is 40
> times that long or about 120 days.

Chemical rockets currently means kerosene/LOX or maybe liquid
methane/LOX or even liquid hydrogen/LOX. Synfuels will screw with
your energy, and e.g. you waste half of energy in liquid hydrogen
to liquify it. Including rocket construction, supply chain, the
EPBT for chemical rocket-launched SPS is probably never. EROEI
needs to be better than 5:1 to bother, so I think chemical rocket
SPS is stone cold dead. The only reason you want to do it is
to supply global wireless power for military applications, where
prices are less relevant.
 
> For the laser part, it draws around a GW to send 60 t/h to GEO.
> (Starting from a sub orbital boost by the Skylon.)  1 M kW/60,000kg is
> 17 kWh/kg

Yes, but Skylons don't yet exist. It is not obvious we can
make scramjets to work, though of course I hope we will.
 
> The Skylon phase burns 66807 kg of hydrogen per launch.  The energy
> content for three per hour would be 14029470 kWh (at 70 kW/kg), or 233
> kWh/kg.
> 
> Together, 250 kWh/kg, (6% efficient) so material for a kW of
> production would take 1250 kWh to lift--which gives an energy payback
> time of around 52 days.
> 
> By renewable energy standards, that's amazingly good.

I think we'll be at EROEI of 100:1 and payback times of few
months for terrestrial PV within 20 years or less. I think that
would be pretty good. Of course, long-term is self-replicating
machine-phase photovoltaics both on Earth and in space.

> 
> See any problems with the logic or math?
> 
> > When we're looking at kW/kg, we shouldn't forget that the
> > kg is at ~Mach 25, and it came from the bottom of the gravity
> > well which taxes your EROEI -- unless it came from lunar material.
> 
> Later in power sat production it's worth going after lunar material
> just so you don't need to be flying so often.  But the way to go after
> lunar material is with a moving cable elevator out through L1.  It

I think we'll first get chemical rockets from in-situ synfuels
from lunar cryotrap water, and then maglev launches. The advantage
of maglev is that it scales, and can produce effectively continous
stream of material, and is self-amplifying since you can beam
down more power from Earth-Moon space SPS as you run out of 
available flux.

> takes an investment of around 100,000 tons and pays back the
> investment at around a 1000 tons per day (pays back in mass in 100
> days).
> 
> But you really need big lift capacity from the earth before you go
> after lunar materials.

The whole point of boostrap with ISRU is that you need minimal
amount of material until you go near self-rep closure of unity,
and none after you're above. The ultimate free lunch, long-term.

-- 
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 mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Apr 21 11:00:01 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:00:01 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <005201cbff4d$3a087ab0$ae197010$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>
	<005201cbff4d$3a087ab0$ae197010$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <001201cc0013$45ebc640$d1c352c0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Max More wrote,
> The Gary Taubes article cited was far from his best material. It was
> merely suggestive.  I would strongly recommend his book, 
> Good Calories, Bad Calories.  You'll find ample evidence in favor
> of higher-fat diets and against the American orthodoxy,
> as you requested.

The order tracking webpage says the book reached my local distribution point
last night and should be delivered sometime today.

--
Harvey Newstrom <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From mail at HarveyNewstrom.com  Thu Apr 21 11:57:12 2011
From: mail at HarveyNewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:57:12 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=_-+QagQBZrkm50xru=PbRuEvKdQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>
	<000c01cbffce$134cb090$39e611b0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTi=_-+QagQBZrkm50xru=PbRuEvKdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <001301cc001b$433733f0$c9a59bd0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>

Max More wrote,
> I couldn't disagree more. Apparently haven't yet read "Good Calories, Bad
> Calories", so I don't understand why you make your "despite" comment here.

The book has not yet arrived.  I just sent off a previous posting saying
that I should get it sometime today.  

However, even before reading the book, the controversy is well-known in this
area.  Nobody can follow the field of nutrition for as long as I have and
not be familiar with this theory.  I have seen it presented, tested, and
debunked over and over.  It makes a fine hypothesis that should be tested.
But all tests I have seen have proven it wrong.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  But I have kept an
open mind.  I have ordered the book and will read it myself to see if the
entire body of science is wrong, if the entire liberal media complex have
mislead me, and if somehow I missed experimental data in the field that
actually supports this hypothesis.  And as a scientist, I will be pleasantly
surprised if it does, and will gladly adapt my diet based on the new
evidence.  However, Bayesian statistics lead me to estimate a low
probability that this conspiracy-theory scenario will actually pan out to
be true.  Conspiracy theories seldom do.

> BTW, your previous comments about sugars being essential for
> energy contradict not only what I've read but??also my experience.

I doubt I advocated eating sugar.  Sugar is bad.  When I say "carbs", I mean
"complex carbohydrates", but paleos tend to hear "sugar".  (I did give an
example of a paleo's "low carb" diet of 20% calories from glucose equaling a
"high carb" diet of 80% fructose using the glycemic index.  But I was
arguing that the terms "low carb" and "high carb" were meaningless, not
advocating that one should really consume most calories from sugar.)

I have no doubt that you can get plenty of energy from fat.  But you have to
go into ketosis to do it.  And you risk an Atkins-style heart-attack.

--
Harvey Newstrom <www.HarveyNewstrom.com>
CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP





From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 13:35:09 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 15:35:09 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <4DAF8FD1.8010502@mac.com>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<20110418140115.GZ23560@leitl.org> <4DAC945C.8010605@mac.com>
	<20110418203336.GL23560@leitl.org> <4DAF8FD1.8010502@mac.com>
Message-ID: <20110421133509.GP23560@leitl.org>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 07:00:49PM -0700, Samantha Atkins wrote:

> Well, ok, partially.   To assume that even an AGI will not be smart  
> enough to self-improve on purpose seems like a stretch.

Let's say you have full write access to your genome.
How would you improve yourself?

An AI doesn't have any source code. It just has state,
plenty of it. Of course inspectable. But improvements
by monkeypatching a live system are hard. 

If you're not layered or modular, with clean interfaces,
how do you improve yourself?

-- 
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 spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 21 14:23:25 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:23:25 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007601cc002f$ad930c60$08b92520$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
...

>> I have a friend who is installing a hundred kWh peak on a ranch in 
>> Oregon to run pumps. ?I am concerned, his brother is worried, he is
terrified.

>If the system runs when it is sunny, and doesn't run when it is not sunny,
has no batteries and runs on DC, then it probably isn't so bad.  Just get a
VERY good electrician, which is very hard to find. Maybe an investment in
Angie's list??  -Kelly

Thanks Kelly.

I can imagine specialty applications like that where one has plenty of land,
doesn't use the PV for home electronics (and so is still relying on the
commercial grid) but rather uses the PVs to lift water from a deep aquifer
to run a center pivot.  Out there in the eastern Oregon desert, there is
intense sunlight all day every day during the time one needs the water.
This would use a lot of PVs, but is still a specialty application.  I can
imagine this arrangement being very common in the desert US west soon.

The notion of maintaining a bunch of lead acid batteries in the home is not
attractive.  Among other things, you have a huge contamination risk if you
have a house fire, plus the room taken up in your house, oy.

spike







From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 14:37:36 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:37:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=WLnFNzS9fcc=CJz4Xvz8==qT83w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=WLnFNzS9fcc=CJz4Xvz8==qT83w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTinPTtZ3cLPoQqY3mt4JhVEydHeK4w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:44 PM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> But you really need big lift capacity from the earth before you go
>> after lunar materials.
>
> As I understand it, we have the material science to build a space
> elevator from the moon with current technology, where the space
> elevator from earth has to be built with a stronger belt than we can
> currently produce. That might serve as the basis for an argument to do
> things from the moon first.

It true we have the material, Spectra, and it happens that I am the
person who ran the calculation for a moving cable elevator off the
lunar surface.  The counterweight *alone* for a minimum sized (1000
t/day) lunar elevator came in at 65,000 tons.  Now if you have a 2500
ton per day materials lift for building power sats you can borrow the
parts shipments for 30 days and afford the rest, like 19,000 tons of
cable and a 15 MW power plant.

But to do this *first* before you have a solid production of power
satellites running and haul up the extraction and fabrications plants
to make lunar rock into useful parts, well, run the numbers, then
multiply them by whatever figure you think it will cost to lift the
stuff to GEO or beyond.

Keith


From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 21 14:25:46 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:25:46 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007701cc0030$01c2de00$05489a00$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
...

>...I'm not going to argue this to death, because I know I won't get
anywhere. I am simply stating my own opinion that people who are journalists
naturally have a left leaning view of the world. They vote Democrat MUCH
more than Republican. That's just a simple fact.  -Kelly


Do you remember the journalism majors from when you were in college?
Compare them as a group with your engineering majors.  What is the most
striking difference?  {8^D

spike






From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 14:41:18 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:41:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <20110421090319.GQ23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110421090319.GQ23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimq20Z1xB5G551OiC-5x1w5J18EyA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

snip

> On the Moon, you can use linear motor/magnetic levitation launches.
> http://www.physorg.com/news91272157.html

MagLev is *so* 70s.

Keith


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 14:44:30 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:44:30 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <20110417110247.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.0970fbc76f.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
References: <20110417110247.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.0970fbc76f.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik4gb2TgBTf7wzziJdk2fuvFSnOTQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 17 April 2011 20:02, Harvey Newstrom <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:

> Stefano Vaj <stefano.vaj at gmail.com> wrote,
> > Yes, we agree that if must have carbs at all long-chain, hi-fiber,
> diluted,
> > carbs, in a caloric restriction framework, are a lot safer and healthier.
> >
> > This is also true for heroin, however, and it could be contended that a
> > heroin flash is more satisfactory to many people. :-)
>
> This is merely an assertion that carbs are as bad as heroin.


This is merely an assertion that heroin is bad, which all in all is not
really true for anybody at anytime. But, yes, I think that we can live
better without both heroin and grains/sugar, and that in most circumstances
it would be advisable to do so.


> Every cell of our body has mitochondria churning away at the Krebs Cycle
> to process carbs for energy.  Every muscle in our body burns carbs to
> move.  Our brain requires carbs to function.  We store carbs (as fat)
> for later use.
>

Is there anything different here than what happens to any animal at all?

Are we suggesting that, say, "nothing proves that grains are not necessary
to a wolf's diet"?

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110421/e59f9dbf/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 14:18:46 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 16:18:46 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Alzheimer
Message-ID: <BANLkTinUCf5sqMm0145nUqpApvzM3RYeiQ@mail.gmail.com>

The father of a good friend of mine has been regrettably diagnosed (well,
such diagnoses appear to be really final only after post-mortem
investigations, but probability is very high...) to be in the very first
stages of Alzheimer.

Besides the protein I am folding right now in a Folding at Home task on my PC,
I am not really up-to-date with regard to either official state-of-the-art
and etherodox approaches. Has anybody some information or sources that he
would care to share?

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110421/4344e8f3/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 15:01:04 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:01:04 +0200
Subject: [ExI] pale diet again: RE: It's not only the fittest who
	survive.
In-Reply-To: <007a01cbfebc$ee19dc10$ca4d9430$@att.net>
References: <20110419101944.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.cded2fd617.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTikmAhApC2mkYqoZksz8LqC-DdjePA@mail.gmail.com>
	<007a01cbfebc$ee19dc10$ca4d9430$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikeO975Sb=oxeJznPmm8XwdWFWUNg@mail.gmail.com>

On 19 April 2011 20:09, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> For instance,
> the Inuits have developed the ability to subsist entirely on meat, whereas
> the Europeans tend to develop gout and ketosis if we try that.


Same as for scurvy, I believe there is some evidence suggesting that gout
has little to do with a diet based on fresh meat and fish, and that once
proteins are are mixed with the right balance of fats we do not really need
much else.

An europoid Norwegian tried to subsist for a couple of years on a purely
carnivorous diet, and the only thing he had to do to be perfectly well was
to adjust his fat intake.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110421/d77f9576/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 21 14:52:01 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 07:52:01 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was
	RE:	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110421091340.GS23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<20110421091340.GS23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <009601cc0033$ac3924e0$04ab6ea0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl
Subject: Re: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
of wind power

>...On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:56:03AM -0700, spike wrote:

>>... I have a friend who is installing a hundred kWh peak on a ranch in
Oregon to

>...100 kWp is a reasonably big installation for a residential one. What was
the price tag, if it's not a secret? Which company did it, and does he have
30+ years manufacturer's warranty, and does the installation company offer
warranty of their own?...


I don't have any of these details, but he is the kind of guy who does all
his financial calculations carefully (masters degree in electrical
engineering.)  His installation isn't primarily for residential.  His PVs
are for farm use, which makes it attractive because of it actually provides
it's own load leveling: irrigation goes on when the sun shines.


>>... run pumps.  I am concerned, his brother is worried, he is terrified.

>...Current commercial systems are turnkey and give zero trouble.
The worst that could happen is hail damage. Is his system insured, and up to
which hail grain size? Make sure he's covered.
_______________________________________________

Hail isn't considered a threat out in that part of the desert (eastern
Oregon.)  That's a good question however: we occasionally get hail in
central west coast, thrice already this year, all pea size and smaller.

My friend's PV system is experimental: they want to see how well it works
out there in anticipation of adding enough to run all the center pivots and
wheel lines.  If you want to get an idea of what this is, go to Google Maps
and look out along John Day Highway (26) out north and west of Jamieson
Oregon.

spike



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 15:25:47 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:25:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <20110421104418.GA23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikTa7UmcUtf4_TatSK7LN0a_y5JhA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110421104418.GA23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin9BCswV1ZoLtSYn0_W91iyW4Qq9g@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 3:44 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 09:46:34AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:
>
>> I looked at this in some detail from the perspective of a moving cable
>> (loop) space elevator. ?That's the gold standard for lifting stuff to
>> GEO, being slightly more than 100% efficient. ?(Ask if you can't
>> figure out why.)
>
> This is all very well, but we don't have such elevators, and
> the number of launches required to build such an elevator, even
> if we had theoretical-strength SWNT ribbons (which we don't)
> would seem enough to wreck major havoc on this planet (look
> at the environmental footprint of the Shuttle, and Russians
> are only slightly better).

_If_ we had the material (which we don't) you only have to lift a
small thread to state the project.  Then you lift larger and larger
cables, doubling the capacity of the cable about 3 times a year.

"In the background was the vibration of the 31-foot diameter driver
wheels turning at 900 rpm, the whip-cracking sound of the supersonic
space elevator cable, reminding Marc of a flag flapping in a strong
wind, and the occasional run down and run up of the variable speed
cable.  The elevator was mostly lifting parts now, but over its life,
more than ninety percent of the capacity of the elevator had raised
more cable and counterweight.  Four more doublings would take it from
its current capacity of 125 tons a day to its design capacity of 2,000
tons per day."

(From UpLift, the 4th chapter in the saga that includes "the clinic seed.")

> Meanwhile, on the Moon you only need commercial aramide.

Spectra.  Density is very important when designing space elevators.

>> Takes (round numbers) 15 kWh per kg. ?Reasonable number for power sat
>> mass is 5 kg/kW. ?A good way to look at energy return on energy
>> invested is how long it takes to get a payback. ?For ground solar or
>> wind it's measured in years.
>
> EPBT for current CIGS or CdTe is under a year (EROEI is 40:1 at the
> moment). The trend is is of course towards better, though it will
> turn asymptotic at some point.
>
>> For a power satellite made with stuff brought up by elevator, 5 kg
>> will take 75 kWh to lift it. ?The 5 kg makes 1 kw, so the payback time
>> is just over *3 days.*
>>
>> Chemical rockets are around 2.5% efficient so the payback time is 40
>> times that long or about 120 days.
>
> Chemical rockets currently means kerosene/LOX or maybe liquid
> methane/LOX or even liquid hydrogen/LOX. Synfuels will screw with
> your energy, and e.g. you waste half of energy in liquid hydrogen
> to liquify it.

Takes around 50 kWh/kg to make H2 from water and 20 kWh/kg to liquefy it.

> Including rocket construction, supply chain, the
> EPBT for chemical rocket-launched SPS is probably never. EROEI
> needs to be better than 5:1 to bother,

For oil, coal, oil sands, etc, EROEI is a good metric.  It's not so on
sun or wind renewable energy.  There, the more useful metric is time
to repay the energy invested in energy out.  For single use rockets
you may be right, we could work it out given that rockets are mostly
aluminum which takes considerable energy to reduce.  But reuseable
rockets are a different story because the energy cost of the materials
is spread over hundreds to thousands of flights, and you can recycle
the worn out ones back into metals.

> so I think chemical rocket
> SPS is stone cold dead. The only reason you want to do it is
> to supply global wireless power for military applications, where
> prices are less relevant.

I have tried to make a case for military SBSP based on current or even
projected rockets and just can't do it.

>> For the laser part, it draws around a GW to send 60 t/h to GEO.
>> (Starting from a sub orbital boost by the Skylon.) ?1 M kW/60,000kg is
>> 17 kWh/kg
>
> Yes, but Skylons don't yet exist. It is not obvious we can
> make scramjets to work, though of course I hope we will.

The Skylon is a lot closer to existing than a lot of stuff we talk
about on this list.

>> The Skylon phase burns 66807 kg of hydrogen per launch. ?The energy
>> content for three per hour would be 14029470 kWh (at 70 kW/kg), or 233
>> kWh/kg.
>>
>> Together, 250 kWh/kg, (6% efficient) so material for a kW of
>> production would take 1250 kWh to lift--which gives an energy payback
>> time of around 52 days.
>>
>> By renewable energy standards, that's amazingly good.
>
> I think we'll be at EROEI of 100:1 and payback times of few
> months for terrestrial PV within 20 years or less.

How are you calculating EROEI for wind or solar?

> I think that
> would be pretty good. Of course, long-term is self-replicating
> machine-phase photovoltaics both on Earth and in space.

And you complain Skylon doesn't exist yet?

>> See any problems with the logic or math?
>>
>> > When we're looking at kW/kg, we shouldn't forget that the
>> > kg is at ~Mach 25, and it came from the bottom of the gravity
>> > well which taxes your EROEI -- unless it came from lunar material.
>>
>> Later in power sat production it's worth going after lunar material
>> just so you don't need to be flying so often. ?But the way to go after
>> lunar material is with a moving cable elevator out through L1. ?It
>
> I think we'll first get chemical rockets from in-situ synfuels
> from lunar cryotrap water, and then maglev launches. The advantage
> of maglev is that it scales, and can produce effectively continous
> stream of material, and is self-amplifying since you can beam
> down more power from Earth-Moon space SPS as you run out of
> available flux.

Hmm.  Do you have any idea of how hard maglev is?  Do you realize
there is just one place on the moon where maglev makes any sense?
Ever heard of achromatic orbits?  Google achromatic orbit heppenheimer

Any idea of the difficulty of catching a stream of packages of lunar
dirt with the mass and velocity of an 18th century cannon ball?  Don't
forget they have shotgun pattern and some will flat out miss the
"catcher."  A *lot* of thought went into mass drivers back in the 70s.
 It wasn't easy then and it isn't now.

>> takes an investment of around 100,000 tons and pays back the
>> investment at around a 1000 tons per day (pays back in mass in 100
>> days).
>>
>> But you really need big lift capacity from the earth before you go
>> after lunar materials.
>
> The whole point of boostrap with ISRU is that you need minimal
> amount of material until you go near self-rep closure of unity,
> and none after you're above. The ultimate free lunch, long-term.

With full blown nanotechnology a coke can sized payload is all you
need to convert the moon to whatever you want.  But for the current
state of the art, the only study I know about in recent years came in
at $2 T and at least 20 years.

If you can put numbers on how to do it and support them, I am eager to listen.

Keith



From rpwl at lightlink.com  Thu Apr 21 15:39:01 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:39:01 -0400
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DB04F95.8060701@lightlink.com>

Kelly Anderson wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote:
>> Kelly Anderson wrote:
>> The idea that the press is "liberal" is so manifesty false that it is not
>> worth arguing with anyone who would argue otherwise.
>>
>> Only in a country in which the right defines the word "liberal" to be
>> synonymous with "questioning an extreme right-wing position in any way
>> whatsoever", can the newspapers be considered "liberal".
>>
>> The Guardian is liberal.  The Morning Star is extreme liberal/communist.
>>  Anything to the right of those is either centrist (The Independent) or
>> slightly right of center (New York Times) or further to the right.
> 
> UCLA is not exactly a bastion of conservatism, but they found it was real...
> 
> http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
> 
> I think the New York Times is very left leaning from the stuff I have
> read there, but that's just my personal opinion rather than science.
> The Washington Times is right leaning, as of course is Fox.
> 
> I'm not going to argue this to death, because I know I won't get
> anywhere. I am simply stating my own opinion that people who are
> journalists naturally have a left leaning view of the world. They vote
> Democrat MUCH more than Republican. That's just a simple fact.

Do you know what is funny about people in the US?  They grow up with an 
educational system that trains them NEVER to use their own brains to 
think about something, but instead just take someone else's opinion as 
fact (as long as the opinion agrees with what they want to believe).

So, NEVER read and think about the content of a paper if its conclusion 
seems to support your point of view.  Just cite it as fact.

Exhibit A:  your reference to the Groseclose and Milyo paper.

If you read the report, and think about the methods that Groseclose and 
Milyo used, you can see that the justification for why their measure 
should actually correlate with the direction of bias is pathetic.

Groseclose and Milyo took a measure of the number of times reporters 
cited "think tanks", and then they cross-compared that to the number of 
citations made by politicians, then used the ADA measure (itself 
normalized to put the House at an average of "centrist"!) to find out 
how liberal those numbers were.

Every link in that chain is a joke.

If the vast majority of reporters in the country decided to, say, ignore 
a huge accumulation of evidence pointing to the fact that Iraq has no 
weapons of mass destruction, just before it is due to be invaded on the 
grounds that it has WMD, ......  but at the very same time that the 
reporters ignore this overwheleming evidence, they just do not bother to 
make any pertinent references to various think tanks, this would show up 
in Groseclose and Milyo's study as ....NOTHING.  No evidence of media 
bias there whatsoever.

Or, if those same reporters decided, on the eve of the Iraq war, to bury 
the story about the biggest anti-war protest in world history on page 
23, while devoting their front page to the "historic" news that the 
British Parliament had decided to ban fox hunting

Or:  if there is a big breaking news story that General Electric paid no 
corporate taxes in the last few years, but instead got a massive rebate 
from the government -- with this being extremely relevant to an ongoing 
right-wing crusade against the crippling, business-destroying corporate 
tax rate in this country -- and if the major television news networks 
decide to say absolutely NOTHING about this story, but instead headlined 
with a news item about "LOL" getting into the Oxford English Dictionary, 
this glaring distortion of the news to cover up something embarrassing 
to the right wing would not make any impact whatsoever on Groseclose and 
Milyo's statistical measure of media bias.

But, hell, don't let yourself be influenced by stupid, embarrassing 
little facts like these.

If the Groseclose and Milyo paper tells you what you want to believe, I 
am sure it must be true.




Richard Loosemore





From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 15:39:17 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:39:17 -0600
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <007701cc0030$01c2de00$05489a00$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>
	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
	<007701cc0030$01c2de00$05489a00$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTik_jEcPf=KH8pZLiDGHfLLy66as6Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:25 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Do you remember the journalism majors from when you were in college?

No. Never met one to my knowledge... :-)

> Compare them as a group with your engineering majors. ?What is the most
> striking difference? ?{8^D

Ability to make a living? Mathematics? :-)

-Kelly



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 15:53:02 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 08:53:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] CCC
Message-ID: <BANLkTim=Eseej+ix3otr8Da7Xk6UoJTjVg@mail.gmail.com>

Just wondered if any of you are going to this

http://events.ccc.de/camp/2011/space.html

Keith


From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 15:47:19 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:47:19 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Did Hugo de Garis leave the field?
In-Reply-To: <480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <mailman.215.1303098924.493.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
	<480844.48052.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTin6V6YYpnxzW4-hw_cyk8ozt=G4vg@mail.gmail.com>

On 18 April 2011 15:39, Ben Zaiboc <bbenzai at yahoo.com> wrote:

> I was disappointed to read this:
>
> "Ask yourself how it?s possible for a creature of a given intelligence
> level to be able to design a creature of greater intelligence. Designing a
> creature of superior intelligence requires a level of intelligence that the
> designer simply does not have. Therefore, it is logically impossible to use
> the traditional blueprint-design approach to create a creature of superior
> intelligence"
>

There again, it sounds as if there is some fundamental flaw of a
philosophical nature in this line of reasoning.

I am more and more inclined to define "intelligence" simply as the ability
to exhibit a universal computation ability - something which, as shown by
Wolfram is indeed a very low threshold. I suspect in fact that "human" or
"animal" intelligence is nothing else than a universal computation device
running a very peculiar program.

Accordingly. something more intelligent than something else is simply
something performing better at a given task.

Now, we already know that we are able to design devices offering better
performances than human brains at given tasks (say, adding integers).

Why should there be tasks were we would be prevented to do just the same?

For instance, I do not see any deep conceptual obstacle to designing devices
that perform even better than humans in Turing tests. An entirely different
story is the effort required to do so and whether we should consider such
achievement as a top priority.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110421/9f76cc69/attachment.html>

From stefano.vaj at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 15:56:02 2011
From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 17:56:02 +0200
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikNn-9wEPkgP6XngdnrW4WatJUndg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikNn-9wEPkgP6XngdnrW4WatJUndg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikYtZEnBNFfwgmLa-sMQZKgGXrpBg@mail.gmail.com>

On 20 April 2011 10:18, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:

> I look fwd to watching the movie, but I hope it is better done than
> Rand's books. My problem with Rand is not her ideology, which I find
> extreme but often refreshing in its unPCness, but the fact that she is
> an awfully boring writer. I am a very avid reader of everything,
> novels, SF, thrillers, literature, philosophy, science and everything
> else, but I am afraid I never managed to finish a Rand novel. Just too
> boring.
>

I do not like much the choice to set the action in *our* future. What's
wrong with ucronias, in the steam-punk style?

Sounds like a remake of Metropolis set in 2014 with people looking in their
PCs or TV sets.

-- 
Stefano Vaj
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110421/91179aa9/attachment.html>

From rpwl at lightlink.com  Thu Apr 21 15:58:39 2011
From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:58:39 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Self improvement
In-Reply-To: <4DAFEDE8.4040803@aleph.se>
References: <BANLkTinOEnGZH7j5BixxMB6pbELAhH7GgQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DAFEDE8.4040803@aleph.se>
Message-ID: <4DB0542F.5010800@lightlink.com>

Anders Sandberg wrote:
> So the real question ought to be: can we produce self-improving software 
> that improves *fast*, along an *important* metric and in an *unlimited* 
> way? Getting just two of these will not matter much (with the possible 
> exception of fast but limited improvement along an important metric). We 
> need a proper theory for this! So far the results in theoretical AI have 
> put some constraints on it (e.g. see Shane Legg's "Machine 
> Superintelligence"), but none that seems to matter for the rather 
> pertinent question of whether rapid takeoffs are possible.

I disagree with the statement that "the results in theoretical AI have
put some constraints on it".  These theoretical results exploit the fact 
that there is no objective measure of "intelligence" to get their 
seemingly useful results, when in fact the results say nothing of 
importance.

To illustrate the point, if I were to define "intelligence" as, say, 
some kind of entropy measure on the knowledge base of an AI, so that 
less entroy meant more intelligence, I might be able to use this 
definition to bring in a boatload of mathematical results from 
elsewhere, to say an awful lot about AI systems.   If, at the same time, 
I could distract people from asking the awkward question of whether my 
definition of intelligence actually corresponded to the real thing, I 
might be able to dazzle a lot of people with all the mathematics, and 
make them think that I was doing real work.

But if that entropic measure was actually not intelligence at all, but 
just .... well, just a measure of a certain type of entropy, with some 
faint family resemblance, in some circumstance, to the thing we call 
"intelligence", then all my mathematical analysis would mean nothing.

So it actually is with AIXItl, Godel Machines, Shane Legg's papers, and 
numerous other "theoretical AI" work.

So I agree with you when you say, of that theoretical work, that "none 
[of these results] seems to matter for the rather pertinent question of 
whether rapid takeoffs are possible", except that I would have stopped 
the sentence at "none [of these results] seems to matter."



Richard Loosemore




From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 16:08:45 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:08:45 +0200
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE:
	Efficiency	of wind power
In-Reply-To: <007601cc002f$ad930c60$08b92520$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<007601cc002f$ad930c60$08b92520$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20110421160845.GQ23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:23:25AM -0700, spike wrote:

> The notion of maintaining a bunch of lead acid batteries in the home is not
> attractive.  Among other things, you have a huge contamination risk if you
> have a house fire, plus the room taken up in your house, oy.

Charged lead-acid batteries (or any other batteries, for that matter)
can be a considerable hazard. A short will easily make you lose your finger,
and exploded lead-acid (nevermind outgassing) have blinded or killed 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 hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 16:13:08 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 09:13:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <20110421160845.GQ23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<007601cc002f$ad930c60$08b92520$@att.net>
	<20110421160845.GQ23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=TDaqg42dmjG3suEBPkbtOtOCH6A@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:23:25AM -0700, spike wrote:
>
>> The notion of maintaining a bunch of lead acid batteries in the home is not
>> attractive. ?Among other things, you have a huge contamination risk if you
>> have a house fire, plus the room taken up in your house, oy.
>
> Charged lead-acid batteries (or any other batteries, for that matter)
> can be a considerable hazard. A short will easily make you lose your finger,
> and exploded lead-acid (nevermind outgassing) have blinded or killed people.

Having pried the heat distorted lead acid batteries out of a couple of
UPS systems, this may be more common than people think.

Keith



From eugen at leitl.org  Thu Apr 21 16:26:51 2011
From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 18:26:51 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimq20Z1xB5G551OiC-5x1w5J18EyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110421090319.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimq20Z1xB5G551OiC-5x1w5J18EyA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20110421162651.GR23560@leitl.org>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:41:18AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> 
> snip
> 
> > On the Moon, you can use linear motor/magnetic levitation launches.
> > http://www.physorg.com/news91272157.html
> 
> MagLev is *so* 70s.

Turbines and ICEs are *so* steampunk. But they continue to provide the bulk
of our power. Hybrids are 110 years old http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lohner-Porsche_Mixte_Hybrid
yet they haven't quite happened.

Maglev doesn't yet quite exist apart from test lines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev_(transport)
nevermind more advanced approaches like mass driver,
or launch loop, or space fountain.

We've got great technology in the pipeline, but the first
steps in SPS will be quite pedestrian, using technology
more than 1000 years old: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket#In_antiquity

?The future is already here, it is just unevenly distributed.? 



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 16:32:13 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 10:32:13 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikN2YopX77481MYb6uXcmNj6KW6gQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikN2YopX77481MYb6uXcmNj6KW6gQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikQ9FF4Of_Br55RsmyZheCvQuqE=Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Mike Dougherty <msd001 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:16 AM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> hiring an electrician that actually knew his head from a hole in the ground.
>
> That sounds like a joke: electrician... hole in the ground... ?sorry,
> couldn't quite put it into a punchline.

Perhaps you were thinking that the electrician was not well grounded... ;-)

> Have you calculated ROI on your PV setup compared to lugging
> electricity in from the grid?

The cost of connecting to the grid is somewhere between $75,000 and
$150,000. Plus we would have to negotiate running wire across several
unfriendly neighbors' property. THEN we get to pay the bill every
month. :-)

-Kelly



From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 16:45:54 2011
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 10:45:54 -0600
Subject: [ExI] solar is looking better all the time: was RE: Efficiency
 of wind power
In-Reply-To: <007601cc002f$ad930c60$08b92520$@att.net>
References: <002701cbf4be$be2d3b30$3a87b190$@att.net>
	<BANLkTikaN_8B4ycUYrC2HVsX-rou=VbC9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110413143101.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimTX+fZy_1TfiN9RCaHTvgxiP7nyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110417184234.GI23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimFkbtTaasRX2aPzZkhh609+wZU+g@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418120542.GR23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTinqwqCjBw72vAcp0JL57de33S2jFw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110418152002.GD23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTi=WYooFxT9Fi-WnxneCF2fHa+kmZg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110419111531.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTikW2BGFde396cMdCxX8C57PE6Bu2Q@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=9Hqn=AX16v=Nb_bUbRMRqNf3P8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTi=7cLadGj8pfdNrvdhMQiUBqYXYfw@mail.gmail.com>
	<006c01cbff73$74460960$5cd21c20$@att.net>
	<BANLkTi=uUqTZ7LmxzZ1VMD424RQ6-_0mxQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<007601cc002f$ad930c60$08b92520$@att.net>
Message-ID: <BANLkTikzJ4PUhMgpBGfzRY8wFjf-47Jmhw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:23 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Thanks Kelly.

NP.

> I can imagine specialty applications like that where one has plenty of land,
> doesn't use the PV for home electronics (and so is still relying on the
> commercial grid) but rather uses the PVs to lift water from a deep aquifer
> to run a center pivot. ?Out there in the eastern Oregon desert, there is
> intense sunlight all day every day during the time one needs the water.
> This would use a lot of PVs, but is still a specialty application. ?I can
> imagine this arrangement being very common in the desert US west soon.

Depleting aquifers (largely fossil water) being another interesting
sustainability topic... ;-)

> The notion of maintaining a bunch of lead acid batteries in the home is not
> attractive. ?Among other things, you have a huge contamination risk if you
> have a house fire, plus the room taken up in your house, oy.

I hadn't considered the batteries in a fire.. not pretty. Space wise,
it is all in a big box about three feet wide and four feet long and
about two and a half feet tall. So it's not all that big given a rural
house.

-Kelly



From thespike at satx.rr.com  Thu Apr 21 17:55:39 2011
From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 12:55:39 -0500
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <007701cc0030$01c2de00$05489a00$@att.net>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
	<007701cc0030$01c2de00$05489a00$@att.net>
Message-ID: <4DB06F9B.6040100@satx.rr.com>

On 4/21/2011 9:25 AM, spike wrote:

> Do you remember the journalism majors from when you were in college?
> Compare them as a group with your engineering majors.  What is the most
> striking difference?

Journalists got way more action?

Damien Broderick


From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr 21 18:34:41 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:34:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Ketogenic diet to replace dialysis?
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=1pW1g4MFuD_s0v9szGbBNEO9dRw@mail.gmail.com>

Interesting:

A type of low-carb, high-fat diet that's typically used to manage
seizures for children with epilepsy could reverse kidney disease in
Type 1 and Type 2 diabetics, a new animal study suggests.

If successful in humans, the so-called ketogenic diet could have the
potential to replace dialysis...

http://www.livescience.com/13817-ketogenic-diet-reverses-mice-kidney-disease.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Livesciencecom+%28LiveScience.com+Science+Headline+Feed%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

-- Max


From sparge at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 18:35:45 2011
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 14:35:45 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <001301cc001b$433733f0$c9a59bd0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>
	<000c01cbffce$134cb090$39e611b0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTi=_-+QagQBZrkm50xru=PbRuEvKdQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<001301cc001b$433733f0$c9a59bd0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=8SBRa3c=K-V2qfmJt_iTtrxqkOg@mail.gmail.com>

On Apr 21, 2011 8:59 AM, "Harvey Newstrom" <mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
>
> I have no doubt that you can get plenty of energy from fat.  But you have
to
> go into ketosis to do it.  And you risk an Atkins-style heart-attack.

Wow, ketosis causes cardiomyopathy? Who knew?

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20110421/71011db8/attachment.html>

From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr 21 18:38:47 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:38:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Carbohydrates and energy
In-Reply-To: <005201cbff4d$3a087ab0$ae197010$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110419100318.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.5352973a6d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<BANLkTimEfvW4w+iwZq+dCWsVd1Yy9j0XZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<003c01cbfedb$efad0e20$cf072a60$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTinz-0QW2vvjB_6rOiottBHZDcmFLw@mail.gmail.com>
	<005201cbff4d$3a087ab0$ae197010$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTim46ETwDDBaemZuhvewCaHPtA2tTg@mail.gmail.com>

Harvey,

In my post yesterday, I said "sugars" because that's what all
carbohydrate are eventually broken down into for fuel.

Since you are going to read Taubes' GCBC, can you suggest a
particularly good book that supports the view that saturated fat is
bad (and related issues that we've been discussing)? I know I have
some books back at the house in Austin that take the standard view,
but they may not be current and you can probably suggest a strong
source.

--- Max


From max at maxmore.com  Thu Apr 21 18:57:48 2011
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:57:48 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Gout and meat adaptations
In-Reply-To: <001301cc001b$433733f0$c9a59bd0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
References: <20110420134823.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.08f117b682.wbe@email09.secureserver.net>
	<004301cbffb2$528dfe10$f7a9fa30$@att.net>
	<000c01cbffce$134cb090$39e611b0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
	<BANLkTi=_-+QagQBZrkm50xru=PbRuEvKdQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<001301cc001b$433733f0$c9a59bd0$@HarveyNewstrom.com>
Message-ID: <BANLkTiktPu7a5R988YiK4VEe=V=VUVcXaQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Harvey Newstrom
<mail at harveynewstrom.com> wrote:
>
> I have no doubt that you can get plenty of energy from fat. ?But you have to
> go into ketosis to do it. ?And you risk an Atkins-style heart-attack.

My understanding is that Atkins had cardiomyopathy most likely due to
a viral infection.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/HEALTH/diet.fitness/04/25/atkins.diet/index.html

"We have been treating this condition, cardiomyopathy, for almost two
years," said Patrick Fratellone, Atkins' personal physician and
cardiologist. "Clearly, his own nutritional protocols have left him,
at the age of 71, with an extraordinarily healthy cardiovascular
system."

Dr. Clyde Yancy, a cardiologist at the University of Texas
Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas and a member of the American
Heart Association's national board of directors, said: "Despite the
obvious irony, I believe there is a total disconnect between the
cardiac arrest and the health approach he (Atkins) popularizes."

So I don't take Atkin's death as indicating a risk for me --
especially when my blood fat numbers look good.

--- Max

-- 
Max More
Strategic Philosopher
Co-founder, Extropy Institute
CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation
7895 E. Acoma Dr # 110
Scottsdale, AZ 85260
877/462-5267 ext 113



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 21 20:07:25 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:07:25 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTik_jEcPf=KH8pZLiDGHfLLy66as6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>	<007701cc0030$01c2de00$05489a00$@att.net>
	<BANLkTik_jEcPf=KH8pZLiDGHfLLy66as6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <004601cc005f$bc05c690$341153b0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson
...
Subject: Re: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 8:25 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> Do you remember the journalism majors from when you were in college?

>No. Never met one to my knowledge... :-)

They were up on the other end of campus.


>> Compare them as a group with your engineering majors. ?What is the most
striking difference? ?{8^D

>Ability to make a living? Mathematics? :-)  -Kelly

They all seemed to have such a life of ease.  Continuous party, play play
play, while we sloggers in the sciences and technical end of the campus were
down in the labs, studying our asses off, sweating and praying we would pass
the test.

spike








From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 21 20:01:10 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:01:10 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DB04F95.8060701@lightlink.com>
References: <BANLkTi=JwtMujYk8mET97THxauLr3NH6OQ@mail.gmail.com>	<BANLkTinvuim5rC6Frqx_M9ZxWvmBgAKpyw@mail.gmail.com>	<4DAF01EB.1050505@lightlink.com>	<BANLkTi=f1Q=B7q6wQ+z-pY+YMcBKCAZexg@mail.gmail.com>
	<4DB04F95.8060701@lightlink.com>
Message-ID: <004501cc005e$dca86110$95f92330$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Richard Loosemore
...
Subject: Re: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review

...

>...If the vast majority of reporters in the country decided to, say, ignore
a huge accumulation of evidence pointing to the fact that Iraq has no
weapons of mass destruction, just before it is due to be invaded on the
grounds that it has WMD...Richard Loosemore


Reporters don't have security clearances.  Those with the clearances are not
at liberty to report.  See George Tenet, former director of the CIA, in his
explanation of the reasoning for invading Iraq, Center of the Storm.

spike



From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Apr 21 18:50:13 2011
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 11:50:13 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Skylon as first stage.
In-Reply-To: <20110421162651.GR23560@leitl.org>
References: <BANLkTikjnZW82jXGzX63n1DtJrQXRFdgUA@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikfn-RSpnCc6ROmWNrtRvMi8jCdCQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<BANLkTikj4BtxMauRUJfBhzBDDcgZc85tqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110420151210.GO23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTim10LKny7jXge3fnZNLhx+pK8wXyw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110421090319.GQ23560@leitl.org>
	<BANLkTimq20Z1xB5G551OiC-5x1w5J18EyA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110421162651.GR23560@leitl.org>
Message-ID: <BANLkTimbhKOqKHP9s07=EequfysERL_mcw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 9:26 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 07:41:18AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:03 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
>>
>> snip
>>
>> > On the Moon, you can use linear motor/magnetic levitation launches.
>> > http://www.physorg.com/news91272157.html
>>
>> MagLev is *so* 70s.
>
> Turbines and ICEs are *so* steampunk. But they continue to provide the bulk
> of our power.

Turbines run as high as 60% efficient.  It is unlike that PV will ever
get that good.  Commercial ones already mass as little as 1/10th
kg/kW.

I think they are the best choice for power satellites.

snip
>
> Maglev doesn't yet quite exist apart from test lines
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maglev_(transport)
> nevermind more advanced approaches like mass driver,
> or launch loop, or space fountain.

It bothers me that nobody has built a model of a launch loop.  It
shouldn't be that hard, particularly if you built it upside down

> We've got great technology in the pipeline, but the first
> steps in SPS will be quite pedestrian, using technology
> more than 1000 years old: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket#In_antiquity

That's my opinion.  Heating a working fluid (hydrogen) with
concentrated light is something Hero of Alexandria would have
understood 2000 years ago.  "An aeolipile (or aeolipyle, or eolipile),
also known as a Hero engine, is a rocket style[1] jet engine[2]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile

Keith


From spike66 at att.net  Thu Apr 21 20:42:22 2011
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 13:42:22 -0700
Subject: [ExI] "Atlas Shrugged" film review
In-Reply-To: <4DB06F9B.604