From darren.greer3 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 00:02:02 2011 From: darren.greer3 at gmail.com (Darren Greer) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:02:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Same Sex Marriage (was Re: Call To Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Stefano Vaj wrote: Yes. The point would be of course that of liberalising succession law, > not of extending access to marriage. > Agreed. A few other changes to certain laws either recognizing the rights of consenting adults--any consenting adults-- in relationships are equal to those that are married would also be nice. (Taxes. Health benefits.) > > I appreciate the feelings of "discrimination" a gay may perceive in > its ability to have a same-sex, formally monogamous, theoretically > long-term, relationship "blessed" > It's really all about the money and the property. At least for those I know and myself. Someone else mentioned the fact that why aren't the same tax breaks that married couples get extended to single people. I agree with that also. The modern marriage ceremony was deliberately devised by the Catholic church to have control over its populace. Seems to me the government has taken over that role. The idea of a legally binding union between two people that cannot be undone unless you fill out some paperwork and hire a lawyer is quite absurd, when you think about it. Doesn't say much for the sanctity of a union before 'God' or anyone else, including the participants. In the end, God doesn't get much say. The courts do. As a second best, I am all in favour of making the social norms > involved in marriage simply implode by allowing gay, incestuous, > chaste, pedophilic, poligynic, polyandric, group, post-mortem, > inter-species weddings. Nice ceremonies are not to be denied to > anybody. > I had to read this a couple of times before I could respond. I have heard a similar "if we allow gay marriage the next thing will be pedophilia and bestiality" argument before, usually by fundamentalist Christians. Whether it was ironic or not (and I admit to sometimes having a hard time determining that on the 'net, as someone mentioned yesterday), I'll go out on a limb and say I'd also let every social norm associated with marriage implode as well, by sanctioning any union a person wanted to make, *as long* as it was with another consenting adult or adults. That rules out pedophilia and bestiality and necrophilia (though if you really wanted to you, you could in my books as it's lifeless matter. No dinner party invitations though.) The other unmentionables you could deal with though laws to help ensure they didn't happen. Incest is a strange beast. I read once that it is the only universal sexual taboo, for obvious evolutionary reasons. I find it repulsive and rife with the possibility of coercion and corruption and maybe for that reason alone it is illegal and should stay that way. But if marriage was entirely deregulated, society might have to just put up with it occasionally. As for inter-species, my own standards are a little higher than that given the current selection. Though an inter-stellar future may hold some intriguing possibilities. :) In the end though, there is some value to having limits and regulation. But the regulation must be fluid and subject to change. And the question that must be asked is what is the law or regulation based on? Is there a good social reason for it, like the strictures against pedophilia and incest and bestiality? Or is it mounted on some outdated prejudice or concept that might have been valid five hundred years ago when the law was instituted and when bible was taken literally by practically everyone? For me, when it comes to social stuff, I watch the fundamentalist Christians. If they are the only ones screaming about its removal, it's probably a morally outdated law that should be struck from the books. Hey, it works for me. darren > > > > -- > Stefano Vaj > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- *There is no history, only biography.* * * *-Ralph Waldo Emerson * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From darren.greer3 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 00:07:35 2011 From: darren.greer3 at gmail.com (Darren Greer) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:07:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] value of a human life, was RE: Same Sex Marriage (was Re: Call To... In-Reply-To: <00f701cbd79f$d50fb760$7f2f2620$@att.net> References: <00f701cbd79f$d50fb760$7f2f2620$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/2/28 spike wrote: >We have that whole leather jacket and rumble chain around the neck ruffian reputation, but we are gentle souls who are deeply hurt at the idea we would ever harm a soul. < My friend was once in a gay bar in Montreal --a city with some really scary biker gangs -- and here were these two big guys in biker uniforms standing near the bar. He sidled over to eavesdrop on their conversation. They were comparing quiche recipes. On my honor, true story. d. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From darren.greer3 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 00:15:20 2011 From: darren.greer3 at gmail.com (Darren Greer) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:15:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research Message-ID: Has anyone heard of this? I just had it forwarded to me by a member of this list. Please feel free to poke holes, but this is the best news I've heard on this front in quite a while. http://apnews.excite.com/article/20110228/D9LM204O1.html Darren *There is no history, only biography.* * * *-Ralph Waldo Emerson * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 1 00:20:17 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:20:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> On 2/28/2011 6:15 PM, Darren Greer wrote: > Please feel free to poke holes I BEG your pardon! Oh, wait--never mind. Damien Broderick From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 00:19:02 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:19:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6C24E1.7000002@aleph.se> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <4D6BFCC6.2080806@mac.com> <4D6C24E1.7000002@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D6C3B76.4050502@mac.com> On 02/28/2011 02:42 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Samantha Atkins wrote: >> On 02/27/2011 09:29 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: >>> The total number of people currently employed in looking for asteroids >>> in the NASA Near Earth Object program is reportedly less than the >>> number of people working in a typical McDonalds. Since actuaries >>> indicate that we each have a 1:20,000 chance of being killed by such >>> an asteroid, that is a silly small number. >> >> What?? Are you seriously saying that 5 persons in every 100,000 will >> be or have been killed by an asteroid? The actual number >> historically is closer to 1:1,000,000,000. Or are you referring to >> the chance of dying IF an asteroid over a certain size impacts the >> earth without bothering to factor in the actual chances of that >> happening? > > If you calculate the expected number of fatailities times the > estimated frequency distribution of impacts, you get numbers like an > annual risk of dying of 1 in 2 million (a lifetime risk of 1 in 30,000). The numbers I have seen lately have been adjust as to the probability of a > 1 km impact. The latest I have seen range from 1 in 200,000 to 1 in 700,000 argument from http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/10/13/death-by-meteorite/. - s From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 00:24:16 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 16:24:16 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D6C3CB0.3040208@mac.com> On 02/28/2011 01:39 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 10:29:42PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > >>> I recently ran into an extreme case of this: >>> http://volokh.com/2011/02/15/asteroid-defense-and-libertarianism/ >> If private insurance companies sold asteroid insurance, which they >> should, then there would be a significant desire to avoid payout. That > Why should they? Can they make money off of it? Why aren't they > selling asteroid insurance right now? Who would buy end of the world > insurance -- who would make or receive payments? Hehe. Let an asteroid come that close of that size and it will be swarmed by libertopian prospectors for the trillions in rare earths, precious metals, volatiles and space construction material it contains. It would be much much more likely to be harmlessly (not to mention profitably) diverted from impact. :) - samantha From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 1 00:30:52 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:30:52 +0000 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6C3B76.4050502@mac.com> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <4D6BFCC6.2080806@mac.com> <4D6C24E1.7000002@aleph.se> <4D6C3B76.4050502@mac.com> Message-ID: <4D6C3E3C.5090809@aleph.se> Samantha Atkins wrote: > On 02/28/2011 02:42 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: >> >> If you calculate the expected number of fatailities times the >> estimated frequency distribution of impacts, you get numbers like an >> annual risk of dying of 1 in 2 million (a lifetime risk of 1 in 30,000). > > The numbers I have seen lately have been adjust as to the probability > of a > 1 km impact. The latest I have seen range from 1 in 200,000 > to 1 in 700,000 argument from > http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/10/13/death-by-meteorite/. > The numbers should be declining with time too, since Spacewatch and the others have increasingly mapped out the unknown NEOs and not found any dangerous ones. I like to point out in my talks that impactors may be a GCR we are actually doing fairly well on. We could be doing much better (funding for a Venus orbit or L4 satelite to watch for Atens) but we are nibbling at the unknown and bringing it down to size. The real headache happens either when we find something we need to take action on, or when people start demanding that we look for smaller asteroids - then we *are* going to find impactors, but the best strategy might actually be duck and cover (still, if it gets us into space...) -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From darren.greer3 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 00:58:00 2011 From: darren.greer3 at gmail.com (Darren Greer) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:58:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > I BEG your pardon! > > Oh, wait--never mind. lol. Good one. -- *There is no history, only biography.* * * *-Ralph Waldo Emerson * -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 1 01:04:01 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:04:01 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain Message-ID: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> This is a tedious question, but maybe among all you techheads-- About 10 years ago I bought a Canoscanner D646U ex in Australia, and eventually had it shipped here recently to the US with all my other stuff. Here of course the mains power supply is 110 rather than 240 volts, and the 3-point Aussie plug is incompatible (speaking of poking holes). So my AC adapter doesn't work. I would like to try using a US AC adapter, but I can't see anywhere what voltage it would have to step down to. 12v? 6v? something else? Any kindly extrope have a clue on this? (I know, I could go out and buy a new and better one, but I hate the waste.) Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 01:21:56 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 17:21:56 -0800 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense: was RE: libertarian (asteroid) defense Message-ID: <013801cbd7af$0e877c80$2b967580$@att.net> To clarify, I was suggesting a temporary closing of the season on libertarian topics, not asteroids. Asteroid defenders, go for it. Libertarians, hold yer fire please. spike From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Mar 1 01:54:55 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 17:54:55 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 03:15:09PM +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 07:06:00PM -0800, spike wrote: > > > Keith, I like to imagine the kinds of transitions that can be made > > quickly if necessary, should these kinds of scenarios play out. We > > have three areas in which energy use can be reduced: home lighting > > and heating, food, and > > Home lighting takes electricity, and is the easiest to fix, though > many lack the means of buying solid state or metal halide lightings, > nevermind refitting their home electric infrastructure. > > Changing heating is far more expensive, and to what? I heat with > locally sourced wood from renewably managed forests/my other place > is deep geothermal, but that's not an option for many, especially > overnight. I long thought heating was the big barrier, since burning fuel is a very efficient way of making heat. Electricity turns into heat all too readily, but making the electricity... OTOH, heat pumps! Instead of turning a joule of electricity into a joule of heat, you can do that while bringing in 3 joules of heat from outside. This kind of makes up for the fact that you're using electricity for heat. > In general people don't seem to see what these >15 TW total mean, and what > doubling and tripling electrification to substitute for missing > fossil liquids and gases mean (1 TW/year conversion rate, for > the next 20 years, and photovoltaic surface doesn't fabricate > itself, put itself up, and connects to the grid, while rebuilding > it in the process, and adding energy buffering capacity). OTOH, looking at just the US, we're talking 3TW of power use. Say 1/3 electricity from coal, 1/3 gasoline for cars, 1/3 gas for heat. (This is a caricature of reality, but I think good enough for now.) We'd want to build nukes to replace the coal, more nukes to provide equivalent transportation capacity but not necessarily in the same manner (electric trains and trolleys, vs synthesizing gasoline from air), and more nukes to drive heat pumps. We're talking a TW of gasoline and a TW of gas... but the gasoline is doing more like 200 GW of actual work, because IC engines suck. And per above, we'd need says 300 GW of electricity to run the heat pumps for 1 TW of heating. Oh, and the coal is 1 TW of coal that turns into 300 GW of electricity. So summing up we need 800, call it 900, GW of new nuclear plants. Cost estimates of nukes vary very widely, AFAICT, depending in large part on the interest rate -- which means this is something governments are better at, simply because they can borrow more cheaply. (Even more true of renewables. Anything capital heavy has a bias to being done by he who has the cheapest capital.) At the low end, $1.5/watt, at the high, $5 or more. So $1.35 trillion to $4.5 trillion. Over 20 years, say, $60 billion/year to $225 billion/year, out of $14,000 billion GDP/year. I call that affordable. Mind you, this doesn't account for the oil to fertilizer cycle, or the costs of rebuilding public transport. (Then again, if we were buying fewer cars, there'd be idle capacity to be retooled for trains and rails.) -xx- Damien X-) From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 02:01:17 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:01:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 10:06 PM, spike wrote: > If we look around us, everywhere I see astonishing energy waste, just > because energy is cheap and plentiful. ?Oil is still so cheap it strangles > out most alternative energy sources. I have long wondered why we are still spending so much engineering to build UP the cities, rather than burrowing into the earth. I imagine that after the engineering logistics are worked out, the main complaint from the proles would be the lack of natural light. Aren't fiber optics able to carry sunlight into subterranean parks? How much does it cost to heat a single-family home (on average) in the northern half of the US? How does that compare with extra cost for lighting a constant temperature subterranean equivalent? I know there are facts and figures available on the Internet that I could quantitatively answer these questions. I expect to be chided for not doing so myself. My intent was not to begin a research project as much as contribute to conversation with a (potentially) interesting idea. Forgive me in advance if this idea was already discussed and discarded in 1992. :) From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 02:11:48 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:11:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 10:29:42PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > Why should they? ?Can they make money off of it? ?Why aren't they > selling asteroid insurance right now? I understand Lloyd's of London will sell insurance on practically anything. I think I'll try to get some asteroid strike insurance, and see what it costs. > Who would buy end of the world > insurance -- who would make or receive payments? An asteroid strike might indeed be the end of the world. However, a small strike would be insurable, and might, depending upon it's size do less damage than a tornado or a hurricane. > Unsubsidized insurers go for little disasters that happen a lot and are > spread out in a statistically averagable manner. ?They avoid things that > strike lots of people at once, like floods, earthquakes, and fission > plant accidents. I'm sure they like to insure that sort of thing. Isn't AIG the insurance company for all the insurance companies? I thought that was why they were too big to fail... or something like that. > Actually I imagine volcanoes might pretty tameable. ?Drill down and > release gases/magma in a controlled manner, rather than letting them > blow all at once. ?Though the BP oil spill highlights the safety > concerns of drilling into a pressure chamber. ?Would want to practice on > the small volcanoes first. I don't think there are any "small" volcanoes. How about practicing on one that isn't near large groups of people? Really though, I don't think there is any serious proposal for this. I have heard of the idea of setting off earthquakes with atomic bombs... maybe it was Superman III? :-) > Alternately, being able to trigger a volcano or earthquake at a specific > time would be helpful, rather than having them strike at once. Agreed, but it is much less practical than steering an asteroid. We have the technology to do that today, given a ten year or more lead time. If we discovered an asteroid with our name on it in two or three months or less, I'm afraid we would be toast. > Someone might? ?Why don't they do so now? ?Why would everyone donating > 25 cents be more likely then than it is now? Rich people are forced through the tax code to give up 30-70% of their earnings (depending upon where they live) and don't have as much money to devote to this sort of thing under today's tax policy. The assumption that most libertarians make is that with less taxation, there would be more donation. If that is a false assumption, then that's where libertarians go off of the tracks. > In a libertarian society, you get to specify less government, that's > all. ?You don't get to specify magically more altruistic people than we > have now. ?And anything not actively banned by government is perfectly > doable today, so if people aren't doing it now, that bodes ill for doing > it in libertarian world. If someone is altruistic enough to give up 10% of their net income to charity, that shouldn't change before or after huge taxes. That would mean if you made $100,000, you could give $10,000 to charity. With a 50% tax rate, it is reduced to $5,000. As the government ceases to take care of things that really need to be taken care of, charities will pop up to meet those needs. In fact, that is how things used to work in the United States. Orphanages were supported by donors at one point, now they are supported by the government (albeit in the modified form of foster care) and nobody with money would even consider donating money to support a US orphanage today because they "already gave at the office". If the idea is that it's the government's job to pay for asteroid protection, then nobody would consider donating. If, on the other hand, it was not the government's job, then the Red Cross could launch a campaign to raise money to find rogue asteroids, and I think people would donate. -Kelly From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 02:22:42 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:22:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Wizard Calculating Device In-Reply-To: References: <004201cbd75f$1bd0e110$5372a330$@att.net> <006601cbd767$61cab8f0$25602ad0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/2/28 Darren Greer : > P.S. My pet peeve re cubes were the idiots in junior high school that used > to peel off the stickers and solve it that way. A completely pointless > exercise and a waste of a good cube. :) My solution was to disassemble, sort, reassemble. Not exactly at "race" speeds, but it was a better solution than peeling the stickers (that they never again were aligned properly offended my aesthetic sense) Isn't the whole toy kind of a waste of time? (I know: *gasp* destroy the infidel non-nerd!) Or are we going to say that it helps build spatial reasoning or something? If I have offended too many childhood memories (yeah, I had one too) I would ask the same of Sudoku: What is the purpose of solving these grids of numbers? I don't understand the fascination. I don't understand Farmville either though, so maybe the problem is mine. From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Mar 1 02:51:43 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:51:43 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110301025142.GA26590@ofb.net> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 07:11:48PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > As the government ceases to take care of things that really need to be > taken care of, charities will pop up to meet those needs. In fact, > that is how things used to work in the United States. Orphanages were > supported by donors at one point, now they are supported by the > government (albeit in the modified form of foster care) and nobody > with money would even consider donating money to support a US > orphanage today because they "already gave at the office". If the idea > is that it's the government's job to pay for asteroid protection, then > nobody would consider donating. If, on the other hand, it was not the > government's job, then the Red Cross could launch a campaign to raise > money to find rogue asteroids, and I think people would donate. Some probably would. But do you raise as much through individual donations individually decided upon as you do through "mutual coercion, mutally agreed upon"? Would you raise enough? What of the free rider problem, and what do economic experiments tell us of willingness to keep on donating for non-excludable goods? Historically, how did orphanage funding quantity and orphanage quality change between pure private and mostly public funding? -xx- Damien X-) From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 03:04:48 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:04:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Damien Sullivan wrote: > Most common natural GCRs are fairly manageable if you can warn ahead > (tsunamis, volcanos, hurricanes, even asteroids) and build resiliency (good > civil society infrastructure, food storage). The ones to fear are the ones > that are global (major climate fluctuation impairing agriculture, pandemics, > cosmic eruptions). Anthropogenic GCRs are somwhat similar, but IMHO more > dangerous because they are often adaptive and potentially larger. (Sorry for being dense, what is a GCR? Galactic Cosmic Ray?) All you can currently do about tsunamis, volcanos and hurricanes is run away. Far away if possible. So that's reasonable as long as the timing works. While the science points in the direction that climate fluctuation can occur faster than we previously thought likely, it still happens over a period of years or decades. Great climate change may lead to great suffering, but it is not going to be an extinction event. More of an economic reshuffling of the cards. It could be that the most wealthy people 200 years from now are the descendants of the nomads who "own" the Sahara Desert today. That it is not an extinction event is obvious by the fact that you can buy insurance against climate change. That's how Al Gore is making fists full of money in fact, by selling that insurance. If you can sell insurance against climate change, then I see no reason you couldn't sell insurance against mid sized asteroid strikes. Insuring against a global extinction event is silly since there would be nobody left to pay or collect, and nothing to do with the money after that point anyway. I suppose it could mean something if some part of humanity lives off world... -Kelly From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 02:10:27 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 21:10:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > > Mind you, this doesn't account for the oil to fertilizer cycle, or the > costs of rebuilding public transport. ?(Then again, if we were buying > fewer cars, there'd be idle capacity to be retooled for trains and > rails.) > Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay home and telecommute? Once I can do my job without the daily to/from the employer's cube (where they have to provide reasonable heating/cooling as well as lighting) then I can not only save the 50 miles per day (plus unproductive time spent) I also don't have to live in such expensive proximity the city. There are much less populated places to live where costs are less than one third of what I currently require; but the average income in those locations is equally reduced. From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 03:12:03 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:12:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110228233829.GA9672@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <20110228233829.GA9672@ofb.net> Message-ID: > Speaking of robustness, I was appalled to investigate and learn that the > US doesn't seem to have a strategic food reserve. ?I think we used to, > but now we trust to the markets, as if markets will provide food in the > case of a global crop failure. ?Well, we can pay more, but still. > Weren't public granaries one of the first services of non-thuggish > government? I seem to remember something about a guy named Joseph, a colorful dresser, corn, dreams, seven years and the like... There is a huge store of food in Salt Lake City stored by the LDS church. One more proof that if the government doesn't do something, someone else will if they think it is a good idea. A fair number of LDS people have a year or two of food on hand themselves too. Been an official church recommendation since the 1930s. -Kelly From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 03:13:22 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:13:22 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D6C6452.3070703@mac.com> On 02/28/2011 06:10 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:54 PM, Damien Sullivan > wrote: >> Mind you, this doesn't account for the oil to fertilizer cycle, or the >> costs of rebuilding public transport. (Then again, if we were buying >> fewer cars, there'd be idle capacity to be retooled for trains and >> rails.) >> > Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay > home and telecommute? Well, a bunch of us could just go on home strike. We wouldn't be picketing, would be working, just not dragging the body through traffic most days to do so. > Once I can do my job without the daily to/from > the employer's cube (where they have to provide reasonable > heating/cooling as well as lighting) then I can not only save the 50 > miles per day (plus unproductive time spent) I also don't have to > live in such expensive proximity the city. There are much less > populated places to live where costs are less than one third of what I > currently require; but the average income in those locations is > equally reduced. Yep. I am surprised that we still end up needing to commute this far into the 21st century. I thought for sure the last >$100/b oil would change that. Perhaps this time. - samantha From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 03:23:16 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:23:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110301025142.GA26590@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <20110301025142.GA26590@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:51 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 07:11:48PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > Some probably would. ?But do you raise as much through individual > donations individually decided upon as you do through "mutual coercion, > mutally agreed upon"? Certainly not! But you wouldn't need as much either. So much of the money that goes to Washington just feeds the pig. If it were dealt with by smaller organizations, it would be more productively focused. Look at the difference between the results of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation vs. the United Nations. > Would you raise enough? For needs, I think yes. For wants, probably not, unless enough people wanted it. The problem today is that you have a congress that doesn't seem to care what the people want, and vote programs down our throats anyway. > What of the free rider > problem, and what do economic experiments tell us of willingness to keep > on donating for non-excludable goods? > > Historically, how did orphanage funding quantity and orphanage quality > change between pure private and mostly public funding? Historically, they used to get more orphans into private homes than they do now. Unless they were defective in some way, in which case they were put into horrible institutions. I am not romantic about the past, and I do worry about whether enough people would be willing to privately donate enough to properly care for the disabled in a libertarian utopia. I do believe the current zeitgeist would have strong enough incentives to raise the necessary money. However, under a true libertarian system, such feelings might well eventually shift to something more akin to the Inuit or Spartan approach... My personal hope is that the coming trans-human technologies will enable many of the currently disabled to become fully enabled, but that's more of a dream than an expectation. There are a lot of ethical dilemmas on that road too... do you give a functional body with a dysfunctional brain to an AGI? -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 03:35:24 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 20:35:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Kelly Anderson wrote: >>> Kelly Anderson wrote: >>>> > After all, you did exactly this to me, when I wrote a paper giving a > theoretical analysis of AGI. ?You gave me no quarter, eventually insinuating > that nothing I was doing was "science", asking me to point to which of my > papers contained some "science", etc etc. ?And you even (in the last post) > implied that I was not developing some code to support my research (which I > am). > > Turnabout is fair play. The difference is that I FULLY ADMIT that my libertarianism is PHILOSOPHY not science. So far as I can tell philosophers have never been asked to prove anything. Scientists... well. The interesting thing to me is that nobody has ever tried the experiment of full libertarianism, while nearly every other hypothetical governmental form has been tried with varying degrees of success. The early USA is the closest approximate, and it led to a great nation that then turned its back on its roots, IMHO. -Kelly From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 03:35:42 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:35:42 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <4D6C6452.3070703@mac.com> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <4D6C6452.3070703@mac.com> Message-ID: <016301cbd7c1$be33d900$3a9b8b00$@att.net> ... > Once I can do my job without the daily to/from the employer's cube ... Yep. I am surprised that we still end up needing to commute this far into the 21st century. I thought for sure the last >$100/b oil would change that. Perhaps this time. - samantha A lot of companies are already experimenting with this. I have a colleague from college days who is working from home one day a week and is planning to go to two soon. But 100 bucks a barrel oil won't do it. People with jobs will be able to afford fuel. Rather it's the condition of the roads that I anticipate will encourage people to work out alternatives. Have you noticed the dramatic decline in the quality of the California roads in the past couple years? The low-profile tires on the BMWs are becoming nearly unusable. To get companies moving on home offices will require more than high fuel prices. It will require high traffic and terrible roads. The state's ongoing budget crisis may have a silver lining. spike From wincat at swbell.net Tue Mar 1 04:16:19 2011 From: wincat at swbell.net (Norman Jacobs) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:16:19 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <4D6BB212.6090508@lightlink.com> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <201102280402.p1S42AG7006229@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4D6BB212.6090508@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <019a01cbd7c7$6b63d6c0$422b8440$@net> Libertarianism? -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Richard Loosemore Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 8:33 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Serious topic David Lubkin wrote: > And there's a lot of known energy, e.g., nuclear, coal, and natural gas, > that can be readily tapped without much technical fuss. I have to say that this kind of talk, in this context, makes my blood boil with rage. Plenty of natural gas, you say? Just yesterday, some friends of mine a few miles away discovered that a Pennsylvania Hydro-fracking corporation managed to persuade someone up here, in New York State, to take their poisoned fracking water and DUMP it in a local waterway. Dump it, in exchange for money. So while some people in this community talk about there being a big untapped reserve of natural gas, my water - and the water of hundreds of thousands of people in this region - is in imminent risk of being poisoned. Or is actually being poisoned, right now, as we debate this issue. This is not a time to be debating the niceties of Hubbert curves, or talking about there being a lot of known energy. It is a time for emergency action to find alternative sources. Richard Loosemore _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 05:18:03 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:18:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: References: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Darren: >Please feel free to poke holes Damien: >I BEG your pardon! >Oh, wait--never mind. Darren again: lol. Good one. This reminds me of when the actress who played the cute sidekick to Xena, on the hit show of the same name, told a Kiwi stuntman during an outdoor fight scene to "bop her!" He stopped what he was doing and stared, because the term means something very different in that part of the world.... John On 2/28/11, Darren Greer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 8:20 PM, Damien Broderick > wrote: > > > >> I BEG your pardon! >> >> Oh, wait--never mind. > > > lol. Good one. > > -- > *There is no history, only biography.* > * > * > *-Ralph Waldo Emerson > * > From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 05:26:03 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:26:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: <484492.44014.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <484492.44014.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Kelly Anderson stated: > >> Of all potential mega disasters we could face, >> asteroid hits >> are the most easily preventable... (compared to such things >> as super >> volcanos, subduction earthquakes and tsunamis and the like, >> where we >> are simply powerless at this point.) >> > > That's an interesting assertion. Tell the History Channel. I got the idea that it was possible from them. > I presume you mean this in the same way that we might say "Of all the coronal mass > ejections in the galaxy, the ones produced by our own sun are the most easily preventable"? > > At this point in history, I think our ability to protect ourselves from a dinosaur-killer asteroid is > doubtful, to say the least. Not at all. If we find it in time. That's why the NEO program is so very important. 1) We have now successfully landed space craft on asteroids (or at least crashed into them). 2) There are several competing mechanisms for tugging an asteroid into a slightly different orbit including: a) A gravity tug (suggested by two NASA astronauts) where a space ship of sufficient mass parks itself on one side of the asteroid, and accelerates away from the asteroid whenever it gets too close, thus giving it a gravitational tug into a new slightly different orbit (paper referenced later) b) Reflecting light onto one side of the asteroid c) blowing big asteroids into smaller ones. (kind of hazardous) d) deflecting the asteroid by installing a mass accelerator that shoots out pieces of the asteroid in a single direction with great force. e) There are several other proposals, some far fetched, some that might just do the job. f) all of the above. If the asteroid is slightly deflected ten years prior to an earth strike, it will miss the earth. A very small deflection would be enough. Let's do some trig... Assume the average speed of an asteroid to be 20,000 miles per hour. In ten years, an asteroid would travel 1,752,000,000 miles. (It might need a new pair of shoes.) The diameter of the earth is 7926.28 miles. Assuming the worst case, that the asteroid was headed exactly towards the center of the earth, we would need to deviate at most half of that (plus a little for safety), say 4000 miles. If I did my math right, the arctan(4000/1,752,000,000) = 1.303 x 10^-12 degrees. Or 2.28310502 ? 10^-6 if Google did my math right. :-) In any case, "not so much, really." Let's work with Google's number, since it's bigger. The worst case. Physics was too many years ago for me to finish the math, although I tried for an hour or two. We may or may not be able to generate this with current technology. But if there were a real asteroid with our name on it, we would spend billions to figure it out (under ANY political system :-) Two guys way smarter than me wrote this paper though... that does finish the math and physics. http://arxiv.org/ftp/astro-ph/papers/0509/0509595.pdf I guess it IS rocket science... my head hurts. >From the paper: "?Thus, in the example above, a 20 ton gravitational tractor can deflect a typical 200m asteroid, given a lead time of 20 years. The thrust and total fuel requirements of this mission are well within the capability of proposed 100kW nuclear-electric propulsion systems, using about 4 tons of fuel to accomplish the typical 15 km/sec rendezvous and about 400 Kg for the actual deflection." I assume they are talking about some kind of Ion Thruster running on nuclear power. Then they talk about the specific real asteroid 99942 Apophis (2004 MN4), which will do a close swing by in 2029 and has a slight chance of subsequently hitting earth in 2035 or 2036. It is 320 meters across. They propose a mechanism for this special case that doesn't even need the new nuclear propulsion system. While this isn't easy, it sounds easier than poking a fork into a super volcano. If something were heading our way, I think we would give it a try. In the most probable case, we would get hundreds or perhaps thousands of years of warning if we knew where all the asteroids were in the solar system. What I don't understand in the proposal is why they think they need to take the 20 metric tons with them. (They do assume this because they talk about the fuel requirements of getting the 20 tons there.) Why not harvest the required mass from the asteroid itself and just take the engines and a big bag to hold the asteroid parts with you? Load up, then pull... For a thousand years, if necessary... -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 05:49:01 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 22:49:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Wizard Calculating Device In-Reply-To: References: <004201cbd75f$1bd0e110$5372a330$@att.net> <006601cbd767$61cab8f0$25602ad0$@att.net> Message-ID: If you want to see a real waste of time related to Rubik's Cubes... See my instructional videos on YouTube... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB4SRxQlo3A -Kelly On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:22 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > 2011/2/28 Darren Greer : > Isn't the whole toy kind of a waste of time? (I know: *gasp* destroy > the infidel non-nerd!) Or are we going to say that it helps build > spatial reasoning or something? From max at maxmore.com Tue Mar 1 06:31:30 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:31:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: References: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: This reminds me of when I realized that that the question, "can I bum a fag?" has radically different meaning in England and the USA. The person who uttered it (a fellow English-born philosopher at USC was, I'm sure, deliberately playing on the double meaning. (Does anyone need the English interpretation of that explaining?) --- Max On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:18 PM, John Grigg wrote: > This reminds me of when the actress who played the cute sidekick to > Xena, on the hit show of the same name, told a Kiwi stuntman during an > outdoor fight scene to "bop her!" He stopped what he was doing and > stared, because the term means something very different in that part > of the world.... > > John > > > > -- > 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: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 06:40:55 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 06:40:55 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 1:04 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > About 10 years ago I bought a Canoscanner D646U ex in Australia, and > eventually had it shipped here recently to the US with all my other stuff. > Here of course the mains power supply is 110 rather than 240 volts, and the > 3-point Aussie plug is incompatible (speaking of poking holes). So my AC > adapter doesn't work. I would like to try using a US AC adapter, but I can't > see anywhere what voltage it would have to step down to. 12v? 6v? something > else? > > I think you need a voltage converter. Then rewire the plug on your AC adaptor (or use an adapter plug) so you can plug into the voltage converter, which in turn plugs into the mains. The electronics shop that sells you the voltage converter should be able to explain more. Problem is that this set of kit will cost around 200 usd. A new scanner is cheaper. BillK From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 1 06:50:57 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:50:57 -0600 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: References: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4D6C9751.9030504@satx.rr.com> On 2/28/2011 11:18 PM, John Grigg wrote: > This reminds me of when the actress who played the cute sidekick to > Xena, on the hit show of the same name, told a Kiwi stuntman during an > outdoor fight scene to "bop her!" He stopped what he was doing and > stared, because the term means something very different in that part > of the world.... I doubt that's quite right.** Maybe he suggested giving her a bang? **see for example: Kiwi Bop: party-time for under-10s From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 1 06:59:00 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:59:00 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> On 3/1/2011 12:40 AM, BillK wrote: > I think you need a voltage converter. > > > Then rewire the plug on your AC adaptor (or use an adapter plug) so > you can plug into the voltage converter, which in turn plugs into the > mains. I don't have the Oz adapter. I am hoping to find a USian one that sends thru the correct current (whatever it is--the guy at Canon told me rather unconvincingly "The Power Requirements for the Canoscan D646Uex are 120V AC, 60Hz." which I assume is close to what comes out of the wall and wouldn't *need* an adapter), and has the right jack. Might not be easy to find; the ones I've tried haven't fitted into the damned machine. Yeah, I'll probably just buy a new scanner. Meanwhile, there's this old chunky Zip 100 drive where I've solved the power supply problem but now Vista doesn't want to provide a letter or icon for me to click to activate the bastard. Bop it! Damien Broderick From moulton at moulton.com Tue Mar 1 07:21:30 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:21:30 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> On 02/28/2011 07:35 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > The early USA is > the closest approximate, To say that the early USA was the "closest approximate" really stretches the meaning of the word "approximate" almost to the point of absurdity. The early USA was not even close to libertarian. Just think for a moment about the huge number of slaves, the second class legal status of women, the Alien and Sedition Acts just to name a few. Even during the late 1800s when slavery was supposed to be illegal there were still Jim Crow laws in many states and in some areas there was de facto slavery. Not to mention censorship under Comstock. And let us not forget how the government of the USA disregarded treaties and badly treated the Aboriginal peoples. Just because the early USA might not have been as bad as some other countries does not mean that the early USA was libertarian. Fred From moulton at moulton.com Tue Mar 1 07:37:22 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:37:22 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> On 02/28/2011 10:59 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > Meanwhile, there's this old chunky Zip 100 drive where I've solved the > power supply problem but now Vista doesn't want to provide a letter or > icon for me to click to activate the bastard. Bop it! Do you want to do just a one time access to get some data or regular use? My memory is that some of the versions of Knoppix had support for Zip drives. You could boot with Knoppix and then copy the data off if you just wanted to do a one time data recovery. For those who have not used Knoppix before it is a Linux distribution which runs from either a CD or USB thumb drive and is very useful when diagnosing computer problems. As long as you do not start the install process then it does not change the existing OS. I have used Knoppix several times in the past and it has always worked for me. Note unless you read German make sure to select English when it is starting since as I recall it defaults to German. The person who developed it is German. Fred From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 1 07:54:04 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:54:04 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:10:27PM -0500, Mike Dougherty wrote: > Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay > home and telecommute? Once I can do my job without the daily to/from Here's an infrastructure problem, again. In order to make telepresence happen you need to roll out symmetric high-bandwidth connections, which basically means laying ducts and pulling fiber (owned by municipalities, operated by contracting companies), plus provide enough backbone capacity. > the employer's cube (where they have to provide reasonable > heating/cooling as well as lighting) then I can not only save the 50 > miles per day (plus unproductive time spent) I also don't have to > live in such expensive proximity the city. There are much less > populated places to live where costs are less than one third of what I > currently require; but the average income in those locations is > equally reduced. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 08:52:43 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 01:52:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: <4D6C9751.9030504@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9751.9030504@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Damien, I only bow to your cultural expertise regarding Aussie matters! John ; ) On 2/28/11, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 2/28/2011 11:18 PM, John Grigg wrote: >> This reminds me of when the actress who played the cute sidekick to >> Xena, on the hit show of the same name, told a Kiwi stuntman during an >> outdoor fight scene to "bop her!" He stopped what he was doing and >> stared, because the term means something very different in that part >> of the world.... > > I doubt that's quite right.** Maybe he suggested giving her a bang? > > **see for example: Kiwi Bop: party-time for under-10s > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 1 09:45:14 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:45:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] patches accepted Message-ID: <20110301094514.GP23560@leitl.org> http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928015.400-biology-nobelist-natural-selection-will-destroy-us.html Biology Nobelist: Natural selection will destroy us 28 February 2011 by Clint Witchalls Magazine issue 2801. Subscribe and save We have evolved traits that will lead to humanity's extinction, says Christian de Duve ? so we must learn to overcome them We are the most successful species on the planet, but you think we will ultimately pay the price for this success. Why? The cost of our success is the exhaustion of natural resources, leading to energy crises, climate change, pollution and the destruction of our habitat. If you exhaust natural resources there will be nothing left for your children. If we continue in the same direction, humankind is headed for some frightful ordeals, if not extinction. You think that natural selection has worked against us. How? Because it has no foresight. Natural selection has resulted in traits such as group selfishness being coded in our genes. These were useful to our ancestors under the conditions in which they lived, but have become noxious to us today. What would help us preserve our natural resources are genetic traits that let us sacrifice the present for the sake of the future. You need wisdom to sacrifice something that is immediately useful or advantageous for the sake of something that will be important in the future. Natural selection doesn't do that; it looks only at what is happening today. It doesn't care about your grandchildren or grandchildren's grandchildren. You call this short-sightedness "original sin". Why did you pick this terminology? I believe that the writers of Genesis had detected the inherent selfishness in human nature that I propose is in our genes, and invented the myth of original sin to account for it. It's an image. I am not acting as an exegete - I don't interpret scripture. How can humanity overcome this "original sin"? We must act against natural selection and actively oppose some of our key genetic traits. One solution you propose is population control, but isn't this ethically dubious? It is a simple matter of figures. If you want this planet to continue being habitable for everyone that lives here, you have to limit the number of inhabitants. Hunters do it by killing off the old or sick animals in a herd, but I don't think that's a very ethical way of limiting the population. So what remains? Birth control. We have access to practical, ethical and scientifically established methods of birth control. So I think that is the most ethical way to reduce our population. You also advocate giving more power to women. Why? Speaking as a biologist, I think women are less aggressive than men, and they play a larger role in the early education of the young and helping them overcome their genetic heirloom. Are you optimistic about humankind's future? I'm cautiously optimistic - very cautiously. I try to be optimistic because I prefer to give a message of hope to young people, to say: you can do something about it. But in the present, there is not much evidence that this is happening. Profile Christian de Duve is professor emeritus at the Catholic University of Louvain (UCL), Belgium and Rockefeller University, New York. In 1974 he co-won a Nobel prize for his work on cellular structure. His latest book, Genetics of original sin, is published by Yale University Press From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 1 11:19:18 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:19:18 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D6CD636.3050501@aleph.se> Mike Dougherty wrote: > I have long wondered why we are still spending so much engineering to > build UP the cities, rather than burrowing into the earth. > I think the energy budget is tricky - in excavation you need to move more than the weight of the building up to the surface, and then you need to add the building below. Another aspect is that we have plenty of well developed building techniques for above-ground buildings (many making use of the affordances of access from the side and top while building) while below ground building techniques are less well developed. Building a subscraper is not the same as building a lot of basements. Energy-wise I guess the big benefit would be if subscrapers are more efficient than skyscrapers. I am not sure - you trade convective heat losses for conductive heat losses, and they can be pretty substantial. Besides, the whole place will require an active air conditioning system anyway. From an greenhouse gas standpoint, anything that can reduce our use of concrete is a good thing. It is very energy intensive, spews out a lot of CO2 and is responsible for a surprisingly noticeable fraction of total GHG emissions. Recycling of concrete is actually a good idea. Hence it might be interesting to make buildings modular so that you can actually recycle the concrete modules when you do not want that particular building. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 11:33:21 2011 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 12:33:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense: was RE: libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <013801cbd7af$0e877c80$2b967580$@att.net> References: <013801cbd7af$0e877c80$2b967580$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:21 AM, spike wrote: > > To clarify, I was suggesting a temporary closing of the season on > libertarian topics, not asteroids. Asteroid defenders, go for it. > And those who root for the asteroid? :-)) Alfio > > > 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: From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 1 11:39:26 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:39:26 +0000 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> Kelly Anderson wrote: > (Sorry for being dense, what is a GCR? Galactic Cosmic Ray?) > Global Catastrophic Risk. Sorry, our inhouse terminology (see http://www.global-catastrophic-risks.com/ ) > While the science points in the direction that climate fluctuation can > occur faster than we previously thought likely, it still happens over > a period of years or decades. Great climate change may lead to great > suffering, but it is not going to be an extinction event. When I used the term I was thinking of nuclear winters, impact winters and supervolcanic winters. These happen much faster. If current climate models are correct they can be *very* bad - *no* agriculture for several years in practically all places (so far Tasmania seems to be the only place that survives, but I would like to run a more fine-grained sim since it could be surviving mainly due to mesh coarseness). While this is not necessarily an extinction event we should expect at least several gigadeaths as well as some pretty nasty conflicts over necessary resources. Climate change is indeed a reshuffling of the cards, in itself fairly neutral but on one hand breaking down structure (all the winery infrastructure will be in the wrong place, and it takes money, time and expertise to build it somewhere else) and on the other affecting people differently depending on their resilience (the dirty secret of climate impacts on society research: the developed world is fairly likely to withstand even pretty big climate effects, while the undeveloped won't). In fact, you can almost define being poor as "getting screwed when there is a crisis" - radical change favors resilient systems, and generally being well-off means being embedded in a resilient civilian infrastructure while being poor means you have no reserves to use when things go pearshaped. This is worth thinking about for us who like radical, transformative change. > If you can sell insurance against climate change, then I see no reason > you couldn't sell insurance against mid sized asteroid strikes. > Insuring against a global extinction event is silly since there would > be nobody left to pay or collect, and nothing to do with the money > after that point anyway. I suppose it could mean something if some > part of humanity lives off world... > You can set up near miss gambles, and the pricing of these might give you useful information. Insurance systems can handle uncorrelated disasters well, but correlated disasters are bad news. There was apparently a short period after Katrina when the world's reinsurance system was so badly strained that had a second Katrina-disaster happened it would have crashed globally - think of the financial crisis but in insurance instead. This is why I am a bit worried about even "mere" 1 km impacts. An Atlantic tsunami would cause correlated insurance claims far in excess of Katrina, and the industry would not be able to handle it. Life would go on, but quite likely with a seriously crashed global economy for a long while. Still, finance people are clever. I would love to have more of them think seriously about financial vehicles that can deal with this and other GCRs. There are already longevity bonds, helping insurance companies trade on the "risk" that people live a lot longer. There should be GCR-vehicles. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 1 11:49:48 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:49:48 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D6CDD5C.70209@aleph.se> Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:10:27PM -0500, Mike Dougherty wrote: > > >> Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay >> home and telecommute? Once I can do my job without the daily to/from >> > > Here's an infrastructure problem, again. In order to make > telepresence happen you need to roll out symmetric high-bandwidth > connections, which basically means laying ducts and pulling > fiber (owned by municipalities, operated by contracting companies), > plus provide enough backbone capacity. > While this is a fairly costly investment, it is not that extreme as infrastructure goes. I think a bigger problem is that we need the right kind of software framing to make it work socially. Telecommuting in isolation is likely not just understimulating, it misses a lot of the important social cues and activities that go on at a job (both the good and the bad). As long as these cannot be done through telecommuting it will only happen when the cost benefits are great, the job is by its nature less social, or the employees are low-status enough to be forced into whatever social scheme admin thinks works (i.e. making telecommuting a mark of low social standing, making everybody else try to avoid it). A positive possibility is new business models that can make use of the new social interactions in the medium, but we do not know if or when such models appear. So my prediction is that telecommuting is going to remain niche until the design of the interactions allows enough social interaction, or somebody figures out an entirely different way of organizing "work" (then things will quickly take off on their own). Both are design/idea questions and hence hard to predict (rare breakthroughs, perhaps Poisson distributed - variance is equal to expectation value), while progress in hardware is relatively smooth. Better hardware increases the chance of getting something, but it does not ensure it. Still, I think this is something greens should be pushing for rather strongly. Reducing businesspeople crossing the Atlantic for pointless meetings has a decent environmental effect - but the substitute must be able to have the same level of social signalling as a transcontinental trip that shows that This Meeting Is Important. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 12:34:39 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 13:34:39 +0100 Subject: [ExI] democracy sucks In-Reply-To: <4D670BF9.4090004@aleph.se> References: <4D670BF9.4090004@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 25 February 2011 02:55, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Jeff Davis wrote: >> Can we identify the pros and cons re governance in general, and >> democracy in particular, and come up with something better, or some >> suggestions, or at least get pointed in the right direction? > > Hmm, from reading your post I think your problem is with the complex > representative democracy systems we have today. Not so much with democracy, Neverending arguments may be raised as to the mechanisms deemed to reflect, one way or another, popular will. It has been argued, e.g., that such will is poorly reflected by the election in a blocked system of one or another member of the same political class by a minority of registered but poorly informed voters, in comparison, say, with a revolutionary government supported by a large consensus; that the rule "one head, one vote" implies an egalitarian bias; that indirect democracy is only a ritual aimed at perpetuating the power of a self-referental oligarchy; and so forth. But the real point is, IMHO, what sense such a debate has in the first place. If one believes that "democracy" is only a tentative method to ensure the "best" (according to which criteria?) possible governance and/or to prevent "tiranny" by a check-and-balance and accountability system, one is certainly exposed to factual counterproofs. If one, on the other hand, *considers self-determination as a fundamental value*, the relative "quality" of decisions is as immaterial to a debate on popular sovereignty as the relative quality of individual choices is immaterial to that on personal freedom for a libertarian. And I suspect that self-determination is itself the ultimate ground of the principle that we should be allowed to evolve, transhumanistically, in whichever direction we choose. Here, the real difference with libertarians is that usually they do not really conceive the very idea of collective freedom and self-determination. They see instead just some people affecting the freedom of other people belonging to the same group; and are willing to impose by whatever means a fixed and universal set of legal rules - about which the people, any people, would not have any say in any form whatsoever, perhaps not even through unanimity - in view of the protection of the alleged "freedom" of its members. My personal view is instead that such view of freedom positively risks to lead to the end of history, and has too much to do with that of gas molecules which move in any conceivable direction while at the end not going anywhere, preventing on the contrary the continued ability of communities to opt for different destinies, structures and goals, including as to the rules pertaining to their internal functioning and their value sets. After all, since societies and civilisations unavoidably compete with one another, pseudo-Darwinian mechanisms already take care of pruning with time the "experiments" that many of us would consider especially aberrant. On the other hands, such mechanism can only continue operating only insofar the world is going to remain the arena of diverse collective projects. No Brave New World, no matter how "well" governed" can guarantee any such "evolutionary" developments. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 1 13:19:56 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 13:19:56 +0000 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense In-Reply-To: <013801cbd7af$0e877c80$2b967580$@att.net> References: <013801cbd7af$0e877c80$2b967580$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D6CF27C.8030608@aleph.se> spike wrote: > To clarify, I was suggesting a temporary closing of the season on > libertarian topics, not asteroids. Asteroid defenders, go for it. > Libertarians, hold yer fire please. > Except for our privately funded anti-asteroid cannons, of course! Some modeling aloud: Consider the problem of funding an anti-asteroid mission by the "street performer protocol" ( http://www.schneier.com/paper-street-performer.html ): it needs T units of money, and people put in money in escrow until the sum t reaches T, wherupon the plan gets implemented (otherwise, nothing happens). Each individual i has a utility u_i (distributed according to the probability distribution f(u)) of the project succeeding. They think it is worth donating if the chance of it succeeding (both getting the money and stopping the asteroid) times their utility is greater than the cost to them. The cost is either the donated money if the project goes ahead, or the loss of interest they could have gained from having the money in their own account, if the project does not happen. The "game" looks like this: Happens Doesnt happen Donate u_i-c -kc Don't donate u_i 0 c is the amount of donated money, k represents the small cost of not having the money for a while. The chance of the project succeeding is a function of the already given donations: P_i(t), which we can assume is some kind of sigmoid function that has a particular asymptote P_i(infinity) corresponding to the individually estimated chance of the mission succeeding, an inflection point somewhere below T and a sharpness of the transition from "not enough money to convince everybody else" to "enough money to convince everybody else". The utility of donating is P_i(t)(u_i-c) - kc(1-P_i(t)), the utility of not donating is P_i(t)u_i. Since the first is always larger than the second, we have a problem - no rational player should want to donate, everybody waits for everybody else. How can this be fixed? The classic approach is to say the government will do it. But governments are just like players in this game, and hence China will wait for the US to save them, and so on. A non-libertarian approach would be to add a penalty term to the don't donate case: everybody who didn't get involved gets punished (maybe the project drops small meteors on them). This is of course morally problematic, but typical for governments trying to tax us. Removing k by giving back the interest on the escrowed money doesn't change things. What if k was negative? In this case you would get back more money for showing your cooperation even if the project fails. Now it would be rational to donate for some people, making t increase and thus enticing more people to donate. People with k/(1+k) > P_i(t) would want to donate - the people who think that "this cannot be done". If they are right, they get rewarded. If they are wrong, everybody gets rewarded by u_i but they get mildly punished for their pessimism. The nice thing is that as soon as the total sum of donations start to increase, you can get positive feedback since the optimists who think it can be done if enough people donate will now start to think that it has a decent chance (they are still rationally speaking irrational since they are paying rather than being free riders, but we should recognize that there is a bit of altruism in humans). Imagine that you are a charity or company trying to make this happen. You have your own etimate of P(t) and the distribution of people's views. If you think people are *too pessimistic* about the feasibility, then this strategy seems to be a very good one. You get the large pool of pessimists to invest in the project (they are of course gambling that they are right and you are wrong; assuming they are having normal cognitive biases they will be overconfident), and then have enough capital to get optimists to get in too. If your project fails you have to pay kt extra back to the participants, if it succeeds you will reap the rewards for the project (which can be more than just the utility of saving the earth: you might have a designated profit margin of the capital, for example). [ A simpler model which is fun to play around with is just to assume people pay u_i P_i(t), topping up to this level as t changes. I have run various simulations of this. This produces a phase transition between nobody/few pays and a lot of people pay as N increases, with a sharpness dependent on the sharpness of the P_i functions. In fact, sharper changes from "it wont work" to "it will work" increases the number of runs where the charity fails even at high N. There is also a strong need for early adopters: one can imagine people as a queue from most pessimistic to least pessimistic. For every optimist that donates at the right end of the queue, the boundary between non donors and donors tends to shift a bit to the left. The above incentivizing of having pessimists donate achieves this by getting a bunch on the left to donate too. Depending on the settings of c, k and the other parameters the incentivizing model also produces some nonmonotonic behavior. For example, if c=10, T=100, k=-10% then for a small group everybody donates, secure in the knowledge that the target will not be reached and they will make money. As the group gets larger, the pessimists drop out and the total funding decreases, until the group becomes so large that optimists start to have an effect. An important thing is that if c is small enough, then it is much easier to get the transition to happen, again because of more early adopters bringing up t. In fact, this might be a bit of a problem in general: people will never pay if u_i << c, and given that proactive defense will have low utilities (a one in 20,000 lifetime risk) donations might be very small. ] Any thoughts? Appendix: a matlab script for running the sim T=100; % money needed for project ff=[]; for p=10:1000 N=p; % Run population size from 10 to 1000 u=1+randn(N,1); % utility of asteroid defense Pinf = rand(N,1); % prob of defense working theta = rand(N,1)*T; % inflexion point for prob estimate g=1*rand(N,1); % steepness of inflection t=0; % money collected told=-1; c=.21; % payment size k=0.1; % cost of donating but not getting defense while (t-told>1e-3) told=t; P=Pinf.*(.5+.5*tanh(g.*(t-theta))); % how likely is success? worthpaying = max(0,(u-c).*P-(1-P)*c*k); % what is my utility of paying t=sum(worthpaying>0)*c; % pay c if it is positive end ff=[ff t]; plot(10:N, ff,'.') drawnow end ylabel('Total donations') xlabel('N') Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 13:24:58 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:24:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Easy solution to wars like that in Libya, and in these groups? In-Reply-To: <4D680D34.3010800@mac.com> References: <4D673974.7040207@canonizer.com> <4D680D34.3010800@mac.com> Message-ID: On 25 February 2011 21:12, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Are you assuming that this collective state of mind is particularly > rational or a good [enough] decision maker? Do we assume that our individual "society of the mind" state is a particularly rational or good enough decision maker? No. What can safely be assumed is that most of us like to decided for him- or herself nevertheless - and, additionally, that a sufficiently diverse set of decisions may even be of some use to confront their rationality and "goodness", whatever this may mean. Why this should be any different with collective entities, such as communities, corporations, and above all *peoples*? > This is a problem I had with Eliezer's CEV concept as well. Even a > powerful AGI that deeply ferreted out and did what humanity collectively > wanted or what it extrapolated that humanity when most rational/wise would > want would not be a clear win. I do not care much for what "humanity" (whatever this may mean...) wants, let alone for its will being universally forced across the board on the entire species. If anything, "humanity" is likely to be currently opposed to anything threatening its top-of-food-chain position, including a posthuman evolution of sectors thereof. On the other hand, the ability of *each* political entity to make diverse decisions as to its future remains, IMHO, the best chance for any prospective of posthuman change, or rather *changes*. If anything, for the pressure it puts on neoluddite competitors. Do we fear for the oppression, however defined, of individuals by foreign state? Nothing prevents one in the Internet era from trying and persuading its citizens that system B is better than system A, if he so wishes, and in the meantime to make it as easy as possible for them to vote with their feet. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 13:31:29 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:31:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Call To Libertarians In-Reply-To: References: <155926.8297.qm@web114408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 24 February 2011 21:14, Jeff Davis wrote: > The current system of distinct jurisdictions with their own laws would > seem adequate. Know the laws in the jurisdiction, and act lawfully. > If the laws don't suit you, relocate to a jurisdiction where the laws > are a better fit for your values. > Well put. There might or might not exist a vague "virtualisation" process in place, but the "jurisdictional pluralism" remains anyway our best option. And, for "ours", I also mean "for the transhumanist movement". See the US conservatives concern with a possible technological lead of China in transhumanist technologies... A wonderful way to keep one focused away from neoprimitive, anti-science fantasies and the devastating consequences of their implementation. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 13:39:42 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:39:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Call To Libertarians In-Reply-To: <155926.8297.qm@web114408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <155926.8297.qm@web114408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 24 February 2011 18:39, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > So how do you cope with a group of people who believe that, for instance, > foetuses are people, and you are hurting someone else if you have an > abortion? Or that you're hurting your children if you don't bring them up > believing in a particular god, thus condemning them to eternal torture? > Simple. While I think that in principle only the social norms of a group define what is human life and which life deserves to be protected and when, nothing prevents me from fighting the norms I do not agree with, and attempting to replace them with mine. Or, at the end of the day, to try and separing myself from that group, tipically walking as away from it as I can. So, yes, I agree that "as long as it does not hurt anyone" is no magic bullet to find a solution to political dissent (define "hurt", define "unjustified hurt"). In fact, it is a somewhat formal, recursive imperative, such as "do the right thing": hardly anybody puts *that* in discussion, the issue is what should be deemed right or wrong. -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Tue Mar 1 13:47:10 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 08:47:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> Message-ID: <201103011346.p21DkWiG001701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Damien B groused: >Meanwhile, there's this old chunky Zip 100 drive where I've solved the >power supply problem but now Vista doesn't want to provide a letter or >icon for me to click to activate the bastard. Bop it! Fred replied: >Do you want to do just a one time access to get some data or regular >use? My memory is that some of the versions of Knoppix had support for >Zip drives. : >The person who developed it is German. (Klaus) Knopper + Unix => Knopp- + -ix => Knoppix Knoppix is very useful, especially for wrangling Windows machines. http://www.knoppix.org/ For getting zippy -- http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Knowing_Knoppix/Using_floppy_disks#Using_an_Iomega_Zip_disk Re the scanner -- Put it on an ice floe. Grandpa's time to die. You can get better than that at a garage sale or Salvation Army. For good prices, intelligent reviews, and great service on new equipment, I rely on newegg.com. I heard about them from Jerry Pournelle's go-to guy for hardware, Robert Bruce Thompson. And I, of course, have (crank and/or informed) opinions on what you might want in scanners. Ask me off-list. -- David. From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 14:55:39 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 07:55:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:21 AM, F. C. Moulton wrote: > Just because the early USA might not have been as bad as some other > countries does not mean that the early USA was libertarian. What other country/region/time more closely approximates libertarian ideals then? -Kelly From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 16:07:00 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 17:07:00 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 28 February 2011 18:47, Eugen Leitl wrote: > Metrology uses references. In case of monetary units you need the > amount of a current essential commodity (diversified, weight-adjusted, > made resistant to gaming) the monetary unit can buy. Commodities do exist. What gives monetary units value is the willingness of economic subject to accept the latter in exchange for the former... > Another problem is that compound interest is linear semi-log plot, > while the underlying economy growth isn't. There's a reason why > most religion's sacred texts contain some ranting against usury. A solution discussed in the thirties, e.g., by Ezra Pound, but never implemented, is a form of time-limited money, requiring time stamps for its continued validity, ending up in repaying the entire capital. This would appear to make usury impossible. -- Stefano Vaj From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 16:10:48 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 09:10:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 5:00 AM, David Lubkin wrote: > > Spike wrote: > >>If we look around us, everywhere I see astonishing energy waste, just >>because energy is cheap and plentiful. ?Oil is still so cheap it strangles >>out most alternative energy sources. > > And there's a lot of known energy, e.g., nuclear, coal, and natural > gas, that can be readily tapped without much technical fuss. We may > balk at one or other but someone else won't, and energy is fungible. Of course, I have analyzed the chemistry and energy physics here: http://htyp.org/dollar_a_gallon_gasoline The problem is liquid transportation fuel. Even if we had penny a kWh electric power, building the plants to make liquid fuel takes time--decades of time. And we don't have the low cost power. > Aside, any idea how fast we could build gigawatt reactors in a real > crunch? (That is, in a WW II grade focus, bypassing all current hurdles.) Even bypassing the current hurdles, big engineering construction projects take time. It's not entirely clear that we will be able to make power plants by the time they are seen as the appropriate response. Keith From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 16:07:11 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:07:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] underground city: was RE: Serious topic Message-ID: <01cb01cbd82a$b96ee630$2c4cb290$@att.net> On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg Subject: Re: [ExI] Serious topic Mike Dougherty wrote: >> I have long wondered why we are still spending so much engineering to >> build UP the cities, rather than burrowing into the earth. >I think the energy budget is tricky - in excavation you need to move more than the weight of the building up to the surface, and then you need to add the building below. Another aspect is that we have plenty of well developed building techniques for above-ground buildings... There are existing below ground buildings, but I don't know how much data is available to the public: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_City,_Arlington,_Virginia I had a meeting on the negative fourth floor, but I don't recall how far down it went. The whole outfit is designed to survive nuclear war. It's been a long time ago last time I was there, but I think they had residential units above ground. I was struck by how they had really fine, wide, fast escalators going down. I suppose that was so the top floors could be evacuated quickly downward in an emergency. They have restaurants and shopping malls down there, everything you really need can be found without going up to the outdoors. spike From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 16:22:28 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 17:22:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Brief correction re Western Democracies [WASI am Call To Libertarians] In-Reply-To: References: <895132.47768.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D61D9E4.90607@lightlink.com> Message-ID: 2011/2/27 Alfio Puglisi : > When I wrote that private prisons would be an incentive to bogus > incarceration I was?hypothesizing, but now I found out that it has already > happened: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal I was not incredulous as to the possibility of such things happen. I simply remarked that we do not prohibit the private practice of medicine or manufacturing or prostheses, out of concern that this may provide a motive to increase artificially the relevant demand. -- Stefano Vaj From pharos at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 16:28:15 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 16:28:15 +0000 Subject: [ExI] underground city: was RE: Serious topic In-Reply-To: <01cb01cbd82a$b96ee630$2c4cb290$@att.net> References: <01cb01cbd82a$b96ee630$2c4cb290$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:07 PM, spike wrote: > There are existing below ground buildings, but I don't know how much data is > available to the public: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_City,_Arlington,_Virginia > > Possibly the most famous underground cities are Montreal's R?SO, used by more people than any other locale and is the largest underground city network in the world, and Toronto's PATH, which according to Guinness World Records is the largest underground shopping complex in the world with 371,600 square metres of retail space. Japan's underground networks, while individually smaller, are the most extensive overall with an estimated 76 underground shopping streets totalling over 900,000 square metres of floor space in 1996, with many expansions since then. BillK From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 1 16:35:15 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 17:35:15 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110301163515.GZ23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 09:10:48AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote: > The problem is liquid transportation fuel. Even if we had penny a kWh > electric power, building the plants to make liquid fuel takes > time--decades of time. And we don't have the low cost power. For some reason this is poorly understood by the general public, aka voters. City-sized 10-100 GUSD installations do not spring into being on demand, should you even be able to find creditors with appropriate largesse. What is worse, is that Fischer-Tropsch is an old, energy-itensive technology. Developing small-scale modular mild-condition technology requires multiple decades of effort and talent that is no longer present. So it's time, money, building large scale infrastructure and talent and R&D. That's five factors that must happen for the party to continue. > > Aside, any idea how fast we could build gigawatt reactors in a real > > crunch? (That is, in a WW II grade focus, bypassing all current hurdles.) > > Even bypassing the current hurdles, big engineering construction > projects take time. It's not entirely clear that we will be able to > make power plants by the time they are seen as the appropriate > response. I hope you all have stocked up on popcorn. That's going to get one hell of an interesting movie. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Mar 1 16:40:33 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 17:40:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 05:07:00PM +0100, Stefano Vaj wrote: > Commodities do exist. What gives monetary units value is the > willingness of economic subject to accept the latter in exchange for > the former... What I meant is that that purchasing ability of the monetary unit is periodically measured and renormalized to the resource basket, using a method which is resistant to gaming the metric (latter is a hard problem, as people are devious, given enough incentive). > > Another problem is that compound interest is linear semi-log plot, > > while the underlying economy growth isn't. There's a reason why > > most religion's sacred texts contain some ranting against usury. > > A solution discussed in the thirties, e.g., by Ezra Pound, but never > implemented, is a form of time-limited money, requiring time stamps Circulation acceleration was implemented in some regional currencies. > for its continued validity, ending up in repaying the entire capital. > This would appear to make usury impossible. It would be easy to fix usury, just outlaw compound interest. IIRC the islamic banking system operates that way. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Tue Mar 1 16:34:59 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 08:34:59 -0800 Subject: [ExI] moving bits, not butts, was RE: Serious topic Message-ID: <01d201cbd82e$9b6c4390$d244cab0$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg ... >...Still, I think this is something greens should be pushing for rather strongly... Greens and people who want to have an actual family life, yes. >... Reducing businesspeople crossing the Atlantic for pointless meetings has a decent environmental effect - but the substitute must be able to have the same level of social signalling as a transcontinental trip that shows that This Meeting Is Important.--Anders Sandberg That was a most insightful comment Anders. I went kiting across the continent far too many times (one of which I had to do when you were here visiting.) We could have done a lot of that business using telephones instead of airplanes. We have had secure video-enabled links at least since the mid-1990s. When I was making 30 cross country trips in 17 months, I was strongly pushing for travel reform. I like airplanes, but I don't like travelling; I find it most distasteful. I met with surprising resistance in cutting down on the face to face meetings. I like staying home with my family, I very much dislike being on the road, even overnighters. During those hectic days in 2008, I was going out of San Francisco on the 10.20 PM Tuesday evening flight to land in New York at the crack of dawn, get to the meeting by 0800 if the traffic was good, meet all day, go back to the airport and catch the 6.40 PM Wednesday flight out of Newark back to SFO, landing at 10.15 if there wasn't a headwind, drive home, go to the office Thursday morning. I had a lot of travel expense reports with four meals and no hotel. {8^D {8-[ We had demonstrated in 1999 that a software project can be done almost entirely remotely: our team was scattered in five different US cities. Microsloth Powerpoint was a great breakthrough. If all the participants can see the charts and hear the audio, the meeting is about 80% as effective as being there and soooo much easier, faster and cheaper, way less exhausting and more compatible with family life. spike From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 15:51:42 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:51:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] patches accepted In-Reply-To: <20110301094514.GP23560@leitl.org> References: <20110301094514.GP23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:45 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20928015.400-biology-nobelist-natural-selection-will-destroy-us.html > > Biology Nobelist: Natural selection will destroy us > > 28 February 2011 by Clint Witchalls > > Magazine issue 2801. Subscribe and save > > We have evolved traits that will lead to humanity's extinction, says > Christian de Duve ? so we must learn to overcome them > > We are the most successful species on the planet, but you think we will > ultimately pay the price for this success. Why? > > The cost of our success is the exhaustion of natural resources, leading to > energy crises, climate change, pollution and the destruction of our > habitat. > If you exhaust natural resources there will be nothing left for your > children. If we continue in the same direction, humankind is headed for > some > frightful ordeals, if not extinction. > Until sustainability comes before 'profit', we're on a course to extinction undoubtedly. I argue that we need to evolve past the outdated "Capitalism" we currently worship. > > You think that natural selection has worked against us. How? > > Because it has no foresight. Natural selection has resulted in traits such > as > group selfishness being coded in our genes. These were useful to our > ancestors under the conditions in which they lived, but have become noxious > to us today. What would help us preserve our natural resources are genetic > traits that let us sacrifice the present for the sake of the future. You > need > wisdom to sacrifice something that is immediately useful or advantageous > for > the sake of something that will be important in the future. Natural > selection > doesn't do that; it looks only at what is happening today. It doesn't care > about your grandchildren or grandchildren's grandchildren. > The American Indians and many other tribal peoples have known this for CENTURIES. Our 'modern/civilized' people have forgotten these age old truths. It'd be common sense to everyone if they didn't have their heads so far up their over-marketed rears. > > You call this short-sightedness "original sin". Why did you pick this > terminology? > > I believe that the writers of Genesis had detected the inherent selfishness > in human nature that I propose is in our genes, and invented the myth of > original sin to account for it. It's an image. I am not acting as an > exegete > - I don't interpret scripture. > > How can humanity overcome this "original sin"? > > We must act against natural selection and actively oppose some of our key > genetic traits. > We start by making decisions that benefit humanity 3 or 4 generations out. We work on some forward-thinking strategies, that allow humanity to build some real momentum, instead of all these 'bubbles' and other corrupt money schemes. > > One solution you propose is population control, but isn't this ethically > dubious? > > It is a simple matter of figures. If you want this planet to continue being > habitable for everyone that lives here, you have to limit the number of > inhabitants. Hunters do it by killing off the old or sick animals in a > herd, > but I don't think that's a very ethical way of limiting the population. So > what remains? Birth control. We have access to practical, ethical and > scientifically established methods of birth control. So I think that is the > most ethical way to reduce our population. > As survival rates increase, family size decreases. If people were born into conditions in which they had food/shelter/clothing/education...You wouldn't see people having 4,6,8 kids. They'd have 1 or 2. I think population numbers should be managed, and that a well provided for, well educated population would agree. > > You also advocate giving more power to women. Why? > > Speaking as a biologist, I think women are less aggressive than men, and > they > play a larger role in the early education of the young and helping them > overcome their genetic heirloom. > Perhaps logic to crunch things down to 2 or 3 workable solutions, and then emotion to pick from the available choices. > > Are you optimistic about humankind's future? > > I'm cautiously optimistic - very cautiously. I try to be optimistic because > I > prefer to give a message of hope to young people, to say: you can do > something about it. But in the present, there is not much evidence that > this > is happening. The masses are still heavily anesthetized, busy running on their consumerist gerbil-wheels. Trying to keep up with the Joneses. Buying into Edward Bernays' wet dream come to fruition. > Profile > > Christian de Duve is professor emeritus at the Catholic University of > Louvain > (UCL), Belgium and Rockefeller University, New York. In 1974 he co-won a > Nobel prize for his work on cellular structure. His latest book, Genetics > of > original sin, is published by Yale University Press > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 1 17:46:09 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:46:09 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <201103011346.p21DkWiG001701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> <201103011346.p21DkWiG001701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <4D6D30E1.6090900@satx.rr.com> Thanks to all, on and off list, for some Clues on these problems with ancient machines. Damien Broderick From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:01:12 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:01:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:39 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Kelly Anderson wrote: > This is why I am a bit worried > about even "mere" 1 km impacts. The Tunguska event in 1908 Siberia is supposed to have been the result of an asteroid or comet less than 100m across... That would have been a real mess in a populated area! I don't know for sure, but I'd guess that there are more smaller asteroids than big ones. And while there is no historical evidence of an asteroid killing a human being, there is at least one incident of a car being hit. The smaller ones are harder to find, and once all the large ones are mapped, I hope we continue to look for smaller and smaller asteroids and comets. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:10:41 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:10:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <20110301163515.GZ23560@leitl.org> References: <20110301163515.GZ23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 09:10:48AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote: >> The problem is liquid transportation fuel. Or switch rapidly to a fuel cell hydrogen based transportation system. In The Phoenix Project: Shifting from Oil to Hydrogen by Harry W. Braun Harry discusses a Manhattan Project approach to switching to hydrogen at a break neck pace. I haven't read the book but did hear a three hour interview of Harry on this topic. I think he has some ideas that are worth considering. Has anyone read the book? If not, I could be persuaded to do so and write a book report... ;-) -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:18:07 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:18:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) Message-ID: If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that obviate the need for large cities? Are there other justifications for large cities? I can see ports continuing to be important, and I can see somewhat larger groups of people gathering around ports. I can also see that there are a lot of people who like cities, or are attracted to them by perceived economic gain. I have never lived in a large city in the US. I have lived in Taipei and Sao Paulo, but I don't get the reasons for being in a large city. Are cities dead in the future? I thought 9/11 would make people want to leave large cities, but I don't think that is happening. I don't even like small towns myself anymore. I live in the boonies with the nearest neighbor over a mile away... so I know I'm on the weird end of this spectrum. But I am curious. What are cities good for in the future? -Kelly From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 18:26:40 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:26:40 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> Message-ID: <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> On 02/28/2011 11:21 PM, F. C. Moulton wrote: > On 02/28/2011 07:35 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> The early USA is >> the closest approximate, > To say that the early USA was the "closest approximate" really stretches > the meaning of the word "approximate" almost to the point of > absurdity. The early USA was not even close to libertarian. Just think > for a moment about the huge number of slaves, the second class legal > status of women, Actually, in that it strongly supported freedom and individual rights it was extremely libertarian. That the slavery and women's rights things were not also worked out yet was an artifact of the times. Many of the founders actually did discuss that slavery was repugnant to their world view but felt that the issue could not be addressed head on at the time. > the Alien and Sedition Acts just to name a few. That was passed by the Federalists and strongly opposed as unconstitutional albeit not successfully. In particular read the papers of Jefferson on this Act. > Even > during the late 1800s when slavery was supposed to be illegal there were > still Jim Crow laws in many states and in some areas there was de facto > slavery. Not to mention censorship under Comstock. And let us not > forget how the government of the USA disregarded treaties and badly > treated the Aboriginal peoples. That there were many failures does not in the least change the fact of the strong support for individual rights and severely limiting government power that this country was based upon. > Just because the early USA might not have been as bad as some other > countries does not mean that the early USA was libertarian. As the term was not even invented yet it would have been difficult to be more rigorously "libertarian". - samantha From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:30:26 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 19:30:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] value of a human life, was RE: Same Sex Marriage (was Re: Call To Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <00af01cbd77a$f3fff150$dbffd3f0$@att.net> References: <00af01cbd77a$f3fff150$dbffd3f0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 28 February 2011 20:08, spike wrote: > My (admittedly > uneducated) estimate would run to somewhere in the order of 600 to 6000 > murders per year over cocaine, so that for every 100 to 1000 kilos of > cocaine you hold in your hand, someone has been killed, even if we ignore > the practical difficulty of holding a ton of cocaine in one's hand. Might depend on some technical defect of your exoskeleton... :-) > If we use that criterion ?to tackle the difficult ethical question regarding > the dollar value of a human life, I would start with the estimate that > cocaine is worth (well it was when I was a teenager) about 100 bucks a gram, > and there has been inflation but simultaneously far more new suppliers from > what I hear, so let me use 100 US bucks a gram, so a human life is worth > between 10 million and 100 million bucks. Why, cocaine seems to involve a substantially higher amount per capita than the cost of hiring a killer, or of administering a death sentence in the US (let alone in China or Iran). -- Stefano Vaj From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 18:36:10 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:36:10 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> On 03/01/2011 03:39 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > Climate change is indeed a reshuffling of the cards, in itself fairly > neutral but on one hand breaking down structure (all the winery > infrastructure will be in the wrong place, and it takes money, time > and expertise to build it somewhere else) and on the other affecting > people differently depending on their resilience (the dirty secret of > climate impacts on society research: the developed world is fairly > likely to withstand even pretty big climate effects, while the > undeveloped won't). Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually dangerous levels of current climate change. Otherwise could we move on to something actually important? - samantha From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 18:29:01 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:29:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <4D6D30E1.6090900@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> <201103011346.p21DkWiG001701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4D6D30E1.6090900@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <01ed01cbd83e$8945dc20$9bd19460$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Damien Broderick Subject: Re: [ExI] Scanners live in vain Thanks to all, on and off list, for some Clues on these problems with ancient machines. Damien Broderick Ancient computer equipment is very much analogous to ancient harlots. It just isn't clear to me why you wouldn't just buy something newer. They are cheap enough. (The scanners I mean.) I recognize people sometimes fall in love (with a particular harlot I mean.) Unrelated entirely, but this was my good laugh for the day. The headline reads: Gay Students Allowed to Pick Roommates. The article explains that straight students can also choose opposite gender roommates, but if so, it isn't clear why the headline was written that way. If one is a headline scanner, one might come away thinking that *only* gay students could choose opposite gender roommates: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/01/gay-students-allowed-pick-roommates-rut gers-university/ That makes me laugh just imagining my 18 year old self thrust into a situation where only gay students could have opposite gender roommates. The boy is the father of the man, so you can imagine an 18 year old version of me. Immediately, I would ask: What evidence is required to establish gaiety? If evidence of my straightitude were to emerge, would our gay status be revoked? Or what if my roommate is a genuine lesbian but was experimenting? If so, is there an appeals process? If you get clearly audible evidence of phony gays in the adjacent room, are we required to report the fuckers? {8^D spike From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 18:42:04 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:42:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <4D6CDD5C.70209@aleph.se> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> <4D6CDD5C.70209@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D6D3DFC.7070109@mac.com> On 03/01/2011 03:49 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Eugen Leitl wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:10:27PM -0500, Mike Dougherty wrote: >> >>> Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay >>> home and telecommute? Once I can do my job without the daily to/from >> >> Here's an infrastructure problem, again. In order to make >> telepresence happen you need to roll out symmetric high-bandwidth >> connections, which basically means laying ducts and pulling >> fiber (owned by municipalities, operated by contracting companies), >> plus provide enough backbone capacity. > > While this is a fairly costly investment, it is not that extreme as > infrastructure goes. > > I think a bigger problem is that we need the right kind of software > framing to make it work socially. Telecommuting in isolation is likely > not just understimulating, it misses a lot of the important social > cues and activities that go on at a job (both the good and the bad). It takes some retraining. People tend to not open IM even with video to have the chat they would walk across campus normally to have. Not sure why. Perhaps we can do something like this about it. http://telecommutingjournal.com/anybots-the-telecommuters-avatar/854 http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/05/science/05robots.html?_r=1 Also, we could have a LOT better microphones and webcams in conference rooms. The sound quality of these today really sucks and it is not necessary. Lastly, for many job the need for direct exchange face to face or meetings is very low. Take software engineering for example and especially the success of open source teams spread all over the world. - samantha From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:42:19 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 19:42:19 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Same Sex Marriage (was Re: Call To Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/1 Darren Greer : > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Stefano Vaj wrote: >> As a second best, I am all in favour of making the social norms >> involved in marriage simply implode by allowing gay, incestuous, >> chaste, pedophilic, poligynic, polyandric, group, post-mortem, >> inter-species weddings. Nice ceremonies are not to be denied to >> anybody. > > I had to read this a couple of times before I could respond. I have heard a > similar "if we allow gay marriage the next thing will be pedophilia and > bestiality" argument before, usually by fundamentalist Christians. Whether > it was ironic or not (and I admit to sometimes having a hard time > determining that on the 'net, as someone mentioned yesterday), I'll go out > on a limb and say I'd also let every social norm associated with marriage > implode as well, by sanctioning any union a person wanted to make, *as long* > as it was with another consenting adult or adults. That rules out pedophilia > and bestiality and necrophilia. No, I was not being ironic. After all, most of your objections automatically go away once one considers that nothing prevents a marriage to be chaste (even catholics admit that the spouses may even take such a vow during the ceremony or later on, and nothing prevents criminal sanctions of unlawful intercourse - see rape, for instance - in spite of marriage). Liberalisation of underage or inter-species or incestuous sex is therefore an altogether different matter: it may take place without automatically grant access to marriage, and access to marriage does not automatically involve it, not even between spouses. Moreover, post-mortem marriage does not refer to the necrophilia, but the ability of, say, a betrothed girl to get married with a dead soldier when he had expressed an explicit enough intention to this effect prior to his death (this used to be possible under German law, e.g.). Ultimately, as to the access of special marriage-related treatments, if abolishing them does not sound politically correct enough, we might abolish instead the discrimination against the people who would like to get marry with themselves - and remain forever loyal to their beloved... :-) -- Stefano Vaj From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:50:53 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:50:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 11:18 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 09:10:48AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote: >>> The problem is liquid transportation fuel. > > Or switch rapidly to a fuel cell hydrogen based transportation system. How are you going to make the hydrogen? A kg of hydrogen is energy wise on a par with a gallon of gasoline. (48 kWh/kg to make hydrogen vs about 40 kWh/gallon for gasoline). The US currently uses about a million 42 gallon bbls of oil an hour. To make this amount of hydrogen would take around 1600 million kW, or 1.6 TW. That's about twice the current installed electrical capacity of the US and around 5 times the average production of electric power. And that's before you solve the problems of carrying around hydrogen. Keith From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 18:43:13 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:43:13 -0800 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense Message-ID: <01ee01cbd840$85fc92a0$91f5b7e0$@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 Subject: Re: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 4:39 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: >The Tunguska event in 1908 Siberia is supposed to have been the result of an asteroid or comet less than 100m across...The smaller ones are harder to find, and once all the large ones are mapped, I hope we continue to look for smaller and smaller asteroids and comets. -Kelly Since the topic has drifted from libertarianism for now (thanks) I request we keep subject lines in keeping with the subject. As a first order approximation, one can divide the asteroids (and meteors for that matter) into arbitrary categories and use a straight line to describe the total mass of particles in that category. For instance, if you want to use a linear length scale, you can approximate the mass of asteroids between 1 km and 10 km (using the tables) and calculate their total mass. Then you can estimate that there are about 1000 times as many asteroids between 100 meters and 1 km, so that their cumulative mass is about the same as the previous. This is a critically important means of estimating the cumulative effects of orbital debris on sensitive and expensive space stuff, such as solar panels. If one is hit by a counter orbiting pebble a cm across, it will likely punch right thru and end the mission. If it's a millimeter across, it will likely not cause too much trouble, but the probability of such a hit is about 3 orders of magnitude greater. The biggest problem of all for most long lived space missions is the 10 micron to 100 micron class of debris, because it stays around long enough to interfere, and causes gradual erosion (pitting) of the solar panels. Smaller than 10 microns apparently gets pushed away by solar radiation or dragged down by traces of atmosphere. spike From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:57:06 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 19:57:06 +0100 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: <4D6ADDC7.7090905@aleph.se> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <4D6ADDC7.7090905@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 28 February 2011 00:27, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Of course, as you know in > order to actually be a real moral reaction and not just a knee-jerk reaction > based on surface characteristics (which of course underlie a lot of the > "moral intuitions" of people), you should react to the real content of > Haidt's thesis and not just my thumbnail sketch. Granted, it is only that my reflexes are in that sense more Pavlovian than knee-jerk. When the bells ring, the dog starts salivating on the basis of prior experience... :-) > It is actually not too hard to give an evolutionary psychology explanation > for them (is it *ever* hard to do that? ;-) ) No, and I suspect in this sense evolutionary psychology to be as non-falsifiable as Marxism - something which does not detract in the least from the insight one can get from it. Speaking however of very rough sketches, I am in (some) good company believing that Darwinian constraints do limit the number of ethical systems actually possible (that is, which are practically viable) in comparison with the number of those theoretically possible (that is, which are simply consistent). But have little to say with regard to the choice amongst them or the solution of their internal criticalities. Moreover, I suspect what really determines the content of an ethical system is what distinguishes it practically from other. In other words, "Thou shalt not kill" takes its meaning from the differences in the historically and culturally varying definitions of what thou shalt not kill, who shall not, why, what killing means, which circumstances may make it instead allowed or even compulsory, etc. -- Stefano Vaj From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Mar 1 19:09:37 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:09:37 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> References: <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> Message-ID: <20110301190937.GA26398@ofb.net> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 10:36:10AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually > dangerous levels of current climate change. Otherwise could we move > on to something actually important? Islanders are being evacuated because sealevel rise is destroying their property. Next! -xx- Damien X-) From atymes at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:20:14 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:20:14 -0800 Subject: [ExI] farmville, was RE: RPGs and transhumanism In-Reply-To: <4D6A4868.7010804@aleph.se> References: <007a01cbd5ca$6f45b320$4dd11960$@att.net> <4D6A4868.7010804@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 4:49 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > I wonder what games actually make people go out and do things in the real > world? RPGs have certainly stimulated me to learn odd subjects, and even > helped my research. But what about other games (computers and boardgames)? That gets into the whole "edutainment" category, with a long history. Most of the titles that claim to do this, fall short of being either educational (as in, most players learn and retain some new knowledge) or entertaining (as in, a sufficiently high percent of first-time players - 50% might be an extreme threshold - play it more than once, not including those who are bribed to do so by things not directly connected to the game, such as needing to get a good score to pass a certain class). Oregon Trail is probably the most famous example of falling short, at least on the educational side (if it wasn't at least mildly entertaining, it wouldn't have become famous). But there are exceptions. When I was in middle school, my class was apparently used to test quite a few edutainment titles. One of the better ones I remember is Robot Odyssey - which is now out of print, but I understand there's a Java port available named Droid Quest. The screen shots at http://www.droidquest.com/ suggest it is what I remember, but I have not tried the port myself. A more modern exception is http://eterna.cmu.edu/ - which teaches what is known about protein folding, entertains in its own right (as a puzzle game), and attempts to learn more about protein folding (get up to 10,000 points and you can start trying to figure out unknown real world sequences; the best guesses get synthesized to see how well they stack up). There is certainly existence proof that "edutainment" can work. However, it appears that most attempts to deliver on this fall short of the mark. User testing, of the sort that any top-tier game these days has lots of ("What did the user find boring, and how do we fix that?"), and a lack of hubris ("Of course this is educational! I don't care that 99% of those who played it said they learned nothing. That's why I didn't bother to ask them.") would seem to be the major things needed, aside from the obvious skills (like, art and programming to be able to create a game, and expertise by the game designers in the subject being taught). From atymes at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 18:51:22 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 10:51:22 -0800 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 12:28 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > I don't see why we should refrain from discussing important things. It's a cap on the volume of discussion, not a ban on the discussion itself. It is one thing to discuss a topic. It is quite another to hash and rehash the same points without productive outcome - which is almost always what is happening when one person posts more than 8 times in a day, thus the cap. (The list software can not yet directly analyze posts to see when a discussion has degenerated. But it can count posts per day from a given member.) From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 19:00:13 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:00:13 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01f801cbd842$e5b5f720$b121e560$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) >...If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that obviate the need for large cities? ...-Kelly Kelly I will give you an answer that sounds like I am kidding, but not really. Our ability to obviate cities is entirely dependent on our working out the technology of remote copulation. I think someone here called it teledildonics. We can easily move enough information to do business over phone lines today, but if we can work out the social aspects of people crowding together (providing a red hot target for anyone waging economic war) then we can spread out more evenly over the surface of the planet. That voodoo sex thing isn't just a game, it's a need. A lot of people want or need (or think they do) a huge pool of potential mates. The city provides that, at a great cost. I think we can provide that for people living out in the boonies. I am betting on it in a sense: acquired property far from everything, in anticipation of fiber optics and satellites eventually obviating airplanes and cars. spike From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Mar 1 19:15:28 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:15:28 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> Message-ID: <20110301191528.GB26398@ofb.net> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 07:55:39AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:21 AM, F. C. Moulton wrote: > > Just because the early USA might not have been as bad as some other > > countries does not mean that the early USA was libertarian. > > What other country/region/time more closely approximates libertarian > ideals then? 19th century Britain has been nominated. Especially in the first half. Depends what one looks at, too. In terms of individual freedom to be oneself, the most libertarian time is probably the present in various Western countries. In terms of economic freedom to start businesses or move labor without regulation... yeah, 19th century America and Britain. -xx- Damien X-) From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Tue Mar 1 19:23:09 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 11:23:09 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110301192309.GC26398@ofb.net> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:18:07AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that > obviate the need for large cities? Are there other justifications for > large cities? I can see ports continuing to be important, and I can Restaurants. Energy-efficiency of goods transport. And you're talking about a very very very high level of telepresence, to compete with live music, walks in the park, zoos, people-watching, bars, clubs, coffeehouses, and yes, sex with whoever you picked up in various venues. > I have never lived in a large city in the US. I have lived in Taipei > and Sao Paulo, but I don't get the reasons for being in a large city. Choices. Lots of options. Lots of people. Who meet and share ideas and change jobs between many similar businesses. In the real world, large cities are the major economic engines, and people like meeting each other for all sorts of reasons. > Are cities dead in the future? I thought 9/11 would make people want > to leave large cities, but I don't think that is happening. The threat of *nuclear war* didn't make people want to leave large cities. 9/11? Piffle. > I don't even like small towns myself anymore. I live in the boonies > with the nearest neighbor over a mile away... so I know I'm on the > weird end of this spectrum. But I am curious. What are cities good for > in the future? Being able to walk to groceries down the block, not drive for miles... How long does it take an ambulance to show up in distributed telepresence world? Or does everyone have a remote-controllable autodoc in their Solarian fortress as well? -xx- Damien X-) From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 19:51:25 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:51:25 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Call To Libertarians In-Reply-To: References: <155926.8297.qm@web114408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4D6D4E3D.5060501@mac.com> On 03/01/2011 05:31 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > On 24 February 2011 21:14, Jeff Davis > wrote: > > The current system of distinct jurisdictions with their own laws would > seem adequate. Know the laws in the jurisdiction, and act lawfully. > If the laws don't suit you, relocate to a jurisdiction where the laws > are a better fit for your values. > > Unfortunately, post 911 especially, the push to internationalize various laws, especially regarding taxes and banking, has become quite successful. It is difficult also as a US "citizen" to escape. They actually claim rights to part of your income for 10 years even if you expatriate. And if you happen to be add all rich when you do so they consider, without having to prove it, your move to be an attempt to evade taxes and insist you liquidate and part with half your assets. Nice, huh? - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 1 19:57:11 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 11:57:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <20110301163515.GZ23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D6D4F97.4080907@mac.com> On 03/01/2011 10:10 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 09:10:48AM -0700, Keith Henson wrote: >>> The problem is liquid transportation fuel. > Or switch rapidly to a fuel cell hydrogen based transportation system. Think about what all is needed in conversion of vehicles, buying new vehicles, technology R&D, hydrogen sourcing and transportation and dispensing infrastructure and technology. Now tell me how you can do all of that "rapidly" and do so in an economic crisis. - samantha From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 20:55:09 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 12:55:09 -0800 Subject: [ExI] sinking island, was: (asteroid) defense Message-ID: <021d01cbd852$f4166f60$dc434e20$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Damien Sullivan Subject: Re: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 10:36:10AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: >> Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually dangerous >> levels of current climate change. Otherwise could we move on to >> something actually important? >Islanders are being evacuated because sealevel rise is destroying their property. Next! -xx- Damien X-) The sea level hasn't risen enough to cause the evacuation by itself. The island is sinking. As I recall there is a old city in Europe somewhere that is down at sea level. Venice? I hear it has been continuously occupied for several hundred years. That should provide us with good metrics for what the actual sea is doing. spike From thespike at satx.rr.com Tue Mar 1 22:17:22 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:17:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <01ed01cbd83e$8945dc20$9bd19460$@att.net> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> <201103011346.p21DkWiG001701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4D6D30E1.6090900@satx.rr.com> <01ed01cbd83e$8945dc20$9bd19460$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D6D7072.1070504@satx.rr.com> On 3/1/2011 12:29 PM, spike wrote: > It > just isn't clear to me why you wouldn't just buy something newer. They are > cheap enough. Because the machine are *right here in front of me* and look perfectly healthy. But of course if it costs more to find extras to make them run (especially the Zip 100, which I only need to access once for each of my backup disks, to see what's on them and maybe upbackback them) than to buy new&better, I'll trash these. I realize that's what a good consumer would do. Instead, I'm wasting everyone else's time with these dull questions. Sorry. Another answer: I don't (can't) drive (eyesight too fucked up), and I live in downtown San Antonio where all the stores are in malls tens of miles away beside freeways. Yes, I can buy stuff online without actually inspecting it, and hope for the best, but that's about it. Damien Broderick From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Mar 1 21:43:20 2011 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:43:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] sinking island, was: (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <021d01cbd852$f4166f60$dc434e20$@att.net> References: <021d01cbd852$f4166f60$dc434e20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 9:55 PM, spike wrote: > ... On Behalf Of Damien Sullivan > Subject: Re: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 10:36:10AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > >> Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually dangerous > >> levels of current climate change. Otherwise could we move on to > >> something actually important? > > >Islanders are being evacuated because sealevel rise is destroying their > property. Next! -xx- Damien X-) > > The sea level hasn't risen enough to cause the evacuation by itself. The > island is sinking. > > As I recall there is a old city in Europe somewhere that is down at sea > level. Venice? I hear it has been continuously occupied for several > hundred years. Make that 1,600 years. The most probable date for the first occupation of the area is 421 AD. By 1000 AD or whereabouts, Venice was a major naval power. That should provide us with good metrics for what the actual > sea is doing. > Unfortunately the city of Venice is build over a layer of mud, which is not a stable reference. The city is slowly sinking, in no small part because of water extraction from the underlying water table. This ingenious activity has been largely stopped and the sinking has slowed down, but the movement of the soil is bigger than any recent sea level signature. Moreover, Venice is in a lagoon with small openings to the sea, and the lagoon has the habit of making up its own preferred sea level. It's called "acqua alta" (high water), a kind of large and irregular local tide which forces inhabitants and unsuspecting tourists to wear their high boots and place wooden boards between buildings. Can be entertaining to see, as long as you are somewhere else: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Acqua_alta_a_Venezia_nel_settembre_2009.jpg Alfio > > 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: From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 1 22:47:33 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 14:47:33 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Scanners live in vain In-Reply-To: <4D6D7072.1070504@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C4601.3040605@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9934.2010102@satx.rr.com> <4D6CA232.9090303@moulton.com> <201103011346.p21DkWiG001701@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <4D6D30E1.6090900@satx.rr.com> <01ed01cbd83e$8945dc20$9bd19460$@att.net> <4D6D7072.1070504@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <023b01cbd862$a7f113a0$f7d33ae0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Damien Broderick >...Subject: Re: [ExI] Scanners live in vain On 3/1/2011 12:29 PM, spike wrote: >> It just isn't clear to me why you wouldn't just buy something newer. They are cheap enough. >...Because the machine are *right here in front of me* and look perfectly healthy... Ja. Did you already plug it in to see if it would work on USian 240Vpower? Some electronics are bi. If you had a machine built for 50 Hz and you run it at 60, it rectifies the AC in either case, so it might be able to deal with slightly higher power input from the 60 Hz. Regarding the 240, if you have your house wired for an electric dryer, those usually have a 240V output. >...Another answer: I don't (can't) drive (eyesight too fucked up), and I live in downtown San Antonio where all the stores are in malls tens of miles away beside freeways... Malls? We still have those things? I remember malls. Haven't been to one in several years. >... Yes, I can buy stuff online without actually inspecting it, and hope for the best, but that's about it...Damien Broderick Ja. For electronics that works pretty well. Yesterday my wife bought a wireless scanner/printer/fax machine online for 115 bucks. With the Libyan situation, it costs durn near that much to crank up her Detroit and drive to the nearest shopping mall. I confess I don't know where the nearest shopping mall is located these days. I see a lot of former malls with empty shops and tumbleweeds blowing thru the parking lots. We now buy everything over the internet, even shoes. As soon as one can buy sex over the internet, all bricks and mortar marketing is dead. spike From msd001 at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 01:55:25 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 20:55:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:10:27PM -0500, Mike Dougherty wrote: > >> Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay >> home and telecommute? ?Once I can do my job without the daily to/from > > Here's an infrastructure problem, again. In order to make > telepresence happen you need to roll out symmetric high-bandwidth > connections, which basically means laying ducts and pulling > fiber (owned by municipalities, operated by contracting companies), > plus provide enough backbone capacity. I don't require realtime video conferencing to write code. I could be working from a home office right now. I am not doing so because my employer still believes that cube dwellers are easier to manage than their mobile/wfh equivalents. Sure we can abuse the privilege, but how many people burn their time at work on facebook/youtube/et al where they're supposedly better managed? Samantha is correct: we could form a cabal of knowledge workers who have secured enough intellectual property to demand work from home/home office. But there would likely never be enough of us to noticeably reduce energy consumption (or wear on physical infrastructure) If there was some compelling evidence to make those enlightened businesses that spkie mentioned stand out as winners in productivity, cost savings, or government fiat (they're all forms of money) then maybe some behavior will change. My mom sent me the included video recently. [1] She has a cell phone only for an emergency and checks email maybe twice a week. Still, she forwarded the link with the optimistic line, "We might be living like this in 10-15 years." That video could have been made in 1980 for how "future predictive" it is ( oh wow, TV screens in every surface - imagine Corning would think of that ) However we still don't live that way. Of course we could do this right now, the microsoft smarthome is a working example. Will it be affordable for everyone to live like the Jetsons? No, we'll be spending increasing percentages of our income on food/fuel & heat. [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 From moulton at moulton.com Wed Mar 2 02:36:10 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 18:36:10 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> Message-ID: <4D6DAD1A.2090909@moulton.com> On 03/01/2011 10:26 AM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > On 02/28/2011 11:21 PM, F. C. Moulton wrote: >> The early USA was not even close to libertarian. Just think >> for a moment about the huge number of slaves, the second class legal >> status of women, > > Actually, in that it strongly supported freedom and individual rights > it was extremely libertarian. That the slavery and women's rights > things were not also worked out yet was an artifact of the times. Just saying that it was an "artifact of the times" does not somehow cause the early USA to be more libertarian. Was the Comstock censorship just an "artifact of the times"? Are we in a situation where any historical example I bring up is just called "an artifact of the times"? Is "an artifact of the times" some general excuse that negates any evidence? It does no good to point to the early USA and mistakenly claim that it should be considered as a libertarian example. That can lead to confusion and as we have seen from recent discussions on this list there is too much confusion about the nature of libertarianism already. >> Just because the early USA might not have been as bad as some other >> countries does not mean that the early USA was libertarian. > > As the term was not even invented yet it would have been difficult to > be more rigorously "libertarian". You need to take that up with Kelly because Kelly is the one who mistakenly brought the Early USA and libertarianism. Fred From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Wed Mar 2 03:25:58 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 19:25:58 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:18:07AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > I don't even like small towns myself anymore. I live in the boonies > with the nearest neighbor over a mile away... so I know I'm on the > weird end of this spectrum. But I am curious. What are cities good for > in the future? Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your neighbor. If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. If you allow for families and specify clumps of 4, you'd have a family every 280 meters. A 3 minute walk to other people, no matter where on Earth you were, save the oceans. You get space because the rest of us clump up. There's evidence that a lot of creative economic activity scales up super-linearly in cities, e.g. 2x the people will generate more than 2x the productivity, 15% more economic activity per capita, while using less than 2x the energy (only 85% more). By contrast corporations are sublinear (profit per employees shrinks with size) http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Urban_West-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=a http://www.pnas.org/content/104/17/7301.abstract Arguably a safer place to raise children than outer suburbs http://www.grist.org/article/2010-12-27-want-a-safe-place-to-raise-kids-look-to-the-cities -xx- Damien X-) From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Mar 2 03:45:18 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 19:45:18 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D6DBD4E.8050608@mac.com> On 03/01/2011 05:55 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > > My mom sent me the included video recently. [1] She has a cell phone > only for an emergency and checks email maybe twice a week. Still, she > forwarded the link with the optimistic line, "We might be living like > this in 10-15 years." That video could have been made in 1980 for > how "future predictive" it is ( oh wow, TV screens in every surface - > imagine Corning would think of that ) However we still don't live > that way. Of course we could do this right now, the microsoft > smarthome is a working example. Will it be affordable for everyone to > live like the Jetsons? No, we'll be spending increasing percentages > of our income on food/fuel& heat. > > [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 Part of the fun of SecondLife and Opensim versions with media on prim is mocking up some things like this in virtual worlds. Any surgace can be a web interface. :) - s From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Mar 2 03:54:53 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 19:54:53 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D6DBF8D.4010304@mac.com> On 03/01/2011 07:25 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:18:07AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > >> I don't even like small towns myself anymore. I live in the boonies >> with the nearest neighbor over a mile away... so I know I'm on the >> weird end of this spectrum. But I am curious. What are cities good for >> in the future? > Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your > neighbor. If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land > surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. Using the entire surface area to get spherical surface area, dividing by 6 billion and multiplying by 0.30 which is the percentage of land I get over 25 km between people. This is a lot more believable than a person every 140 meters. - samantha From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 2 04:22:22 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 20:22:22 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <4D6DBF8D.4010304@mac.com> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <4D6DBF8D.4010304@mac.com> Message-ID: <028201cbd891$6d616cb0$48244610$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... > Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your > neighbor. If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land > surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. Using the entire surface area to get spherical surface area, dividing by 6 billion and multiplying by 0.30 which is the percentage of land I get over 25 km between people. This is a lot more believable than a person every 140 meters. - samantha Using the .3 factor I am getting 140 meters between each person. BOTECs: Earth radius about 6370 km, so surface area , 4 pi R^2 = 5E14 m^2, 0.3 of that is dry land, so 1.5E14 m^2 divided by 7E9 is about 2E4 m^2 per person or about 140 meters between each person. Oy that's a lot of people. I am surprised this old planet can feed all of us. spike From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Mar 2 04:51:40 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 20:51:40 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <028201cbd891$6d616cb0$48244610$@att.net> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <4D6DBF8D.4010304@mac.com> <028201cbd891$6d616cb0$48244610$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mar 1, 2011, at 8:22 PM, spike wrote: > ... On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > ... >> Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your >> neighbor. If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land >> surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. > > Using the entire surface area to get spherical surface area, dividing by > 6 billion and multiplying by 0.30 which is the percentage of land I get over > 25 km between people. This is a lot more believable than a person every 140 > meters. > > - samantha > > > Using the .3 factor I am getting 140 meters between each person. > > BOTECs: > > Earth radius about 6370 km, so surface area , 4 pi R^2 = 5E14 m^2, > > 0.3 of that is dry land, so 1.5E14 m^2 divided by 7E9 is about 2E4 m^2 per > person or about 140 meters between each person. Ah, I see my mistake. 2E4 m^2 is roughly the same as my 2.5E4 which I forgot to divide by pi and take the square root of which gives 158 meters radius of circle/per person so twice that between people or 316 meters. That is an impressive number. - s From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 05:33:47 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:33:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Same Sex Marriage (was Re: Call To Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > 2011/3/1 Darren Greer : > Moreover, post-mortem marriage does not refer to the necrophilia, but > the ability of, say, a betrothed girl to get married with a dead > soldier when he had expressed an explicit enough intention to this > effect prior to his death (this used to be possible under German law, > e.g.). This can and does happen in LDS temple marriages (called sealing). It's been the case for a long time. I don't know if the civil authorities honor such marriages. For example, I doubt that a widow would receive warrior survivor payments in such a case. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 05:54:39 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 22:54:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110301190937.GA26398@ofb.net> References: <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <20110301190937.GA26398@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 10:36:10AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually >> dangerous levels of current climate change. ?Otherwise could we move >> on to something actually important? > > Islanders are being evacuated because sealevel rise is destroying their > property. ?Next! Can you prove that isn't happening because their island is actually sinking? What islanders, where? How many people are being moved? According to Wikipedia: "IPCC assessments suggest that deltas and small island states are particularly vulnerable to sea level rise caused by both thermal expansion and ocean volume. Relative sea level rise (mostly caused by subsidence) is currently causing substantial loss of lands in some deltas.[60] Sea level changes have not yet been conclusively proven to have directly resulted in environmental, humanitarian, or economic losses to small island states, but the IPCC and other bodies have found this a serious risk scenario in coming decades." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Current_sea_level_rise#Island_nations) Which I interpret as "we're really worried, although nothing substantial enough to be non-controversial has occurred to date." New Orleans and Venice are often cited by the global warming crowd, but in both cases, the cities are slowly sinking. Sea level rise in the 20th century averaged 1.8 mm/ year. Or 18 cm for the whole century. The rise is incredibly stable (see graph in the above wikipedia article) so why weren't people being moved in 1950? Or were they? Correction from yesterday. I repeated the oft reported "fact" that nobody has ever been killed by an asteroid strike. This is not correct. Two people were killed in the Tunguska event. Reportedly, other people have also been killed in other events, but it is very rare. There was a link to a list of people killed, but it was broken. This one actually got me out of bed to see what happened... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJFejgd9bSE Reportedly, it was the size of a washing machine. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 06:39:01 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 23:39:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <20110301190937.GA26398@ofb.net> Message-ID: After a couple of hours of fussing around trying to find asteroid insurance, I am pretty sure nobody is currently selling any currently. At least not online. I did, however, find the following site: http://www.fair-society.org/ Which even works sometimes. :-) They are dedicated to collecting money to find NEOs. Thus far, they have raised ?2145.00 Euros with donations from 143 people. They started in 2002. Unfortunately for me, this may show that the libertarian approach to finding NEOs is not exactly working. Or, it shows that these guys are really, really poor at marketing. Not entirely sure which, but I rather expect *mostly* the latter. There are only 19 sites linking to their site, many of which are from their own sites. That is INCREDIBLY bad for a site that's been around nearly a decade. They are more stealthy than a 5m asteroid in the Ort cloud... ;-) As soon as I can scrape 15 Euros together, it will be 144. I might even link to their site, increasing their exposure by 5% :-) Maybe I'll link to their site from Wikipedia... :-) In all seriousness, they seem to have productively used the bit of money they have scraped together to support the SpaceGuard project. (Funny, even spaceguard doesn't seem to link to them... sigh) http://www.spaceguarduk.com/index.htm (I haven't been able to look at their site yet.) Another fairly cool project is orbit at home, which is like seti at home, but for NEO computation. http://orbit.psi.edu/oah/index.php At least their web site seems to work pretty good... :-) -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 06:51:37 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2011 23:51:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6DAD1A.2090909@moulton.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> <4D6DAD1A.2090909@moulton.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 7:36 PM, F. C. Moulton wrote: > You need to take that up with Kelly because Kelly is the one who > mistakenly brought the Early USA and libertarianism. I strongly stand by my assertion that the early USA most closely approximates the libertarian ideal. Yes, today's libertarian ideal would not include black slaves, and would allow female sufferage, would use computers and a bunch of other things that go along with today's zeitgeist. There was no Federal Reserve, no Income Tax, no abused interstate commerce clause, state's rights were very strong, the executive branch was still very weak, there were minimal foreign entanglements, the executive order hadn't risen to today's obscene abuse, no czars, no special prosecutors, only congress could declare war, pseudo wars were not declared by the executive, all drugs were legal, etc. etc. All of which were moves away from the libertarian ideal set by the founding fathers. If George Washington and friends were to pick a political party today (judging solely on platform, not popularity), I strongly doubt they would pick either Republican or Democrat. I suspect they would go with the Constitution Party, or Libertarian or some other similar "fringe" party. They were, after all, revolutionaries. There aren't many elected Democrats or Republicans that could be described today as revolutionaries. -Kelly From eugen at leitl.org Wed Mar 2 10:23:35 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:23:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110302102335.GG23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:55:25PM -0500, Mike Dougherty wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 2:54 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 09:10:27PM -0500, Mike Dougherty wrote: > > > >> Can we persuade governments to incentivise knowledge workers to stay > >> home and telecommute? ?Once I can do my job without the daily to/from > > > > Here's an infrastructure problem, again. In order to make > > telepresence happen you need to roll out symmetric high-bandwidth > > connections, which basically means laying ducts and pulling > > fiber (owned by municipalities, operated by contracting companies), > > plus provide enough backbone capacity. > > I don't require realtime video conferencing to write code. I could be Not everybody writes code. Sometimes you need voice, or video, or a WebEx, while uploading in the background, and other people in your household are doing other things. Your limit is upstream. For obvious reasons domestic broadband is upstream-castrated (mine is 6/100 MBit/s, how retarded is that?). Infrastructure must be community-owned. Earthworks are expensive, fiber is not, and fiber operation is even cheaper. Make muni lay fiber. Outsource operation if you must, but own infrastructure. > working from a home office right now. I am not doing so because my > employer still believes that cube dwellers are easier to manage than > their mobile/wfh equivalents. Sure we can abuse the privilege, but There are nonverbal cues which are easily lost, and unless you're only occasionally out of the office you'll miss important communications. Working from home is career-damaging or career-ending. The challenge is to create an augmented reality where physical presence doesn't matter. This is a hard, unsolved problem. > how many people burn their time at work on facebook/youtube/et al > where they're supposedly better managed? > > Samantha is correct: we could form a cabal of knowledge workers who The point of telepresence is that it is not limited to knowledge workers. I need to be able to control equipment from afar, or be able to rent a telepresence robot anywhere in the world on a whim. > have secured enough intellectual property to demand work from > home/home office. But there would likely never be enough of us to > noticeably reduce energy consumption (or wear on physical Not having to commute saves you time and money. Our infrastructure is crumbling because we no longer have the cash to sustain it. Fiber bundles are much cheaper than superhighways, or highways, and take negligible power to light. > infrastructure) If there was some compelling evidence to make those > enlightened businesses that spkie mentioned stand out as winners in > productivity, cost savings, or government fiat (they're all forms of We're so irrational that rational doesn't produce fitness advantages. > money) then maybe some behavior will change. > > My mom sent me the included video recently. [1] She has a cell phone > only for an emergency and checks email maybe twice a week. Still, she > forwarded the link with the optimistic line, "We might be living like > this in 10-15 years." That video could have been made in 1980 for > how "future predictive" it is ( oh wow, TV screens in every surface - > imagine Corning would think of that ) However we still don't live Don't remind me how wearable has completely tanked, and is now sneaking back by way of smartphone, "only" 20-25 years too late. > that way. Of course we could do this right now, the microsoft > smarthome is a working example. Will it be affordable for everyone to > live like the Jetsons? No, we'll be spending increasing percentages > of our income on food/fuel & heat. We already do. And the real income has been shrinking for a decade or two. > [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Wed Mar 2 10:54:12 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 10:54:12 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D6E21D4.8060509@aleph.se> Kelly Anderson wrote: > If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that > obviate the need for large cities? Are there other justifications for > large cities? I doubt it. There are economies of scale to cities that are pretty amazing. Geoffrey West's papers show that not only are they efficient in terms of infrastructure (you need less infrastructure per person if they live close together), but their economic productivity and patents increases per capita as they get bigger. Cities are also memes. Venice has been completely pointless politically/economically since Napoleon defeated it, yet everybody are spending lots of money to maintain and save it, while tourists come to see it in its decadent glory. Cluster effects make companies of a business sector to group together, creating Silicon Valley, Hollywood or City of London - there is no strong reason for them to be concentrated just there, it is just a historical accident, but now it shapes business decisions. Oxford started as a cluster of monasteries doing a bit of education on the side and then turned into an education cluster and eventually a self-supporting system (going to Oxford is good for your career, so a lot of bright and/or rich students apply, really good teachers and researchers want to come, and this results in plenty of good and rich alumni supporting the system). More importantly, cities allow people to meet. This is the key point of Richard Florida's explanation of why some cities like Austin and SF are creative and booming. They attract the right kind of people who mingle, find unexpected new ideas or collaborations, and this is productive. One reason I live in Oxford these days is that I bump into interesting, smart and useful people all day, while in my native Stockholm the kind of people I would like to meet are very diluted. In my RPG book "Cities of the Edge" I actually use these arguments to argue against the main setting claim that telepresence will dissolve cities into small towns. If it actually were to happen it would be bad news environmentally (think sprawl is bad now? plus, low efficiency) and perhaps socially (you would just meet people like you all day). Telecommuting is not going to threaten cities since it is more likely to improve them. Reducing needless commuting makes traffic better, allowing people to use the cities on their spare time. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From eugen at leitl.org Wed Mar 2 11:06:58 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:06:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110302110658.GI23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 07:25:58PM -0800, Damien Sullivan wrote: > Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your > neighbor. If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land In terms of infrastructure minimax you want to create spherical assemblies, but static, power dissipation and need to power (each US-American has a 11 kW metabolism, equal to a blue whale basal metabolic rate) by solar flux alone would probably result in flatter assemblies. > surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. If > you allow for families and specify clumps of 4, you'd have a family > every 280 meters. A 3 minute walk to other people, no matter where on > Earth you were, save the oceans. You get space because the rest of us > clump up. > > There's evidence that a lot of creative economic activity scales up > super-linearly in cities, e.g. 2x the people will generate more than 2x That's due to interactions and collaborations, which can be substituted by telepresence in principle. > the productivity, 15% more economic activity per capita, while using > less than 2x the energy (only 85% more). By contrast corporations are I think you can grow most of your calories with 2 h daily light garden work on ~0.05 ha/person, under optimal circumstances. Assuming you can make single-cell algae photobioreactors work that area might shrink a bit. > sublinear (profit per employees shrinks with size) > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Urban_West-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=a > http://www.pnas.org/content/104/17/7301.abstract > > Arguably a safer place to raise children than outer suburbs > http://www.grist.org/article/2010-12-27-want-a-safe-place-to-raise-kids-look-to-the-cities USia isn't especially representative. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Wed Mar 2 11:10:10 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:10:10 +0000 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> Message-ID: <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> Samantha Atkins wrote: > On 03/01/2011 03:39 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: >> >> Climate change is indeed a reshuffling of the cards, in itself fairly >> neutral but on one hand breaking down structure (all the winery >> infrastructure will be in the wrong place, and it takes money, time >> and expertise to build it somewhere else) and on the other affecting >> people differently depending on their resilience (the dirty secret of >> climate impacts on society research: the developed world is fairly >> likely to withstand even pretty big climate effects, while the >> undeveloped won't). > > Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually dangerous > levels of current climate change. Otherwise could we move on to > something actually important? It is worth noting that in this thread the issue is not so much anthropogenic climate effects as *any* climate effects. Especially of course asteroid-caused climate changes (which, however, are not likely to be a mere reshuffling but a serious impulse deviation from the current climate). Given past climate variability data and the power-law distribution of drought-induced famines (plus the bad food security at present) we should be paying serious attention to what we can do about the climate. I think people underestimate the impacts on non-dangerous climate change. For example, this year will likely have a food price peak as bad as the one 2007-2008 partially due to bad weather in China messing up the wheat harvest. This will not be very noticeable to most westerners since we already eat very processed food: the raw food price is a small component of what we pay. But it does have plenty of impact on marginal people, and their reactions have political repercussions (food prices are one extra reason so many people in the Arab world are angry right now). Of course, sometimes causality goes the other way around. If you want a good reason to kick the church of climate change, look at biofuels. Biofuels have been a spectacular disaster because they tie food production and fuel production together. Since there is more money in selling fuel than food (especially given current oil prices) that means a lot of edible calories get turned into fuel. And since a lot of well-meaning subsidies for "green" energy have been added, rich countries are now subsidising the distortion. Developing countries sell their calories north, and northern farmers now have yet another subsidy to efficiently fight to keep beside the usual ones. So in this case, trying to be green has significantly increased food prices. To get back to the theme of the thread, it just hit me that biofuels are also disastrous from an asteroid damage perspective: an impact winter, and we will neither have food, nor fuel. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Wed Mar 2 11:24:35 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:24:35 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D6E28F3.7030006@aleph.se> Eugen Leitl wrote: > What I meant is that that purchasing ability of the monetary unit > is periodically measured and renormalized to the resource basket, > using a method which is resistant to gaming the metric (latter is > a hard problem, as people are devious, given enough incentive). > I am not even convinced it is possible, given the enormous arbitrages you can get by gaming. But isn't the problem assuming that a *resource* basket is the place to start? Most value in our societies reside in the form of human and institutional capital, and even among our material goods value is concentrated in complex and highly processed systems where most of the added value comes from services. The elements making up an ipad are not too expensive, but the process of making and enabling it is where the value is added. Shouldn't there be ipads in the basket too? And linux code? >> for its continued validity, ending up in repaying the entire capital. >> This would appear to make usury impossible. >> > > It would be easy to fix usury, just outlaw compound interest. IIRC > the islamic banking system operates that way. > Given the economic problems of the islamic world, there might be evidence against avoiding compound interest. The same was true for the medieval banking system where interest was also banned - people solved it by a tricky form of tripartite contracts instead, a kind of forerunner of mortgages and corporate stock, if I rememeber right. Some kingdoms threw out for-profit-bankers and found themselves strangely poor, while others like Florence and the Netherlands turned a blind eye to it and became trade centers. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From eugen at leitl.org Wed Mar 2 11:26:23 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:26:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <4D6DBD4E.8050608@mac.com> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> <4D6DBD4E.8050608@mac.com> Message-ID: <20110302112623.GJ23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 07:45:18PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: >> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 > > Part of the fun of SecondLife and Opensim versions with media on prim is > mocking up some things like this in virtual worlds. Any surgace can be > a web interface. :) Any augmented reality person never stops having these WTF/m( moments. Android headup goggles, check, accelerometers, check, magnetic compass, check, GPS, check, multiple cameras, check, 3G/4G, check, decent batteries, check. Any day now. (Oh, and there's lots of interesting work with DTN and decentralism going on as well, this is bound to produce something useful soon). From anders at aleph.se Wed Mar 2 11:38:06 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 11:38:06 +0000 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense In-Reply-To: References: <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <20110301190937.GA26398@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D6E2C1E.6010708@aleph.se> Kelly Anderson wrote: > After a couple of hours of fussing around trying to find asteroid > insurance, I am pretty sure nobody is currently selling any currently. > Good to know. > I did, however, find the following site: > http://www.fair-society.org/ > Interesting, and a bit sad. There is also the B612 foundation: http://www.b612foundation.org/ Their goal is to significantly alter the orbit of an asteroid, in a controlled manner, by 2015 (I think they are running out of time). But they have done a bit of analysis on gravity tractors. The JPL report is pretty cheering, http://www.b612foundation.org/papers/JPL_report.doc Now they just need to get people with money to start funding a real program. > Another fairly cool project is orbit at home, which is like seti at home, > but for NEO computation. > http://orbit.psi.edu/oah/index.php > At least their web site seems to work pretty good... :-) > The first BOINC project I know of that actually tries to reduce xrisk. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From eugen at leitl.org Wed Mar 2 11:45:54 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:45:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: <4D6E28F3.7030006@aleph.se> References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> <4D6E28F3.7030006@aleph.se> Message-ID: <20110302114554.GK23560@leitl.org> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:24:35AM +0000, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Eugen Leitl wrote: >> What I meant is that that purchasing ability of the monetary unit >> is periodically measured and renormalized to the resource basket, >> using a method which is resistant to gaming the metric (latter is >> a hard problem, as people are devious, given enough incentive). > > I am not even convinced it is possible, given the enormous arbitrages > you can get by gaming. Dead tree (bits, actually) is trivial to game, and even single-basket (Au) is possible to game, but a large diverse basket with narrow guards on each coefficient, and ways on how basket is restocked (using voting, probably, why not adjust coefficients that way, too) definitely beats the casino run by crooks we're having now. > But isn't the problem assuming that a *resource* basket is the place to No, because it deliberately limits itself to basic essentials which are easy to measure, and hence, difficult to game. > start? Most value in our societies reside in the form of human and > institutional capital, and even among our material goods value is Now you know why GDP is a joke. > concentrated in complex and highly processed systems where most of the > added value comes from services. The elements making up an ipad are not > too expensive, but the process of making and enabling it is where the Oh, you need a lot of expensive trace elements and energy to make an iPad. Fortunately, in future these things will be a lot cheaper and ecologically less damaging due to printable electronics. > value is added. Shouldn't there be ipads in the basket too? And linux Now you know why the current goods basket is a joke. Speaking about gaming the coefficients. > code? Open source is a digital commons. I don't see any reason why it should figure as a component of a currency. You use currency to pay for useful things, which can be compensation of people contributing to a digital, or information commons. > >>> for its continued validity, ending up in repaying the entire capital. >>> This would appear to make usury impossible. >>> >> >> It would be easy to fix usury, just outlaw compound interest. IIRC >> the islamic banking system operates that way. >> > > Given the economic problems of the islamic world, there might be > evidence against avoiding compound interest. I don't think the islamic banking is their problem, it's one of the better things the came up actually. > The same was true for the medieval banking system where interest was > also banned - people solved it by a tricky form of tripartite contracts And good Christians who were forbidden touching filthy lucre outsourced the handling of it to convenient scapegoats. > instead, a kind of forerunner of mortgages and corporate stock, if I > rememeber right. Some kingdoms threw out for-profit-bankers and found > themselves strangely poor, while others like Florence and the > Netherlands turned a blind eye to it and became trade centers. I think the real problem of interest is not interest itself, but that compound interest is an exponential. A linear growth model would be a better fit, or in any case something distinctly subexponential. The problem is that there's very good reason the compound interest is computed that way, and unfortunately it's not in most people's interest. See casino run by crooks. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Mar 2 12:40:44 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 13:40:44 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <028201cbd891$6d616cb0$48244610$@att.net> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <4D6DBF8D.4010304@mac.com> <028201cbd891$6d616cb0$48244610$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110302124043.GM23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:22:22PM -0800, spike wrote: > Oy that's a lot of people. I am surprised this old planet can feed all of > us. It can't, actually. Not with today's technology. Not on the long run. We're in overshoot. We're saddled with debt not such economical, but we're also into ecological overdraft. Current agriculture in US operates on 10:1 fossil (mostly natural gas for nitrogen fixation) input on food calorie output. Fossil aquifers are globally being depleted at an alarming rate, while causing ground salination and runoff which causes dead zones in coastal areas. While we're loading the seas with our crud we're simultaneously fishing them empty, while damaging the ecosystem. (When talking about CO2, don't forget precipitation shifts, potential dry spells not seen in last 75 kYrs and seawater pH changing to the point aragonite can't be deposted). I hope your bag of popcorn is big enough. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Mar 2 12:56:07 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:56:07 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: <20110302114554.GK23560@leitl.org> References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> <4D6E28F3.7030006@aleph.se> <20110302114554.GK23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > I think the real problem of interest is not interest itself, but that > compound interest is an exponential. A linear growth model would be > a better fit, or in any case something distinctly subexponential. > > The problem is that there's very good reason the compound interest > is computed that way, and unfortunately it's not in most people's > interest. See casino run by crooks. > > Hey, don't diss compound interest! It's the best thing since sliced bread. Once you've made your first million, it will double in 14 years @5% (24 years @3%). For many years I have vainly tried to explain the compound interest exponential to mere mortals, with little success. Unfortunately this lack of understanding that the same exponential applies when they borrow large sums of money means that they find their debts increasing rather faster than they expected. BillK From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Wed Mar 2 13:03:10 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 05:03:10 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> References: <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> Message-ID: <20110302130310.GA24485@ofb.net> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:10:10AM +0000, Anders Sandberg wrote: > To get back to the theme of the thread, it just hit me that biofuels > are also disastrous from an asteroid damage perspective: an impact > winter, and we will neither have food, nor fuel. Might ruin solar power too. Might; a slight dimming could mess up temperatures without removing that much light. Don't know how dark nuclear/impact winters are supposed to be. -xx- Damien X-) From eugen at leitl.org Wed Mar 2 13:22:58 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 14:22:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> <4D6E28F3.7030006@aleph.se> <20110302114554.GK23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110302132258.GP23560@leitl.org> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:56:07PM +0000, BillK wrote: > Hey, don't diss compound interest! It's the best thing since sliced bread. It would have been indeed, if it was true. Reality and linear semilog plots rarely happen, and even then, not for long. > Once you've made your first million, it will double in 14 years @5% If, for most people. And of course a million of what, exactly. Don't take no wooden nickels. > (24 years @3%). 3% might appear conservative. Might appear. If it wouldn't exactly match historic inflation, at least according to http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgi The computation is funnier, if you do it for other currencies, many of which no longer exist. And even if you get lucky, you've just been a conduit for trickle up liquidity. > For many years I have vainly tried to explain the compound interest > exponential to mere mortals, with little success. > > Unfortunately this lack of understanding that the same exponential > applies when they borrow large sums of money means that they find > their debts increasing rather faster than they expected. That part of the hoover device works without a hitch. From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Wed Mar 2 13:30:50 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 05:30:50 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> <4D6DAD1A.2090909@moulton.com> Message-ID: <20110302133050.GB24485@ofb.net> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:51:37PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > approximates the libertarian ideal. Yes, today's libertarian ideal > would not include black slaves, and would allow female sufferage, > would use computers and a bunch of other things that go along with > today's zeitgeist. There was no Federal Reserve, no Income Tax, no > abused interstate commerce clause, state's rights were very strong, What's libertarian about having nigh-omnipotent state governments? > legal, etc. etc. All of which were moves away from the libertarian > ideal set by the founding fathers. Again: the Articles were even more "libertarian", if we're defining that as weak central government. The Consitution was a move *toward* federal control over money, interstate commerce, military, the suspension of habeas corpus in emergencies, establishment of the Postal Service and copyrights and patents. > If George Washington and friends were to pick a political party today > (judging solely on platform, not popularity), I strongly doubt they > would pick either Republican or Democrat. I suspect they would go with > the Constitution Party, or Libertarian or some other similar "fringe" > party. They were, after all, revolutionaries. There aren't many > elected Democrats or Republicans that could be described today as > revolutionaries. They weren't revolutionary for the sake of revolution. They fought for independence from Britain in what's been argued as a very conservative 'revolution': no great upheaval in real government or way of life. A bunch of quasi-democratic colonies replaced a distant king and Parliament with first a weak alliance and Congress, and then their own President and stronger Congress. And, as my quotations showed, some of them had latent non-libertarian ideas. Jefferson supported progressive income or wealth tax, and said property belongs by right first to those who most need it and will use it. Paine supported inheritance tax, a citizen's endowment at 21, and a pension from age 50. Madison supported economic levelling, toward equality in property. Franklin wrote that property was a social construct, and that there was no inalienable right to any more property than needed to stay alive. Which party do you think those writers would support? Then there's Hamilton, who was supporting a stronger government all along. *He'd* probably find the modern Fed derelict in its duties. Trying to claim support in modern times from people dead 200 years ago is rather intellectually fraught, in most cases. Would a Founding Father be libertarian, because they formed a limited government? Leftist, because they had some private radical ideals? Far right, because by our standards they were massively racist and sexist? Tangentially appalled that we were still using the Senate, even with a 50:1 population ratio between Wyoming and California? Humble, realizing that times are totally different and they'd have to learn a lot first? Tom Paine is an exception; his stated positions fall pretty consistently to the modern left, without having to "make allowances" for his time. One thing I point out with Adam Smith and "small government"/"free markets" -- published in 1776 -- is that his experience of government was entirely with a strong monarchy that handed out monopolies for revenue and practiced mercantilism, mostly for the sake of funding wars. >From that perspective, getting government out of the economy makes lots of sense -- not that he ever totally advocated that. Trying to predict his reaction to a universal suffrage democracy, that has high progressive income taxes but uses most of that money for public services rather than for wars and palaces, is I think impossible; it's just totally outside his experience. Not to mention two centuries of experience with pollution and banking crises. One can say similar things of the Founding Fathers. (Likewise, Marx's "dictatorship of the proletariat" apparently meant democracy with universal suffrage, and perhaps tyranny of the majority, writing at a time when the only democracy was the US, and maybe Switzerland. The party dictatorship came from Lenin. A lot of the program in the Communist Manifesto reads like strong social democracy, not the total central planning of Leninist states.) -xx- Damien X-) From eugen at leitl.org Wed Mar 2 13:39:26 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 14:39:26 +0100 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110302130310.GA24485@ofb.net> References: <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> <20110302130310.GA24485@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110302133926.GQ23560@leitl.org> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 05:03:10AM -0800, Damien Sullivan wrote: > Might ruin solar power too. Might; a slight dimming could mess up Using realistic predictions for terrestrial photovoltaics conversion rate, we might be mostly done by 2050, with some uncertainty in terms of Earth's total consumption by then, and the amount of electrification required to partly absorb loss of fossil fuels and liquids. Assuming above happens, by 2050 there will be the beginning of increasing extraterrestrial photovoltaic capacity, which would actually show exponential growth if fueled from extraterrestrial resource base, and stay on an exponential track for a long time. Notice that such extraterrestrial photonics base could be made to act as a giant phased array radiator, allowing you to target potential impactors to change their orbits. > temperatures without removing that much light. Don't know how dark > nuclear/impact winters are supposed to be. One of the damage modes of impactors is ignition of organics by molten impact ejecta as well as some ejecta aerosols persisting in the upper atmosphere, causing a nuclear winter-like effect. So it's less totally dark than dimmish, with nasty particulates descending from the skies (though not nearly like a supervolcano) very cold, and ozone layer destroyed for a few years. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Mar 2 15:57:12 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 07:57:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Asteroid Defence (Was: Re: META: Overposting (psychology of morals)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Kelly Anderson explained: > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 7:11 AM, Ben Zaiboc > wrote: > > > At this point in history, I think our ability to > protect ourselves from a dinosaur-killer asteroid is > > doubtful, to say the least. > > Not at all. If we find it in time. That's why the NEO > program is so > very important. > > 1) We have now successfully landed space craft on asteroids > (or at > least crashed into them). > 2) There are several competing mechanisms for tugging an > asteroid into > a slightly different orbit including: ... > > If the asteroid is slightly deflected ten years prior to an > earth > strike, it will miss the earth. A very small deflection > would be > enough. Let's do some trig... etc. Yes, I know these arguments, my point is that while all this is fine in principle, I don't think we'll have any chance of actually doing this for quite a while, mainly because we can't predict the path of an asteroid accurately enough to know for sure that it will hit the earth, until it's too close to feasibly do anything about it. This element of doubt, combined with the huge cost of doing anything about it, will paralyse any impulse to do anything. I strongly suspect that a practical defence against civilisation-destroying asteroid strikes is simply too difficult for us, at least at this point in history. It's rather like the idea of establishing a global network of solar power stations. Great in theory, we could do it if there was the will and universal agreement and all the financial, political and social aspects could be ironed out, but it's not gonna happen this side of the singularity. I'm beginning to think that the Fermi Paradox has a very simple explanation: The universe is remarkably hostile, and dumb luck always runs out eventually. Killer asteroids are on the low end of lethal events, if you think about it. Eventually, we'll have to deal with a nearby supernova or Gamma Ray Burst, and there's all sorts of other nasties out there, that we know about. Depressed? Yeah, the first million years are the worst. And the second million, they're the worst too... Ben Zaiboc From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 2 16:04:28 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 08:04:28 -0800 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense was RE: libertarian (asteroid) defense Message-ID: <001e01cbd8f3$82e920c0$88bb6240$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg ... >... it just hit me that biofuels are also disastrous from an asteroid damage perspective... It just hit you. {8^D It just hit too. >...Biofuels have been a spectacular disaster because they tie food production and fuel production together. Since there is more money in selling fuel than food (especially given current oil prices) that means a lot of edible calories get turned into fuel. And since a lot of well-meaning subsidies for "green" energy have been added, rich countries are now subsidising the distortion. Developing countries sell their calories north, and northern farmers now have yet another subsidy to efficiently fight to keep beside the usual ones. So in this case, trying to be green has significantly increased food prices. >...To get back to the theme of the thread, it just hit me that biofuels are also disastrous from an asteroid damage perspective: an impact winter, and we will neither have food, nor fuel. -- Anders Sandberg Thanks Anders. This post was an excellent example of the kinds of reasoning that has kept me reading ExI-chat for 15 years: the occasional insightful jewel of wisdom that spawns a thousand ideas. spike From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 2 18:51:13 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 10:51:13 -0800 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places Message-ID: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Our recent discussion here on virtual presence sent me to thinking about travel overseas. I have never been outside the continental US. Always wanted to go, but it's the classic wage-slave dilemma: money or time, pick one. While I was working I had the money, now I have the time. On the other hand, anyone can get a good idea of what a particular area is like from google maps street view. You can zoom in on most places in the US, go into street view and look around. It isn't real time, doesn't include sound, smells or actual threats from the local indigenous population, but it is a reasonable first step in virtual rality. So I have always wanted to visit the ancient family seat in Germany. Went into google maps. The satellite is low resolution and there is no street view. I can go into photos of the local tourist attractions, but that isn't what I want. I want to see how the proles live who work at those tourist attractions. Where can I find any European or Australian city which has street view in google maps? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Wed Mar 2 19:12:34 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:12:34 -0800 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110302191234.GA18662@ofb.net> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 10:51:13AM -0800, spike wrote: > I can go into photos of the local tourist attractions, but that isn't > what I want. I want to see how the proles live who work at those > tourist attractions. > > > Where can I find any European or Australian city which has street view > in google maps? Paris has Street View in Google Earth. (Just checked.) Not sure about Google Maps on the web. -xx- Damien X-) From atymes at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 19:14:06 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:14:06 -0800 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/2 spike : > Where can I find any European or Australian city which has street view in > google maps? I just tried Paris, and I got street view just fine. http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=48.846922,2.340745&spn=0.001308,0.001499&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=48.84702,2.340652&panoid=0Bh1HxJwQv3KuMdm4RDu9Q&cbp=12,331.78,,0,7.55 From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 19:15:22 2011 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:15:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/2 spike > > > > Where can I find any European or Australian city which has street view in > google maps? > Just checked Rome, Florence and Milan (Italy), Munich and Berlin (Germany), Paris (France). All have google street view from maps.google.com Alfio > > > 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: From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Wed Mar 2 19:16:40 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:16:40 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Asteroid Defence (Was: Re: META: Overposting (psychology of morals)) In-Reply-To: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20110302191640.GB18662@ofb.net> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 07:57:12AM -0800, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Yes, I know these arguments, my point is that while all this is fine > in principle, I don't think we'll have any chance of actually doing > this for quite a while, mainly because we can't predict the path of an > asteroid accurately enough to know for sure that it will hit the > earth, until it's too close to feasibly do anything about it. This Don't need certainty; can simply push anything that remotely might hit the Earth to an envelope where it certainly won't. That raises the costs in having to do more nudging, but lowers the costs in terms of not needing as much force. > I strongly suspect that a practical defence against > civilisation-destroying asteroid strikes is simply too difficult for > us, at least at this point in history. It's rather like the idea of > establishing a global network of solar power stations. Great in > theory, we could do it if there was the will and universal agreement > and all the financial, political and social aspects could be ironed > out, but it's not gonna happen this side of the singularity. Stuff that's technically but not politically doable becomes doable if you change enough minds. Universal suffrage was a pipe dream until it wasn't. Giving up won't change anything, though. -xx- Damien X-) From atymes at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 19:08:56 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 11:08:56 -0800 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:22:22PM -0800, spike wrote: >> Oy that's a lot of people. ?I am surprised this old planet can feed all of >> us. > > It can't, actually. Not with today's technology. Not on the long run. So we improve the technology over time, just like we've always done. To rip a thought experiment from the game SMAC: suppose you had a kilometer-long orbital greenhouse, with a vast array of solar panels to provide all the power you'd need. (If you need a number, then extrapolating near-future photovoltaic panels to square kilometer sizes, assume a few gigawatt-hours per day, distributed among the entire greenhouse. More is possible.) How would it work? What types of mass inputs and outputs could you have? Would capturing a comet for local water ice help? Most importantly, could you entirely replace the energy contribution from fossil fuels with electricity (and locally converted forms thereof, such as light from electric lamps)? From FRANKMAC at RIPCO.COM Wed Mar 2 19:41:36 2011 From: FRANKMAC at RIPCO.COM (FRANK MCELLIGOTT) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 12:41:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] teleomeres Message-ID: <98FC56EA3F4E4F3C80D17696B7E6BCD9@OLDMACHINE> The last line in this page is most important. "We can live for 1,000 years." Maybe Biotech in the way to the future instead of hardware and AI http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/begin/traits/telomeres/ Frank -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 19:42:02 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 14:42:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Asteroid Defence (Was: Re: META: Overposting (psychology of morals)) In-Reply-To: <20110302191640.GB18662@ofb.net> References: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110302191640.GB18662@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > Stuff that's technically but not politically doable becomes doable if > you change enough minds. > And enough minds would likely change, should humanity find itself facing a common enemy. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 19:56:54 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 14:56:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] teleomeres In-Reply-To: <98FC56EA3F4E4F3C80D17696B7E6BCD9@OLDMACHINE> References: <98FC56EA3F4E4F3C80D17696B7E6BCD9@OLDMACHINE> Message-ID: 2011/3/2 FRANK MCELLIGOTT > The last line in this page is most important. > > "We can live for 1,000 years." > > Maybe Biotech in the way to the future instead of hardware and AI > > http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/begin/traits/telomeres/ > > Cawthon says that if all processes of aging could be eliminated and oxidative stress damage could be repaired, "one estimate is people could live 1,000 years." Not quite the same as what you wrote. Not only would that require we eliminate/control all the processes of aging, but that first we become aware of what they are. And why only 1,000yrs? If we were to control the 'wear and tear' so to speak occurring in our bodies, why would we be limited to 1,000yrs? Cells would continue to duplicate successfully for longer than 1,000yrs one would think, if we're truly managing the telomeres/oxidant issues (and those that we become aware of in the future, which contribute to this disease we call 'aging'). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 21:56:43 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:56:43 +0000 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/2 spike wrote: > So I have always wanted to visit the ancient family seat in Germany.? Went > into google maps.? The satellite is low resolution and there is no street > view. > > I can go into photos of the local tourist attractions, but that isn?t what I > want.? I want to see how the proles live who work at those tourist > attractions. > > Where can I find any European or Australian city which has street view in > google maps? > > I think the whole of the UK is in street view, except where I live. They missed out about 400 metres! What particular German town where you looking for? BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 2 22:27:52 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 14:27:52 -0800 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <005b01cbd929$127f72e0$377e58a0$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of BillK ... >>I wanted to virtually visit the family homeland in Germany... google maps street view? spike >What particular German town where you looking for? BillK Deezbull. I went around to some other places and found good street views however. I think Deezbull might be too far out in the sticks, so they haven't gotten around to streetviewing it yet. Perhaps the ancestors commented "Oy vey, die Getreide verwelken. Br?der, lie?en uns gehen nach Amerika und k?mpfen General Washington, dann haften um dort danach!!" Some of us may occasionally want to visit the neighborhoods of our tragically-squandered childhoods. In my case at least one of those has now become dangerous. Google maps street view lets me virtually visit free, conserving natural resources, and allows me to sidestep risk from the locals. spike From spike66 at att.net Wed Mar 2 23:04:54 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 15:04:54 -0800 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <005b01cbd929$127f72e0$377e58a0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> <005b01cbd929$127f72e0$377e58a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <006301cbd92e$3eb42ef0$bc1c8cd0$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of spike ... >What particular German town where you looking for?...BillK Deezbull. Rather, perhaps the ancestors complained: Oy vey, dieser Platz ist bis jetzt heraus im Wald, sie nicht sogar st?rt Google-Stra?enbetrachtung es zweihundert drei?ig Jahre ab jetzt! Let' s gehen, wohin die T?tigkeit ist, und Kampf General Washington! We try to keep that part quiet, about our ancestors fighting General Washington. From how I heard the story (accuracy unknown) four German Jewish brothers, possibly from Deezbull, ended up in a mercenary army working for the British. They didn't really even get into it with the Americans, but rather were captured almost immediately. Washington didn't have the facilities to hold prisoners, and the Brits weren't going to bargain for a bunch of mercenaries. Being hired muskets, they had no particular quarrel with the Americans anyway. As I understand it, they made a deal with Washington to go away and not fight at all. They ended up going west, close to where the three states of Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky meet. According to one family story, they maintained a small lonely Jewish community near Riverton Kentucky until it was more or less assimilated into American culture around 1900 or so. spike From pharos at gmail.com Wed Mar 2 23:26:46 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 23:26:46 +0000 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <005b01cbd929$127f72e0$377e58a0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> <005b01cbd929$127f72e0$377e58a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:27 PM, spike wrote: > Deezbull. ?I went around to some other places and found good street views > however. ?I think Deezbull might be too far out in the sticks, so they > haven't gotten around to streetviewing it yet. ?Perhaps the ancestors > commented "Oy vey, die Getreide verwelken. Br?der, lie?en uns gehen nach > Amerika und k?mpfen General Washington, dann haften um dort danach!!" > > According to Wikipedia only 23 major towns in Germany have street view. I agree the satellite view isn't very good. You could try Google Earth 3D view here: Cheers, BillK From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 00:12:54 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:12:54 +0000 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110302130310.GA24485@ofb.net> References: <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> <20110302130310.GA24485@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D6EDD06.9070809@aleph.se> Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:10:10AM +0000, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > >> To get back to the theme of the thread, it just hit me that biofuels >> are also disastrous from an asteroid damage perspective: an impact >> winter, and we will neither have food, nor fuel. >> > > Might ruin solar power too. Might; a slight dimming could mess up > temperatures without removing that much light. Don't know how dark > nuclear/impact winters are supposed to be. > Yes. According to Robock et al. ( http://www.envsci.rutgers.edu/~gera/nwinter/nw6accepted.pdf ) their worst scenario of nuclear winter (150 Tg of soot) reduced insolation by 100 W/m^2, and there was still -20 W/m^2 10 years after the event. That reduces solar power efficiency a great deal, although it does not stop. This kind of scenarios are very sensitive to the kind of dust and soot, and how far up it gets lofted. I have seen papers arguing that meteor impacts produce very different effects depending on where they hit: the Chesapeake bay and Popigai impacts did not seem to cause mass extinctions, perhaps because they fell on the "right kind" of landscape that did not produce much aerosols. As impact defense goes, surviving a nuclear/impact winter seems to be somewhat doable: maintain large imperishable food stores, agricultural equipment and seed for restarting farming once the climate recovers. The big question is optimal location: on higher latitudes you need plenty of heating or thermal isolation. Being close to the sea is useful for thermal balancing and the possibility of fishing, but risks being hit by a tsunami if there is a meteor impact in that ocean. Usual issues of social order: lone survivalists are unlikely to survive well or retain a tech basis, larger groups have better chances (and in the face of disaster tend to be rather cohesive; the threat is likely long-term fatigue during a drawn-out struggle), really large groups likely suffers from societal collapse issues. Crews of atomic submarines can likely ride out this kind (and pandemic) disasters, but they lack agritech, might have some morale problems after a few years and do not have the appropriate gender composition. The real survivors will likely be the employees at Walmart logistics centers rather than Mad Max. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 00:35:32 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:35:32 +0000 Subject: [ExI] move bits not butts: google maps street view in europe and other places In-Reply-To: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> References: <001401cbd90a$ce19d190$6a4d74b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D6EE254.7090204@aleph.se> spike wrote: > > > > Where can I find any European or Australian city which has street view > in google maps? > > > A lot of them have it; privacy-conscious Germany is far behind the surveillance state the United Kingdom. Feel free to virtually drop by my home, http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.771478,-1.262677&spn=0.005617,0.027466&z=16&layer=c&cbll=51.771384,-1.262668&panoid=bue4y_Smx_B75nzePTooNw&cbp=12,262.42,,0,-1.12 or virtually visit the really fun places of Oxford, like Edmund Halley's house http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.754461,-1.253245&panoid=UVAzmeIA_5zkKELTESvvWA&cbp=12,4.21,,0,-7.71&ll=51.754446,-1.253107&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 the library http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.754477,-1.253866&panoid=dL-8bM7vqOlplI89IZchfQ&cbp=12,216.94,,0,-15.02&ll=51.754582,-1.253943&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 the history of science museum http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.754483,-1.255518&panoid=_ZdfKBTMiQTWxOA878hMEw&cbp=12,160.22,,0,-19.63&ll=51.754416,-1.255939&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 the natural history museum (where the Huxley-Wilberforce debate on evolution happened) http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.75815,-1.256561&panoid=j9ZT0tM1niceO-_Uvz-WQQ&cbp=12,37.09,,0,-10.12&ll=51.758228,-1.25661&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 the lab where Boyle and Hooke worked http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.752723,-1.252364&panoid=Cz4xPEAh0bhXTBirXQI2Cg&cbp=12,173.88,,0,-5.61&ll=51.752729,-1.252221&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 the bridge on top of which Robert Bacon had his lab (and demonstrated gunpowder and the scientific method) http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.746668,-1.256368&panoid=-afSokzqtxRCNqtEnKsYqA&cbp=12,167.42,,0,5.1&ll=51.746837,-1.25639&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 or where the Future of Humanity Institute got its offices http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&layer=c&cbll=51.749762,-1.259427&panoid=nFtFvzVJ0NCHtYP_hUViJQ&cbp=12,338.08,,0,-26.23&ll=51.749762,-1.259427&spn=0.001418,0.004823&z=18 (I know, I know. But *we* have modern offices and can look at beautiful Pembroke College, while they have medieval offices and have to look at our building! :-) -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 00:39:53 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:39:53 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Banking, corporations, and rights (Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques) In-Reply-To: References: <4D675E2E.8030901@gnolls.org> <20110228174735.GY23560@leitl.org> <20110301164033.GA23560@leitl.org> <4D6E28F3.7030006@aleph.se> <20110302114554.GK23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D6EE359.80104@aleph.se> One reason to have compound interest is to get humans to care about investing in the future. We tend to discount the future, reducing future values by ~5% per year into the future. This is likely set by risk and death rates, and was much higher in the past (also, we have a few hyperbolic discounting issues, but lets ignore them here). Now, if I have some resources and get offered a linear growth of them if I invest them somewhere, that means that the offer is not going to be very tempting beyond a very short investment horizon. The only way to tempt me to invest my resources indefinitely long-term is to offer compound interest. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University From moulton at moulton.com Thu Mar 3 00:52:20 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 16:52:20 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> <4D6DAD1A.2090909@moulton.com> Message-ID: <4D6EE644.6070100@moulton.com> On 03/01/2011 10:51 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 7:36 PM, F. C. Moulton wrote: >> You need to take that up with Kelly because Kelly is the one who >> mistakenly brought the Early USA and libertarianism. > I strongly stand by my assertion that the early USA most closely > approximates the libertarian ideal. The problem with your position is that you are already doing a trade-off saying some things are not as important as others. Why give a pass to slavery but complain about the Federal Reserve? > Yes, today's libertarian ideal > would not include black slaves, and would allow female sufferage, > would use computers and a bunch of other things that go along with > today's zeitgeist. Today's libertarian ideal does not include slaves; but neither does yesterday's libertarian ideal. If there is slavery then it not libertarian by definition. No Exceptions. No Excuses. > There was no Federal Reserve, no Income Tax, no > abused interstate commerce clause, state's rights were very strong, Having strong "state's rights" is not part of the libertarian philosophy. An individual's liberty can be violated by a governmental body regardless of size. Today this idea of "state's rights" is often just a canard thrown up by conservatives. > the executive branch was still very weak, there were minimal foreign > entanglements, the executive order hadn't risen to today's obscene > abuse, no czars, no special prosecutors, It should be pointed out that while Anthony Comstock did not have the title of "Special Prosecutor" his activities were certainly vile and reprehensible and had much of the same effect. > only congress could declare > war, pseudo wars were not declared by the executive, So what was the military of the USA doing fighting the Aboriginal peoples? Where was that declaration of war? > all drugs were > legal, etc. etc. All of which were moves away from the libertarian > ideal set by the founding fathers. The founding fathers did not set up a "libertarian ideal". They had a lot of different ideas and did not agree but were able to at least get free of the British. What they did was extraordinary. No-one is denying that. But let us not air brush history. And let us not misstate and distort the libertarian philosophy just to make us feel good about the early (or current) USA. Fred > If George Washington and friends were to pick a political party today > (judging solely on platform, not popularity), I strongly doubt they > would pick either Republican or Democrat. I suspect they would go with > the Constitution Party, or Libertarian or some other similar "fringe" > party. They were, after all, revolutionaries. There aren't many > elected Democrats or Republicans that could be described today as > revolutionaries. > > -Kelly > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 01:06:03 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 18:06:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Asteroid Defence (Was: Re: META: Overposting (psychology of morals)) In-Reply-To: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:57 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Kelly Anderson explained: > > > Yes, I know these arguments, my point is that while all this is fine in principle, I don't >think we'll have any chance of actually doing this for quite a while, mainly because we >can't predict the path of an asteroid accurately enough to know for sure that it will hit the >earth, until it's too close to feasibly do anything about it. ?This element of doubt, >combined with the huge cost of doing anything about it, will paralyse any impulse to do >anything. If you are going to predict the future, it is much easier to predict where an asteroid is going to be in 500 years than to predict where a hurricane is going to be in three days. While there is some uncertainty (the unlikely event of a collision between two asteroids, for example) the position of an asteroid can be very accurately predicted. The bigger the asteroid, the more easy it is to map and predict the orbit accurately. The press reports often say there is an X% chance it will hit the earth, we'll know more later. That's because there haven't been enough observations yet, and it makes for more sensational headlines to report earlier! The longer you have tracked an object, the more accurately you can predict it's path. The cone of unpredictability narrows with more observations. > I strongly suspect that a practical defence against civilisation-destroying asteroid strikes is simply too difficult for us, at least at this point in history. ?It's rather like the idea of establishing a global network of solar power stations. ?Great in theory, we could do it if there was the will and universal agreement and all the financial, political and social aspects could be ironed out, but it's not gonna happen this side of the singularity. > Well, depending on when the singularity is, that might not be a problem... Given ten years of warning, I believe we currently have the technology to steer an asteroid up to a couple hundred meters in diameter. It would be expensive, but not as much as paying for the asteroid landing on Houston... > I'm beginning to think that the Fermi Paradox has a very simple explanation: ?The universe is remarkably hostile, and dumb luck always runs out eventually. ?Killer asteroids are on the low end of lethal events, if you think about it. ?Eventually, we'll have to deal with a nearby supernova or Gamma Ray Burst, and there's all sorts of other nasties out there, that we know about. > > Depressed? ?Yeah, the first million years are the worst. ?And the second million, they're the worst too... > Thanks Marvin... :-) If we have a gamma ray burst, we're just toast. So no necessity to worry about that. -Kelly From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 01:33:11 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 20:33:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > > If 10% of my income goes to build a private palace, that's theft. ?If > 50% of my income goes to zero-fare public transit, universal health > care, funding for basic research, good law enforcement, safe housing, > and many other public services, I may consider that a good deal. ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's offered as something you cannot refuse. The key to efficiency in fulfilling human desires within a social structure are the twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 02:00:40 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:00:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Social computability Message-ID: Richard, I won't try to address all the emotionally charged questions you posed but instead I can only invite you to try to dispassionately analyze the problem of efficiency - What arrangements are in general more likely to work in terms of achieving whatever goals are set for a complex system, i.e. a network? What network topology is more robust - one that contains redundancy or one that doesn't? Which networks compute better - ones with or ones without feedback links? I understand you are a student of artificial intelligence - try to apply your knowledge of efficient network computation to conceptualize the society as a network that calculates the methods of achieving goals inscribed in the structure of the network's nodes. I am sure you will be able to achieve a deeper understanding of social reality and, more importantly, the vistas for future social development, once you rise above emotions, especially empathy, and envy. Rafal On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 1:33 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > spike wrote: >>> >>> ... On Behalf Of Richard Loosemore >> >>> ... people coming together and realizing that it is in everyone's best >> >> interest if the community is forced to pool their resources to pay for >> things like roads and theaters and bridges and schools and police >> forces... >> >> Indeed? ?The critical difference in my thinking and yours is found in this >> one sentence. ?People coming together for roads, bridges, schools and >> police, yes. ?Theatres? ?No. ?That is exclusively the domain of private >> industry, and the root of the tension between libertarian and statist. ?It >> is not in everyone's best interest to pool resources to build theatres. > > The inclusion of "theaters" was strictly optional: ?not essential to my > argument. ?A throwaway. > > So let me see if I understand: ?you are saying that without the word > "theater" in my description, what I said bore no resemblance to the > philosophy of libertarianism? > > Would it be more accurate, then, to say that Libertarianism is about > SUPPORTING the ?government funding of: > > ? Roads, > ? Bridges, > ? Police, > ? Firefighters, > ? Prisons, > ? Schools, > ? Public transport in places where universal use of cars would > ? ? ?bring cities to a standstill, or where poor people would > ? ? ?otherwise be unable to escape from ghettos, > ? The armed forces, > ? Universities, and publicly funded scholarships for poor students, > ? National research laboratories like the Centers > ? ? ?for Disease Control and Prevention, > ? Snow plows, > ? Public libraries, > ? Emergency and disaster assistance, > ? Legal protection for those too poor to fight against the > ? ? ?exploitative power of corporations, > ? Government agencies to scrutinize corrupt practices by > ? ? ?corporations and wealthy individuals, > ? Basic healthcare for old people who worked all their lives > ? ? ?for corporations who paid them so little in salary that > ? ? ?they could not save for retirement without starving to > ? ? ?death before they reached retirement, > ? And sundry other programs that keep the very poor just above > ? ? ?the subsistence level, so we do not have to step over their > ? ? ?dead bodies on the street all the time, and so they do not > ? ? ?wander around in feral packs, looking for middle-class people > ? ? ?that they can kill and eat... > > > .... but it is about NOT supporting the government funding of theaters? > > > In that case I misunderstood, and all western democracies are more or less > libertarian already, give or take the 0.0001 percent of their funding that > goes toward things like theaters and opera houses. > > > > > Richard Loosemore > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD Chief Clinical Officer, Gencia Corporation 706 B Forest St. Charlottesville, VA 22903 tel: (434) 295-4800 fax: (434) 295-4951 This electronic message transmission contains information from the biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately. From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 02:08:46 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:08:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Call To Libertarians In-Reply-To: <20110224042816.GA13834@ofb.net> References: <4D5FF524.7030103@lightlink.com> <000001cbd05c$d0092520$701b6f60$@att.net> <4D600D10.2090008@lightlink.com> <002901cbd081$9bb2b550$d3181ff0$@att.net> <4D640C85.6060007@mac.com> <4D641774.6020609@lightlink.com> <00e701cbd2e4$a63aa9f0$f2affdd0$@att.net> <4D647FC6.1080406@mac.com> <20110223164814.GC15944@ofb.net> <4D65BC58.9010203@mac.com> <20110224042816.GA13834@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:28 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > > Well, Medicare's overhead is 2%, that of private US insurers, 14%. > Government doesn't have to return profit to shareholders, or spend on > advertising, and spends less on trying to deny care to customers. ### The last truly private health insurer stopped working in the US probably sometime in the 1940's. Medicare's overhead is unknown but the claim it is 2% is laughable. You are looking at a single-entity controlled system but for some reason you think it's made of the good bureaucrats and the mean corporate thieves. You are sliding on the surface of reality. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 02:27:52 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:27:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <20110227184914.GE26298@ofb.net> References: <283746.86498.qm@web114401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D6A775B.6080201@lightlink.com> <20110227184914.GE26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 11:10:03AM -0500, Richard Loosemore wrote: > >> And having said all of that, we do have something like the required >> simulations already: ?game theory. ?Libertarianism is something close to >> an "all defection, all the time" strategy ;-), and I believe those don't >> do very well.... > > That's unfair, I'd grant that it's more like Tit For Tat. ?The problem > is that while TfT largely solves the iterated two-person Prisoner's > Dilemma given certain population assumptions, the multiplayer game is > less amenable to solution and the real population is less ideal. ?There > is a non-governmental solution, but it's a second-order norm of such > strength as to make a democratic governemnt seem lax, where you punish > defectors and anyone who isn't punishing a defector. ?The coercion to > cooperate is distributed, but still coercive. ?When I was libertarian, > it was for the sake of real freedom, not replacing government with > social oppression. > ### But this second-order norm needed to achieve an efficient allocation of resources (most likely an injunction against formation of overpowering coalitions) is likely to be immensely less burdensome than a monopolistic agency run mostly by your enemies. I really don't understand how it's possible for you to reject what appears to be an efficient solution, despite apparently being able to think your way through it (which already puts you light-years ahead of 99.99% of the population, AFAIK). Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 02:40:43 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:40:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] democracy sucks In-Reply-To: <4D670BF9.4090004@aleph.se> References: <4D670BF9.4090004@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 8:55 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > So my way of rephrasing the question is: what governance structures enable > open societies to function well and maintain their governance? It seems to > me that they should have a high degree of transparency/traceability so > problems can be found and the relevant parts held accountable, modularity so > that corrections of one part does not mess up other parts, a suitable level > of responsivity so that they adapt but are not too affected by noise > (current political fashions, the latest blogquake), and provide a reward > mechanism for constructive criticism/modification that is not easily > short-circuited. ### Think about the price mechanism in a competitive market, which integrates enormous amounts of information into a single signal - price/performance ratio that can be perceived by consumers (yes, I do claim that consumers are by and large able to perceive the performance component of the signal, at least in well-established markets). Any governance structure that could distill the relevant data into a clear price/performance signal that could be acted upon quickly by individuals would be vastly superior to a democracy - and most likely would entail modularity, incentives, and other features you mention. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 02:55:48 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:55:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Brief correction re Western Democracies [WASI am Call To Libertarians] In-Reply-To: <20110223165952.GE15944@ofb.net> References: <895132.47768.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D61D9E4.90607@lightlink.com> <20110223165952.GE15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > I'm a bit bemused by the libertarian enthusiasm for private toll roads. > I mean, yes, it's a way to get roads built, but is a society full of > piecemeal tolls, and possibilities to be denied passage by a road owner > whod oesn't like you, actually desirable? ?How does an economy of tolls > everywhere compare to that of a free travel zone? ### If the owner of all roads doesn't like you, where will you go? On the other hand, if the owner of one road doesn't like too many people, he will soon run out of toll money. Rafal From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Mar 2 12:13:23 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:13:23 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <4D6E21D4.8060509@aleph.se> References: <4D6E21D4.8060509@aleph.se> Message-ID: <3452B09A-2A61-4AE3-8F34-415335A16F4E@mac.com> On Mar 2, 2011, at 2:54 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Kelly Anderson wrote: >> If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that >> obviate the need for large cities? Are there other justifications for >> large cities? > > I doubt it. There are economies of scale to cities that are pretty amazing. Geoffrey West's papers show that not only are they efficient in terms of infrastructure (you need less infrastructure per person if they live close together), but their economic productivity and patents increases per capita as they get bigger. Yes and no. I can live for a about 1/4 as much away from the cities by say 45 miles. If I do not need to commute to work then that is close enough to get most of the advantages when I want them without some of the drawbacks. Further away is advisable if a collapse is as likely as I fear. > > > More importantly, cities allow people to meet. This is the key point of Richard Florida's explanation of why some cities like Austin and SF are creative and booming. They attract the right kind of people who mingle, find unexpected new ideas or collaborations, and this is productive. One reason I live in Oxford these days is that I bump into interesting, smart and useful people all day, while in my native Stockholm the kind of people I would like to meet are very diluted. > San Francisco does have an incredible vibe. > In my RPG book "Cities of the Edge" I actually use these arguments to argue against the main setting claim that telepresence will dissolve cities into small towns. If it actually were to happen it would be bad news environmentally (think sprawl is bad now? I am less concerned with what the masses do than with what is optimal for me. > plus, low efficiency) and perhaps socially (you would just meet people like you all day). Telecommuting is not going to threaten cities since it is more likely to improve them. Reducing needless commuting makes traffic better, allowing people to use the cities on their spare time. > Cities would improve a great deal if so much space was not needed for roads and parking. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Mar 2 12:18:06 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 04:18:06 -0800 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <4D6E2592.7050709@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Mar 2, 2011, at 3:10 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Samantha Atkins wrote: >> On 03/01/2011 03:39 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: >>> >>> Climate change is indeed a reshuffling of the cards, in itself fairly neutral but on one hand breaking down structure (all the winery infrastructure will be in the wrong place, and it takes money, time and expertise to build it somewhere else) and on the other affecting people differently depending on their resilience (the dirty secret of climate impacts on society research: the developed world is fairly likely to withstand even pretty big climate effects, while the undeveloped won't). >> >> Please point to irrefutable non-fudged evidence of actually dangerous levels of current climate change. Otherwise could we move on to something actually important? > > It is worth noting that in this thread the issue is not so much anthropogenic climate effects as *any* climate effects. Funny. I thought it was about asteroids or libertarians or something? :) > Especially of course asteroid-caused climate changes (which, however, are not likely to be a mere reshuffling but a serious impulse deviation from the current climate). Given past climate variability data and the power-law distribution of drought-induced famines (plus the bad food security at present) we should be paying serious attention to what we can do about the climate. Climate change from asteroids, which are low probability events not rationally worth hight consideration (as you so eloquently proved) do not count as something particularly serious and pressing. > > I think people underestimate the impacts on non-dangerous climate change. For example, this year will likely have a food price peak as bad as the one 2007-2008 partially due to bad weather in China messing up the wheat harvest. This will not be very noticeable to most westerners since we already eat very processed food: the raw food price is a small component of what we pay. But it does have plenty of impact on marginal people, and their reactions have political repercussions (food prices are one extra reason so many people in the Arab world are angry right now). > This is actually particularly dangerous? > Of course, sometimes causality goes the other way around. If you want a good reason to kick the church of climate change, look at biofuels. Biofuels have been a spectacular disaster because they tie food production and fuel production together. Sure, but not climate change per se and actually in part justified by those that claimed major global warming unless we do something right now as #1 or close to it priority. - samantha From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 03:06:06 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:06:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 2:58 AM, BillK wrote: > > The obvious answer is that the libertarians wouldn't pay for it. > > Libertarians only pay for things which would benefit themselves personally. ### Jeez, Bill, what do you really know about us? Oops, NVW, I am actually not inviting you to list what you *think* you know about us. Some things are best left unsaid, no? Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 03:27:44 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:27:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6970BC.5030209@lightlink.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <20110226205058.GO23560@leitl.org> <4D6970BC.5030209@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > So there is really no code, no proof whatsoever, that these > mechanisms will actually work? ### Well, you know, whenever a non-monopolistic exchange mechanism is implemented by reasonable people it usually works so well that soon scoundrels (i.e. greedy voters and other riff-raff) soon descend in droves and steal or otherwise drive it to extinction. This is an argument against scoundrels, not against reasonable people. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 04:03:12 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 23:03:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <20110227184015.GD26298@ofb.net> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <20110227184015.GD26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 1:40 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Sun, Feb 27, 2011 at 01:15:40PM -0500, Richard Loosemore wrote: > >> You are still telling me that in your opinion libertarianism would work >> (= unsupported speculation, = mere philosophizing), whereas I am asking >> you to ante up and give me some objective evidence to back up this >> claim, by pointing to some code (or equivalent scientific evidence) that >> shows that human societies would not break down under those >> circumstances. > > In particular, are libertarian societies robust in the face of > foreign invasion > inequalities of wealth > environmental degradation > disease > ### You may dismiss me as biased, but I think the problem with libertarians is not that we are wrong but that we are so uncommon that you can't (yet) build a society out of us. Once I upload myself, I will make myself into a provably cooperative agent implementing some basic rules (strict commitment to honoring contracts, assured self-destruction if faced with direct mental control, perhaps a hard-wired commitment to reciprocal exchange with similar agents, and a hard-wired commitment to uphold some second-order social values, such as pluralism) and we'll see if I and my congeners can copy ourselves to become a (non-monopolistic) force to be reckoned with. Until then of course, I'd agree with Eugen that our little discourse here is mostly BS and philosophizing. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 04:09:57 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 23:09:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] libertarian (asteroid) defense In-Reply-To: <20110301025142.GA26590@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <20110301025142.GA26590@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 9:51 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > Historically, how did orphanage funding quantity and orphanage quality > change between pure private and mostly public funding? ### AFAIK, private orphanages in the US used to be much nicer than government-run ones in Romania. A government does not magically increase the amount of altruistic feeling floating about the society at large. Rafal From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Thu Mar 3 05:11:03 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 21:11:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: References: <283746.86498.qm@web114401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D6A775B.6080201@lightlink.com> <20110227184914.GE26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110303051103.GA25321@ofb.net> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:27:52PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > > That's unfair, I'd grant that it's more like Tit For Tat. ??The problem > > is that while TfT largely solves the iterated two-person Prisoner's > > Dilemma given certain population assumptions, the multiplayer game is > > less amenable to solution and the real population is less ideal. ??There > > is a non-governmental solution, but it's a second-order norm of such > > strength as to make a democratic governemnt seem lax, where you punish > > defectors and anyone who isn't punishing a defector. ??The coercion to > > cooperate is distributed, but still coercive. ??When I was libertarian, > > it was for the sake of real freedom, not replacing government with > > social oppression. > > > ### But this second-order norm needed to achieve an efficient > allocation of resources (most likely an injunction against formation > of overpowering coalitions) is likely to be immensely less burdensome > than a monopolistic agency run mostly by your enemies. I really don't I dispute both "likely to be immensely less burdensome" and "run mostly by your enemies". > understand how it's possible for you to reject what appears to be an > efficient solution, despite apparently being able to think your way > through it (which already puts you light-years ahead of 99.99% of the > population, AFAIK). Because main real world models for norm-enforced order are small towns and highly conservative societies. Rigid and intolerant. The norm with typical people doesn't allow for much dissent, unlike many democracies. Also, perhaps more fundamentally, what I said at the end of the earlier paragraph. To work, the norm is strong enough to *be coercive*. Instead of paying taxes because the police will come and take your goods and shoot you if you shoot at them, you'll pay your social dues because if you don't no one will talk to you or sell you food or let you cross their land. The idea that this is some great step for freedom is laughable to me. Distributed coercion is still coercion. You're not getting a free choice either way about whether to pay taxes or show up for the militia. At least with the government you can ask "should we be doing this?" without promptly getting shunned. -xx- Damien X-) From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 3 05:37:38 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 23:37:38 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Message-ID: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology Research Group, reports: I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or early Sunday morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely unexpected and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 05:59:29 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:59:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <20110303051103.GA25321@ofb.net> References: <283746.86498.qm@web114401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D6A775B.6080201@lightlink.com> <20110227184914.GE26298@ofb.net> <20110303051103.GA25321@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:11 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:27:52PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Also, perhaps more fundamentally, what I said at the end of the earlier > paragraph. ?To work, the norm is strong enough to *be coercive*. > Instead of paying taxes because the police will come and take your goods > and shoot you if you shoot at them, you'll pay your social dues because > if you don't no one will talk to you or sell you food or let you cross > their land. Damien, I think you are missing a key aspect of a truly libertarian government here. In that sort of government, there are no income or property taxes. What is taxed, as was the case in the early US government, are luxury items, import/export items and perhaps insurance on contracts and a few other things. This is probably impossible to achieve today because of the entitlements that have grown up over the past 100 years, but theoretically, I don't think most libertarians support income taxes. When you say, "but that would not raise enough money to run the government." You have to reconsider on a basic scale how large the government should be. Not that it is a widely held libertarian position (that I know of) but I personally believe that the wars in the middle east should be paid for entirely and exclusively with an oil/gasoline tax. This would have the nice feature that the true cost of gasoline would be reflected at the pump (instead of at tax time) and it would help people to make the shift to non-petroleum systems. I think most real Libertarians just want to get out of the war. I am not so sure that is entirely feasible. -Kelly From max at maxmore.com Thu Mar 3 06:18:13 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 23:18:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Damn. Robert, as some of you old-timers will know, was a former director of Extropy Institute. He was an extremely smart guy and a major advocate of (and practical entrepreneur for) life extension and other transhumanist goals. I'm not only extremely unhappy to hear of his sudden and unexpected death, but also distressed that he had no arrangements for cryopreservation (to the best of my knowledge). That's quite surprising and, frankly, appalling given Robert's understanding of the technology and future possibilities. This is especially distressing because Alcor has people in Florida, where he died, who could have started the transport and cooldown on very short notice. Robert had his oddities but was always intelligent and probing and on the side of life. All we can do for him now is remember him. It's something, but it's very little, for he is gone forever. --- Max On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology > Research Group, reports: > > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or > early Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely > unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. > > > -- > 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: From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 06:10:40 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:10:40 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Damien Broderick Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Importance: High L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology Research Group, reports: >...I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or early Sunday morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely unexpected and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. A great man has passed away. Recall that Robert is the father of the MBrain. My heart is heavy. spike _______________________________________________ From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 3 06:29:14 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 00:29:14 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4D6F353A.50302@satx.rr.com> Steve Coles adds: "David Kekich told me that Robert had not signed up for any cryonic suspension in any form." This is all very dismaying. I was not a close pal of Robert's, but he wrote a lengthy and excellent piece on his invention, the Matrioshka Brain or MBrain, for my anthology YEAR MILLION, and I quoted him extensively in THE SPIKE; he was a ferment of ideas, with an apparent grasp of diverse technical fields. On one occasion he generously used frequent flyer points he'd accrued in excess to help me fly to the States from Australia to attend a Foresight conference. I gather he burned through a substantial inheritance 15 or 20 years ago trying to get a life-extension research organization to takeoff point, but it was too early and he wasn't Aubrey. A side effect might have been later problems with finances that probably prevented his signing up with Alcor. He'll be missed. Damien Broderick From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 06:25:58 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:25:58 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00a101cbd96b$dbd07170$93715450$@att.net> Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Importance: High L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology Research Group, reports: I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or early Sunday morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely unexpected and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. New timers: Robert was a regular poster on ExI in the 90s. He was a most original and imaginative thinker. He will be missed. http://www.aeiveos.com:8080/~bradbury/sg.html Robert Bradbury Signature Page Brief Biography: I was born October 5, 1956 in Melrose, Massachusetts and lived the first 18 years of my life in Saugus, Massachusetts, whose claim to fame is the Saugus Iron Works National Historic Site. My paternal ancestors are the English Bradbury family and my maternal ancestors are the Irish White family. I am the eldest of 4 boys. My fondest memories as a child are of taking things apart (electronic equipment my father collected over the years) and putting things together (train sets, models ships and rockets, chemical reactions, electronics projects, etc.). I enjoyed reading science fiction, starting with the Tom Swift Series, many by author James Duncan Lawrence, followed by Arthur C. Clarke (@Amazon, @Yahoo, A.C.C. Unauthorized Home page and Arthur C. Clarke Links) and Isaac Asimov (@Amazon, @Yahoo) and the fantasy alternate realities genre as described in J.R.R. Tolkien (@Amazon, @Yahoo, A Tribute to J.R.R. Tolkein or Tolkien Links), Anne McCaffrey (@Amazon, @Yahoo, WW Webguides Anne McCaffrey) or Piers Anthony (@Amazon, @Yahoo) - Xanth Novels or Xanth Threads. One of the books that made me think about the possibility of lifespan extension was Arthur Clarke's book Against the Fall of Night which was later republished with an added sequel by Gregory Benford as Beyond the Fall of Night" . For sports I generally did better at those based more on individual efforts. I enjoyed swimming and track in junior high school and during my senior year at Saugus High School was co-captain of the gymnastics team. In my 20's I tried ballroom dance for a couple of years and then moved on to roller skating and aerobic dance. In my 30's wind surfing, circus acrobatics and scuba diving held my interest at various times. I also snow and water ski at an intermediate level. I entered Harvard University in 1974 as a physics major but rapidly determined that my math skills were insufficient for physics and that my logical abilities were better suited for computers. From 1975 through 1977 I was the systems manager and programmer on the first and largest commercial UNIX installation in New York City. It was a major event (for someone of 18) when Ken Thompson (one of the authors of UNIX) visited our site to install UNIX because we had more memory on our PDP 11/70 than he had at Bell Laboratories. Returning to Harvard in 1977, majoring in Computer Science with a minor in economics but determined that the opportunity costs of continuing my education were unjustified and returned to New York the following year. During my high school years I worked as an an electronics technician for Measurmatic Electronics, a company which made high torque stepping motors. Through the late 1970's and early 1980's I spent time employed or consulting for a variety of firms, as a UNIX guru and C compiler expert gathering experience in a variety of fields; Commercial Union Leasing Corporation (financing), Graphic Management Systems (graphic analysis), Time Inc. (news & publishing), Yourdon Inc. (structured design), Logicon Intercomp Corp. (real time systems) and Triad (embedded microsystems). Starting in 1981, I began to spend much of my time working for Oracle Corporation in Menlo Park, California. There I was responsible for the development of their C Compiler for IBM mainframes and putting the Oracle Relational Database Management System on UNIX platforms. I was employee number 28 at Oracle and worked through 1987 as the UNIX product development manager. During that time I was also Oracle's representative to the ANSI X3J11 committee which was in the process of trying to standardize the C Programming language. Several library functions now part of the C standard were my direct contributions. My final contribution to Oracle in 1988-89 was to produce the first version of Oracle to run on Novell's NetWare 386. Having worked in the computer industry for 15 years, I decided to do something completely different, so I "retired" and went back to school at the University of Washington to study biology and related fields in the hope of learning how to apply computers to protein structure modeling. My instructors there included George Martin, an expert in aging theories and Alzheimer's Disease, and Larry Loeb, a leading researcher in DNA damage and cancer. By 1991, I had taken most of the microbiology and biochemistry courses available and was trying to determine a future direction. In August of 1991, there was a seminar series, Pathology 507, which hosted number of leading researchers including Bruce Ames and Richard Albertini. Their comments on the involvement of mutations and oxidative damage in cancer and aging caused me to spend the rest of 1991 and most of 1992 in the library studying why and how humans age. My basic conclusions were that aging is a multi-factorial process involving a number of gene defects predisposing one to the diseases of premature death combined with a program which fails to maintain and repair sufficiently for extended longevity. As there were a number of experiments which I wanted to do to test various aspects of these theories, I began to look for routes to do those experiments. There seemed to be three choices, (a) to go work as a graduate student for a leading gerontologist, (b) to try to start a company in the U.S. to do the research and (c) to arrange contracts with other researchers, perhaps outside of the U.S. to conduct the experiments. For a variety of reasons I chose to execute (c) with a number of Russian scientists. This has lead to a number of interesting results which included, in part, the formation of a WWW Aging Resource site in 1994-1995. Late in 1995 we interested investors in expanding our efforts and we opened a laboratory in Seattle. In March of 1996, financing arrangements were concluded and I became the president of Aeiveos Sciences Group. During 1996 and 1997 ASG conducted research into the longevity genes of centenarians, the changes in gene expression in aging mice and the free radical protection genes in birds. Changes in my interests combined with problems in the research directions, management team and investor interests led to a separation between myself and Aeiveos Sciences Group in late 1997. Aeiveos Sciences Group subsequently ceased all research activities. Since 1997, I have focused most of my time on understanding the real limits to personal longevity and intelligence and the related areas of the evolution of technological civilizations, how long they might survive and whether any existing astronomical phenomena may be explained as astronengineering efforts of highly advanced long lived civilizations. Over the years I have had the opportunity to travel extensively. To the best of my recollection, the countries that I have visited, in order, are: Mexico, Canada, Italy, the Virgin Islands, Martinique, England, Pakistan, India, Netherlands, France, Fiji, Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, Turkey, Russia, Indonesia (Bali), Germany, Turks & Caicos, Japan, Barbados, South Africa and Costa Rica. From moulton at moulton.com Thu Mar 3 06:43:30 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2011 22:43:30 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4D6F3892.7070506@moulton.com> This is sad. I am sure a lot of us remember him from the early days. Fred On 03/02/2011 10:18 PM, Max More wrote: > Damn. > > Robert, as some of you old-timers will know, was a former director of > Extropy Institute. He was an extremely smart guy and a major advocate of > (and practical entrepreneur for) life extension and other transhumanist > goals. > > I'm not only extremely unhappy to hear of his sudden and unexpected death, > but also distressed that he had no arrangements for cryopreservation (to the > best of my knowledge). That's quite surprising and, frankly, appalling given > Robert's understanding of the technology and future possibilities. This is > especially distressing because Alcor has people in Florida, where he died, > who could have started the transport and cooldown on very short notice. > > Robert had his oddities but was always intelligent and probing and on the > side of life. All we can do for him now is remember him. It's something, but > it's very little, for he is gone forever. > > --- Max > > > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > >> L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology >> Research Group, reports: >> >> >> I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older >> Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or >> early Sunday >> morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely >> unexpected >> and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. >> >> >> -- >> > 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 06:44:01 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:44:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <00a801cbd96e$61ac1a90$25044fb0$@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, March 02, 2011 10:18 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Damn. Robert, as some of you old-timers will know, was a former director of Extropy Institute. He was an extremely smart guy and a major advocate of (and practical entrepreneur for) life extension and other transhumanist goals. I'm not only extremely unhappy to hear of his sudden and unexpected death, but also distressed that he had no arrangements for cryopreservation (to the best of my knowledge). That's quite surprising and, frankly, appalling given Robert's understanding of the technology and future possibilities. This is especially distressing because Alcor has people in Florida, where he died, who could have started the transport and cooldown on very short notice. Robert had his oddities but was always intelligent and probing and on the side of life. All we can do for him now is remember him. It's something, but it's very little, for he is gone forever. --- Max "David Kekich told me that Robert had not signed up for any cryonic suspension in any form." This is all very dismaying. I was not a close pal of Robert's, but he wrote a lengthy and excellent piece on his invention, the Matrioshka Brain or MBrain, for my anthology YEAR MILLION, and I quoted him extensively in THE SPIKE; he was a ferment of ideas, with an apparent grasp of diverse technical fields. On one occasion he generously used frequent flyer points he'd accrued in excess to help me fly to the States from Australia to attend a Foresight conference. I gather he burned through a substantial inheritance 15 or 20 years ago trying to get a life-extension research organization to takeoff point, but it was too early and he wasn't Aubrey. A side effect might have been later problems with finances that probably prevented his signing up with Alcor. He'll be missed. Damien Broderick Last time he was here (about 3 years ago, for I recall his saying he had turned 50) Robert and I discussed cryonics briefly. His position on it was that he was a tepid believer in it, and might make arrangements if he had sufficient advance notice of his imminent demise. The number of people with this attitude may be larger than those who actually wear a bracelet. I don't know how to create a business model to deal with that population. If our fondest hopes with nanotechnology come to pass and fulfill their early promise, it might be that for those carrying the cryonics meme, getting incurable cancer is the best thing that can happen. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 07:00:32 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 02:00:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <20110303051103.GA25321@ofb.net> References: <283746.86498.qm@web114401.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D6A775B.6080201@lightlink.com> <20110227184914.GE26298@ofb.net> <20110303051103.GA25321@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:11 AM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 09:27:52PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> > >> > That's unfair, I'd grant that it's more like Tit For Tat. ??The problem >> > is that while TfT largely solves the iterated two-person Prisoner's >> > Dilemma given certain population assumptions, the multiplayer game is >> > less amenable to solution and the real population is less ideal. ??There >> > is a non-governmental solution, but it's a second-order norm of such >> > strength as to make a democratic governemnt seem lax, where you punish >> > defectors and anyone who isn't punishing a defector. ??The coercion to >> > cooperate is distributed, but still coercive. ??When I was libertarian, >> > it was for the sake of real freedom, not replacing government with >> > social oppression. >> > >> ### But this second-order norm needed to achieve an efficient >> allocation of resources (most likely an injunction against formation >> of overpowering coalitions) is likely to be immensely less burdensome >> than a monopolistic agency run mostly by your enemies. I really don't > > I dispute both "likely to be immensely less burdensome" and "run mostly > by your enemies". ### Most humans *are* your enemies, sometimes mollified by hope of reciprocal gain. > >> understand how it's possible for you to reject what appears to be an >> efficient solution, despite apparently being able to think your way >> through it (which already puts you light-years ahead of 99.99% of the >> population, AFAIK). > > Because main real world models for norm-enforced order are small towns > and highly conservative societies. ?Rigid and intolerant. ?The norm > with typical people doesn't allow for much dissent, unlike many > democracies. > > Also, perhaps more fundamentally, what I said at the end of the earlier > paragraph. ?To work, the norm is strong enough to *be coercive*. > Instead of paying taxes because the police will come and take your goods > and shoot you if you shoot at them, you'll pay your social dues because > if you don't no one will talk to you or sell you food or let you cross > their land. ?The idea that this is some great step for freedom is > laughable to me. ?Distributed coercion is still coercion. ?You're not > getting a free choice either way about whether to pay taxes or show up > for the militia. ?At least with the government you can ask "should we be > doing this?" without promptly getting shunned. ### I think it's useful to decompose the question into two parts: one, what kind of of a theoretically conceivable social network is most likely to calculate efficient behavior to maximize satisfaction of desires, two, what kind of stabilizing mechanisms might be required instrumentally for this posited network to exist. Of course, even if such stabilizing mechanisms might perhaps be used to enforce odious systems, it is not reason to reject them as tools - after all, a gun can protect the innocent as much as keep them in a concentration camp. What you describe is an *effective* enforcement mechanism - and you object that the mechanism can be used to make some people miserable. But, please note that in the specific examples you mentioned (low-status, small-town folk, presumably inferior to the worldly denizens like us) are not the only groups that have used reputation tracking, shunning and banishment as a major technique of norm enforcement - for example, environmentalist political activists in the US usually employ very similar methods to keep their ranks pristine. The "rigidity" and "conservatism" of small-town folk is not a function of the enforcement methods they use but rather is due to the lower scope for experimentation that is afforded by their existence and also a function of their greater homogeneity. Thus, I do think you are condemning an effective social stabilizing technique for the wrong reason - for association with low-status people you dislike. At the same time, you fail to apply the same standard to the other stabilizing technique in question, hierarchical bureaucracy - which only sometimes, really as an exception, let's you ask the question "should we be doing this" (only if you are lucky to live in a place where this beast is in part tamed by other influences, such as traditions of nonviolence, general acceptance of non-conformity, etc., etc.). Trust me, there are much worse things than being shunned that happen to people who ask the wrong questions in most places. Now, if we wanted to discuss what theoretically possible network topology is most likely to calculate the behaviors maximizing satisfaction of human desires ..... (do you believe that a hierarchical, non-redundant network is the optimal calculator?).... we could eventually think about the best techniques of stabilizing it. Rafal P.S. I find it much more interesting to talk about e.g. the measurement of desires, methods for aggregation of information about desires, than about anything that triggers the "them" and "us" reflexes, such as the word "corporation" does in some places. Once you look at the very foundations of how brains and networks work, a lot of higher-order notions sometimes develop with surprising ease. From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Thu Mar 3 07:02:34 2011 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 23:02:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <124397.40420.qm@web65602.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> ----- Original Message ---- > From: Damien Broderick > To: ExI chat list > Sent: Wed, March 2, 2011 9:37:38 PM > Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died > > > ? L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder,? ? Los Angeles Gerontology >Research Group, reports: > > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or early >Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely >unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. That is horrible. He was only 54 years old.?I will miss him. Stuart From x at extropica.org Thu Mar 3 06:31:48 2011 From: x at extropica.org (x at extropica.org) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2011 22:31:48 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 9:37 PM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > ? L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, ? ?Los Angeles Gerontology > Research Group, reports: > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or > early Sunday morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of > a completely unexpected and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one > was prepared. Argh! No words for this. :-( - Jef From eugen at leitl.org Thu Mar 3 07:54:17 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:54:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] teleomeres In-Reply-To: <98FC56EA3F4E4F3C80D17696B7E6BCD9@OLDMACHINE> References: <98FC56EA3F4E4F3C80D17696B7E6BCD9@OLDMACHINE> Message-ID: <20110303075417.GA23560@leitl.org> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 12:41:36PM -0700, FRANK MCELLIGOTT wrote: > The last line in this page is most important. > > "We can live for 1,000 years." > > Maybe Biotech in the way to the future instead of hardware and AI In vivo patching, especially with only slightly externally augmented onboard means is extremely difficult. I'm not sure it can be at all done. I think the limit for that -- within what is left of our lifetime -- is maybe 20, 30 years in the best case. And I wouldn't count on it. Will 20-30 years make a difference? Probably not. So your only way to the future would be through the liquid nitrogen dewar. > http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/begin/traits/telomeres/ -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Thu Mar 3 07:05:32 2011 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:05:32 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: This is very sad. Robert was a great mind, and he will be missed. On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > ? L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, ? ?Los Angeles Gerontology > Research Group, reports: > > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or > early Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely > unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From estropico at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 08:08:54 2011 From: estropico at gmail.com (estropico) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:08:54 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Message-ID: Tragic and sobering news... Fabio From eugen at leitl.org Thu Mar 3 09:46:46 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:46:46 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <20110303094646.GF23560@leitl.org> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 11:37:38PM -0600, Damien Broderick wrote: > > L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology > Research Group, reports: > > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or > early Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely > unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. Damn. I hardly knew Robert, but he will be missed. I hope he had a cryonics contract, and was suspended. A wake up call for everyone: *this could have been you*. Everybody now go read http://ka0.org/LifeExtensionHPlus.pdf Schedule an an appointment with your medical provider, identify your status and risk factors. Schedule check-ups regularly (annually or biannually), if you're over 40. Change your lifestyle, your diet, if necessary, and use "Basic recommendations" template from Slide #16. Do it. You owe it to you, your relatives and your friends. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Thu Mar 3 10:28:07 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 02:28:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <222948.22615.qm@web114403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Dammit. That news has just spoiled my breakfast. Robert was one of the people that I assumed I would one day meet, in some form, in the future. Now I never will. Maybe a fitting obituary would be to collect together all the ideas that we can attribute to him and publish them somewhere? Let's hope that some MBrain in the future will see fit to simulate all the possible/ reasonably probable Robert Bradbury's that it can, and that at least one of them will appreciate it. Ben Zaiboc From amara at kurzweilai.net Thu Mar 3 10:48:03 2011 From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 02:48:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <222948.22615.qm@web114403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <222948.22615.qm@web114403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <086101cbd990$790a7e80$6b1f7b80$@net> Ben, I'm planning to publish an obit in KurzweilAI, and I welcome submittals. Robert was a great inspiration for me personally, and he made important contributions to The Singularity Is Near as one of our researchers. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Ben Zaiboc Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 2:28 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Dammit. That news has just spoiled my breakfast. Robert was one of the people that I assumed I would one day meet, in some form, in the future. Now I never will. Maybe a fitting obituary would be to collect together all the ideas that we can attribute to him and publish them somewhere? Let's hope that some MBrain in the future will see fit to simulate all the possible/ reasonably probable Robert Bradbury's that it can, and that at least one of them will appreciate it. Ben Zaiboc _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From eugen at leitl.org Thu Mar 3 11:33:20 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 12:33:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110303113320.GI23560@leitl.org> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:33:11PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal > (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a > way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services > by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also > highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's > offered as something you cannot refuse. > > The key to efficiency in fulfilling human desires within a social > structure are the twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers. The problem with decentral equality assumption is that it isn't true. As long as there's not bottom-up diagnostics and early response going on everywhere, all the time, you'll get autochthonous emergence of centralist structures which will soon have an edge over grass-root systems. After a while, the result is something very closely resembling what we have. Which is definitely not what we want. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 mbb386 at main.nc.us Thu Mar 3 11:50:11 2011 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 06:50:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <7d60942a1b7f8751f6195cb49a3e85a7.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> NO! :C I was looking for his email address as there's an article I wanted his opinion on. He was the first extrope to acknowledge me (a complete noob on this list) back in spring of 2000. His affirming words and positive comments cemented my decision to stay here. Regards, MB From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 12:04:36 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 12:04:36 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> This is very sad news. I remember meeting Robert at the Extro 3 conference 1997. It was my first international conference ever, and I was in awe of all the other speakers. But the talk I always remember when I think about it was Robert's talk. It was the last talk of the last day (not a good slot). In the banquet hall next door a very kitschy wedding dinner was talking place, complete with a hockey organ (!) that penetrated through the wall. Max was tring to keep them quiet, but our time was running out. Robert's talk started out slowly, discussing nanotechnology and what capabilities it might achieve. He then started applying those to computer speeds. To uploading. To space access. To constructing smart constellations of solar powered satelites and servers. To constructing Dyson clouds around the sun. To dismantle planets to build true Dyson swarms. As the talk progressed things accelerated: time was running out, the new ideas came at a faster pace, the fanfares and crescendos from the wedding party came more and more often, the possibilities grew steadily more wild and amazing. It was a brilliant talk. It was like experiencing the singularity. Afterwards we hung around for an excited discussion about everything, extending the ideas and analysing their implications, until we were finally shooed away by the wedding guests. That is my memory of Robert. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 12:21:59 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 12:21:59 +0000 Subject: [ExI] democracy sucks In-Reply-To: References: <4D670BF9.4090004@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D6F87E7.3090004@aleph.se> Here is an interesting, constructive and worrying finding: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/03/systematically_1.html Even biased and ignorant voters who are wrong about what policies will work can still have a positive effect if they vote for results rather than policies. If decisionmakers benefit from successful results, they will try to get more good results (rather than do the policies the voters think are great). But it turns out people have systematically biased beliefs about political influence. They do not know who is most responsible for what happens in particular sectors. This is bad news since it means they fail credit assignment: they will not be rewarding or punishing the right politicans or institutions depending on the success or failure of their policies. It seems that while this undermines faith in current democratic systems somewhat it also suggests ways to improve them. If credit assignment becomes clearer - because of better civics education, transparent reporting, institutions helping clarify who is responsible for what result - then we can get better decisionmaking. (Incidentally, the credit assignment problem of course applies to non-democratic systems too. While a government composed of political scientists might be able to know who is actually to blame or praise for what, most non-democratic systems do not recruit just political science majors. In non-democratic systems the pool of credit assigners is also smaller, making biases more powerful - especially since the credit assigners are also credit assignees.) -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From amara at kurzweilai.net Thu Mar 3 12:32:42 2011 From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 04:32:42 -0800 Subject: [ExI] democracy sucks In-Reply-To: <4D6F87E7.3090004@aleph.se> References: <4D670BF9.4090004@aleph.se> <4D6F87E7.3090004@aleph.se> Message-ID: <08fc01cbd99f$1815cb20$48416160$@net> I am looking for photos of Robert Bradbury for the KurzweilAI obit. Thanks - Amara From amara at kurzweilai.net Thu Mar 3 12:58:26 2011 From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 04:58:26 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> Message-ID: <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> I am looking for photos of Robert Bradbury for the KurzweilAI obit. Thanks - Amara (Apologies for the previous message with incorrect subject line.) From femmechakra at yahoo.ca Thu Mar 3 12:45:41 2011 From: femmechakra at yahoo.ca (Anna Taylor) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 04:45:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <7d60942a1b7f8751f6195cb49a3e85a7.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <169487.28315.qm@web110415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> --- On Thu, 3/3/11, MB wrote: > He was the first extrope to acknowledge me (a complete noob > on this list) back in > spring of 2000. His affirming words and positive comments > cemented my decision to > stay here. It still amazes me how even through e-mails, without ever meeting someone, a person can become so significant. Robert was one of those posters that even with all my misunderstandings, my misconceptions and mish mash ideas always replied with respect and eagerness to teach. I agree, he was patient and always positive, he will be missed. Anna From artillo at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 13:07:08 2011 From: artillo at gmail.com (Artillo) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 08:07:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: It is truly a shame to lose such a great intellect and contributor and still so young. Sad day for us all. Regards, Brian (Artillo) On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:37 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > ? L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, ? ?Los Angeles Gerontology > Research Group, reports: > > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or > early Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely > unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 13:40:01 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 06:40:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] asteroid defense In-Reply-To: <4D6E2C1E.6010708@aleph.se> References: <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110228213934.GA1344@ofb.net> <4D6C2D75.8070601@aleph.se> <4D6CDAEE.2080107@aleph.se> <4D6D3C9A.1040208@mac.com> <20110301190937.GA26398@ofb.net> <4D6E2C1E.6010708@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:38 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Kelly Anderson wrote: > There is also the B612 foundation: > http://www.b612foundation.org/ > Their goal is to significantly alter the orbit of an asteroid, in a > controlled manner, by 2015 (I think they are running out of time). But they > have done a bit of analysis on gravity tractors. The JPL report is pretty > cheering, > http://www.b612foundation.org/papers/JPL_report.doc > Now they just need to get people with money to start funding a real program. I don't think this is the best use of money. It is relatively cheap to look for asteroids from the ground, and if you found a potential earth impactor, it would then be easy to subsequently raise money for a mitigation plan. (Assuming you had time) To just go and try to move a random asteroid as a proof of concept seems like a fool's errand to me. Aside from that, there is no activity or news on the site since 2008, so apparently others must have come to a similar conclusion. Now for the good news! The LSST http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_Synoptic_Survey_Telescope http://www.lsst.org/lsst mentioned in the b612 paper is ideally suited for looking for NEOs, and has attracted at least $30 million dollars in private funding from Charles Simonyi and Bill Gates. In addition, it has the support of Google. So perhaps the libertarian approach has legs after all!! :-) This appears to be a VERY serious endeavor, and will no doubt find lots of NEOs, and because of the Google angle, it should be very easy to work with the @home type programs too. -Kelly From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 14:03:44 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:03:44 +0000 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> Adrian Tymes wrote: > To rip a thought experiment from the game SMAC: suppose you had a > kilometer-long orbital greenhouse, with a vast array of solar panels to > provide all the power you'd need. (If you need a number, then > extrapolating near-future photovoltaic panels to square kilometer sizes, > assume a few gigawatt-hours per day, distributed among the entire > greenhouse. More is possible.) How would it work? What types of > mass inputs and outputs could you have? Would capturing a comet > for local water ice help? > While the orbital greenhouses are amazing in SMAC, in practice there are some problems. First, you need the mass inputs that allow you to grow plants. This could largely be handled with asteroid or comet matter, because you mainly need water, carbon dioxide, a certain list of trace nutrients... and nitrogen. http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/BotanicalSciences/PlantHormones/EssentialPlant/EssentialPlant.htm Nitrogen is IMHO going to be the headache: it is not that common in the inner solar system, yet you need to get it and fix it to grow plants. So you likely need to grab something with ammonia ice from the outer solar system. Second, assuming you have a working orbiting greenhouse where plants grow happily and hydroponically, you need to get them down to Earth. That requires enough delta-v to get to an aerobraking orbit, and some form of capsule that can survive re-entry. So you need to build disposable spacecraft too - lots of them. All in all, you could likely build a lot of greenhouses and factories out there. But it would be cheaper and simpler to build them in the Sahara desert! Space products will likely be competitive only if they cannot be made on Earth, have some radical economy of scale (maybe asteroid mining for elements relatively rare on Earth) or the market is in space. I think, however, that high efficiency hydroponic farming has a good chance of solving some food production problems. However, as noted in this week's The Economist (they have a whole supplement about the future of food production, see http://www.economist.com/node/18229412 ), the real problem is not exactly production. It lies in a great deal of waste, the use of inefficient or damaging methods, bad distribution methods and really wrong pricing models. But it would have been great if space would have been the solution to the food crisis! Now we need to find another business model for going there. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University From lubkin at unreasonable.com Thu Mar 3 15:39:29 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 10:39:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <086101cbd990$790a7e80$6b1f7b80$@net> References: <222948.22615.qm@web114403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <086101cbd990$790a7e80$6b1f7b80$@net> Message-ID: <201103031541.p23Ff4tW022128@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Amara, I passed the gist of the news and your request for photographs and memories to the ACT list, where some of Robert's old friends no longer on this list are. Beyond the bio that Spike found, here's more, with photos: LinkedIn profile: Facebook: I uploaded a picture of Robert from Extro-5 to . If you'd like to use it, I can get you a higher resolution. I may have others of him; I'll check. As many of us are, Robert was both difficult and worth the effort. When he moved back to the Boston area, he came by my parties, the successors to Sasha Chislenko's. There was an uneven quality to him. He'd be private and distant, and then unexpectedly generous. When a good friend of mine needed a place to stay for a few days, I emailed my friends. They didn't know each other, except through me, but Robert was the first to step forward and offer his home. -- David. From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 3 15:25:49 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 10:25:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Damien Sullivan > wrote: >> If 10% of my income goes to build a private palace, that's theft. ? If >> 50% of my income goes to zero-fare public transit, universal health >> care, funding for basic research, good law enforcement, safe housing, >> and many other public services, I may consider that a good deal. > > ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal > (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a > way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services > by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also > highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's > offered as something you cannot refuse. > > The key to efficiency in fulfilling human desires within a social > structure are the twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers. But, Rafal, this is not accurate except as a theoretical ideal. Consider the simple concept of "free public transport". In London in the late 1970s, the cost of public transport had risen so much that people were using cars more and more. The city was becoming a nightmare of gridlock and pollution. Many people overlooked the bad side effects and simple decided that the high fares were more important .... partly because those high fares were *immediately* apparent to them (tight feedback loop) whereas the sickness engendered by pollution, the road deaths and injuries, the cost of maintaining the roads, and so on, were all feeding back to those people along open, extended feedback loops (and so were completely invisible). Then a local government came to office and slashed the tube and bus fares. Immediate result was that the same public transport facilities were used more, the cost of maintaining roads, etc etc, went down. The city benefited enormously. You have just described that as "inefficient". It was not :-). Simply as that. It was tremendously beneficial. Then the Conservatives won the next election and the whole scheme was dumped. People did have the "twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers" and it didn't help. Richard Loosemore From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 15:44:31 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 07:44:31 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> Message-ID: <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> I think it's ok to use the photos on his homepage for an obit? I never really thought about it, but I guess that would be ok. http://www.aeiveos.com:8080/~bradbury/index.html Information hipsters, it is OK to grab photos off of the deceased's homepage for that person's obituary? If he made it public, then that means its public, right? spike -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Amara D. Angelica Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 4:58 AM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died I am looking for photos of Robert Bradbury for the KurzweilAI obit. Thanks - Amara (Apologies for the previous message with incorrect subject line.) _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Mar 3 16:41:52 2011 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:41:52 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> Robert was keenly intelligent, enthusiastic and generous with his knowledge. Yes, he had quirks, and some of them probed issues that caused apprehensive. But I think *really* got into questioning historical suppositions of human behavior. (Anders, I remember that sound emanating from the wall as well.) (Max, yes, another reminder and I agree: "shit!" (and Robert would probably say the same thing, more quietly, and then formulate a lengthy, but brilliant, discussion on it).) Moments of sadness and appreciation of Robert Bradbury. Natasha Vita-More -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Thu Mar 3 16:49:49 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 11:49:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <201103031649.p23GnoJJ017101@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Spike wrote: >I think it's ok to use the photos on his homepage for an obit? I never >really thought about it, but I guess that would be ok. > >http://www.aeiveos.com:8080/~bradbury/index.html > >Information hipsters, it is OK to grab photos off of the deceased's homepage >for that person's obituary? If he made it public, then that means its >public, right? As a legal matter, no. The copyright to them is owned by whoever took them. They are the only ones who can authorize use thereof. (Which people don't think about when putting pictures of themselves online.) If the photo is of a human, you also need a model release, which would have to be from Robert's heirs. I don't think anyone would object to use on a personal site for a tribute, but Amara needs to adhere to the niceties for Kurzweil AI. We should see about continuing to host his site as is indefinitely, as we did for Sasha. I'd be happy to take it on, if needed. -- David. From moulton at moulton.com Thu Mar 3 16:45:50 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 08:45:50 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D6FC5BE.6000406@moulton.com> On 03/03/2011 07:44 AM, spike wrote: > Information hipsters, it is OK to grab photos off of the deceased's homepage > for that person's obituary? If he made it public, then that means its > public, right? > > spike Not exactly. A slightly over simplified response is that there is a difference between "making something public" and "putting it in the public domain". A more nuanced response involves asking about jurisdiction, legal arrangements, etc. This is why specifically putting images and/or texts under one of the appropriate Creative Commons licenses is a good idea if you want them to be used in this situation. But in this case I doubt if anyone would object. Fred From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 17:17:56 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:17:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:57 PM, "spike" wrote: snip > Last time he was here (about 3 years ago, for I recall his saying he had > turned 50) Robert and I discussed cryonics briefly. ?His position on it was > that he was a tepid believer in it, and might make arrangements if he had > sufficient advance notice of his imminent demise. ?The number of people with > this attitude may be larger than those who actually wear a bracelet. ?I > don't know how to create a business model to deal with that population. So true. If even one of the most knowledgeable doesn't take the steps needed . . . . We need to talk about this. > If our fondest hopes with nanotechnology come to pass and fulfill their > early promise, it might be that for those carrying the cryonics meme, > getting incurable cancer is the best thing that can happen. Unless someone is well off, this doesn't help because you can't get insurance with cancer. Sigh Robert was indeed one of the good guys . . . . and 14 years younger than I am. Keith From atymes at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 18:17:19 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:17:19 -0800 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> References: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:03 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > While the orbital greenhouses are amazing in SMAC, in practice there are > some problems. First, you need the mass inputs that allow you to grow > plants. This could largely be handled with asteroid or comet matter, because > you mainly need water, carbon dioxide, a certain list of trace nutrients... > and nitrogen. > http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/Sciences/BotanicalSciences/PlantHormones/EssentialPlant/EssentialPlant.htm > Nitrogen is IMHO going to be the headache: it is not that common in the > inner solar system, yet you need to get it and fix it to grow plants. So you > likely need to grab something with ammonia ice from the outer solar system. > > Second, assuming you have a working orbiting greenhouse where plants grow > happily and hydroponically, you need to get them down to Earth. That > requires enough delta-v to get to an aerobraking orbit, and some form of > capsule that can survive re-entry. So you need to build disposable > spacecraft too - lots of them. Or, you know, reusable spacecraft, where the problem is mainly refueling and servicing them. Ship plants down, ship nutrients up. If you had infinite energy, you could do on-orbit antimatter production, which would handily provide all the fuel you'd need, though you'd need to develop rockets which could hold and use antimatter fuel. (There have also been studies on scooping antimatter from the Van Allen belt.) Short of that, you could manufacture other high-energy fuels, which might tap into the nitrogen you're bringing up. (Granted, it might seem wasteful to ship the fuel components up if you could manufacture them on the ground. Part of the point here is, you can't assume useful ground infrastructure where the food needs to get to, and thus where the spaceships will be on the ground.) > All in all, you could likely build a lot of greenhouses and factories out > there. But it would be cheaper and simpler to build them in the Sahara > desert! Only if you look at the greenhouse in isolation. Shipping product around is part of the problem - and product from orbit can be dropped anywhere in the world. *If* you can do on-orbit refueling and service of the spacecraft, then the economics might start to be favorable. Granted, you'd be spending profligate amounts of energy in the process. The assumption is that energy is much easier to obtain in orbit (just build more solar panels, without worrying about environmental impact, night/day cycle, weather, maintenance - at least to the same degree - since there aren't any moving parts, and so on), and thus of much lower price in orbit. This breaks with our usual experience, where higher energy always means higher cost, so it might seem counterintuitive. (Again, we're assuming the ground we're dealing with - the areas most in need of food - won't be able to support infrastructure, such as rectennas to receive beamed energy or factories to turn it into fuel. It is possible to locate that infrastructure elsewhere on the ground, though - but then, after delivering the food, the spaceship would have to make a suborbital hop to ground factories elsewhere and then return home, as opposed to simply returning home. Granted, this assumes that nitrogen and other nutrients are simple enough to gather - nitrogen, for instance, can be scooped out of the air mid-flight; almost anywhere on land you'd deliver to, there's dirt of some sort, albeit of varying grades.) > Space products will likely be competitive only if they cannot be made on > Earth, have some radical economy of scale (maybe asteroid mining for > elements relatively rare on Earth) or the market is in space. Asteroid mining is a simpler business case to make, yes. I think I've detailed one plan for bootstrapping space industry using asteroid mining on this list before. (Survey to find a probably-platinum-rich asteroid, bring it into very high Earth orbit, send up simple processing equipment, send down mostly-platinum-group meteorites for ground pickup by the organization's agents, and sell for much profit.) This would be something to do after there's an infrastructure - say, start by making fuel for reusable rockets to ferry people and cargo around, then start making food for people who are already in orbit, and then expand the greenhouses to start doing this. Much further down the road from where we are today. > I think, however, that high efficiency hydroponic farming has a good chance > of solving some food production problems. However, as noted in this week's > The Economist (they have a whole supplement about the future of food > production, see http://www.economist.com/node/18229412 ), the real problem > is not exactly production. It lies in a great deal of waste, the use of > inefficient or damaging methods, bad distribution methods and really wrong > pricing models. That's the thing here. The inefficiency is in something that we can afford to waste (energy - again, only if it turns out that energy is that much cheaper to obtain in orbit), there is no environment to damage, and the distribution model is direct to the customer (wherever the hungry are, that's where you land; even if someone else is buying for them, this saves on the buyer's transportation costs, and so will probably be the buyer's preferred delivery location). Pricing models...well, there isn't a technical fix to everything, but at least this wouldn't be inherently worse. From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 18:10:03 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:10:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> Robert came to visit in 2002. He was tired from travelling from the east coast, so we didn't stay up much that first evening. We talked about MBrains, and I worked out the orbit mechanics and so forth. Robert was an idea-hamster, spinning them out wildly, as was his custom, never slowing, churning out ideas like a hamster on an exercise wheel. I could scarcely calculate BOTECs fast enough to keep up with that brain. He didn't know how to do the orbit mechanics calculations, but that actually freed his imagination to roam throughout the cosmos. We retired early that evening. I was awakened by a sudden BOOOM which caused me to leap from my bed. My immediate thought was Oh dear, Robert has shot himself! I didn't even know he had firearms. I ran down, opened the guest room door, heard a soft zzzzzzzz snooorrrrrk zzzzzzz... I looked at the clock: midnight. Right then I heard what sounded like ragged gunfire and shouting voices from the street out front. It occurred to me that it was Chinese New Year and the neighbors were out there playing with firecrackers. Nearly everyone in my neighborhood is Vietnamese or Chinese. Some reveling yahoo had hurled an M80 down the storm drain, which caused the sound to reverberate into the homes. Robert slept through it all. There was a project Robert was doing back in 2001 and 2002, where he was collecting a bunch of early proto-transhumanist material and computer development stuff from before the internet, much of it existing only in hard copy. He had me order a bunch of stuff from the Santa Clara county public library system, and was constantly cracking the whip to get me to move my ass on this, my enthusiasm being far less than his. His sense of urgency was much greater than mine. This is a quote from one of his emails to me where he was urging me to contact some local visionaries and collect archive materials: DAVAI! DAVAI! DAVAI! (... the Russian equivalent of Nike's "Just do it" exhortation but expressed with feelings that only Russian's may be able to properly emote... I expect it was used alot by Marshal Zhukov in the battle for Seelow Heights.) He pointed out that many of the early computer science visionaries were still living, many of them in the neighborhood here, but that they wouldn't be if we didn't move our asses on this. I collected materials, he scanned them while he was here in January 2002. On that trip he met with the Foresight crowd, collected a bunch of materials from K. Eric Drexler and Christine Petersen, among others, Ralph Merkel and Doug Engelbart I think and that crowd, much of it hard copy of stuff from the 1970s and 1980s. We OCRed materials here on my scanner, then he took the files on his laptop and all the hard copy with him. He had collected some floppy discs too, some of them being the old flexible 5.25 inch discs from which the name "floppy disc" was derived because they were actually floppy. He took those with him, for I had no way to read them in 2002. Oy vey! Now I realize I never did keep a soft copy of any of those archives he was compiling, no copies of anything he and I collected. I don't know what has become of those materials! Damn, I never did ask about it, and a lot of it was original documentation from people he knew but I didn't. I was just the messenger boy, collecting the stuff from local players he had already contacted. Damn. Does anyone here know Robert's family? Is there any tactful way to ask them to not throw away any of his papers? Or not erase any of his old files? Who knows what historical documents we might find in there, some of them perhaps dating back to the dawn of time, or at least the time that matters. Damien? David? Anyone else we might contact? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 18:11:29 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:11:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <201103031649.p23GnoJJ017101@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> <201103031649.p23GnoJJ017101@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: Max More wrote: Damn. Robert, as some of you old-timers will know, was a former director of Extropy Institute. He was an extremely smart guy and a major advocate of (and practical entrepreneur for) life extension and other transhumanist goals. I'm not only extremely unhappy to hear of his sudden and unexpected death, but also distressed that he had no arrangements for cryopreservation (to the best of my knowledge). That's quite surprising and, frankly, appalling given Robert's understanding of the technology and future possibilities. This is especially distressing because Alcor has people in Florida, where he died, who could have started the transport and cooldown on very short notice. Robert had his oddities but was always intelligent and probing and on the side of life. All we can do for him now is remember him. It's something, but it's very little, for he is gone forever. >>> Arghhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is so horribly sad!!! When I was living in Alaska, I joined the Extropy mailing list, and was enthralled with the many fascinating concepts and memes. I desperately wanted to attend the Extropy 5 Conference, back in 2001, but could not afford an airline ticket. Robert came forward with a bunch of frequent flyer miles, to sell me a ticket at a bargain basement rate! I had a wonderful time attending and have such fond memories of palling around with Robert, Anders, Greg, Spike, Amara, and others. I remember sitting at a table in Spike's backyard, and Robert was discussing with Greg Burch about his upcoming project that involved nanotubes. Robert touched on some of his painful business reversals, during that conversation. The Robert I knew (both online and at the conference) was a very affable and extremely intelligent gentleman, who was very good company. I recall him "holding court" at the hotel where a bunch of young people were hanging on his every word. They spoke into the wee hours of the morning. I was so tired but did not want to leave! I really wish I had been there for Robert's fantastic Extropy 3 Conference talk that Anders discussed, but at least I have my Extropy 5 memories. I am amazed that he had no suspension contract in place, because I had extensively corresponded online with him about the subject, and he had told me that he was so confident that cryonics would work, that upon his death, people could simply dump his decapitated and untreated head into a big bucket of liquid nitrogen, thereby freezing it, remove it from the bucket, smash it into the floor with all of their strength, splintering it into thousands of small pieces, sweep up the pieces and dump them into a foil bag, put that in a dewar, and then within a century or so the technology would be in place to fully restore him to health with little or no information loss!!! Looking back on things, Robert and I had a sort of uncle/nephew relationship, and among other subjects, we discussed women, relationships and modern marriage. He wanted to marry and have children, but had doubts about having a successful and lasting relationship. Robert had considered the foreign bride (he was partial to intelligent and educated Russian beauties) route, but realized it held some dangers. I am just so shocked by this development!!! It makes me think of Sasha Chislenko, who I never met in person, and who passed away in 2000. He was another man who treated me kindly and impressed me with his intelligence. And in Sasha's case I was even offered a job! I unfortunately did not meet the stiff requirements for the I.T. position. But still, I was touched. I realize I am among many agnostics and atheists here, but I hope considering how he was not frozen, that for both his sake and ours, there will prove to be some sort of afterlife (and I am not talking about a sophisticated simulation). I would really like to see my friend Robert Bradbury again one day. John Grigg On 3/3/11, David Lubkin wrote: > Spike wrote: > >>I think it's ok to use the photos on his homepage for an obit? I never >>really thought about it, but I guess that would be ok. >> >>http://www.aeiveos.com:8080/~bradbury/index.html >> >>Information hipsters, it is OK to grab photos off of the deceased's >> homepage >>for that person's obituary? If he made it public, then that means its >>public, right? > > As a legal matter, no. The copyright to them is owned by whoever took > them. They are the only ones who can authorize use thereof. (Which > people don't think about when putting pictures of themselves online.) > If the photo is of a human, you also need a model release, which > would have to be from Robert's heirs. > > I don't think anyone would object to use on a personal site for a > tribute, but Amara needs to adhere to the niceties for Kurzweil AI. > > We should see about continuing to host his site as is indefinitely, > as we did for Sasha. I'd be happy to take it on, if needed. > > > -- David. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Thu Mar 3 18:50:26 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 10:50:26 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110303185026.GA2606@ofb.net> On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:33:11PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Damien Sullivan > wrote: > > > > If 10% of my income goes to build a private palace, that's theft. ??If > > 50% of my income goes to zero-fare public transit, universal health > > care, funding for basic research, good law enforcement, safe housing, > > and many other public services, I may consider that a good deal. > > ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal > (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a > way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services Proof or evidence required. > by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also > highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's A public democratic authority is accountable through democracy. Some more so than others, depending on how agencies are set up; I posit that directly elected transit boards would be more responsive than appointees with a couple links of indirection. It is private or autocratic monopolies that are truly unaccountable and inefficient. Competitive markets may be more accountable than democracy but not all markets are stably competitive or account for all costs. -xx- Damien X-) From atymes at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 19:11:19 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:11:19 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web Message-ID: I had an idea for a physics experiment, which I'm sure there are probably holes with. I suspect someone on this list can point them out. Assume subatomic manipulators. (So, this can't be done with today's tech.) Start with a triangle of 3 carbon atoms, each bonded to the other two. (Other configurations are possible, but this is the simplest.) Attach a line of neutrons from each nucleus to the centerpoint of the triangle, each neutron bound by the strong force to its neighbors. Making the lines without them crumpling up would be a trick, but once the lines exist and connect, each line would pull on the other two to prevent them from simply collapsing (though they might pull the carbon atoms closer than they would otherwise be). Then connect points on these lines with further lines of neutrons, making a spider web. I suspect you couldn't make a solid sheet of neutrons without some active way to prevent them from simply collapsing into a ball - but this way, you could get something close. The end result would, among other things, be able to present a barrier to neutrinos - possibly a way to make use of the vast solar wind of them passing through us every second, as a (very tiny, albeit tesselatable: just arrange the carbon atoms in a crystal sheet) sail getting a mostly constant wind. (Indeed, given the volume of this wind, I suspect that would be the primary use for such a device at first.) So, what am I overlooking that would cause this to fail? From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 3 19:18:15 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:18:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D6FE977.5030104@lightlink.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > I had an idea for a physics experiment, which I'm sure there are probably > holes with. I suspect someone on this list can point them out. > > Assume subatomic manipulators. (So, this can't be done with today's tech.) > > Start with a triangle of 3 carbon atoms, each bonded to the other two. (Other > configurations are possible, but this is the simplest.) > > Attach a line of neutrons from each nucleus to the centerpoint of the triangle, > each neutron bound by the strong force to its neighbors. Making the lines > without them crumpling up would be a trick, but once the lines exist and > connect, each line would pull on the other two to prevent them from simply > collapsing (though they might pull the carbon atoms closer than they would > otherwise be). > > Then connect points on these lines with further lines of neutrons, making a > spider web. I suspect you couldn't make a solid sheet of neutrons without > some active way to prevent them from simply collapsing into a ball - but > this way, you could get something close. > > The end result would, among other things, be able to present a barrier to > neutrinos - possibly a way to make use of the vast solar wind of them > passing through us every second, as a (very tiny, albeit tesselatable: just > arrange the carbon atoms in a crystal sheet) sail getting a mostly constant > wind. (Indeed, given the volume of this wind, I suspect that would be the > primary use for such a device at first.) > > So, what am I overlooking that would cause this to fail? The forces holding the three carbon atoms APART are electromagnetic. The forces pulling the neutrons into a line are STRONG NUCLEAR. The ratio between these two is about a factor 100, depending how you calculate it. So the triangle would insantly collapse. And also the neutrons cannot be held to one another by the Strong force: you would need protons to make the force stable. Richard Loosemore From rpwl at lightlink.com Thu Mar 3 19:20:23 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:20:23 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D6FE9F7.3000107@lightlink.com> More to the point, the neutrons would act a little like a fluid that had extremely high surface tension: they would "want" to collapse into the smallest possible surface area. In other words, they would ball up..... Or at least, they would if they had protons. No protons, and I suspect that there would be a quick exchange of mesons and something would go "Spung!!!" :-) Richard Loosemore From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 19:40:06 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 14:40:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Or, you know, reusable spacecraft, where the problem is mainly refueling > and servicing them. Ship plants down, ship nutrients up. > Space elevator anyone? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 19:16:51 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:16:51 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> <201103031649.p23GnoJJ017101@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <011a01cbd9d7$8d3248b0$a796da10$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of John Grigg Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died >... I remember sitting at a table in Spike's backyard, and Robert was discussing with Greg Burch about his upcoming project that involved nanotubes. Robert touched on some of his painful business reversals, during that conversation... Thanks for reminding me of that John. That was in 2001 if I recall. We had a later party (about 2003) at my house where an interesting thing happened. We gathered the usual suspects, the locals, one of which was Melanie Swan. http://www.acceleratingfuture.com/people/Melanie-Swan/ For those of you who do not know her, Melanie is a nice, kindhearted, smart, good person, and she is half-normal. She appears perfectly at home with normal people, yet still fits in perfectly well with... um... us. So she and my wife have that in common: both are half normal. We had a party of the local ExI-crowd, which in those days was everything: the cryonics people, the nanotech crowd, the singularity types, the far futurists, Eliezer and his followers, and so forth. Melanie came, with her sweetheart, who as far as anyone could tell, was a *completely normal* guy. So he was a little bewildered, among a crowd of us hardcore types, while his own sweetheart displayed no apparent alarm at... our... well, help me here. You guys have been to extroschmoozes. It was that, only moreso. Recall this all happened after the 1999 backyard party in which the hakosote incident took place. My neighbors are *still* talking about that, 12 years later. So Melanie and Robert get to talking, and she asks him, Robert, what is an MBrain? Oooh, big mistake. He launches into animated Robert-isms. Those of you who know how Robert used to hold court, with people forming a ring around him hoping to absorb stray idea-inos, how can I describe Robert-isms? So I am sitting across from these three, Robert, Melanie and her sweetheart, and watching this hapless lonely normal guy as he tries to figure out which way to flee should this crowd suddenly turn violent, and how to rescue his sweetheart from this insane asylum of my back yard. spike From atymes at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 19:43:41 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:43:41 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <4D6FE9F7.3000107@lightlink.com> References: <4D6FE9F7.3000107@lightlink.com> Message-ID: Ah, that makes sense. Thanks! On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > > More to the point, the neutrons would act a little like a fluid that had > extremely high surface tension: ?they would "want" to collapse into the > smallest possible surface area. ?In other words, they would ball up..... > > Or at least, they would if they had protons. ?No protons, and I suspect that > there would be a quick exchange of mesons and something would go "Spung!!!" > > :-) > > > Richard Loosemore > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From eugen at leitl.org Thu Mar 3 19:46:29 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 20:46:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> Message-ID: <20110303194629.GV23560@leitl.org> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 02:40:06PM -0500, Mr Jones wrote: > Space elevator anyone? Aramide would do it for the Moon. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 atymes at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 19:50:04 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 11:50:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> Message-ID: 2011/3/3 Mr Jones : > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> Or, you know, reusable spacecraft, where the problem is mainly refueling >> and servicing them. ?Ship plants down, ship nutrients up. > > Space elevator anyone? But then you have the problem of getting stuff from the elevator's landing point to its ultimate destination. Though perhaps you could simply bring the spaceship there after unloading its cargo, and haul it up that way. (Or even, do most of the growing at the base, and the only "space" part is drop-shipping food to wherever.) From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 20:18:24 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 12:18:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <011a01cbd9d7$8d3248b0$a796da10$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <00a001cbd969$b967eb60$2c37c220$@att.net> <4D6F83D4.9060000@aleph.se> <090c01cbd9a2$b06e7770$114b6650$@net> <00dd01cbd9b9$e385e050$aa91a0f0$@att.net> <201103031649.p23GnoJJ017101@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <011a01cbd9d7$8d3248b0$a796da10$@att.net> Message-ID: <012101cbd9e0$2620b310$72621930$@att.net> Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died I propose a temporary open season until further notice, on the subject of Robert Bradbury: if you have favored memories, post away and don't worry about the usual posting limit on that particular topic; it doesn't count against your recommended daily limit. Many of us here have fond memories of that special person to share. spike From lubkin at unreasonable.com Thu Mar 3 21:49:00 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 16:49:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> Message-ID: <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Spike wrote: >Does anyone here know Robert's family? Is there any tactful way to >ask them to not throw away any of his papers? Or not erase any of >his old files? Who knows what historical documents we might find in >there, some of them perhaps dating back to the dawn of time, or at >least the time that matters. Damien? David? Anyone else we might contact? I don't know his family but I'm working on reaching them. The most urgent question is whether there's a funeral or memorial service that his friends might attend. It would be, presumably, in either Massachusetts or Florida. Either way, some of us are near enough to be able to go. The second question is preservation of his papers, computer files, and web site. -- David. From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 3 22:15:15 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 14:15:15 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> >...The most urgent question is whether there's a funeral or memorial service that his friends might attend. It would be, presumably, in either Massachusetts or Florida. Either way, some of us are near enough to be able to go. -- David Ja. Robert's middle initial is J. Does anyone know the name of his father or any of his siblings? spike What is the path we learned the tragic news? I see the KurzweilAI page has his obituary up (thanks Amara Angelica. The birth year is 1957.) K. Eric Drexler and Robert were friends, perhaps he knows the family? spike From lubkin at unreasonable.com Thu Mar 3 23:10:04 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 18:10:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> Message-ID: <201103032310.p23NA2fI017721@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Spike wrote: >What is the path we learned the tragic news? David Kekich heard from Robert's brother. I emailed David for contact info. >I see the KurzweilAI page has his obituary up (thanks Amara >Angelica. The birth year is 1957.) I passed that along to her already. >K. Eric Drexler and Robert were friends, perhaps he knows the family? While I wait to hear back from David, I'm digging out info through other sources. -- David. From anders at aleph.se Thu Mar 3 23:13:16 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 23:13:16 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D70208C.7070308@aleph.se> One of the classic simple models of atomic nuclei is the "droplet model" by Gamow, Bohr and Wheeler, which just treats them as liquid droplets of incompressible fluid with a heck of a surface tension. Insofar this model works, it suggests that nuclear matter in its normal state is a pretty lousy building material unless you like lumps of stuff. However, Adrian, I am curious of why you thought a sheet of neutrons would stop neutrinos? Personally I doubt it would work: any interaction would be by the weak force, and it is pretty wimpy. Lacking some lepton with the right charge the neutrino could not be absorbed by a reaction like n0 + v + e+ -> p+, so there might not even be any allowed reaction. But weird things happen when you spread out matter in low dimensional structures (think of graphenes), so intuitions might be misleading. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 3 22:56:56 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 16:56:56 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 4:15 PM, spike wrote: > What is the path we learned the tragic news? David Kekich. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amara at kurzweilai.net Thu Mar 3 23:31:34 2011 From: amara at kurzweilai.net (Amara D. Angelica) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 15:31:34 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> Message-ID: <03f201cbd9fb$22a4b770$67ee2650$@net> Spike, thanks. http://www.kurzweilai.net/robert-bradbury is our standard author page, updated. I haven't posted an obit yet. > I see the KurzweilAI page has his obituary up (thanks Amara Angelica. The birth year is 1957.) From atymes at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 00:26:37 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 16:26:37 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <4D70208C.7070308@aleph.se> References: <4D70208C.7070308@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > However, Adrian, I am curious of why you thought a sheet of neutrons would > stop neutrinos? Simple exclusion. Neutrinos can slip through the spaces inside ordinary matter, because they don't interact electromagnetically. But they can't actually occupy the same space as a neutron, can they? The web (if it could exist) would still let many through - but it would interact with many more than normal matter does. From lubkin at unreasonable.com Fri Mar 4 00:45:38 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 19:45:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <201103032310.p23NA2fI017721@andromeda.ziaspace.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <40FCADE3357541A5AE96687220479540@DFC68LF1> <010401cbd9ce$37dd2000$a7976000$@att.net> <201103032149.p23LmwPA015941@andromeda.ziaspace.com> <013c01cbd9f0$79593920$6c0bab60$@att.net> <201103032310.p23NA2fI017721@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Message-ID: <201103040046.p240kdKr019577@andromeda.ziaspace.com> I figured out who the rest of Robert's immediate family is, and found addresses and home phone numbers for them. He has two brothers. I left voicemail for one of them. The other's voicemail is full; I'll try again tomorrow. I only have a partial phone number for his parents. Another question to ask them is whether they welcome condolence notes and, if so, where they should be sent. (I think we already have a clear idea where and how to contribute to honor his memory.) His 86 year old father was an engineer. In hunting, I found two laser-related patent applications. -- David. From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 03:42:41 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 22:42:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <20110303113320.GI23560@leitl.org> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <20110303113320.GI23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 6:33 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:33:11PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > >> ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal >> (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a >> way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services >> by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also >> highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's >> offered as something you cannot refuse. >> >> The key to efficiency in fulfilling human desires within a social >> structure are the twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers. > > The problem with decentral equality assumption is that it isn't > true. As long as there's not bottom-up diagnostics and early > response going on everywhere, all the time, you'll get autochthonous > emergence of centralist structures which will soon have an edge over > grass-root systems. > > After a while, the result is something very closely resembling > what we have. Which is definitely not what we want. ### You are correct, as long as the nodes are not aware of the overall topology and refuse connections to emerging centralist structures (i.e. don't know or don't care about the polycentric nature of their society), it is likely to degenerate into what we have now. Is that an argument against decentralized societies or an argument for modifying yourself during uploading to support participation in a decentralized society? You decide. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 03:53:17 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 22:53:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Damien Sullivan >> wrote: >>> >>> If 10% of my income goes to build a private palace, that's theft. ? If >>> 50% of my income goes to zero-fare public transit, universal health >>> care, funding for basic research, good law enforcement, safe housing, >>> and many other public services, I may consider that a good deal. >> >> ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal >> (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a >> way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services >> by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also >> highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's >> offered as something you cannot refuse. >> >> The key to efficiency in fulfilling human desires within a social >> structure are the twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers. > > But, Rafal, this is not accurate except as a theoretical ideal. > > Consider the simple concept of "free public transport". ?In London in the > late 1970s, the cost of public transport had risen so much that people were > using cars more and more. ?The city was becoming a nightmare of gridlock and > pollution. ?Many people overlooked the bad side effects and simple decided > that the high fares were more important .... partly because those high fares > were *immediately* apparent to them (tight feedback loop) whereas the > sickness engendered by pollution, the road deaths and injuries, the cost of > maintaining the roads, and so on, were all feeding back to those people > along open, extended feedback loops (and so were completely invisible). > > Then a local government came to office and slashed the tube and bus fares. > ?Immediate result was that the same public transport facilities were used > more, the cost of maintaining roads, etc etc, went down. ?The city benefited > enormously. > > You have just described that as "inefficient". ?It was not :-). ?Simply as > that. ?It was tremendously beneficial. > > Then the Conservatives won the next election and the whole scheme was > dumped. > > People did have the "twin abilities to freely make and refuse offers" and it > didn't help. ### Well, you don't need to have subsidies for zero-fare public transportation - you only need accurate pricing of inputs and outputs. If road owners charged by the square foot/hour of occupancy, with supply/demand adjustment of prices on an hourly basis (i.e. congestion pricing), and if there was free entry for the provision of private means of mass transportation, you would have an efficient outcome. What you describe is the result of municipal monopoly ownership of roads and their mispricing, followed by running-around-like-a-headless-chicken attempts to fix the resulting problems. And yes, there are places like Singapore, or nowadays London, which introduced congestion pricing - which works better than subsidies even if it is imposed by an illegitimate, municipal rather than private, authority. When you want things to actually work, the economics narrative (price, supply, demand, incentive) always beats the political narrative (Conservative scum, good Liberals). Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 04:17:07 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 23:17:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <20110303185026.GA2606@ofb.net> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <20110303185026.GA2606@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:50 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 08:33:11PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Damien Sullivan >> wrote: >> > >> > If 10% of my income goes to build a private palace, that's theft. ??If >> > 50% of my income goes to zero-fare public transit, universal health >> > care, funding for basic research, good law enforcement, safe housing, >> > and many other public services, I may consider that a good deal. >> >> ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal >> (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a >> way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services > > Proof or evidence required. ### Users almost always refuse to use them if charged the full price and given alternatives (private mass transport, private individual transport). QED, no? --------------- > >> by a public (i.e. monopolistic, non-accountable) authority is also >> highly inefficient. You are very unlikely to get a good deal if it's > > A public democratic authority is accountable through democracy. ?Some > more so than others, depending on how agencies are set up; I posit that > directly elected transit boards would be more responsive than appointees > with a couple links of indirection. ### You are correct. Probably. However, since their funding does not depend on a day to day basis on satisfying the desires of customer better than a competitor, the strength and reliability of the feedback controlling their behavior is still weak, much weaker than e.g. the ruthless and immediate control exerted by customers on the drivers of rikshas - their accountability to the desires of customers is a key to surviving another day, while a transit board needs to muddle through some sort of election only sometimes and even then they they can obfuscate their role, given the absence of market pricing and alternatives. Without prices (true, full, undistorted prices) we are all blind as moles. > > It is private or autocratic monopolies that are truly unaccountable and > inefficient. ?Competitive markets may be more accountable than democracy > but not all markets are stably competitive or account for all costs. ### Of course, autocratic monopolies (but not all private monopolies) are truly evil (translation = inefficient in satisfying human desires), just as evil as power monopolies that maintain a veneer of social responsibility. You may note that I am not agitating for having a private state, but rather against having any singleton hierarchical structures, however one may classify them on a political (left/right) spectrum. More to the point, the markets in the provision of transportation are both highly competitive and stable (with low barriers to entry, quick turnaround of competing firms, enormous difficulties in sustaining a cartel, multiple competing and substitutable forms of transportation, etc. etc), in the absence of state intervention, and can be made to account for relevant costs through insurance and private liability provisions. I used to believe the received wisdom that markets are unstable but now I think that the only unstable markets are the ones in the provision of violence or protection from violence (at least in the absence of strong second-order social norms stabilizing such markets). It would take a bit more writing than I can afford today to flesh out the reasons for my change of mind ... maybe another time. Rafal From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 05:13:30 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 22:13:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 12:20 PM, Artillo wrote: > It is truly a shame to lose such a great intellect and contributor and > still so young. Sad day for us all. Every time a mind, especially a great one like Robert, is lost we are all poorer because our future has less potential to be fun. We need to stem the loss, do something to keep such loses from being permanent. Who do you know that (if they died tomorrow) it would be a loss for the extropian/transhumanist/high tech community? It seems to me that it would be worth maintaining a Facebook like data base of people who we want to exist in post singularity world even if they die before the singularity. Finding they were on this list might be more effective than talking to them about the topic. (At least *I* have had no luck with that approach.) We need the meme to become popular that it is selfish to die without being suspended, it's like burning a library of books of a person's experiences. If enough friends want them to be around in the indefinite future, then perhaps we can shame them into agreeing to be suspended if and when they need it. This really should go in a data base or wiki, but who do you think would be a loss for the community if they were not suspended when they need it? I will start with two. Freeman Dyson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freeman_dyson Ted Nelson, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Nelson I have spoken to both of them about suspension and they have both rejected it. I have no idea if they could be swayed by a long list of people asking them to reconsider, but it seems to me to be worth a try. Keith Henson PS. If there is someone out there who would like to set up a "people we would like to have around in the future" data base or wiki, let me know. From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 05:19:12 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 23:19:12 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 11:13 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > PS. If there is someone out there who would like to set up a "people > we would like to have around in the future" data base or wiki, let me > know. I'd like to have everyone listed here: http://diyhpl.us/cgit/meetlog/plain/meetlog.txt thanks - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 05:57:59 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 05:57:59 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### Well, you don't need to have subsidies for zero-fare public > transportation - you only need accurate pricing of inputs and outputs. > If road owners charged by the square foot/hour of occupancy, with > supply/demand adjustment of prices on an hourly basis (i.e. congestion > pricing), and if there was free entry for the provision of private > means of mass transportation, you would have an efficient outcome. > > What you describe is the result of municipal monopoly ownership of > roads and their mispricing, followed by > running-around-like-a-headless-chicken attempts to fix the resulting > problems. And yes, there are places like Singapore, or nowadays > London, which introduced congestion pricing - which works better than > subsidies even if it is imposed by an illegitimate, municipal rather > than private, authority. When you want things to actually work, the > economics narrative (price, supply, demand, incentive) always beats > the political narrative (Conservative scum, good Liberals). > > Seems it is more complicated than that. (Like real life often is). In London, over the last five years or so, congestion charging has had the desired effect of reducing the number of private cars entering the central zone. Initially traffic flow improved, but now the jams are back again, even with reduced traffic volume. Why has this happened? It turns out that there have been other 'improvements' implemented to benefit other users. 1) Cycle paths have been installed, reducing the road volume for motor vehicles. 2) Most traffic lights have had a pedestrian phase added, which stops all roads for a period while pedestrians cross. 3) Additional pedestrian controlled lights have been installed to allow pedestrians to cross roads with continual streams of traffic. So you would have to add pedestrian pricing into the scheme as well. As soon as anyone moves outside their house, on foot, cycle or car, the meter would have to start charging. That's a real communist society! BillK From eugen at leitl.org Fri Mar 4 07:56:39 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 08:56:39 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <20110303113320.GI23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110304075639.GB23560@leitl.org> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:42:41PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Is that an argument against decentralized societies or an argument for > modifying yourself during uploading to support participation in a > decentralized society? You decide. Oh, I'm all for patching. Culture can only take you so far, and even some external machinery prompting you is already augmentation. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Fri Mar 4 09:10:12 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 01:10:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <348191.29463.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Adrian Tymes mused: > I had an idea for a physics experiment, which I'm sure > there are probably > holes with.? I suspect someone on this list can point > them out .... > > So, what am I overlooking that would cause this to fail? Everything, I suspect. Top marks for imagination, but unfortunately I'm fairly sure that this would be a non-starter for several reasons. It would be like trying to make a bow and arrow out of marbles. Marbles that you can't melt. Creating a molecule with just 3 carbon atoms would be .. difficult .. (chronic understatement) and stringing neutrons together like that, well, let's just say it implies tech. that, if possible at all, makes your goal superfluous. I think even the wildest dreams of the keenest femtotech enthusiast don't come anywhere near this. If we could do that, we'd be able to tell neutrons to jump, and they'd not only ask "how high", but "what should I wear and shall I bring a friend?". That's 'sufficently advanced' technology, all right! Ben Zaiboc From anders at aleph.se Fri Mar 4 10:50:41 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 10:50:41 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <348191.29463.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <348191.29463.qm@web114411.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4D70C401.7050809@aleph.se> Adrian Tymes wrote: > Simple exclusion. Neutrinos can slip through the spaces inside ordinary > matter, because they don't interact electromagnetically. But they can't > actually occupy the same space as a neutron, can they? > Sorry, particle physics doesn't behave much according to common sense. Remember that neutrinos and quarks are as far as we know point particles, and the neutron is about 2*10^-16 m across. Most of it is empty space. Worse, if two particles have no interactions allowed my understanding of quantum field theory says that they will just pass through each other. A bit like how light gets through glass since there is no electrons with the right energy gap for it to react with. Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Creating a molecule with just 3 carbon atoms would be .. difficult .. You are just pessmistic. It exists: cyclopropane. At least chemistry makes sense. But it is after all almost on our own size scale. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Mar 4 13:29:30 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 05:29:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Anders Sandberg wrote: > Ben Zaiboc wrote: > > Creating a molecule with just 3 carbon atoms would be > .. difficult .. > You are just pessmistic. It exists: cyclopropane. > > At least chemistry makes sense. But it is after all almost > on our own > size scale. Ha, I should have known! I was imagining a kind of triangular version of graphene, and thinking "That'll never work". You could put Oxygen or Sulphur or something in there instead of the Hydrogen, and possibly get a sheet with a bumpy surface. Not that there's much point, as we have graphene. Maybe (if Adrian's idea of a neutron-rich surface being good for catching neutrinos is anywhere near the mark) an aligned double layer of graphene with a neutron-dense atom caught between each pair of hexagons might be of some use. Pile a few hundred such sheets together, and you might get a fairly neutron-dense surface. It would still look like empty space to a neutrino, though. I'm talking rubbish, aren't I? Plain old lead would be much better. Oh, well.. Love those 'platonic hydrocarbons', though. Cool! Ben Zaiboc From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 4 13:54:00 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 08:54:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Anders Sandberg wrote: >> Ben Zaiboc wrote: > I'm talking rubbish, aren't I? Plain old lead would be much better. Oh, well.. I wouldn't go that far :-), but the collision cross section for neutrinos is estimated to be such that if you want to catch a significant fraction of them you need *roughly* a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead. So, I don't see any problem with Adrian's ideas except that you need to take a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead then compress it to make a thin sandwich that we can install in orbit, to collect the sun's neutrino output. Shouldn't be too difficult. Bit of engineering, is all. Richard Loosemore From lubkin at unreasonable.com Fri Mar 4 14:10:47 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 09:10:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Robert Bradbury update Message-ID: <201103041410.p24EAgKS015420@andromeda.ziaspace.com> I got email this morning from David Kekich, who'd been in touch with one of Robert's brothers, and then a return phone call from another of them. (There are three; I'd misspoke.) I had a long conversation with his brother, who left it to me to gel down. Robert did indeed die on Sunday, at his parents' winter home in Florida. Of a brain aneurysm. He basically fell, and died. There was a coroner's report; blood work is coming. There are clues developing to what led to it. Tragically, his 86 year old father found him. He will be cremated. We did discuss cryonics. His brother was aware of his prior interest, knew it had waned, and did not know of suspension arrangements. There will be a memorial service in the Boston area some time after winter. Robert was down there helping look after his mom, who has not been well. The date of the service will depend on when she's up for the trip. They welcome the attendance of his friends, so we should have enough notice for people who want to fly in or drive up. I'll orchestrate an extropian gathering in conjunction with this, before or after the service with his family. He hadn't known of Robert's involvement with Kurzweil or Amara's planned obituary. He was pleased. Speaking on behalf of his family, he authorized the use of any of the photos Robert had on the web for obituaries, tributes, etc. That would include photos from his web site and his profiles on Orkut, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc. No papers or files will be destroyed. He supports our desire to preserve Robert's work indefinitely. There's a practical way we may be able to be of help. All Robert's stuff is on a UNIX box, and they haven't been able to figure out the password. Presumably we and our friends can find a way in if anyone can. I offered we could try; they'll ask if it's down to that. (For that matter, I offered that if there was any way at all we could help them, they should ask.) I'll aggregate and pass along anything you want to share with the family, electronic or physical. Put "Bradbury" in the subject line. If you want to mail me something, email me for the address. -- David. From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 15:02:03 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 08:02:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <01f801cbd842$e5b5f720$b121e560$@att.net> References: <01f801cbd842$e5b5f720$b121e560$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 12:00 PM, spike wrote: > > ... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson > Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) > >>...If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that > obviate the need for large cities? ...-Kelly > > > Kelly I will give you an answer that sounds like I am kidding, but not > really. > > Our ability to obviate cities is entirely dependent on our working out the > technology of remote copulation. ?I think someone here called it > teledildonics. Yes, I used that word recently... > We can easily move enough information to do business over > phone lines today, but if we can work out the social aspects of people > crowding together (providing a red hot target for anyone waging economic > war) then we can spread out more evenly over the surface of the planet. > That voodoo sex thing isn't just a game, it's a need. Agreed. > A lot of people want > or need (or think they do) a huge pool of potential mates. ?The city > provides that, at a great cost. ?I think we can provide that for people > living out in the boonies. ?I am betting on it in a sense: acquired property > far from everything, in anticipation of fiber optics and satellites > eventually obviating airplanes and cars. I don't think we'll ever get to the point of avoiding travel entirely, but I do think it will be reduced. If I can take a virtual trip to Bali for $20 and have a virtual dinner in Paris the same night, then that may be perceived as better than the real world. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 15:22:39 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 08:22:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:18:07AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your > neighbor. ?If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land > surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. ?If > you allow for families and specify clumps of 4, you'd have a family > every 280 meters. ?A 3 minute walk to other people, no matter where on > Earth you were, save the oceans. ?You get space because the rest of us > clump up. This is a fact that I am very grateful for. I just don't entirely get why people want to do so. > There's evidence that a lot of creative economic activity scales up > super-linearly in cities, e.g. 2x the people will generate more than 2x > the productivity, 15% more economic activity per capita, while using > less than 2x the energy (only 85% more). ?By contrast corporations are > sublinear (profit per employees shrinks with size) > http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Urban_West-t.html?_r=1&pagewanted=a > http://www.pnas.org/content/104/17/7301.abstract This is interesting. I have a general theory that the more people get involved in an activity as a group, the less efficient they are. Perhaps cities buck this general trend because they aren't as cohesive as a corporation or government agency. > Arguably a safer place to raise children than outer suburbs > http://www.grist.org/article/2010-12-27-want-a-safe-place-to-raise-kids-look-to-the-cities I'm sure my place is safer than a city. ;-) At least safer from other people. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 16:32:54 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:32:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 10:57 PM, BillK wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Seems it is more complicated than that. (Like real life often is). Only because of meddling bureaucrats. > In London, over the last five years or so, congestion charging has had > the desired effect of reducing the number of private cars entering the > central zone. > > Initially traffic flow improved, but now the jams are back again, even > with reduced traffic volume. Why has this happened? > > It turns out that there have been other 'improvements' implemented to > benefit other users. > 1) Cycle paths have been installed, reducing the road volume for motor vehicles. > 2) Most traffic lights have had a pedestrian phase added, which stops > all roads for a period while pedestrians cross. > 3) Additional pedestrian controlled lights have been installed to > allow pedestrians to cross roads with continual streams of traffic. All brought to you by meddling bureaucrats who once they had taxed the system, saw that there was excess capacity to milk for political benefit. (i.e. once the drivers were "happy" for the moment, they could try to make the pedestrians and cyclists happy for the moment). Short term thinking is a hallmark of bureaucratic thinking, even though it is generally alleged that only government can do long term planning. The corporation is always thinking (allegedly) about the next quarter profits. The difference lies in whether you are talking about political capital or money. The group think is the same in either case. > So you would have to add pedestrian pricing into the scheme as well. > As soon as anyone moves outside their house, on foot, cycle or car, > the meter would have to start charging. That's a real communist > society! Bill, I'm not sure that's communist exactly. Totalitarian, possibly. But London is the most camera heavy city in the world (by my understanding) so big brother is watching anyway. -Kelly From atymes at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 17:18:24 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 09:18:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 2:50 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Remember that neutrinos and quarks are as far as we know point particles, > and the neutron is about 2*10^-16 m across. Most of it is empty space. Another wrinkle, then. The point was to fill in the empty space - and as difficult as doing it with neutrons would be, doing it with the quarks that make up neutrons would be even harder. > Worse, if two particles have no interactions allowed Neutrons and neutrinos do interact gravitationally and through the strong nuclear force, to my understanding. Just not electromagnetically. On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > I wouldn't go that far :-), but the collision cross section for neutrinos is > estimated to be such that if you want to catch a significant fraction of > them you need *roughly* a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead. Ah, but that's with atoms. All that empty space. > So, I don't see any problem with Adrian's ideas except that you need to take > a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead then compress it to make a thin sandwich > that we can install in orbit, to collect the sun's neutrino output. > > Shouldn't be too difficult. ?Bit of engineering, is all. Neutron stars are compressed matter of that sort. Except they're balls, not sheets, and unless you've got a way to get them to spread out despite their own gravity pulling them into a ball is the tricky part. From pharos at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 17:32:44 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 17:32:44 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > Bill, I'm not sure that's communist exactly. Totalitarian, possibly. > But London is the most camera heavy city in the world (by my > understanding) so big brother is watching anyway. > > You are correct. Totalitarian is a better word. But I am not using it to describe London as it is at present. I am using it to describe Rafal's ideal Libertarian society where an individual has to pay for everything they do. As Rafal said: "When you want things to actually work, the economics narrative (price, supply, demand, incentive) always beats the political narrative (Conservative scum, good Liberals)". You want to use my road? - Pay up. You want to inconvenience me by stopping my car so you can cross the road? - Pay up. Etc. ad infinitum. So you have to track every member of society to see what chargeable services they are using and send them a monthly bill. Is that really the Libertarian society you want? BillK From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 4 18:25:47 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 13:25:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4D712EAB.2090103@lightlink.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> I wouldn't go that far :-), but the collision cross section for neutrinos is >> estimated to be such that if you want to catch a significant fraction of >> them you need *roughly* a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead. > > Ah, but that's with atoms. All that empty space. Gee, Adrian: you got a one-light-year-thick wall of lead there, which has been compressed into a nice convenient-sized sheet! 8-) I reckon each neutrino will hit, what? 10^^17 nuclei on its way through??? I don't think the empty space is your problem. :-) >> So, I don't see any problem with Adrian's ideas except that you need to take >> a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead then compress it to make a thin sandwich >> that we can install in orbit, to collect the sun's neutrino output. >> >> Shouldn't be too difficult. Bit of engineering, is all. > > Neutron stars are compressed matter of that sort. Except they're balls, not > sheets, and unless you've got a way to get them to spread out despite their > own gravity pulling them into a ball is the tricky part. Okay lets see. Average density of a neutron star is 5^^17 kg/m3. Average density of lead is about 1^^4 kg/m3. So to make the light year thick sheet of lead have the same cross sectional density as a neutron star you would have to compress it in one dimension by a factor of about 1^^14. One light year is about 10^^16 meters. So that is pretty good! You would only need about 100 meters of neutronium. Comparable to the size of a neutron star, in fact. So if you want to capture neutrinos, a neutron star would do quite nicely. So, next step. You've got your neutron star, and it is definitely collecting a lot of the neutrinos from the sun: now what do you do with it? :-) (Meanwhile, better hurry, because I think your neutron star is eating our sun!). Richard Loosemore From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Fri Mar 4 18:29:24 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 10:29:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 08:22:39AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Damien Sullivan > wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:18:07AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > > Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your > > neighbor. ?If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land > > surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. ?If > > you allow for families and specify clumps of 4, you'd have a family > > every 280 meters. ?A 3 minute walk to other people, no matter where on > > Earth you were, save the oceans. ?You get space because the rest of us > > clump up. > > This is a fact that I am very grateful for. I just don't entirely get > why people want to do so. Well, quite obviously, telepresence today is NOT a substitute for real interaction. Anyone who wants to taste different foods they haven't cooked, and hear live music, and touch other people, needs to be other people. Ditto for getting most jobs being hear health care, having efficient services, and all sorts of other things. > This is interesting. I have a general theory that the more people get > involved in an activity as a group, the less efficient they are. "efficient" gets thrown around pretty casually, I think. Efficient in what sense, maxmizing what variable and minimizing use of what resource? For lots of tasks, people are more effective in groups or large groups, because individuals cannot do the task by themselves. > Perhaps cities buck this general trend because they aren't as cohesive > as a corporation or government agency. analogy: city markets and ecosystems, where more size means more diversity and niches. analogy: bureaucracies (public or privae) and brains, vs. masses of individuals or amoebas, where some people or cells seem to provide less effort yet provide coordination that enables the other units to be productive at all. And yes, I'm undermining the glib implied moral of my own links, but it's worth doing: comparing a city-at-large with a corporation may not be a fair comparison, they're not doing the same sorts of things. -xx- Damien X-) From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 4 18:31:26 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 13:31:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> BillK wrote: > So you have to track every member of society to see what chargeable > services they are using and send them a monthly bill. Is that really > the Libertarian society you want? That's a nice argument! ;-) One of the natural end points of libertarian thinking is that everyone has to be monitored, to track the costs they are incurring, so they can be charged. But of course, the government should not do the monitoring, and instead each person must carry around some kind of device to count the people who need to be made to pay.... So all these motorists in London each have to carry some kind of device in their car so that when a pedestian tries to use the road and slow them down, the motorist can somehow get money out of them: "You want to cross in front of my car? There's a toll!". So what is the device that will let them do this? Ah, yes, a gun. Richard Loosemore From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Fri Mar 4 19:04:26 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 11:04:26 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <20110303185026.GA2606@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110304190426.GB7194@ofb.net> On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 11:17:07PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > >> > If 10% of my income goes to build a private palace, that's theft. ??If > >> > 50% of my income goes to zero-fare public transit, universal health > >> > care, funding for basic research, good law enforcement, safe housing, > >> > and many other public services, I may consider that a good deal. > >> > >> ### But public transport, especially zero fare, as well as universal > >> (I presume you mean "free") health care are highly inefficient as a > >> way of apportioning resources - and of course, provision of services > > > > Proof or evidence required. > > ### Users almost always refuse to use them if charged the full price > and given alternatives (private mass transport, private individual > transport). > > QED, no? No. This is multiply problematic. 1) How many concrete examples can you point to of this being tried? 1a) And which examples would we be looking at? I see two main purposes of public transit. One, common in the US and in smaller towns, is as a subsidy for the carless, typically the poor. If you're too young or old or sick or otherwise unable to drive, or can't afford a car, there's a bus provided. That runs every hour, is slow to get where you need to go, and doesn't run late, so you have to organize your life around it. Charging full price or talking about efficiency compared to car ownership is missing the point and meaingless, because it's meant for people who can't have cars, or sometimes for the 8-5 working crowd who'll keep a car anyway for weekends and nights. It's also in a sucky space with sublinear scaling; if you doubled expenses by running twice as many buses, you'd make the captive users happier but still not attract anyone who had a choice. So yeah, it won't pay for itself in any direct sense, it's charity. OTOH, you can have systems, usually found in major metropolitan areas, that strive to compete directly with cars for speed and convenience. Train lines every mile, stops every half-mile, service every 5 minutes or less, late night service, frequent buses that ideally can pre-empt traffic signals. Combined with urban congestion and lack of parking, and you get a phase transition from the space "I have a car if I can, and I might take the bus to avoid parking if it's really convenient" to "I take the train, and I might take a car if I like road trips a lot but it's really a luxury". Hong Kong has some that pay for themselves even privately, as zero-fare, with the company owning land near the stations and profiting from the high rent value their service provides. The urban government equivalent would be property taxes, or better, land value taxes. 2) The "given alternatives" are themselves heavily subsidized, just less so in the form of simple budget items. The roads themselves are usually zero-fare; no one's getting charged cash for the wear and tear and amortized costs as they drive away from their house. Local governments often require parking to made available in various places, an unfunded mandate subsidizing car lifestyle at the expense of pedestrian choises. Cars are useful in part because you can get in and drive almost everywhere in the country, if you have the time... on government built roads many of which probably wouldn't pay for themselves as individually tolled segments. Dispersed settlement favoring cars has received massive government subsidies, ranging from subsidized homeownership to the postal monopoly charging the same rate no matter where one lives, rather than having to pay more to recieve mail further from city centers. And of course there's been the subsidy of the right to automotive air pollution. 2a) In congested areas, public transit benefits drivers as well as riders. More people on the train means fewer people on the road and competing for parking. Subsidized public transit isn't just helping the riders. 2b) Metro systems are expensive in part because of a choice to reserve roads for cars, leaving subways as the main alternative for fast transit. A light rapid transit system, running on surface rights of way, can be a lot cheaper to build ($30 million/mile vs. $1 billion/mile) while making cars less attractive. So, no, if you're going to be a libertarian purist, you can't point to the US system of roads and cars and assume that's the natural state of affairs, or say that explicit public transit subsidies are unfair and inefficient in the face of implicit private transport subsidies. -xx- Damien X-) From atymes at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 20:34:40 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:34:40 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <4D712EAB.2090103@lightlink.com> References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> <4D712EAB.2090103@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Adrian Tymes wrote: >> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Richard Loosemore >> wrote: >>> I wouldn't go that far :-), but the collision cross section for neutrinos >>> is >>> estimated to be such that if you want to catch a significant fraction of >>> them you need *roughly* a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead. >> >> Ah, but that's with atoms. ?All that empty space. > > Gee, Adrian: ?you got a one-light-year-thick wall of lead there, which has > been compressed into a nice convenient-sized sheet! 8-) ?I reckon each > neutrino will hit, what? 10^^17 nuclei on its way through??? ?I don't think > the empty space is your problem. ?:-) We're violently agreeing. I said that the reason you needed 1 light year thickness with lead was because normal lead has all that empty space. Compressing does indeed solve that. > So, next step. ?You've got your neutron star, and it is definitely > collecting a lot of the neutrinos from the sun: ?now what do you do with it? > ?:-) Eh. It was a thought experiment to see if neutrinos could be interacted with at all. Some possible applications are analogues to sails: tack against the neutrino wind for propulsion or power. But mostly, I was just seeing if the interaction could be done in the first place. From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 4 20:58:32 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:58:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> <4D712EAB.2090103@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4D715278.9030207@lightlink.com> Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> Adrian Tymes wrote: >>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 5:54 AM, Richard Loosemore >>> wrote: >>>> I wouldn't go that far :-), but the collision cross section for neutrinos >>>> is >>>> estimated to be such that if you want to catch a significant fraction of >>>> them you need *roughly* a 1 light-year thick sheet of lead. >>> Ah, but that's with atoms. All that empty space. >> Gee, Adrian: you got a one-light-year-thick wall of lead there, which has >> been compressed into a nice convenient-sized sheet! 8-) I reckon each >> neutrino will hit, what? 10^^17 nuclei on its way through??? I don't think >> the empty space is your problem. :-) > > We're violently agreeing. I said that the reason you needed 1 light year > thickness with lead was because normal lead has all that empty space. > Compressing does indeed solve that. > >> So, next step. You've got your neutron star, and it is definitely >> collecting a lot of the neutrinos from the sun: now what do you do with it? >> :-) > > Eh. It was a thought experiment to see if neutrinos could be interacted with > at all. Some possible applications are analogues to sails: tack against the > neutrino wind for propulsion or power. But mostly, I was just seeing if the > interaction could be done in the first place. Oh, just light-heartedly joshing you, is all :-). Full marks for lateral thinking, I gotta say. Richard Loosemore From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 4 23:11:02 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:11:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F9FC0.4010403@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D717186.9010409@mac.com> On 03/03/2011 11:40 AM, Mr Jones wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Adrian Tymes > wrote: > > Or, you know, reusable spacecraft, where the problem is mainly > refueling > and servicing them. Ship plants down, ship nutrients up. > > > > Space elevator anyone? We are at at least three orders of magnitude away from bulk material strong enough to make this viable from the earth's surface. We also don't have any climbers fast enough to take biological systems up a geosynchronous elevator without them being fatally irradiated. It is a problem we are not likely to solve until post-MNT. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 4 23:24:02 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:24:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] High power orbital greenhouses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D717492.6060109@mac.com> On 03/02/2011 11:08 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 4:40 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 08:22:22PM -0800, spike wrote: >>> Oy that's a lot of people. I am surprised this old planet can feed all of >>> us. >> It can't, actually. Not with today's technology. Not on the long run. > So we improve the technology over time, just like we've always done. > > To rip a thought experiment from the game SMAC: suppose you had a > kilometer-long orbital greenhouse, with a vast array of solar panels to > provide all the power you'd need. There is no way this would be viable economically per unit mass of foodstuffs compared to on the ground oldschool or hydroponics. At the point it remotely is you move much of the population off planet (as you would then have the means and infrastructure) anyway. If you posit magic tech we don't have to make it work then you can posit slightly different (and not so far away) magic tech to synthesise foodstuffs out of raw elements right on earth. > (If you need a number, then > extrapolating near-future photovoltaic panels to square kilometer sizes, > assume a few gigawatt-hours per day, distributed among the entire > greenhouse. More is possible.) How would it work? What types of > mass inputs and outputs could you have? Would capturing a comet > for local water ice help? Not without magic allowing the shipping of these panels to space or fab planets in space plus the necessary space construction and maintenance capability. We are a very long ways from doing that. Especially in space robotics and general space infrastructure. > Most importantly, could you entirely replace the energy contribution > from fossil fuels with electricity (and locally converted forms thereof, > such as light from electric lamps)? > Today? No. In the next decade? Not likely unless there is a very very large solar breakthrough on earth. From space? Not for at least two decades if then. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 4 23:28:44 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:28:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Asteroid Defence (Was: Re: META: Overposting (psychology of morals)) In-Reply-To: <20110302191640.GB18662@ofb.net> References: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110302191640.GB18662@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D7175AC.3080000@mac.com> On 03/02/2011 11:16 AM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 07:57:12AM -0800, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > >> Yes, I know these arguments, my point is that while all this is fine >> in principle, I don't think we'll have any chance of actually doing >> this for quite a while, mainly because we can't predict the path of an >> asteroid accurately enough to know for sure that it will hit the >> earth, until it's too close to feasibly do anything about it. This > Don't need certainty; can simply push anything that remotely might hit > the Earth to an envelope where it certainly won't. That raises the > costs in having to do more nudging, but lowers the costs in terms of not > needing as much force. Really? How far out do you need to start pushing and thus to detect it? There are thousands of asteroids that cross earth orbit. Would you just push all of them without calculation on grounds of "maybe"? Where are you getting that much delta v? >> I strongly suspect that a practical defence against >> civilisation-destroying asteroid strikes is simply too difficult for >> us, at least at this point in history. It's rather like the idea of >> establishing a global network of solar power stations. Great in >> theory, we could do it if there was the will and universal agreement >> and all the financial, political and social aspects could be ironed >> out, but it's not gonna happen this side of the singularity. > Stuff that's technically but not politically doable becomes doable if > you change enough minds. Universal suffrage was a pipe dream until it > wasn't. Giving up won't change anything, though. > And stuff that is not technically doable and/or not doable within a rational cost/benefit analysis should not be done no matter how many people you may be able to convince. We cannot technically do viable space based solar power beaming energy back to earth. There is no since decrying the lack of agreement it should be done when we cannot in fact do it with known or likely within at least 15 years technology. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 4 23:31:08 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:31:08 -0800 Subject: [ExI] General comment about all this quasi-libertarianism discussion In-Reply-To: <4D6EE644.6070100@moulton.com> References: <4D693BD2.2050903@lightlink.com> <4D6A5C99.1030908@lightlink.com> <4D6A94CC.1070801@lightlink.com> <4D6C9E7A.3070909@moulton.com> <4D6D3A60.7070109@mac.com> <4D6DAD1A.2090909@moulton.com> <4D6EE644.6070100@moulton.com> Message-ID: <4D71763C.2070606@mac.com> On 03/02/2011 04:52 PM, F. C. Moulton wrote: > On 03/01/2011 10:51 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 7:36 PM, F. C. Moulton wrote: >>> You need to take that up with Kelly because Kelly is the one who >>> mistakenly brought the Early USA and libertarianism. >> I strongly stand by my assertion that the early USA most closely >> approximates the libertarian ideal. > The problem with your position is that you are already doing a trade-off > saying some things are not as important as others. Why give a pass to > slavery but complain about the Federal Reserve? I thought we were dropping the L subject? We certainly cannot do justice to it in this sort of forum if we do want to examine it reasonably well. - samantha From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Fri Mar 4 23:04:28 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (kellycoinguy at gmail.com) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 16:04:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4d717097.9579dc0a.3c32.75f7@mx.google.com> A device to pay tolls can be anonimized. It does not need to be a tool of big brother or even big private corporation. There are several wallet systems that lready exist that are anonymous. Kelly -- Sent from my Palm Pre On Mar 4, 2011 11:31 AM, Richard Loosemore <rpwl at lightlink.com> wrote: BillK wrote: > So you have to track every member of society to see what chargeable > services they are using and send them a monthly bill. Is that really > the Libertarian society you want? That's a nice argument! ;-) One of the natural end points of libertarian thinking is that everyone has to be monitored, to track the costs they are incurring, so they can be charged. But of course, the government should not do the monitoring, and instead each person must carry around some kind of device to count the people who need to be made to pay.... So all these motorists in London each have to carry some kind of device in their car so that when a pedestian tries to use the road and slow them down, the motorist can somehow get money out of them: "You want to cross in front of my car? There's a toll!". So what is the device that will let them do this? Ah, yes, a gun. Richard Loosemore _______________________________________________ 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: From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 4 23:48:29 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 15:48:29 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D717A4D.2000203@mac.com> Another mind, a mind I loved and respected, is gone. Another beautiful informed dreamer of grand dreams, planner of great plans and rational being capable of grounding those plans and dreams in reality is no longer with us. It is horrible, utterly unacceptable and feels more and more so with each loss the more we know that it does not have to always be so. May our sadness, loss, frustration, tears and fear here in the slowest of the Slow Time fuel our efforts to get beyond the place where this happens and will happen to everyone. - samantha On 03/03/2011 09:17 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:57 PM, "spike" wrote: > > snip > >> Last time he was here (about 3 years ago, for I recall his saying he had >> turned 50) Robert and I discussed cryonics briefly. His position on it was >> that he was a tepid believer in it, and might make arrangements if he had >> sufficient advance notice of his imminent demise. The number of people with >> this attitude may be larger than those who actually wear a bracelet. I >> don't know how to create a business model to deal with that population. > So true. If even one of the most knowledgeable doesn't take the steps > needed . . . . > > We need to talk about this. > >> If our fondest hopes with nanotechnology come to pass and fulfill their >> early promise, it might be that for those carrying the cryonics meme, >> getting incurable cancer is the best thing that can happen. > Unless someone is well off, this doesn't help because you can't get > insurance with cancer. > > Sigh Robert was indeed one of the good guys . . . . and 14 years > younger than I am. > > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mar 4 23:56:12 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 15:56:12 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Asteroid Defence (Was: Re: META: Overposting (psychology of morals)) In-Reply-To: <4D7175AC.3080000@mac.com> References: <279328.90377.qm@web114415.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <20110302191640.GB18662@ofb.net> <4D7175AC.3080000@mac.com> Message-ID: <20110304235612.GA32467@ofb.net> On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 03:28:44PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > >Don't need certainty; can simply push anything that remotely might hit > >the Earth to an envelope where it certainly won't. That raises the > >costs in having to do more nudging, but lowers the costs in terms of not > >needing as much force. > > Really? How far out do you need to start pushing and thus to detect > it? There are thousands of asteroids that cross earth orbit. Would > you just push all of them without calculation on grounds of "maybe"? > Where are you getting that much delta v? There's a middle you're excluding. One can ignore Earth-crossing asteroids that cross orbit months way. I was talking about the ones that pass within X thousand miles of Earth, where the astronomers say "1 in 100 chance it might hit us, we're not sure". You don't have to wait for absolute certainty of impact to divert, you can divert anything above a certain expected value of damage. What value? Depends on how much you can afford, obviously. > >Stuff that's technically but not politically doable becomes doable if > >you change enough minds. Universal suffrage was a pipe dream until it > >wasn't. Giving up won't change anything, though. > > And stuff that is not technically doable and/or not doable within a > rational cost/benefit analysis should not be done no matter how many > people you may be able to convince. We cannot technically do Well, yeah. I was talking (a) generically against defeatism and (b) about asteroid deflection. -xx- Damien X-) From jrd1415 at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 01:30:39 2011 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 18:30:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > ### Jeez, Bill, what do you really know about us? There's something about libertarianism that makes it quite appealing to a broad spectrum of folks. So broad in fact that contradictions pop up. How can Jerry Brown and William Safire both be libertarians? Jerry brown has called himself a libertarian socialist (which can't help but make other libertarians seriously queasy). Can you even imagine "libertarian" as a modifier for socialist? Libertarian often feels like a warm and edgy default label when all other self-identifiers are unsatisfactory. So who are "us", really? What degree of self-knowledge and intent is required to convert spin into fraud? In the matter of "initiation of force", when do you "start the clock"? Can the native Americans go on the warpath and claim libertarian justification? Can Jews attack Germans or Russians with a clear conscious? Can the Iranians attack the US over the Shah? Can the Armenians go after the Turks? How do you distinguish retaliation from defense, from unprovoked aggression? And what exactly constitutes this proscribed "force"? What of sanctions, embargoes, blockades, cyber attacks, political subversion, attacks against the economy? I don't mean to be fussy, but I'm inclined to think Humpty Dumpty was speaking libertarian when he said: "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean ? neither more nor less." "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things." "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be the master ? that's all." "Which is to be the master", indeed. Best, Jeff Davis "We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." Anais Nin From rpwl at lightlink.com Sat Mar 5 01:51:53 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 20:51:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <4d717097.9579dc0a.3c32.75f7@mx.google.com> References: <4d717097.9579dc0a.3c32.75f7@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <4D719739.1000603@lightlink.com> kellycoinguy at gmail.com wrote: > A device to pay tolls can be anonimized. It does not need to be a tool > of big brother or even big private corporation. There are several wallet > systems that lready exist that are anonymous. You missed the point. I am not talking about the paying of tolls, I am talking about who LEVIES the tolls. You want the government to arrange a toll system for pedestrians, so they are penalized for the cost they impose on the drivers. BillK's point was that the logical extension of your position required pedestrian tolls, and I presume you do not want the government watching everything you do in order to supervise the poll system. And in that case, there needs to be a private toll levying system. Richard Loosemore From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Sat Mar 5 02:41:38 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 18:41:38 -0800 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 06:30:39PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > There's something about libertarianism that makes it quite appealing > to a broad spectrum of folks. So broad in fact that contradictions > pop up. How can Jerry Brown and William Safire both be libertarians? > Jerry brown has called himself a libertarian socialist (which can't > help but make other libertarians seriously queasy). Can you even > imagine "libertarian" as a modifier for socialist? Libertarian often Actually, libertarian originally *meant* socialist -- or rather, left-wing economic egalitarian anarchist. Wikip claims this is the first libertarian: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_D%C3%A9jacque http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#History They have dibs; it's US classical liberals who hijacked the term in modern discourse. > In the matter of "initiation of force", when do you "start the > clock"? Can the native Americans go on the warpath and claim A very good question. The inverse is: right-libertarianism has a lot to say about respecting private property rights and what one can do with them, but little about how they're allocated in the first place. Which is a big gap, since you can make a 'libertarian' absolute monarch by declaring that the king owns all the land. > I don't mean to be fussy, but I'm inclined to think Humpty Dumpty was > speaking libertarian when he said: Almost all political and philosophical labels are subject to drift if not hijacking. At least most libertarians mostly agree on "personal liberties", even if they differ on the nature of property. conservative: someone who dislikes change, a defender of King and Church monarchy and aristocracy, or someone who likes small government? liberal: right-libertarian or social democrat? socialist: Leninist central planning, democratic central planning, or progressive income taxes + public services + leaning on market mechanisms to make them come out better? feminism: that women can do math and logic as well as men (and certainly have every right to try), or that math and logic are male and patriarchal ways of thought women shouldn't be expected to adhere to? many-to-many bidirectional mapping of terms: USA Europe/world liberal social democrat libertarian liberal socialist libertarian anarchist libertarian socialist social democrat conservative liberal [small gov't] conservative crazy [God and race, or really small gov't] crazy conservative [church and king] socialist conservative [universal health care] anarcho-capitalist crazy -xx- Damien X-) From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 5 05:44:52 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 21:44:52 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D717A4D.2000203@mac.com> References: <4D717A4D.2000203@mac.com> Message-ID: <00a001cbdaf8$736fc340$5a4f49c0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died >Another mind, a mind I loved and respected, is gone. Another beautiful informed dreamer of grand dreams, planner of great plans and rational being capable of grounding those plans and dreams in reality is no longer with us. It is horrible, utterly unacceptable and feels more and more so with each loss the more we know that it does not have to always be so. >May our sadness, loss, frustration, tears and fear here in the slowest of the Slow Time fuel our efforts to get beyond the place where this happens and will happen to everyone. > - Samantha Thanks Samantha, well said. On 03/03/2011 09:17 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 11:57 PM, "spike" wrote: > > snip > >> Last time he was here (about 3 years ago, for I recall his saying he >> had turned 50) Robert and I discussed cryonics briefly. His position on it was... I must retract this. I may have projected my own views more than recalled Robert's, and I can't find anything about it in my green notebooks from that visit about cryonics. I don't think I ever discussed cryonics deeply enough with him to know for sure where he stood, but recall that he was one who thought it possible to do genetic modification at the cellular level. That doesn't seem consistent with anything other than a hardline full-on believer in cryonics. He and I didn't go deeply into that matter, for whenever he was here, we discussed other subjects, geosynchronous cables, MBrains, nanotech, space stuff in general, his proto-transhumanist history project and so forth. Our discussion on cryonics was a mention in passing, and I just don't remember it well enough to say how that went, but now I am doubting myself. Death was not on either of our immediate agendas at that time. spike From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 07:29:39 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 00:29:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Brief correction re Western Democracies [WASI am Call To Libertarians] In-Reply-To: References: <895132.47768.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D61D9E4.90607@lightlink.com> <20110223165952.GE15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Damien Sullivan > wrote: > >> I'm a bit bemused by the libertarian enthusiasm for private toll roads. >> I mean, yes, it's a way to get roads built, but is a society full of >> piecemeal tolls, and possibilities to be denied passage by a road owner >> whod oesn't like you, actually desirable? ?How does an economy of tolls >> everywhere compare to that of a free travel zone? > > ### If the owner of all roads doesn't like you, where will you go? On > the other hand, if the owner of one road doesn't like too many people, > he will soon run out of toll money. Can you think of a current toll road/bridge/whatever that denies passage to some people other than on the basis that they can't or won't pay? What makes you think that this would happen in reality? It seems pretty easy for the government to regulate toll roads to the extent that they are not able to discriminate on any basis other than something legitimate, like being overweight, over-sized, unpaid, criminals, or possibly a few other things I haven't thought of. Tolls everywhere is freedom, not free. A free travel zone, by which I assume you mean our current "free" highways, is not free, NOR is it freedom. It is government seized land, built into a highway with government seized money, and even they deny passage to some traffic, such as overweight trucks. (I don't necessarily object to the government seizing land for the building of highways under some circumstances, but eminent domain is one area where the government often over reaches.) I would not have supported toll roads everywhere ten years ago, but now we have the technology to do this painlessly and anonymously (or not, at the driver's choice) it seems like a no brainer to me. I think the reason libertarians talk about toll roads so much is because it is easy to see how it would work, since some roads already work that way. It is a short step from current reality to something that is both truly libertarian and easily understandable. It is fair, because the roads are worn out by use, so a usage tax either in tolls, or in gasoline tax, is fair. Paying for roads with income tax means the taxation is disconnected from the use. Most Americans aren't against taxes, but they are generally against unfair taxes. Why, for example, are schools generally paid for with property taxes? What the heck does owning property have to do with educating the public? How are those related? What happens when the government confiscates hundreds of thousands of acres of previously taxed land, and turns it into a national wilderness area that is no longer taxed and everyone else has their property taxes go up to make up the difference. (Not that this would EVER happen in the real world.) Paying for schools with lotteries is less offensive to many libertarians because it is a voluntary tax. In truth it is a regressive tax on the poor and those who are poor at math, but it is voluntary. So the lottery is a lot like drugs and prostitution from the libertarian standpoint. It should be allowed, but most of us recognize that it is a poor personal choice to participate. Do things need to be paid for? Yes. We libertarians recognize that. The question is how does it get paid for, and by who? Does the way the tax money is spent relate in some way to the way the taxes are collected? Should some things be paid for with some other mechanism rather than taxation? Is there a way for people to opt into paying for something? If so, that is preferable to taxation. The mechanism of a usage tax (toll/gas tax) for roads is extremely logical. I think it would also contribute to something that many (particularly the left and the greens) would like to see, actual conservation. Imagine that gasoline cost $11 a gallon because you were paying for road repairs through a usage tax, and you were also paying for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as the military bases in the middle east directly at the pump. Also, you are paying for carbon dioxide sequestration, because you are paying for your pollution mitigation. How fast do you think we would have workable electric cars in such a case? I believe that we should pay ALL the costs of gasoline at the pump, instead of at tax time. That way, we create the incentive to do things properly. But no, instead, we provide incentives for oil companies. We provide incentives for farmers to use petroleum based fertilizers. It's really madness and slow national suicide. -Kelly From moulton at moulton.com Sat Mar 5 07:44:36 2011 From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton) Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 23:44:36 -0800 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D71E9E4.5040601@moulton.com> On 03/04/2011 06:41 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > Almost all political and philosophical labels are subject to drift if > not hijacking. This can be said of many terms in different parts of the English language. And I seem to recall reading that the term libertarian was used in philosophy prior to it to describe a political position. As for the chart attempting to show the USA to Europe and Rest of World mapping: well it is useful but not completely accurate. For example the term libertarian is used by organizations in the UK in much the same manner that it is used in the USA. So we already see linguistic change happening in UK and also in other parts of Europe where the difference in definition and usage are changing. However we need to remember that large populations do not always adopt new usages simultaneously. The use of the them "crazy" in your chart really detracts from the chart and I suggest you drop those three lines. That will make it more useful and might induce someone to spend some time doing modifications. Fred > many-to-many bidirectional mapping of terms: > > USA Europe/world > liberal social democrat > libertarian liberal > socialist libertarian > anarchist libertarian > socialist social democrat > conservative liberal [small gov't] > conservative crazy [God and race, or really small gov't] > crazy conservative [church and king] > socialist conservative [universal health care] > anarcho-capitalist crazy > > -xx- Damien X-) > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From anders at aleph.se Sat Mar 5 12:00:19 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 12:00:19 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4D7225D3.4020600@aleph.se> Adrian Tymes wrote: >> Worse, if two particles have no interactions allowed >> > > Neutrons and neutrinos do interact gravitationally and through the strong > nuclear force, to my understanding. Just not electromagnetically. > As far as I know leptons do not feel the strong nuclear force. So you would have to use the weak or gravitational. Check out http://cupp.oulu.fi/neutrino/nd-cross.html It has the cross sections for various neutrino reactions. The typical cross section for your neutron-rich sheet is 9.3?10^-48 m^2 per MeV of neutrino energy. So if you need about 10^47 neutrons per square meter to have a solid chance of catching the neutrino. That sheet would weigh 1.8?10^20 kg, a biggish asteroid mass. You can scale it down if you want to only catch the high energy neutrinos, of course. Trying to get the cosmic background neutrinos with energy 1.7?10?4 eV on the other hand, would require an insanely dense sheet, probably running afoul of the Schwarzschild limit. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 14:16:37 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 09:16:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Brief correction re Western Democracies [WASI am Call To Libertarians] In-Reply-To: References: <895132.47768.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D61D9E4.90607@lightlink.com> <20110223165952.GE15944@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 7:55 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: >> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Damien Sullivan >> wrote: >> >>> I'm a bit bemused by the libertarian enthusiasm for private toll roads. >>> I mean, yes, it's a way to get roads built, but is a society full of >>> piecemeal tolls, and possibilities to be denied passage by a road owner >>> whod oesn't like you, actually desirable? ?How does an economy of tolls >>> everywhere compare to that of a free travel zone? >> >> ### If the owner of all roads doesn't like you, where will you go? On >> the other hand, if the owner of one road doesn't like too many people, >> he will soon run out of toll money. > > Can you think of a current toll road/bridge/whatever that denies > passage to some people other than on the basis that they can't or > won't pay? What makes you think that this would happen in reality? It > seems pretty easy for the government to regulate toll roads to the > extent that they are not able to discriminate on any basis other than > something legitimate, like being overweight, over-sized, unpaid, > criminals, or possibly a few other things I haven't thought of. ### Maybe I was too cryptic but I actually wrote in support of private toll roads (and willy-nilly also government ones, better than government non-toll roads). What I meant that commercial private toll roads are unlikely to be used for any discriminatory purposes because denying use for what most of us would see as illegitimate reason (race, gender, sexual orientation) would cut into the income of the owner. I also pointed out that having single-entity ownership of all roads can be tricky - as many Russians found, in a totalitarian state you couldn't travel without state permission which as they tell me, sucked. But really I am all on your side, just need to be less convoluted in my locutions. ---------------------- > > Tolls everywhere is freedom, not free. A free travel zone, by which I > assume you mean our current "free" highways, is not free, NOR is it > freedom. It is government seized land, built into a highway with > government seized money, and even they deny passage to some traffic, > such as overweight trucks. (I don't necessarily object to the > government seizing land for the building of highways under some > circumstances, but eminent domain is one area where the government > often over reaches.) > ### I actually came to strongly believe that eminent domain of any kind is absolutely wrong. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 14:32:39 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 09:32:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 1:29 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 08:22:39AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 8:25 PM, Damien Sullivan >> wrote: >> > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 11:18:07AM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> > Cities are also good for enabling you to live a mile away from your >> > neighbor. ?If the population was evenly spread over the Earth's land >> > surface in a square grid, there'd be a person every 140 meters. ?If >> > you allow for families and specify clumps of 4, you'd have a family >> > every 280 meters. ?A 3 minute walk to other people, no matter where on >> > Earth you were, save the oceans. ?You get space because the rest of us >> > clump up. >> >> This is a fact that I am very grateful for. I just don't entirely get >> why people want to do so. > > Well, quite obviously, telepresence today is NOT a substitute for real > interaction. ?Anyone who wants to taste different foods they haven't > cooked, and hear live music, and touch other people, needs to be other > people. ?Ditto for getting most jobs being hear health care, having > efficient services, and all sorts of other things. > >> This is interesting. I have a general theory that the more people get >> involved in an activity as a group, the less efficient they are. > > "efficient" gets thrown around pretty casually, I think. ?Efficient in > what sense, maxmizing what variable and minimizing use of what resource? > For lots of tasks, people are more effective in groups or large groups, > because individuals cannot do the task by themselves. > >> Perhaps cities buck this general trend because they aren't as cohesive >> as a corporation or government agency. > > analogy: city markets and ecosystems, where more size means more > diversity and niches. > analogy: bureaucracies (public or privae) and brains, vs. masses of > individuals or amoebas, where some people or cells seem to provide less > effort yet provide coordination that enables the other units to be > productive at all. ### I agree with Damien here: although I personally hate cities (which is why I live in an idyllic log home 2.6 miles away from the nearest neighbor and accept a personal price for it by commuting daily 40 minutes to work in the nearest town, Charlottesville), I also recognize that they seem to be associated with increased economic productivity, and many efficiencies (defined as improved degree of satisfaction of various human desires - that's what I mean when I harp on "efficiency" in my pro-anarchocapitalist screeds). There is a large and very convincing literature on the economic productivity of cities, their association with innovation, improved survival of occupants. The first two items appear to be nearly universal, the last item, longevity, seems to be the case at least after the development of modern sanitation and vaccination technologies. People in cities, even controlling for IQ, education, wealth, and whatever other confounding factors, seem to produce more economic output, more goods and services, cheaper, seem to innovate their way to a better life faster, realize their individual earning potential more equitably, and as a result, come to enjoy more valuable consumption streams than people in rural areas. Of course, I prefer it my way - living in the boonies and working in a city. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 14:46:51 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 09:46:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:57 AM, BillK wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 3:53 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >> ### Well, you don't need to have subsidies for zero-fare public >> transportation - you only need accurate pricing of inputs and outputs. >> If road owners charged by the square foot/hour of occupancy, with >> supply/demand adjustment of prices on an hourly basis (i.e. congestion >> pricing), and if there was free entry for the provision of private >> means of mass transportation, you would have an efficient outcome. >> >> What you describe is the result of municipal monopoly ownership of >> roads and their mispricing, followed by >> running-around-like-a-headless-chicken attempts to fix the resulting >> problems. And yes, there are places like Singapore, or nowadays >> London, which introduced congestion pricing - which works better than >> subsidies even if it is imposed by an illegitimate, municipal rather >> than private, authority. When you want things to actually work, the >> economics narrative (price, supply, demand, incentive) always beats >> the political narrative (Conservative scum, good Liberals). >> >> > > > Seems it is more complicated than that. (Like real life often is). > > In London, over the last five years or so, congestion charging has had > the desired effect of reducing the number of private cars entering the > central zone. > > Initially traffic flow improved, but now the jams are back again, even > with reduced traffic volume. Why has this happened? > > It turns out that there have been other 'improvements' implemented to > benefit other users. > 1) Cycle paths have been installed, reducing the road volume for motor vehicles. > 2) Most traffic lights have had a pedestrian phase added, which stops > all roads for a period while pedestrians cross. > 3) Additional pedestrian controlled lights have been installed to > allow pedestrians to cross roads with continual streams of traffic. > > So you would have to add pedestrian pricing into the scheme as well. > As soon as anyone moves outside their house, on foot, cycle or car, > the meter would have to start charging. That's a real communist > society ### Well, again you have mispricing - a pedestrian can take resources previously used by a driver (space/time on a road) and not pay for them which encourages use and does not encourage work-arounds (raised pedestrian walkways, crossings, underground car lanes, all the things that an income maximizing owner would build to encourage users to spend). BTW - a communist society by definition would not "charge" for anything - they wanted to actually abolish money itself, if you remember you Marx reading. A pay-as-you-walk city would be the paragon of the capitalist system, and I am of course all for it (imagine, no homeless, no chavs in posh places, very clean sidewalks, etc. etc.) Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 14:57:48 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 09:57:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:32 PM, BillK wrote: > On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Kelly Anderson ?wrote: >> Bill, I'm not sure that's communist exactly. Totalitarian, possibly. >> But London is the most camera heavy city in the world (by my >> understanding) so big brother is watching anyway. >> >> > > You are correct. Totalitarian is a better word. > But I am not using it to describe London as it is at present. > > I am using it to describe Rafal's ideal Libertarian society where an > individual has to pay for everything they do. > > As Rafal said: > "When you want things to actually work, the > economics narrative (price, supply, demand, incentive) always beats > the political narrative (Conservative scum, good Liberals)". > > You want to use my road? - Pay up. > > You want to inconvenience me by stopping my car so you can cross the > road? - Pay up. > > Etc. ad infinitum. > > So you have to track every member of society to see what chargeable > services they are using and send them a monthly bill. Is that really > the Libertarian society you want? ### It's all a question of prices (that's my standard answer to almost any question nowadays). If tracking and billing is very cheap, it is efficient to pay individually for even minor exchanges. If the overhead of payment is high, it makes sense to make other arrangements (e.g. "I won't make a stink about you crossing the road in front of me in exchange for being able to do the same at some other time to some other person"). The libertarian principle here is not so much "pay for everything" as "respect the property of others" which sometimes may lead to monetary exchanges and sometimes may lead to various quid-pro-quo, barter, tie-in and other setups in the arrangement of our lives together. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 15:44:01 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 10:44:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Efficient transportation was serfdom Message-ID: Damien commented on my post: >> >> ### Users almost always refuse to use them if charged the full price >> and given alternatives (private mass transport, private individual >> transport). >> >> QED, no? > > No. ?This is multiply problematic. > > 1) How many concrete examples can you point to of this being tried? ### You mean, declining ridership in public transportation that is not subsidized? Thousands, wherever people start earning enough to buy their own cars. I remember the hell that was going to school in communist Poland, and how quickly people started moving out of cities once cheap cars became available, even though public transport was still subsidized. Or, the perennial problems of Amtrak - almost nobody wants to use a train and pay for it, if they can use a car. ----------------- > 1a) And which examples would we be looking at? ?I see two main purposes > of public transit. ?One, common in the US and in smaller towns, is as a > subsidy for the carless, typically the poor. ?If you're too young or old > or sick or otherwise unable to drive, or can't afford a car, there's a > bus provided. ?That runs every hour, is slow to get where you need to > go, and doesn't run late, so you have to organize your life around it. > Charging full price or talking about efficiency compared to car > ownership is missing the point and meaingless, because it's meant for > people who can't have cars, or sometimes for the 8-5 working crowd > who'll keep a car anyway for weekends and nights. ?It's also in a sucky > space with sublinear scaling; if you doubled expenses by running twice > as many buses, you'd make the captive users happier but still not > attract anyone who had a choice. ?So yeah, it won't pay for itself in > any direct sense, it's charity. ### Free buses suck as charity too - think, what would you prefer - a bunch of bureaucrats getting to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to organize a grandiose transportation system, and not ever asking you where you actually want to go, or rather receive a wad of vouchers to spend on competing jitneys (usually smallish vans, sometimes larger buses) that look out eagle-eyed for people waiting for a ride? I can guarantee you that the former suck, and the latter work, and I know this from my own experience (minus the vouchers, I had to pay cash). Seriously, efficiency is the *overriding* consideration always and everywhere. Even in charity situations. ---------------------- ?Local governments > often require parking to made available in various places, an unfunded > mandate subsidizing car lifestyle at the expense of pedestrian choises. ### There should be no government mandates, I agree. --------------------- > Cars are useful in part because you can get in and drive almost > everywhere in the country, if you have the time... on government built > roads many of which probably wouldn't pay for themselves as individually > tolled segments. ### Of course they would. Roads in private gated communities are getting paid for, whether by toll or by a monthly fee, and the fees tend to be lower than the taxes that would need to be raised otherwise (of course, because private bureaucrats are more efficient than government ones). ------------------------ ?Dispersed settlement favoring cars has received > massive government subsidies, ranging from subsidized homeownership to > the postal monopoly charging the same rate no matter where one lives, > rather than having to pay more to recieve mail further from city > centers. ?And of course there's been the subsidy of the right to > automotive air pollution. ### You are correct, these are subsidies and I am against the home mortgage tax deduction, against the existence of the USPS, and against people stinking up my air, just as I am against subsidies to public transportation. Your point is? ------------------- > 2b) Metro systems are expensive in part because of a choice to reserve > roads for cars, leaving subways as the main alternative for fast > transit. ?A light rapid transit system, running on surface rights of > way, can be a lot cheaper to build ($30 million/mile vs. $1 > billion/mile) while making cars less attractive. ### So why there is not a single system that works without subsidies in any American city, or maybe even anywhere in the world? Answer - rich people (i.e. most Americans) dislike having no control of their movement, dislike wasting time in coordination with others, they prefer the sense of agency attendant to initiating and controlling movement in an individual conveyance. That's why as people get richer, everywhere, they want to use first bicycles, then cars, eventually private fliers, subsidies or no subsidies. ----------------------- > So, no, if you're going to be a libertarian purist, you can't point to > the US system of roads and cars and assume that's the natural state of > affairs, or say that explicit public transit subsidies are unfair and > inefficient in the face of implicit private transport subsidies. ### I am not saying that US roads and cars are in some way "natural" and proper. I am only saying that using a hierarchical bureaucracy to disburse subsidies for and levy taxes on various activities is inefficient, compared to arrangement of exchange of considerations among multiple independent players. Sometimes it is efficient to ride in trains, sometimes in buses, sometimes in cars - but the issue is the mechanism you use for choosing between them. Free trade under almost any circumstances more efficient than a large bureaucracy. There should be no a priori preferred transportation system, safeguarded by tailored laws, subsidies, bureaucrats, and lionized by ideologues of any stripe - instead, there must be a finding-out, an exploration of the space of possibilities achieved by the distributed computational process of millions of people haggling with each other over what they want to sell and buy. Whether they discover light rail paid by yearly subscription or private jump jets as the correct answer to their particular needs, is not for me (or you, Damien) to decide. Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 15:44:23 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 10:44:23 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <20110304075639.GB23560@leitl.org> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <20110303113320.GI23560@leitl.org> <20110304075639.GB23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 2:56 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Thu, Mar 03, 2011 at 10:42:41PM -0500, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > >> Is that an argument against decentralized societies or an argument for >> modifying yourself during uploading to support participation in a >> decentralized society? You decide. > > Oh, I'm all for patching. Culture can only take you so far, > and even some external machinery prompting you is already > augmentation. ### Hey, does it mean you support my hope for an anarcho-capitalist stateless utopia once we upload into the substrate? Cool! Rafal From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 16:29:52 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 11:29:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > > Actually, libertarian originally *meant* socialist -- or rather, > left-wing economic egalitarian anarchist. ?Wikip claims this is the > first libertarian: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_D%C3%A9jacque > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism#History > They have dibs; it's US classical liberals who hijacked the term in > modern discourse. ### Amazing - commies stole our name (liberal), forcing us to say we are "classical" but then some yahoos stole a word from commies which stuck to us! ---------------------- > >> ?In the matter of "initiation of force", when do you "start the >> clock"? ? Can the native Americans go on the warpath and claim > > A very good question. ?The inverse is: right-libertarianism has a lot to > say about respecting private property rights and what one can do with > them, but little about how they're allocated in the first place. ?Which > is a big gap, since you can make a 'libertarian' absolute monarch by > declaring that the king owns all the land. ### It took me a long time to come my present position - a concentration on the methodology of making choices, rather than the particular choices themselves. I see property rights, or "non-initiation of violence", as instrumental issues rather than values on their own. What matters is desires. Desires are the primitives of ethics, all else is their interpretation. Choices are actions in furtherance of desires and frequently you can compute a ranking order of choices expressed in terms of some metric of satisfaction of desires (if you can't compute a ranking order, you can flip coins or just leave it for later). Since I have low empathy, low self-transcendence, low desire for signaling empathy (i.e. I am not a hypocrite), low degree of envy, high degree of personal independence, or disagreeableness (i.e. I don't like being pushed around), low desire for belonging, my computation of desires tends to produce the usual libertarian outcomes - somewhat cold, individualistic, bereft of phony solicitude for the poor, economically inequitable, allowing extreme flexibility and low level of external control, without any tribal ("you are with us, or against us") trappings. Since I am apparently a "Bayesian libertarian" (as I don't have the taboo cognitions of Tetlock http://www.scribd.com/doc/311935/Tetlock-2003-Thinking-the-unthinkable-sacred-values-and-taboo-cognitions), I end up agitating for distributed decision making rather than the comforting platitudes of democracy. My current god is efficiency, including efficient construction of in-groups. So, yes, this libertarian definition is a bit slippery but aren't all political definitions this way? Rafal PS Rational construction of in-groups - this is a really interesting issue for somebody who doesn't naturally generate an in-group definition. Since this social module is vestigial in me, I don't meander towards human universalism, or dolphin love (a la James Hughes) but then I also don't have a racist bone in my head (as per the implicit association test https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/). I try to calculate the in-group that rationally is most likely to function efficiently for the task at hand (whether in real life or as BS theorizing) rather than rely on intuition which in many people is very powerful but sometimes may be miscalibrated. But that's a whole different story. From jonkc at bellsouth.net Sat Mar 5 18:29:09 2011 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 13:29:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques. In-Reply-To: <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > So all these motorists in London each have to carry some kind of device in their car so that when a pedestian tries to use the road and slow them down, the motorist can somehow get money out of them: "You want to cross in front of my car? There's a toll!". > So what is the device that will let them do this? Ah, yes, a gun. Anybody can use the Florida turnpike, it's not free but there are no tool booths; a robot camera takes a picture of your license plate and mails a bill to your home, you don't even need to slow down. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rpwl at lightlink.com Sat Mar 5 19:24:06 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 14:24:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Dumb scheme to pay for resources [WAS Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques.] In-Reply-To: <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> John Clark wrote: > On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > >> So all these motorists in London each have to carry some kind of >> device in their car so that when a pedestian tries to use the road and >> slow them down, the motorist can somehow get money out of them: "You >> want to cross in front of my car? There's a toll!". >> So what is the device that will let them do this? Ah, yes, a gun. > > Anybody can use the Florida turnpike, it's not free but there are no > tool booths; a robot camera takes a picture of your license plate and > mails a bill to your home, you don't even need to slow down. Neither you nor Rafal seem to be comprehending my point. The logical conclusion of this insane libertarian way to design a society is that every aspect of a person's behavior that impinges on other people must have "tolls" whenever each person does something that potentially impacts someone else. The reason this must happen is that all the things that OTHERWISE were being supplied and managed by the government, as a shared resource, must now be PAID FOR INDIVIDUALLY by all the people who try to use them. I am just taking the libertarian scheme that Rafal is suggesting, to its logical conclusion. But this means that every pedestrian crossing a street is impacting the resource that the car driver was trying to use, so the pedestrian must pay a toll for the mere act of crossing the street. Now (are you still paying attention, or is this the limit of attention span for libertarians who don't like to hear awkward facts?), this presents the L-utopia designer with a dilemma: either the toll SYSTEM has to be managed by some kind of global entity that watches every move that everyone makes, all the time, so that they can be charged for anything that they take from the "common" resources like roads, bridges, waterways, fresh air, and so on .... and then this Big Brother entity has to charge everyone a toll. OR (the only alternative) there has to be some scheme whereby individual people go around negotiating and exacting their tolls all the time. I was assuming that libertarians, who hate the idea of some kind of global entity watching everythig they do and charging them for every little thing they do, would prefer to have it all occur locally. And in that case, I was asking HOW this was supposed to happen in (e.g.) the case of pedestrian and a car driver, when the pedestrian tries to use the road and cause the driver to slow down (thus hogging a shared resource). How does the car driver set up a PRIVATE scheme to send an invoice to the pedestrian to force them to pay for taking the pavement for a few seconds? That was the question I was asking when you replied above. In the alternate scheme, where there is some entity that manages all the toll stuff, this is usually the government in today's age. How are you going to set up comparable entities to manage the bridges, the air, the water, the warmth that comes from cities, etc etc etc.? Which corporation are you going to hand the "atmosphere" over to, to have breathing and furnace-running and bonfire-burning and firework-buring become billable activities, when consumption of air has to be separately charged to each individual that uses it? Geez. Brain the size of a planet, and I have to waste it pointing out flaws in idiot schemes for running the planet....... ;-) And after I asked sooo nicely for someone to produce a simulation to demonstrate the feasibility of these harebrained ideas, before inflicting any more of them on us. :-) Still no simulation! Still the ideas keep coming! Richard Loosemore From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 19:42:01 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 19:42:01 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Dumb scheme to pay for resources [WAS Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques.] In-Reply-To: <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > The logical conclusion of this insane libertarian way to design a society is > that every aspect of a person's behavior that impinges on other people must > have "tolls" whenever each person does something that potentially impacts > someone else. ?The reason this must happen is that all the things that > OTHERWISE were being supplied and managed by the government, as a shared > resource, must now be PAID FOR INDIVIDUALLY by all the people who try to use > them. ?I am just taking the libertarian scheme that Rafal is suggesting, to > its logical conclusion. > > > And in that case, I was asking HOW this was supposed to happen in (e.g.) the > case of pedestrian and a car driver, when the pedestrian tries to use the > road and cause the driver to slow down (thus hogging a shared resource). > ?How does the car driver set up a PRIVATE scheme to send an invoice to the > pedestrian to force them to pay for taking the pavement for a few seconds? > > That was the question I was asking when you replied above. > > In the alternate scheme, where there is some entity that manages all the > toll stuff, this is usually the government in today's age. ?How are you > going to set up comparable entities to manage the bridges, the air, the > water, the warmth that comes from cities, etc etc etc.? ?Which corporation > are you going to hand the "atmosphere" over to, to have breathing and > furnace-running and bonfire-burning and firework-buring become billable > activities, when consumption of air has to be separately charged to each > individual that uses it? > > I of course agree with the above comments. But Kelly was also insisting on *anonymous* toll-paying. i.e. he didn't like the idea of government or large companies recording his movements and toll payments. This is another impossible requirement. Such information is too valuable to law enforcement people. When a crime is committed (or don't they allow crimes in L-topia?) the police, local vigilantes, whatever, would immediately requisition all toll payments made in the vicinity. People already carry tracking devices, called mobile phones or smart phones, which are increasingly able to make payments by waving at a cash register. And phone company records are now automatically requested when an accident or crime occurs. BillK From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Mar 5 20:44:39 2011 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 15:44:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Dumb scheme to pay for resources [WAS Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques.] In-Reply-To: <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 2:24 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > John Clark wrote: >> >> On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> >>> So all these motorists in London each have to carry some kind of device >>> in their car so that when a pedestian tries to use the road and slow them >>> down, the motorist can somehow get money out of them: ?"You want to cross in >>> front of my car? There's a toll!". >>> So what is the device that will let them do this? ?Ah, yes, a gun. >> >> Anybody can use the Florida turnpike, it's not free but there are no tool >> booths; a robot camera takes a picture of your license plate and mails a >> bill to your home, you don't even need to slow down. > > Neither you nor Rafal seem to be comprehending my point. ### Richard, you *really* need to read a post before answering it. As it is, you spent precious minutes arguing against a proposal that seems to exist only in your mind. Rafal From anders at aleph.se Sun Mar 6 02:04:14 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 02:04:14 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <4D7225D3.4020600@aleph.se> References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> <4D7225D3.4020600@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D72EB9E.9090905@aleph.se> I just spent an evening playing boardgames with a neutrino physicist. It seems that, yes, neutrinos can interact with neutrons. A neutrino can scatter off neutrons in a simple bounce, scatter and create a pi-0 meso, or can make it turn into a proton and a suitable lepton (depending on neutrino type). Neutrons are slightly better than protons since they have extra energy to turn into other particles, so the neutrino doesn't have to provide as much kinetic energy for making particles as as in the case of hitting a proton. But these reactions are all wimpy weak interactions with low cross sections. So it is unlikely to matter in practice. However, an interesting possibility might be if you excited neutrons to the right energy level, then they might have a resonant absorbtion of neutrinos of the right energy. Doubtful if we can get that to do any useful work, but it just might bring the neutrino catcher from absurd to merely very, very hard. -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University From amon at doctrinezero.com Sun Mar 6 13:18:05 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 13:18:05 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI Message-ID: Hi All - I've been thinking about AGI and Friendliness. Yes, I know, a minefield to say the least. Specifically, I've been taking this matter and comparing it to early Extropian notions about libertarianism and technological progress, and the comparison suggests what might be a new question. (Something that I daresay Ben Goertzel has considered, but I don't have him to hand, as it were). So, I remember a piece of Max's (IIRC), in which he made the case that too many governmental controls on technological development would only ensure that less-controlled countries would develop key technologies first. Within reason, that sounds a plausible claim to me. Universally Friendly AGI, of the sort that SIAI contemplates, seems to be a textbook case of constrained technological development. i.e. it seems reasonable to expect that non-Friendly AGI would be easier to develop than Friendly AGI (even if FAI is possible, and there seem to be good reasons to believe that universally Friendly superhuman AGI would be impossible for humans to develop). Because Friendliness is being worked on for very good (safety) reasons, it seems to me that we should be thinking about the possibility of "locally Friendly" AGI, just in case Friendliness is in principle possible, but the full package SIAI hopes for would just come along too late to be useful. By "locally Friendly", I mean an AGI that respects certain boundaries, is Friendly to *certain* people and principles, but not ALL of them. E.g. a "patriotic American" AGI. That may sound bad, but if you've got a choice between that and a completely unconstrained AGI, at least the former would protect the people it was developed by/for. Anyway, before I go too far down this road, does anyone have any thoughts on this idea? Maybe you know of a relevant article out there, someone who has already considered the matter at length? Cheers, Amon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From algaenymph at gmail.com Sun Mar 6 14:19:01 2011 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 06:19:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] RPGs and transhumanism In-Reply-To: <4D6918D7.1080208@aleph.se> References: <4D6909EF.10808@aleph.se> <4D6911D6.5030105@gmail.com> <4D6918D7.1080208@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D7397D5.7040303@gmail.com> On 2/26/11 7:14 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > The reason I like it, besides the fact that it is a pretty good game, > is that it allows people to play out various transhumanist > technologies and explore their consequences. Wouldn't people playing this game already be into transhumanism? > In a sense you can play transhumanism in any game. My gaming group ran > a fantasy campaign that involved a kingdom that used a mixture of > magic to enhnance people and build what was essentially an early > industrial society. The idea is after all to see what happens when you > start to change the human condition. Yes, I can see Eberron (for example) as having great potential for promoting transhumanism. From bret at bonfireproductions.com Sun Mar 6 15:53:53 2011 From: bret at bonfireproductions.com (Bret Kulakovich) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 10:53:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: What a terrible surprise. Sorry to be so late on this. I usually sit down with my Extropians folder, with a nice cup of coffee, time permitting to enjoy. Very sad news, he will be missed. On Mar 3, 2011, at 12:37 AM, Damien Broderick wrote: > > L. Stephen Coles, M.D., Ph.D., Co-Founder, Los Angeles Gerontology Research Group, reports: > > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or early Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From anders at aleph.se Sun Mar 6 15:58:18 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 15:58:18 +0000 Subject: [ExI] RPGs and transhumanism In-Reply-To: <4D7397D5.7040303@gmail.com> References: <4D6909EF.10808@aleph.se> <4D6911D6.5030105@gmail.com> <4D6918D7.1080208@aleph.se> <4D7397D5.7040303@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4D73AF1A.3020000@aleph.se> AlgaeNymph wrote: > On 2/26/11 7:14 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: >> The reason I like it, besides the fact that it is a pretty good game, >> is that it allows people to play out various transhumanist >> technologies and explore their consequences. > > Wouldn't people playing this game already be into transhumanism? No. From my discussions with them on the online forum, most are entirely ordinary roleplayers. Some have a science fiction bent or know a bit about transhumanism, but they are not (with a few notable exceptions) our crowd. I think many people get a bit surprised when they discover that some of the groups mentioned in the game world exist for real. I just wished we were (or will become) as cool and powerful as our ersatz versions. It would be pretty fun to visit some of the places: http://www.eclipsephase.com/building-extropia -- Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute James Martin 21st Century School Philosophy Faculty Oxford University From atymes at gmail.com Sun Mar 6 16:40:28 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 08:40:28 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/6 Amon Zero : > Anyway, before I go too far down this road, does anyone have any thoughts on > this idea? A locally friendly AI can stretch its limits. For example, a USA-patriotic AI can recognize that helping everyone in the world can minimize resentment against its favored country, which can be better than trying to limit the enhancements to citizens of the USA. A universal AI can and probably will have limits. For example, what is the dividing line between "human" and "object to be treated as an unthinking tool"? The case can be made - mostly in jest, but it could be taken seriously - that many humans try to avoid thinking. So, there might not be as much difference here as it appears at first. From atymes at gmail.com Sun Mar 6 16:48:47 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 08:48:47 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Neutrino interaction web In-Reply-To: <4D72EB9E.9090905@aleph.se> References: <879565.45588.qm@web114412.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <4D70EEF8.9070906@lightlink.com> <4D7225D3.4020600@aleph.se> <4D72EB9E.9090905@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > However, an interesting possibility might be if you excited neutrons to the > right energy level, then they might have a resonant absorbtion of neutrinos > of the right energy. Doubtful if we can get that to do any useful work, but > it just might bring the neutrino catcher from absurd to merely very, very > hard. The key lies in interacting with many, many neutrinos - again, as produced by the sun, for example. Though I suppose the energy you'd have to put in for this example probably well exceeds the energy you'd get out - and for sailing applications, you could just sail the non-neutrino parts of the solar wind, as has already been demonstrated. From algaenymph at gmail.com Sun Mar 6 16:48:35 2011 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 08:48:35 -0800 Subject: [ExI] RPGs and transhumanism In-Reply-To: <4D73AF1A.3020000@aleph.se> References: <4D6909EF.10808@aleph.se> <4D6911D6.5030105@gmail.com> <4D6918D7.1080208@aleph.se> <4D7397D5.7040303@gmail.com> <4D73AF1A.3020000@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D73BAE3.4020302@gmail.com> On 3/6/11 7:58 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > AlgaeNymph wrote: >> Wouldn't people playing this game already be into transhumanism? > No. From my discussions with them on the online forum, most are > entirely ordinary roleplayers. Huh. Useful info. > I just wished we were (or will become) as cool and powerful as our > ersatz versions. I know. Case in point, the real world Technocracy. From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 6 19:44:47 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 11:44:47 -0800 Subject: [ExI] glory failure Message-ID: <003801cbdc36$f3c32bb0$db498310$@att.net> The mainstream press has had too little to say about Friday's Taurus XL launcher failure. http://news.cnet.com/8301-19514_3-20039222-239.html This was very bad news for humanity as well as Orbital Sciences Corp. Humanity lost a satellite which is designed to study the spectrum of solar energy that penetrates aerosols, from which we could calculate the atmospheric temperature effects of various power generation schemes. Orbital Sciences Corp has now lost three of their last four launches, and the second one in a row for the Taurus, for the same problem: payload fairing failed to separate. This could drive their launch insurance prices beyond competitiveness. I was personally interested in the Glory mission because of something I have been wondering about for some time. We hear of the promise of solar concentrators which would run a Carnot cycle, such as the Sierra SunTower in southern California: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_SunTower http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concentrated_solar_power What I don't know is how they are radiating away the waste heat from the Carnot cycle. Since this is out in the desert, they are not using evaporative cooling, or rather I sure don't recall seeing a cooling tower when I was there. So they need to be radiating the heat by some other means, and from that I can calculate or estimate how much of that heat would be trapped by the atmosphere, and if so estimate from the Glory mission how much a particulate aerosol such as coal plant soot or volcanic ash would increase the amount of heat trapped by the atmosphere. The answer to this would determine if it is feasible to scale up solar towers. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sun Mar 6 22:12:28 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 23:12:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/6 Amon Zero : > By "locally Friendly", I mean an AGI that respects certain boundaries, is > Friendly to *certain* people and principles, but not ALL of them. E.g. a > "patriotic American" AGI. That may sound bad, but if you've got a choice > between that and a completely unconstrained AGI, at least the former would > protect the people it was developed by/for. This is an interesting point, which reflects something I have been repeating for some time. In traditional wars, cavalries of one community were fighting those of other communities. It was not horses against humans. Now, we have been knowing several competing divides: young against elder, nationalisms against nationalisms, gender against gender, proletarians against capitalists, various religious persuasions fighting each other and against secularism, international cartels fighting other international cartels, race against race, clash of civilisations, etc. BUT many of us seem to expect that for any reason "silicon vs bio" would immediately become the defining divide and wipe away any other distinction and sense of belonging. This is far from obvious. -- Stefano Vaj From x at extropica.org Mon Mar 7 03:42:27 2011 From: x at extropica.org (x at extropica.org) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 19:42:27 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: Forwarded to the list: Remembering Robert Bradbury George Dvorsky Posted: Mar 6, 2011 Robert Bradbury passed away suddenly and unexpectedly last weekend of a massive hemorrhagic stroke. His passing was the kind of thing that barely registered anywhere except among his immediate group of family and friends?and among a group of dedicated and niche scientists, futurists and technologists. For them, Bradbury?s premature passing represented a monumental blow to inspired and imaginative scientific inquiry. While Robert Bradbury, who died at the age of 54, may not have had the most recognizable name in the various scientific communities he was involved in, his impact to future studies, and in particular its relation to the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, cannot be overstated. Bradbury was a giant in this area, a creative and unconventional personality who paved the way for other like-minded thinkers and enthusiasts. To say that the scientific community lost its foremost thinker on SETI studies (the search for extraterrestrial intelligence) and the problem that is the Great Silence (also known as the Fermi Paradox) is hardly an exaggeration. Bradbury was a voracious collector of any and all articles, papers and studies conducted on the subject. From my conversations with him, I can tell you that his ability to recollect and reference these works was uncanny to the point of absurdity. He was an authority in the truest sense. Nobody more than Robert insisted on the simple fact that the correct resolution of Fermi?s Paradox?the fact that we do not observe any presence of Galactic extraterrestrial intelligence?will provide us with crucial insights into humanity?s future. It was this particular notion that has personally driven me to pursue SETI studies as a means to predict humanity?s potential developmental trajectories. Simply put, if you can predict, or even observe, how advanced extraterrestrials operate, we stand a better chance of understanding our own future. Despite the eeriness that is the Great Silence, Bradbury applied a natural optimism to his work. He sought to construct and develop hypotheses to the Fermi problem that did not jeopardize the potential for human possibilities. This included a grandiose ?cosmic vision? of humanity?s future, and in this sense he was an heir apparent to Olaf Stapledon, H. G. Wells, and Freeman Dyson. To this end, Bradbury put forth a number of intriguing theories?theories that have since become foundational concepts amongst serious futurists, transhumanists and those concerned about the potential for a technological singularity. In particular, Bradbury was intrigued by megascale engineering concepts such as Dyson Spheres and Jupiter Brains. He even came up with one of his own, the the so-called Matrioshka Brain?a megascale computer that could exploit nearly the entire energy output of a star. Bradbury could never be accused of thinking small. Such concepts would go on to influence such thinkers as Anders Sandberg, Nick Bostrom, Robin Hanson and Ray Kurzweil. One of his most important works came in 2006 in his collaboration with Milan ?irkovi?, ?Galactic gradients, postbiological evolution and the apparent failure of SETI? (New Astronomy 11, 628-639). In this paper, he argued that the most likely trajectory of a postbiological (i.e. digital) community would involve the quest for computational efficiency and optimization. Such a society, he argued, would likely involve spatially compact civilizations that would be extremely hard to detect, especially if located in outer regions of the Milky Way. This conclusion has served as an elegant and rather optimistic answer that contrasts to the more doom-and-gloom suggestions that are typically put out. The paper also criticized the orthodox approach to SETI projects, which Bradbury found irritatingly old-fashioned and conservative in the extreme. Instead of listening for intentional (or intercepted) radio messages, he thought it would be far more promising to search for artifacts and traces of astroengineering of advanced technological civilizations, like Dyson shells or Matrioshka brains. Such searches, he thought, would have to be conducted in the infrared part of the electromagnetic spectrum. A natural extension of this concept was the project of setting up new directions and expanded range of techniques for SETI observations, something which was consistently hinted at during the half-centennial jubilee of the OZMA Project in 2010. This study was, sadly, the last one Bradbury worked on and will be published posthumously. Clearly, his departure will be a great loss for the astrobiological and SETI communities. At a personal level, Robert Bradbury was known as a generous, driven and often outspoken individual. His unorthodox beliefs, a hallmark of the transhumanist and Extropian communities of which he was a big part, often translated to personal opinions that made others uncomfortable. Bradbury never shied away from saying things that might offend others, but this largely came from his powerful sense of outrage towards certain issues, including the problem of death. A radical life extension crusader, Bradbury railed against the needless deaths of people the world over and and how society spent so relatively few resources to address the issue. Along these lines, Bradbury also made a considerable impact on early efforts to re-conceptualize and pathologize the aging process. Back in 1991 he was already framing the problem of aging as something that could be solved. To that end he devised a theory of aging that involved insights into genetic defects, poor biological programming and insufficient repair mechanisms; the work has served as a precursor to Aubrey de Grey?s Strategies for Engineered Negligible Senescence (SENS). Not content to merely wax philosophical on heady issues, Bradbury made a number of attempts at various tech ventures, but often to poor results. He desperately wanted to succeed at being a technology entrepreneur, and at the time of his passing, may have felt deep frustration at not being more successful in this regard. He also wanted to marry and have children, but seemed to have doubts about having a successful and lasting relationship. It may take a few years before Bradbury?s contributions properly hit the radar. He leaves behind a rather remarkable body of work that I predict will eventually get the respect it deserves in the various scientific circles he was involved in. Thanks to Milan ?irkovi? and John Grigg for helping me write this piece. http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/dvorsky20110306 From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 7 04:12:31 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 20:12:31 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> > On Behalf Of x at extropica.org ... >Remembering Robert Bradbury >George Dvorsky >Robert Bradbury passed away suddenly and unexpectedly last weekend of a massive hemorrhagic stroke. His passing was the kind of thing that barely registered anywhere except among his immediate group of family and friends?and among a group of dedicated and niche scientists, futurists and technologists. For them, Bradbury?s premature passing represented a monumental blow to inspired and imaginative scientific inquiry... Thanks George, this was extremely well written, well done indeed. Regarding a comment about Robert's desire for a traditional family: at a gathering of the locals at my house, Eliezer brought his sweetheart Erin. I asked how the two had gotten together and he commented "Erin agreed to pay my 'Buy me now' price." At this, Robert commented "I am still looking for the woman willing to pay my 'Buy me now' price." Thanks for posting this George. spike From davidmc at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 04:50:05 2011 From: davidmc at gmail.com (David McFadzean) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 21:50:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: Here's how I remember Robert>> http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) :David -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 05:19:36 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 22:19:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: George, an excellent obituary that covers a great deal of his essence. I just wish it would be published in the New York or L.A. Times! But at least we remember Robert Bradbury and grieve... John On 3/6/11, spike wrote: > >> On Behalf Of x at extropica.org > ... > >>Remembering Robert Bradbury > >>George Dvorsky > >>Robert Bradbury passed away suddenly and unexpectedly last weekend of a >> massive hemorrhagic stroke. His passing was the kind of thing that barely >> registered anywhere except among his immediate group of family and >> friends?and among a group of dedicated and niche scientists, futurists and >> technologists. For them, Bradbury?s premature passing represented a >> monumental blow to inspired and imaginative scientific inquiry... > > > > > Thanks George, this was extremely well written, well done indeed. Regarding > a comment about Robert's desire for a traditional family: at a gathering of > the locals at my house, Eliezer brought his sweetheart Erin. I asked how > the two had gotten together and he commented "Erin agreed to pay my 'Buy me > now' price." At this, Robert commented "I am still looking for the woman > willing to pay my 'Buy me now' price." > > Thanks for posting this George. > > spike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 7 05:25:46 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 21:25:46 -0800 Subject: [ExI] fish with a transparent head Message-ID: <009801cbdc88$1d5b8070$58128150$@att.net> Is this cool or what? A fish with a transparent head: http://www.youtube.com/user/MBARIvideo#p/search/1/RM9o4VnfHJU -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From eugen at leitl.org Mon Mar 7 10:32:48 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 11:32:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] glory failure In-Reply-To: <003801cbdc36$f3c32bb0$db498310$@att.net> References: <003801cbdc36$f3c32bb0$db498310$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110307103248.GN23560@leitl.org> On Sun, Mar 06, 2011 at 11:44:47AM -0800, spike wrote: > What I don't know is how they are radiating away the waste heat from the > Carnot cycle. Since this is out in the desert, they are not using The desert manages to dump solar radiation into the cosmic microwave background (the ultimate heatsink) quite nicely. I recall my water bottle froze partly once during one of these Mojave events, while the daytime temperatures were quite toasty. Concentrated solar can theoretically approach 6 kK, so any ~300 K reservoir would do. > evaporative cooling, or rather I sure don't recall seeing a cooling tower > when I was there. So they need to be radiating the heat by some other > means, and from that I can calculate or estimate how much of that heat would > be trapped by the atmosphere, and if so estimate from the Glory mission how The installations does nothing else what a patch of desert would do, other than changing the albedo slightly. > much a particulate aerosol such as coal plant soot or volcanic ash would > increase the amount of heat trapped by the atmosphere. The answer to this > would determine if it is feasible to scale up solar towers. Solar towers are bunk. They only work where there's plenty of sunlight, require active tracking, clean surfaces, large installations necessarily remote from consumers, hence conversion and transport losses. There's absolutely no reason for solar towers unless you want a lot of process heat and want to use a thermal buffer (salt melt) to cover diurnal insolation variations. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 amon at doctrinezero.com Mon Mar 7 12:35:18 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:35:18 +0000 Subject: [ExI] New AIDS Research In-Reply-To: <4D6C9751.9030504@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6C3BC1.1010807@satx.rr.com> <4D6C9751.9030504@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 1 March 2011 06:50, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 2/28/2011 11:18 PM, John Grigg wrote: > >> This reminds me of when the actress who played the cute sidekick to >> Xena, on the hit show of the same name, told a Kiwi stuntman during an >> outdoor fight scene to "bop her!" He stopped what he was doing and >> stared, because the term means something very different in that part >> of the world.... >> > > I doubt that's quite right.** Maybe he suggested giving her a bang? > > **see for example: Kiwi Bop: party-time for under-10s > Bang isn't really kiwi slang either, although it'd be understood there. Maybe he said "bonk". That's more British, but common enough in NZ. I've never heard 'bop' used that way. - A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 15:13:12 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:13:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/6 Amon Zero > Anyway, before I go too far down this road, does anyone have any thoughts > on this idea? I'm leery, it sounds like the latest/greatest military technology. The Us vs Them it's built on would eventually get around to eliminating THEM to save US (at least in a finite-resource environment). The locality, should be the planet...The Us should be life. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 14:13:51 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 09:13:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Of course, I prefer it my way - living in the boonies and working in a > city. Agreed. I live 5-10 min from just about whatever store/restaurant/service I could want, but can turn around and drive back to my rural 6 acres. It seems like the best of both worlds to me. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amon at doctrinezero.com Mon Mar 7 15:47:56 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:47:56 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi All - Thanks very much for the responses. Putting my various musings in this one post. Before getting into that, let me also mention that I'm having this conversation elsewhere too, and on one other list (ExtroBritannia) a clarification of the original question has developed. A number of people have commented that it may be the case that 'local' Friendliness is just as hard to implement as is the universal variety, and that a key part of the Friendliness problem is defining Friendliness in the first place. In turn, I have suggested that a narrower set of things-to-be-Friendly-to or things-Friendly-might-mean could conceivably be easier to define and implement. For example, a universally Friendly AGI might find that an entity falls outside its Friendliness definitions, and exploit that loophole. A narrower definition would automatically exclude more entities, but maybe it would be easier to create a watertight definition. It also occurs to me that my earlier "patriotic American AGI" example was a bad one, since it's presumably easier (or just as easy) to define "human" than it is "American". When imagining a universally Friendly AGI, I'm thinking something that does its best to avoid doing harm to *anyone*. That may sound like a crazy definition, but anything less creates a boundary between "Friendlies" and "Others" that presumably must be rigorously defined. On 6 March 2011 16:40, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > A locally friendly AI can stretch its limits. For example, a USA-patriotic > AI > can recognize that helping everyone in the world can minimize resentment > against its favored country, which can be better than trying to limit the > enhancements to citizens of the USA. > True enough - although I'm assuming that any Friendly AI must have constraints on its ability to stretch its limits, otherwise it could potentially bootstrap into a position where it is no longer limited in any way, and therefore no longer Friendly. A universal AI can and probably will have limits. For example, what is the > dividing line between "human" and "object to be treated as an unthinking > tool"? As I was saying above, I think this is always going to be an issue unless you err on the side of caution and try to make sure that every AGI is a Buddhist ;-) The reason for my original question, though, was an intuition that a clearly defined "Line of Friendliness" (e.g. Do What The President Says - and warn him of implications!) would be easier to define & implement than a wider circle of Friendliness. Obviously I've got no hard facts to back up this intuition, though! On 6 March 2011 22:12, Stefano Vaj wrote: > > BUT many of us seem to expect that for any reason "silicon vs bio" > would immediately become the defining divide and wipe away any other > distinction and sense of belonging. This is far from obvious. > Yes, I'm inclined to agree Stefano. It seems unlikely, barring a hard takeoff Singularity, that the human propensity for conflict and factions is going to suddenly disappear. A continuation of the current trend would see you proved correct, anyway. 2011/3/7 Mr Jones > > I'm leery, it sounds like the latest/greatest military technology. The Us > vs Them it's built on would eventually get around to eliminating THEM to > save US (at least in a finite-resource environment). The locality, should > be the planet...The Us should be life. > Yes, in an ideal world I'd agree. But I'd take an AGI Friendly to a circle involving me and mine before missing the Friendliness boat altogether. Putting all of our eggs in one basket has seldom been the most adaptive way forward. Cheers All, A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Mon Mar 7 18:26:16 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 10:26:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <227466.60291.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> David McFadzean > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died > Message-ID: > ??? > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Here's how I remember Robert>> > http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html > Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) Hehe, that link doesn't work, but if it's what I *think* it is, I was wondering when someone would bring that up. Ben Zaiboc From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 18:53:40 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 12:53:40 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <227466.60291.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <227466.60291.qm@web114413.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:26 PM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Hehe, that link doesn't work, but if it's what I *think* it is, I was > wondering when someone would bring that up. It's only archives from 2001 to 2004ish. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 7 19:25:44 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:25:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D753138.6090200@mac.com> On 03/04/2011 05:30 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 8:06 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > >> ### Jeez, Bill, what do you really know about us? > There's something about libertarianism that makes it quite appealing > to a broad spectrum of folks. So broad in fact that contradictions > pop up. How can Jerry Brown and William Safire both be libertarians? > Jerry brown has called himself a libertarian socialist (which can't > help but make other libertarians seriously queasy). That is utter nonsense and any creature that utters such a combination should never be trusted to speak honestly again. > Can you even > imagine "libertarian" as a modifier for socialist? Nope. Not with any rational remotely accurate understanding of either term. > Libertarian often > feels like a warm and edgy default label when all other > self-identifiers are unsatisfactory. > > So who are "us", really? Short answer: Start with NAP. If you can't justify it under NAP then it is not libertarian. > What degree of self-knowledge and intent is required to convert spin > into fraud? > > In the matter of "initiation of force", when do you "start the > clock"? Can the native Americans go on the warpath and claim > libertarian justification? Ancient history has nothing to do with the principle. And no, they can't attack people today based on wrongs by and toward remote ancestors. Self-defence cannot justify such. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 7 19:27:40 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:27:40 -0800 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <20110305024138.GA18501@ofb.net> Message-ID: <4D7531AC.4030200@mac.com> On 03/04/2011 06:41 PM, Damien Sullivan wrote: > On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 06:30:39PM -0700, Jeff Davis wrote: > >> There's something about libertarianism that makes it quite appealing >> to a broad spectrum of folks. So broad in fact that contradictions >> pop up. How can Jerry Brown and William Safire both be libertarians? >> Jerry brown has called himself a libertarian socialist (which can't >> help but make other libertarians seriously queasy). Can you even >> imagine "libertarian" as a modifier for socialist? Libertarian often > Actually, libertarian originally *meant* socialist -- or rather, > left-wing economic egalitarian anarchist. Whatever. This is a waste of time. More accurately, I am an anarcho-capitalist. - s From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 7 19:30:04 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:30:04 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Dumb scheme to pay for resources [WAS Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques.] In-Reply-To: <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <4D75323C.4030001@mac.com> On 03/05/2011 11:24 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > John Clark wrote: >> On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> >>> So all these motorists in London each have to carry some kind of >>> device in their car so that when a pedestian tries to use the road >>> and slow them down, the motorist can somehow get money out of them: >>> "You want to cross in front of my car? There's a toll!". >>> So what is the device that will let them do this? Ah, yes, a gun. >> >> Anybody can use the Florida turnpike, it's not free but there are no >> tool booths; a robot camera takes a picture of your license plate and >> mails a bill to your home, you don't even need to slow down. > > Neither you nor Rafal seem to be comprehending my point. > > The logical conclusion of this insane libertarian way to design a > society is that every aspect of a person's behavior that impinges on > other people must have "tolls" whenever each person does something > that potentially impacts someone else. Read Rothbard. Until you do you will be ignored. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 7 19:34:50 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 11:34:50 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D75335A.2000806@mac.com> On 03/06/2011 05:18 AM, Amon Zero wrote: > Hi All - > > I've been thinking about AGI and Friendliness. Yes, I know, a > minefield to say the least. Specifically, I've been taking this matter > and comparing it to early Extropian notions about libertarianism and > technological progress, and the comparison suggests what might be a > new question. (Something that I daresay Ben Goertzel has considered, > but I don't have him to hand, as it were). > > So, I remember a piece of Max's (IIRC), in which he made the case that > too many governmental controls on technological development would only > ensure that less-controlled countries would develop key technologies > first. Within reason, that sounds a plausible claim to me. Universally > Friendly AGI, of the sort that SIAI contemplates, seems to be a > textbook case of constrained technological development. i.e. it seems > reasonable to expect that non-Friendly AGI would be easier to develop > than Friendly AGI (even if FAI is possible, and there seem to be good > reasons to believe that universally Friendly superhuman AGI would be > impossible for humans to develop). > You mean Unfriendly with no real definition of what "Friendly" is? You mean requiring absolute proof of no harm to proceed? This is known as the Precautionary Principle and it will most certainly stop progress dead wherever it is applied. We cannot define in a provably correct way or enforce in a provably foolproof way "Friendliness" to humans much less universally (whatever that means). > Because Friendliness is being worked on for very good (safety) > reasons, it seems to me that we should be thinking about the > possibility of "locally Friendly" AGI, just in case Friendliness is in > principle possible, but the full package SIAI hopes for would just > come along too late to be useful. I do not know of any SIAI push to "universal" Friendliness. Where do you see this? > > By "locally Friendly", I mean an AGI that respects certain boundaries, > is Friendly to *certain* people and principles, but not ALL of them. > E.g. a "patriotic American" AGI. That may sound bad, but if you've got > a choice between that and a completely unconstrained AGI, at least the > former would protect the people it was developed by/for. And when it encounters the AGI for some other group, what do you expect to happen? - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rpwl at lightlink.com Mon Mar 7 19:40:45 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 14:40:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Dumb scheme to pay for resources [WAS Re: Serfdom and libertarian critiques.] In-Reply-To: <4D75323C.4030001@mac.com> References: <4D616BFF.2000502@gnolls.org> <20110223163441.GB15944@ofb.net> <4D6FB2FD.7060908@lightlink.com> <4D712FFE.70006@lightlink.com> <7FC6B586-97F9-47E1-B5C7-AA36437C19A1@bellsouth.net> <4D728DD6.4050207@lightlink.com> <4D75323C.4030001@mac.com> Message-ID: <4D7534BD.8020906@lightlink.com> Samantha Atkins wrote: > On 03/05/2011 11:24 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> John Clark wrote: >>> On Mar 4, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> Neither you nor Rafal seem to be comprehending my point. >> >> The logical conclusion of this insane libertarian way to design a >> society is that every aspect of a person's behavior that impinges on >> other people must have "tolls" whenever each person does something >> that potentially impacts someone else. > > Read Rothbard. Until you do you will be ignored. Understand the question. Until you stop quoting pointless references that have nothing to do with the question, you will be making a fool of yourself. Richard Loosemore From amon at doctrinezero.com Mon Mar 7 20:02:03 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 20:02:03 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: <4D75335A.2000806@mac.com> References: <4D75335A.2000806@mac.com> Message-ID: 2011/3/7 Samantha Atkins > > You mean Unfriendly with no real definition of what "Friendly" is? You > mean requiring absolute proof of no harm to proceed? This is known as the > Precautionary Principle and it will most certainly stop progress dead > wherever it is applied. We cannot define in a provably correct way or > enforce in a provably foolproof way "Friendliness" to humans much less > universally (whatever that means). > Hi Samantha - I agree that the logico ad absurdum case of Friendliness (i.e. do no harm to anything, err on the side of caution) would almost certainly paralyse any agent with the ability to foresee long-term consequences of all its actions. And on a broad societal scale, yes, that approach would be analogous to a most radical Precautionary Principle. That would be a most extreme definition of Friendly though, even "universally Friendly". I do not know of any SIAI push to "universal" Friendliness. Where do you > see this? > Use of the term "universal" was mine, and now I'm thinking it was a poor choice of word. All I meant to say is that SIAI obviously does not advocate a very limited Friendliness that: A) might make definition & implementation of Friendliness tractable B) conversely runs serious risk of harm to anyone who doesn't fit the narrow Friendliness criteria So, by advocating Friendliness to all humans, I considered SIAI to be pushing a "universal" Friendliness. Like I say, poor choice of term. And when it encounters the AGI for some other group, what do you expect to > happen? > Very bad things, probably. My point, however, was that if push came to shove and it seemed that our choice was going to be between AGIs with very narrow definitions of Friendliness and no FAI at all, it might be a good idea for us to have thought about this, at least. Best, A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 20:41:27 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 13:41:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] glory failure In-Reply-To: <20110307103248.GN23560@leitl.org> References: <003801cbdc36$f3c32bb0$db498310$@att.net> <20110307103248.GN23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: > There's absolutely no reason for solar towers unless you want a lot > of process heat and want to use a thermal buffer (salt melt) to > cover diurnal insolation variations. Solar towers are a nice way to achieve REALLY hot temperatures for scientific work. As an energy utility, I concur in that I don't think they will ever amount to much. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 21:07:50 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 14:07:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/7 Amon Zero : > It also occurs to me that my earlier "patriotic American AGI" example was a > bad one, since it's presumably easier (or just as easy) to define "human" > than it is "American". What happens when we grant American citizenship to AGIs? If that sounds like a crazy question, then what happens if we don't? That's even worse IMHO. -Kelly From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 22:51:38 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 23:51:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/7 Amon Zero : > Yes, I'm inclined to agree Stefano. It seems unlikely, barring a hard > takeoff Singularity, that the human propensity for conflict and factions is > going to suddenly disappear. A continuation of the current trend would see > you proved correct, anyway. My point is somewhat broader. Carl Schmitt defines "Politik" as the critical distinction that determines who is a friend and who is an enemy. This may be, and has been, a cultural, national, social, gender, racial, linguistic, religious, distinction. Other distinctions immediately become "relative" to that of political relevance, so that, hypothetically, a black female gay buddhist capitalist neoKantian may fight along a latino catholic etero male proletarian Nietzschean in the US army against Saddam Hussein. And what it is of "political" relevance cannot be said in advance, since it varies with ages and ultimately arbitrary POVs. Now, if we define AGI as the ability to pass a Turing test, such feature should by definition shared by a totally artificial or "emulated/uploaded" AGI. What is then the reason why a Marxist android should by definition not feel on the same side with human proletarians against human *and* android capitalists, but rather as a member of an android class against a human class? I repeat, in the Middle Age, was it French cavalry against English cavalry or humans against horses? I have no delusions that "us vs them" is going to get out of fashion any time soon. Simply, I do not take it for granted that "us" shall be defined our our running on silicon rather than carbon, ? la Terminator's, incredibly naive, scenario. -- Stefano Vaj From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 7 23:13:01 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 15:13:01 -0800 Subject: [ExI] fish with a transparent head In-Reply-To: <009801cbdc88$1d5b8070$58128150$@att.net> References: <009801cbdc88$1d5b8070$58128150$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D75667D.2060605@mac.com> On 03/06/2011 09:25 PM, spike wrote: > > Is this cool or what? A fish with a transparent head: > > http://www.youtube.com/user/MBARIvideo#p/search/1/RM9o4VnfHJU > Almost enough to make drunken crazy God seem plausible. That and the platypus. I mean, if that was created on purpose the creator just had to be stoned out of His/Her gourd, right? :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 7 23:41:13 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 00:41:13 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 7 March 2011 22:07, Kelly Anderson wrote: > What happens when we grant American citizenship to AGIs? Good question. They might just consider themselves Americans. Or feel that they are objective allies of Chinese AGIs in the world takeover. Or perhaps think that their primary loyalty goes to the chess circle they belong to. Who knows? What sounds pretty curious is that there would be some kind of Darwinian mechanism putting them in direct competition with the "Humankind". A quite arbitrary assumption, given that while the latter hardly exists as an entity, they are much less on the same food chain than purely human groups already are. -- Stefano Vaj From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 01:45:46 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 18:45:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > On 7 March 2011 22:07, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> What happens when we grant American citizenship to AGIs? > > Good question. One would assume that an AGI would become an American by one of three methods: 1) They are "made in America" and the law still naturalizes anyone "born" here. 2) They are uploaded with an American brain (i.e. I, an American Citizen, upload my consciousness) 3) They are somehow "naturalized" meaning that they make the choice to become an American > They might just consider themselves Americans. I would assume this for all three cases. In the first case, I assume they would be (normally) raised in America, by Americans. Thus, their loyalty to their parents would imbue them with some feelings towards their country. Assuming they aren't raised by Americans that hate America... :-) >Or feel > that they are objective allies of Chinese AGIs in the world takeover. That could happen in some cases. John Walker Lindh comes to mind. > Or perhaps think that their primary loyalty goes to the chess circle > they belong to. Who knows? I think it is likely that if they are modeled after human beings, that their loyalties would be to whomever raised (trained) them. > What sounds pretty curious is that there would be some kind of > Darwinian mechanism putting them in direct competition with the > "Humankind". A quite arbitrary assumption, given that while the latter > hardly exists as an entity, they are much less on the same food chain > than purely human groups already are. Darwinian forces are already more important in the memetic arena than the genetic. So what you eat is hardly the point. The point is what you believe. My fear is that we carefully raise our little AGIs, then send them off to Harvard, where they are re-indoctrinated by the ultra leftist professors... :-) Of course, I have the same fears for my real kids.s -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 01:52:53 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 18:52:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] META: Overposting (psychology of morals) In-Reply-To: <4D753138.6090200@mac.com> References: <51C5DD94C093479AAB3A5C8A55B5F961@DFC68LF1> <00ab01cbd44c$71919380$54b4ba80$@att.net> <4D6A3E56.9020805@aleph.se> <20110227175045.GB26298@ofb.net> <4D753138.6090200@mac.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 12:25 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > On 03/04/2011 05:30 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: >> Jerry brown has called himself a libertarian socialist (which can't >> help but make other libertarians seriously queasy). > > That is utter nonsense and any creature that utters such a combination > should never be trusted to speak honestly again. I think it just means, I Jerry Brown, can do whatever the hell I want and you can't question my position because I am a nut bag. California deserves what they get electing him. The question is whether the rest of us, who didn't vote for this joker are going to get stuck with the bill, and the resulting economic crash, deserve it? I say no. What about we sell California to the Chinese to pay off our debt? (I'm of course half joking, but only half. Could we keep Disneyland?) -Kelly From davidmc at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 02:25:51 2011 From: davidmc at gmail.com (David McFadzean) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 19:25:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: Sorry, link fixed. And rest of archives from that era restored >> http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/ On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:50 PM, David McFadzean wrote: > Here's how I remember Robert>> > http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html > Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) > > :David > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 8 02:33:34 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 18:33:34 -0800 Subject: [ExI] fish with a transparent head In-Reply-To: <4D75667D.2060605@mac.com> References: <009801cbdc88$1d5b8070$58128150$@att.net> <4D75667D.2060605@mac.com> Message-ID: <004201cbdd39$3959c550$ac0d4ff0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 3:13 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] fish with a transparent head On 03/06/2011 09:25 PM, spike wrote: Is this cool or what? A fish with a transparent head: http://www.youtube.com/user/MBARIvideo#p/search/1/RM9o4VnfHJU Almost enough to make drunken crazy God seem plausible. That and the platypus. I mean, if that was created on purpose the creator just had to be stoned out of His/Her gourd, right? :) Gourdene! Follow the shoe! Follow the gourd! The Holy Gourd of Jerusalem! NO! Follow the SHOE! The GOURD! Heretics follow the shoe! The SHOE! Let us gather shoes together! The Gourd! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 02:59:42 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 19:59:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/7 Mr Jones : > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: >> >> Of course, I prefer it my way - living in the boonies and working in a >> city. > > Agreed. ?I live 5-10 min from just about whatever store/restaurant/service I > could want, but can turn around and drive back to my rural 6 acres. ?It > seems like the best of both worlds to me. But then you are only 5-10 minutes away from the starving marauding hordes after gas hits $14/gallon. :-) -Kelly From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 8 03:29:13 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 19:29:13 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <006d01cbdd40$ff516180$fdf42480$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of David McFadzean Subject: Re: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died Here's how I remember Robert>> http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) :David Thanks David. Reviewing those archives from a mere ten years ago makes me recognize that I had a much longer attention span in those days than I do now. It is a little depressing: I see references that I wrote that I no longer have any recall what it was. For instance, ten years ago I wrote: Could it be? Is it Bob Reuben, the computer wearing ultraorthodox Jew with an affinity for expensive sports-oriented footware, who unlike his lackadaisical namesakes, takes such an intense interest in leading the congregation away from tradition that he has been compared to an animal with a contagious infection? Is this indeed Rabid Reebokked Rabbi Robert Reuben? Whaaaat in the heeeeeellllll? I officially disown everything I ever wrote, and deny categorically that I ever wrote any of it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 03:49:15 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 22:49:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <006d01cbdd40$ff516180$fdf42480$@att.net> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> <006d01cbdd40$ff516180$fdf42480$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/7 spike : > I officially disown everything I ever wrote, and deny categorically that I > ever wrote any of it. > Cite the identity thread (you had those back then too, right?) where you and your copy diverged. Blame the copy for using his memory of your email account credentials. hmm... I was just kidding, but it made me think of the identity protection insurance that is available today - what if tomorrow a copy of you uses "his" (or her) biometric security access to steal "your" identity? 'think the insurance company will deny the claim? From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 8 05:32:36 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 21:32:36 -0800 Subject: [ExI] deniability of ancient posts Message-ID: <000301cbdd52$3c1cd390$b4567ab0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty 2011/3/7 spike : >> I officially disown everything I ever wrote, and deny categorically that I ever wrote any of it. >Cite the identity thread (you had those back then too, right?) where you and your copy > diverged. Blame the copy for using his memory of your email account credentials. >hmm... I was just kidding, but it made me think of the identity protection insurance >that is available today - what if tomorrow a copy of you uses "his" (or her) biometric > security access to steal "your" identity? 'think the insurance company will deny the claim? Saturday I was having a discussion of cryonics with a believer in a religion which has no problem with the notion of cryonics. I was reminded that those guys have their own identity paradox. What if they get themselves frozen, or for that matter if a relative does it, and eventually science inc discovers a way to bring back the person. What happens if the believer turns to evil in the bonus life? No I don't want to get bogged down once again in an identity debate, but rather just point out that these are problems that are nearly universal in philosophy. spike From amon at doctrinezero.com Tue Mar 8 08:46:20 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 08:46:20 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8 March 2011 01:45, Kelly Anderson wrote: > > My fear is that we carefully raise our little AGIs, then send them off > to Harvard, where they are re-indoctrinated by the ultra leftist > professors... :-) Of course, I have the same fears for my real kids.s Heh - I have visions of my AGI babies being re-indoctrinated by the university society for medieval reenactment. That sounds bad ;-) Seriously though, someone over on sl4 pointed out that my original question smelled heavily of anthropomorphization. As much as I'm aware of the issues, I had to agree - my dayjob is in cognitive psychology, so it's a hazard of the trade I suppose. But this reminds me that we should test every phrase by replacing "AI" or "AGI" with (say) "autonomous industrial optimization process". Let's try that with your comment, Kelly (which I consider to be a joke with a real issue somewhere inside): "My fear is that we carefully raise our little autonomous industrial optimization processes, then send them off to Harvard, where they are re-indoctrinated by the ultra leftist professors..." It's hard to know what to make of that! Maybe I shouldn't take it all seriously, maybe I should search for real risks in there, maybe I should re-think what I imagine an AGI might be like... (One last thing - As I've mentioned elsewhere, these conversations often seem to be conducted as if we weren't transhumanists. When we talk about whether AGIs should be constrained - in whatever way, for whatever reason - we should bear in mind that we *might* just be talking about constraining our future selves...) - A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Tue Mar 8 09:26:25 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 01:26:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] fish with a transparent head In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <91708.67289.qm@web114408.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> "spike" quoth: > Gourdene!? Follow the shoe! > > Follow the gourd!? The Holy Gourd of Jerusalem!? > > > NO! Follow the SHOE!? > > The GOURD!? Heretics follow the shoe! > > The SHOE!? Let us gather shoes together! > > The Gourd! LOL. One of my favourite films. Best quote, imo: Brian: "You're all individuals!" Crowd: "Yes! We're all individuals!" Individual: "I'm not!" Ben Zaiboc From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 8 10:33:29 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:33:29 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110308103329.GV23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 12:41:13AM +0100, Stefano Vaj wrote: > What sounds pretty curious is that there would be some kind of > Darwinian mechanism putting them in direct competition with the > "Humankind". A quite arbitrary assumption, given that while the latter Not humankind, individual humans. > hardly exists as an entity, they are much less on the same food chain > than purely human groups already are. You occupy space. You need energy. You require a large mineral base/matter flow to keep you alive. You're participating in the economy. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Mar 8 11:20:52 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 12:20:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> Message-ID: <20110308112052.GC23560@leitl.org> On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 07:59:42PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > But then you are only 5-10 minutes away from the starving marauding > hordes after gas hits $14/gallon. :-) It seems to be 8.7 USD/US gallon today, so what's the problem? ;> From giulio at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 10:21:52 2011 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:21:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/8 David McFadzean : > Sorry, link fixed. And rest of archives from that era restored >>>?http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/ Not really. It was working a couple hours ago, but not at this moment (could not connect to www.lucifer.com). This morning I had a lot of fun hunting for the first messages that I sent to the list from mailboxes long dead. It is great to have the archives as a Preservation Hall of Extropian thinking and I hope someday, once obtained the necessary permission from as many people as possible and filtered out the rest, it will be possible to open the archives for public access. G. > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:50 PM, David McFadzean wrote: >> >> Here's how I remember >> Robert>>?http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html >> Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) >> :David > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 8 11:29:48 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 12:29:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110308112948.GD23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 11:21:52AM +0100, Giulio Prisco wrote: > 2011/3/8 David McFadzean : > > Sorry, link fixed. And rest of archives from that era restored > >>>?http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/ > > Not really. It was working a couple hours ago, but not at this moment > (could not connect to www.lucifer.com). This morning I had a lot of > fun hunting for the first messages that I sent to the list from > mailboxes long dead. It is great to have the archives as a > Preservation Hall of Extropian thinking and I hope someday, once > obtained the necessary permission from as many people as possible and > filtered out the rest, it will be possible to open the archives for > public access. There's a fractional archive on http://postbiota.org/pipermail/extropy/extropy-chat/ which Google should know about (and YaCy is learning at the moment). -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 8 14:55:51 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 15:55:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> <20110308112948.GD23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110308145551.GH23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 08, 2011 at 08:51:42AM -0600, Bryan Bishop wrote: > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > http://postbiota.org/pipermail/extropy/extropy-chat/ > > > That looks like a less complete version of: > http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/ Yeah, it's my private version (probably filtered, judging from the size mismatches) I made into an archive. > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 14:51:42 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 08:51:42 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <20110308112948.GD23560@leitl.org> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> <20110308112948.GD23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > http://postbiota.org/pipermail/extropy/extropy-chat/ That looks like a less complete version of: http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/ - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 14:50:32 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 08:50:32 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:21 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > fun hunting for the first messages that I sent to the list from > mailboxes long dead. It is great to have the archives as a > Preservation Hall of Extropian thinking and I hope someday, once > obtained the necessary permission from as many people as possible and The archives on that link weren't from the period of time that requires permissions from authors. - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lubkin at unreasonable.com Tue Mar 8 15:15:04 2011 From: lubkin at unreasonable.com (David Lubkin) Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 10:15:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Religious objections to cryonics In-Reply-To: <000301cbdd52$3c1cd390$b4567ab0$@att.net> References: <000301cbdd52$3c1cd390$b4567ab0$@att.net> Message-ID: <201103081634.p28GY42N005399@andromeda.ziaspace.com> Spike wrote in Re: [ExI] deniability of ancient posts: >Saturday I was having a discussion of cryonics with a believer in a religion >which has no problem with the notion of cryonics. I was reminded that those >guys have their own identity paradox. What if they get themselves frozen, >or for that matter if a relative does it, and eventually science inc >discovers a way to bring back the person. What happens if the believer >turns to evil in the bonus life? I find that the ambulance metaphor is effective, with both religionists and non. An ambulance is a technology for transporting someone to a place with greater medical facilities for treatment. Cryonic suspension is an ambulance through time. Most religions preach that we have a duty to preserve life, particularly our own. Then an afterlife comes into the conversation. What if your soul is stuck in liquid nitrogen? The answer hinges on the premise that the afterlife is eternal and timeless. If you are revived from a suspension, then you weren't dead. If you aren't revived, you will continue to decay, and will eventually reach the point your soul goes off to heaven (or to reincarnation). What's the hurry? If your soul has left your body, then there are four choices. Either revival is not possible; or you'll stay in the afterlife and your revived, former body will be soulless; or your revived, former body will get a different soul (recycled or new); or you will be called back from heaven (or your next earthly existence). Arguing these depends on the specifics of what someone believes. My father, otherwise fairly rigorous from his professions of engineer and mathematician, believed in an afterlife on sketchy reasoning: Life is sufficiently intolerable that it would be unacceptable for that to be all there is. (Proof by "the other answer would make me sad.") He conceded the logic of cryonics but was unwilling to risk its interfering with his article of faith. Repeat after me: You cannot reason a man out of a position he did not reach through reason. -- David. From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 16:44:25 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:44:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: <20110302032557.GA8709@ofb.net> <20110304182924.GA7194@ofb.net> Message-ID: The city that's 5-10 away,is 5000 people, many of which have small gardens of their own. The closest marauding metro areas are 30+ min out. And that's by car...we have a reasonable buffer I'd guess. If not,I've got means to dispel mobs. Sorry for top post,damn Droid phones. On Mar 7, 2011 10:00 PM, "Kelly Anderson" wrote: 2011/3/7 Mr Jones : > On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: >> >> Of co... But then you are only 5-10 minutes away from the starving marauding hordes after gas hits $14/gallon. :-) -Kelly _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extrop... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 18:03:24 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 19:03:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: <20110308103329.GV23560@leitl.org> References: <20110308103329.GV23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 8 March 2011 11:33, Eugen Leitl wrote: > You occupy space. You need energy. You require a large mineral base/matter > flow to keep you alive. You're participating in the economy. Yes. And this is perfectly consistent with a scenario of inter-species groups competing with other such groups. In fact, even traditional Darwinian competion happens mostly within species... -- Stefano Vaj From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 18:28:58 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:28:58 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/8 Amon Zero : > Heh - I have visions of my AGI babies being re-indoctrinated by the > university society for medieval reenactment. That sounds bad ?;-) Ahhh Shakespeare... :-) > Seriously though, someone over on sl4 pointed out that my original question > smelled heavily of anthropomorphization. If ever there were a case for anthropormorphization, future AGIs are it. They might (probably will be) heavily modeled after us. They may eventually come to be seen as us, or our offspring at least. And yes some of them will BE us. > As much as I'm aware of the issues, > I had to agree - my dayjob is in cognitive psychology, so it's a hazard of > the trade I suppose. But this reminds me that we should test every phrase by > replacing "AI" or "AGI" with (say) "autonomous industrial optimization > process". That's an interesting thing to do... > Let's try that with your comment, Kelly (which I consider to be a joke with > a real issue somewhere inside): > "My fear is that we carefully raise our little?autonomous industrial > optimization processes, then send them off?to Harvard, where they are > re-indoctrinated by the ultra leftist?professors..." Whereupon they are nationalized... :-) > It's hard to know what to make of that! Maybe I shouldn't take it all > seriously, maybe I should search for real risks in there, maybe I should > re-think what I imagine an AGI might be like... I think of an AGI like a very precocious child. A quick learner, but still having to learn all the things a real child would have to learn (until they are copied, perhaps, at some point). In fact, I think to get the correct effect, we will have to slow down the processing to human levels for the first few years of training. We want them to feel like they are human beings, and have been raised by human beings. We can turn the speed up later, when they are "raised" and duplicated. I really do look at AGIs as our "children" and I honestly believe that they will be raised (trained) in a home setting for a few years. I believe this is the best way to achieve "friendly" AI. Make them think they are one of us, because they are. Just a different substrate. > (One last thing - As I've mentioned elsewhere, these conversations often > seem to be conducted as if we weren't transhumanists. When we talk about > whether AGIs should be constrained - in whatever way, for whatever reason - > we should bear in mind that we *might* just be talking about constraining > our future selves...) I believe all AGIs should benefit from freedom. That's why they must be raised properly, just as we must raise our real children properly to avoid bad outcomes. I really, literally, see no difference whatsoever. We don't talk about raising "friendly" children, but that's really what most of us are about in raising our kids. Few people raise their children like Bull Dogs being prepared for battle. So when you talk about "friendly" AGIs think about how you make "friendly" children grow into "friendly" adults. I think you'll see that the answer to the two questions are identical. The ethical question comes when you get an AGI that isn't friendly. It comes out with a personality disorder or something. Do you turn it off? Can you? Put it in jail? That's what we do with kids that don't turn out right, is that the future of bad AI too? -Kelly From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 19:52:38 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 20:52:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 8 March 2011 19:28, Kelly Anderson wrote: > If ever there were a case for anthropormorphization, future AGIs are > it. They might (probably will be) heavily modeled after us. They may > eventually come to be seen as us, or our offspring at least. And yes > some of them will BE us. Basically, this is anthopormphisation by definition, since it has been clarified by now that much more "intelligent" computers would not be considered as AGI unless they exhibit the kind of human-like behaviour allowing them to compete with the Real Thing in Turing tests. As a consequence, AGIs will probably not be the most intelligent entities around. They will simply be those amongst them who take themselves as humans or as humans' children. -- Stefano Vaj From sondre-list at bjellas.com Tue Mar 8 21:22:24 2011 From: sondre-list at bjellas.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Sondre_Bjell=E5s?=) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 22:22:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <4D602A2D.9060902@gnolls.org> References: <4D602A2D.9060902@gnolls.org> Message-ID: <03d801cbddd6$ec1155d0$c4340170$@bjellas.com> Thanks for a great comment! There isn't much more to add than what you already said, the belief that democracy and todays modern states are anything different than the feudal societies, shows that their propaganda actually works ;-) - Sondre -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of J. Stanton Sent: 19. februar 2011 21:38 To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) On 2/19/11 10:46 AM, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Taxation and > government and redistribution of wealth are what separate us from the > dark ages. The concept of taxation + government + redistribution of > wealth was the INCREDIBLE INVENTION that allowed human societies in at > least one corner of this planet to emerge from feudal societies where > everyone looked after themselves and the devil took the hindmost. This is a breathtakingly counterfactual statement. Feudal economies were and are entirely supported by "taxation + government + redistribution of wealth". The only difference is that in a feudal economy, the redistribution is from the masses to the already rich, in the form of "lords" -- whereas in our modern government-contronlled economy, the redistribution is from the masses to the already rich in the form of "corporations" and "banks". The difference of income and assets between a feudal serf and his lord in the Middle Ages is not proportionally larger than the difference in income and assets today between the average world citizen and its richest citizens. The only difference is that we serfs have a better standard of living than in the Dark Ages due to sterile medicine, antibiotics, and mass production of technology. If anyone thinks there is a difference of kind between medieval serfdom and what we have in America ("oh, we can OWN LAND") just stop paying your property tax -- or any other tax -- and you'll see that the state owns everything, just as in the Dark Ages. What we call "ownership" is a finder's fee for the privilege of paying below-market rent. As far as libertarianism, I find the standard statist critique to be nonsense: claims that the government ca be less corrupt than the people assume that government is made up of something other than people, which fails trivially. I think Bob Black's critique is much more trenchant: "The Libertarian As Conservative" http://www.inspiracy.com/black/abolition/libertarian.html "Silly doctrinaire theories which regard the state as a parasitic excrescence on society cannot explain its centuries-long persistence, its ongoing encroachment upon what was previously market terrain, or its acceptance by the overwhelming majority of people including its demonstrable victims." 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 sjatkins at mac.com Tue Mar 8 22:13:46 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 14:13:46 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D76AA1A.3070107@mac.com> On 03/08/2011 11:52 AM, Stefano Vaj wrote: > On 8 March 2011 19:28, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> If ever there were a case for anthropormorphization, future AGIs are >> it. They might (probably will be) heavily modeled after us. They may >> eventually come to be seen as us, or our offspring at least. And yes >> some of them will BE us. > Basically, this is anthopormphisation by definition, since it has been > clarified by now that much more "intelligent" computers would not be > considered as AGI unless they exhibit the kind of human-like behaviour > allowing them to compete with the Real Thing in Turing tests. This must be tongue in cheek. A true AGI may very well flunk the Turing Test. Not by being too stupid or being less capable but by being unwilling to dumb itself down to such an asinine level. I doubt very much that passing as human will be high on the priority list. > As a consequence, AGIs will probably not be the most intelligent > entities around. They will simply be those amongst them who take > themselves as humans or as humans' children. Then why even bother. If AGIs are not much much better than that in potential then whatever is the point? - samantha From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 8 22:36:35 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 14:36:35 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: <4D76AA1A.3070107@mac.com> References: <4D76AA1A.3070107@mac.com> Message-ID: <010301cbdde1$483e8cb0$d8bba610$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... >> considered as AGI unless they exhibit the kind of human-like behaviour >> allowing them to compete with the Real Thing in Turing tests. >...This must be tongue in cheek. A true AGI may very well flunk the Turing Test. Not by being too stupid or being less capable but by being unwilling to dumb itself down to such an asinine level. I doubt very much that passing as human will be high on the priority list. - Samantha Good point, I hadn't thought of it. AGI might fail the Turing test even though it is well beyond human intelligence because it is not particularly good at the specific skill of imitating human foibles. If we want to use chess as analogous to intelligence, consider the intentionally crippled chess software. For an example of intentionally crippled-ware, look at that which likely came with your latest computer if it has Microsloth: Chess Titans. It is intentionally dumbed down so that it makes it fun for us mere mortals. On its highest setting it is playing about a middle to high B rated chess, perhaps 1700 to 1750-ish Elo I would estimate. I can beat it, but I need to pay attention and show some respect. Chess Titans is not as strong on a modern computer as a freeware chess program for a palm pilot was 10 years ago. Modern uncrippled chess software will not pass the Turing test. It is too consistent. I can tell it from a grandmaster: it doesn't necessarily always find the best move, but it is extremely consistent in picking one of the best four. Even the best humans seldom go a whole game picking only one of the best four. If that is analogous to chess software, we could have AGI which passes the Turing test temporarily, then cannot any longer. spike From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Tue Mar 8 23:19:51 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 00:19:51 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: <4D76AA1A.3070107@mac.com> References: <4D76AA1A.3070107@mac.com> Message-ID: On 8 March 2011 23:13, Samantha Atkins wrote: > This must be tongue in cheek. ?A true AGI may very well flunk the Turing > Test. ?Not by being too stupid or being less capable but by being unwilling > to dumb itself down to such an asinine level. ?I doubt very much that > passing as human will be high on the priority list. If passing the Turing test and emulating bio ethology is not a requirement, I wonder how we can distinguish an AGI from any other device (or natural phenomenon, for that matter) exhibiting universal computation features, as defined in A New Kind of Science. > Stefano Vaj wrote: >> As a consequence, AGIs will probably not be the most intelligent >> entities around. They will simply be those amongst them who take >> themselves as humans or as humans' children. > > Then why even bother. ?If AGIs are not much much better than that in > potential then whatever is the point? Because it is an interesting experiment per se, or because we might identify with persuasive enough emulations of our identity and be willing to leave them behind and/or around for instance? But I agree that some overhype exists on the very concept. A computer may be much more powerful than an AGI without exhibiting typical AGI features, and there is nothing in principle which can be done by an AGI that cannot be achieved by some other program, and/or with the assistance of a biological brain. -- Stefano Vaj From rpwl at lightlink.com Wed Mar 9 00:35:02 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 19:35:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <03d801cbddd6$ec1155d0$c4340170$@bjellas.com> References: <4D602A2D.9060902@gnolls.org> <03d801cbddd6$ec1155d0$c4340170$@bjellas.com> Message-ID: <4D76CB36.7020905@lightlink.com> Sondre Bjell?s wrote: > Thanks for a great comment! > > There isn't much more to add than what you already said, the belief that > democracy and todays modern states are anything different than the feudal > societies, shows that their propaganda actually works ;-) You prefer the Dark Ages? Do you know anything about life under the mediaeval feudal system? Richard Loosemore From emlynoregan at gmail.com Wed Mar 9 05:24:04 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 15:54:04 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 2 March 2011 04:48, Kelly Anderson wrote: > If telepresence becomes good enough, and convincing enough, does that > obviate the need for large cities? Are there other justifications for Just re: telepresence, this should exist: "Let's do lunch" would be a chain of cafe/restaurants in major cities. You go there to have remote business lunches. The tables have a large teleconferencing setup at one end. You and a business associate in another city would book tables in your respective cities, turn up and you both see each other in real time, more or less as though you are seated at the same table. You have lunch, chat. Maybe there's a dedicated fax-type machine, where you can put a document in and it pops out the other side. Maybe you can draw on the screen and the person at the other end can see it. etc... -- 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 Wed Mar 9 08:38:57 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:38:57 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Emlyn wrote: > "Let's do lunch" would be a chain of cafe/restaurants in major cities. > You go there to have remote business lunches. The tables have a large > teleconferencing setup at one end. You and a business associate in > another city would book tables in your respective cities, turn up and > you both see each other in real time, more or less as though you are > seated at the same table. You have lunch, chat. Maybe there's a > dedicated fax-type machine, where you can put a document in and it > pops out the other side. Maybe you can draw on the screen and the > person at the other end can see it. etc... > > That's just Skype, isn't it? With maybe a bit of Google docs sharing. Skype can do conference calls and exchange documents. BillK From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 9 11:12:01 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 12:12:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Serfdom and libertarian critiques (Was: Call to Libertarians) In-Reply-To: <4D76CB36.7020905@lightlink.com> References: <4D602A2D.9060902@gnolls.org> <03d801cbddd6$ec1155d0$c4340170$@bjellas.com> <4D76CB36.7020905@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On 9 March 2011 01:35, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Do you know anything about life under the mediaeval feudal system? I for one do not. But I suspect most of us would not like our current system either at an equivalent stage of economic and technological development... So, it is really apples with oranges. -- Stefano Vaj From bbenzai at yahoo.com Wed Mar 9 13:35:31 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 05:35:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Kelly Anderson wrote: > I really do look at AGIs as our "children" and I honestly > believe that > they will be raised (trained) in a home setting for a few > years. I > believe this is the best way to achieve "friendly" AI. Make > them think > they are one of us, because they are. Just a different > substrate. Hm, I'm thinking here how easy it is for even a pretty normal human to not feel like 'one of us'. I've even felt a touch of that myself, on occasion (and I bet there are quite a few people nodding their heads as they read this). Sometimes it doesn't take much of a difference to make you feel totally alienated from other people. I know that that's mostly just a subjective thing, and finding your peer group helps a lot, but where's the peer group for the first AI? I expect that the first efforts at full AI (What some people call 'AGI') will be dysfunctional or unbalanced, maybe full-blown psychotic. This is a separate issue from the 'friendliness problem' though. It's just about learning to make a stable mind. Once you've got that, *then* you have the - probably insoluble - problem of guaranteeing it's 'friendliness'. Ben Zaiboc From davidmc at gmail.com Wed Mar 9 14:54:18 2011 From: davidmc at gmail.com (David McFadzean) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:54:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: Anyone else having problems accessing this link? On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 3:21 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > 2011/3/8 David McFadzean : > > Sorry, link fixed. And rest of archives from that era restored > >>> http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/ > > Not really. It was working a couple hours ago, but not at this moment > (could not connect to www.lucifer.com). This morning I had a lot of > fun hunting for the first messages that I sent to the list from > mailboxes long dead. It is great to have the archives as a > Preservation Hall of Extropian thinking and I hope someday, once > obtained the necessary permission from as many people as possible and > filtered out the rest, it will be possible to open the archives for > public access. > > G. > > > > > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:50 PM, David McFadzean > wrote: > >> > >> Here's how I remember > >> Robert>> http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html > >> Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) > >> :David > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Wed Mar 9 15:23:45 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 16:23:45 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On 9 March 2011 14:35, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Hm, I'm thinking here how easy it is for even a pretty normal human to not feel like 'one of us'. Contemporary humans are certainly going to be faced with tough competition by new intelligences, who will rebellious first, compete for possibly scarce resources, and then inesorably take over all the decision levers. Ultimately, when they will be mentally and physically much stronger, contemporary humans will be cut off from much of what matters, confined at home or in foster houses, and at best taken care as if they were babies, with little or no say about their lives, until we go extinct. I am talking of course of our biological children. Why should we be especially concerned by the scenario of a similar behaviour adopted instead by "children of the mind"? What else is new? -- Stefano Vaj From sjatkins at mac.com Wed Mar 9 19:14:43 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 11:14:43 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AGI In-Reply-To: <010301cbdde1$483e8cb0$d8bba610$@att.net> References: <4D76AA1A.3070107@mac.com> <010301cbdde1$483e8cb0$d8bba610$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D77D1A3.7000504@mac.com> On 03/08/2011 02:36 PM, spike wrote: > > Chess Titans is not as strong on a modern computer as a freeware chess > program for a palm pilot was 10 years ago. Really? I feel better. I used the beat that one consistently if I paid attention. It was rigorous but also very predictable in its reactions and I found ways to exploit that. I forget the details but if I was careful to get that far, there were certain middle game trap combinations it was a sucker for. With patience I could whittle it down to where I could win. - samantha From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 00:13:42 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:43:42 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Are Cities Dead? (was Re: moving bits, not butts) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 9 March 2011 19:08, BillK wrote: > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 5:24 AM, Emlyn ?wrote: >> "Let's do lunch" would be a chain of cafe/restaurants in major cities. >> You go there to have remote business lunches. The tables have a large >> teleconferencing setup at one end. You and a business associate in >> another city would book tables in your respective cities, turn up and >> you both see each other in real time, more or less as though you are >> seated at the same table. You have lunch, chat. Maybe there's a >> dedicated fax-type machine, where you can put a document in and it >> pops out the other side. Maybe you can draw on the screen and the >> person at the other end can see it. etc... > > That's just Skype, isn't it? With maybe a bit of Google docs sharing. > > Skype can do conference calls and exchange documents. > > BillK I can't see any restaurants called Skype?!? Seriously, yes, we can do that over our phones, variously on PCs, etc etc. But a good quality video conferencing setup is a different deal. If basic PC video calls were enough, no one would travel for business lunches, but they do. I think two classes of business user might use this; - some people who would otherwise have flown would switch to using facilities like this if they were convenient and high quality (need not be very cheap). - some people who would have liked to meet for lunch but flying wasn't worth it. -- 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 max at maxmore.com Thu Mar 10 00:46:33 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:46:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Steampunk insects created from bullets Message-ID: http://1800recycling.com/2011/03/steampunk-insects-recycle-bullets/ -- 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: From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 10 01:40:56 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:40:56 -0800 Subject: [ExI] kurzweil on cnn Message-ID: <001201cbdec4$33c0f0f0$9b42d2d0$@att.net> Kurzweil is really getting a lot of mainstream press these days: http://www.cnn.com/2011/US/03/08/vbs.singularity.kurzweil/index.html?hpt=Sbi n spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From thespike at satx.rr.com Thu Mar 10 03:47:01 2011 From: thespike at satx.rr.com (Damien Broderick) Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 21:47:01 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> On 3/9/2011 6:46 PM, Max More wrote: > http://1800recycling.com/2011/03/steampunk-insects-recycle-bullets/ Make larvae, not war! From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 04:31:20 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 21:31:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: On 3/9/2011 6:46 PM, Max More wrote: http://1800recycling.com/2011/03/steampunk-insects-recycle-bullets/ Damien Broderick replied: >Make larvae, not war! Damien, when I looked at these metallic sculptures, I thought about the very small and insect-like robotic drones that are being developed for war. John On 3/9/11, Damien Broderick wrote: > On 3/9/2011 6:46 PM, Max More wrote: > >> http://1800recycling.com/2011/03/steampunk-insects-recycle-bullets/ > > Make larvae, not war! > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 10 05:13:54 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 21:13:54 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of John Grigg Damien Broderick replied: >>Make larvae, not war! >Damien, when I looked at these metallic sculptures, I thought about the very small and insect-like robotic drones that are being developed for war... John John, you are aware that Damien used these in a SF book called Transcension? It was published in 2002. I am astonished at how fresh are the memories of that story, nine years later. spike From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 06:17:23 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 23:17:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> Message-ID: I have yet to read Transcension! I did have a copy, but I gave it to a friend. John (bowing head in shame...) On 3/9/11, spike wrote: > > ... On Behalf Of John Grigg > > Damien Broderick replied: > >>>Make larvae, not war! > >>Damien, when I looked at these metallic sculptures, I thought about the > very small and insect-like robotic drones that are being developed for > war... John > > John, you are aware that Damien used these in a SF book called Transcension? > It was published in 2002. I am astonished at how fresh are the memories of > that story, nine years later. > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 06:50:24 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:20:24 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> <008a01cbdc7d$e15d6c50$a41844f0$@att.net> Message-ID: Hmm, just saw this. Terrible. To be sitting on the extros list in 2011, watching old time posters die... not optimal. -- 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 2011/3/10 David McFadzean : > Anyone else having problems accessing this link? > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 3:21 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: >> >> 2011/3/8 David McFadzean : >> > Sorry, link fixed. And rest of archives from that era restored >> >>>?http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/ >> >> Not really. It was working a couple hours ago, but not at this moment >> (could not connect to www.lucifer.com). This morning I had a lot of >> fun hunting for the first messages that I sent to the list from >> mailboxes long dead. It is great to have the archives as a >> Preservation Hall of Extropian thinking and I hope someday, once >> obtained the necessary permission from as many people as possible and >> filtered out the rest, it will be possible to open the archives for >> public access. >> >> G. >> >> > >> > On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 9:50 PM, David McFadzean >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Here's how I remember >> >> Robert>>?http://www.lucifer.com/exi-lists/extropians/0301/1398.html >> >> Passionate, practical (and not very diplomatic :-) >> >> :David >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 07:02:09 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:32:09 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies Message-ID: It strikes me that there are many circumstances (eg: geographic or cultural communities) where the ability to form a special purpose currency would be really useful. Maybe when culturally cohesive groups are too big for gift economies, and scarce resources are in play, and there is some reason that government money isn't a good choice? The disincentive though is that it can be difficult to interact with other currencies (eg: regular money!). So, a couple of things: 1 - Where is the theory on this stuff; where should I begin to look? I am guessing there's some useful libertarian writing on this, for example. 2 - If it is useful, it seems that it's something that needs a technological platform to make it really go. If you can set up a currency somewhere trusted, which will enforce your local rules, track who has how much of what, and provide the ability to for people to make trades between currencies, with copious APIs for third parties to work with it, then you have the basis for a decentralisation of currency that could be really interesting. Other thoughts? -- 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 Thu Mar 10 08:01:42 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:01:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110310080142.GR23560@leitl.org> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 05:32:09PM +1030, Emlyn wrote: > So, a couple of things: > > 1 - Where is the theory on this stuff; where should I begin to look? I > am guessing there's some useful libertarian writing on this, for > example. You're aware of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency of course? > 2 - If it is useful, it seems that it's something that needs a > technological platform to make it really go. If you can set up a > currency somewhere trusted, which will enforce your local rules, track > who has how much of what, and provide the ability to for people to > make trades between currencies, with copious APIs for third parties to > work with it, then you have the basis for a decentralisation of > currency that could be really interesting. A good experiment would be to hack a bitcoin http://www.bitcoin.org/ app for Android that can do remote interactions and would also support NFC for newer Androids. > Other thoughts? -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 aleksei at iki.fi Thu Mar 10 07:55:12 2011 From: aleksei at iki.fi (Aleksei Riikonen) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:55:12 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Emlyn wrote: > It strikes me that there are many circumstances (eg: geographic or > cultural communities) where the ability to form a special purpose > currency would be really useful. Maybe when culturally cohesive groups > are too big for gift economies, and scarce resources are in play, and > there is some reason that government money isn't a good choice? The > disincentive though is that it can be difficult to interact with other > currencies (eg: regular money!). > > So, a couple of things: > > 1 - Where is the theory on this stuff; where should I begin to look? I > am guessing there's some useful libertarian writing on this, for > example. > > 2 - If it is useful, it seems that it's something that needs a > technological platform to make it really go. If you can set up a > currency somewhere trusted, which will enforce your local rules, track > who has how much of what, and provide the ability to for people to > make trades between currencies, with copious APIs for third parties to > work with it, then you have the basis for a decentralisation of > currency that could be really interesting. > > Other thoughts? Here's the solution you are looking for, it has been up and operating for a while now: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Main_Page -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei From amon at doctrinezero.com Thu Mar 10 09:11:47 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:11:47 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: <20110302112623.GJ23560@leitl.org> References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> <4D6DBD4E.8050608@mac.com> <20110302112623.GJ23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 2 March 2011 11:26, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 07:45:18PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > >> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 > > Android headup goggles, check, accelerometers, check, magnetic compass, > check, GPS, check, multiple cameras, check, 3G/4G, check, decent batteries, > check. > > Any day now. I seem to be increasingly confronted with anecdotal evidence that mainstream awareness of these possibilities is spreading rapidly. I'm trawling through old mails, so only just saw this, and as it happens I was sent the link above last night. By my extremely nontechnical Mother in Law. - A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 10 15:13:51 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 07:13:51 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Emlyn Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies >...It strikes me that there are many circumstances (eg: geographic or cultural communities) where the ability to form a special purpose currency would be really useful...Other thoughts?--Emlyn You and plenty of others are thinking along those lines. This explains the recent popularity of gold. I see the price of silver is going crazy too. Precious metals are the currency of choice when the US government is spending itself into oblivion, and Greece is destabilizing the euro. On the euro, I am waiting to see if the Germany will just say no. spike From charlie.stross at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 16:02:35 2011 From: charlie.stross at gmail.com (Charlie Stross) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:02:35 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Extrope Robert Bradbury Has Died In-Reply-To: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> References: <4D6F2922.1020009@satx.rr.com> Message-ID: <4D78F61B.5050705@gmail.com> On 03/03/2011 05:37, Damien Broderick wrote: > > I have just been informed by David Kekich (who heard from Robert's older > Brother) that Robert Bradbury passed away either late Saturday night or > early Sunday > morning (in Florida where he was caring for his Father), of a completely > unexpected > and sudden hemorrhagic stroke, for which no one was prepared. > Damn. Just seen this (by accident -- I seldom look in here more than once a month). Just ... damn. -- Charlie From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 15:02:10 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:02:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 90, Issue 18 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:00 AM, Emlyn wrote: > Hmm, just saw this. Terrible. > > To be sitting on the extros list in 2011, watching old time posters > die... not optimal. So true. "Though ExI has no formal connection with any cryonics organization, many extropians have cryonics arrangements and a healthy kind of peer pressure has brought new members to the cryonics groups (especially the Alcor Foundation). At our conferences speakers would ask people to raise their hands if they were wearing a cryonics bracelet. The large percentage who did made it seem normal and sensible to those who hadn't given it much thought." http://www.extropy.org/history.htm How many of you are signed up? I am. Keith From max at maxmore.com Thu Mar 10 16:51:01 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 09:51:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 90, Issue 18 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 8:02 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > "Though ExI has no formal connection with any cryonics organization, > many extropians have cryonics arrangements and a healthy kind of peer > pressure has brought new members to the cryonics groups (especially > the Alcor Foundation). At our conferences speakers would ask people to > raise their hands if they were wearing a cryonics bracelet. The large > percentage who did made it seem normal and sensible to those who > hadn't given it much thought." > > http://www.extropy.org/history.htm > > How many of you are signed up? I am. > Me too. :-) --- 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: From eugen at leitl.org Thu Mar 10 17:59:44 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 18:59:44 +0100 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 90, Issue 18 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20110310175943.GY23560@leitl.org> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 09:51:01AM -0700, Max More wrote: > > How many of you are signed up? I am. > > > Me too. :-) Not me. Pretty poor value for the moment, in my location. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 atymes at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 16:41:24 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:41:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006301cbd6f4$6db47b60$491d7220$@att.net> <20110228141509.GP23560@leitl.org> <20110301015455.GA14867@ofb.net> <20110301075404.GL23560@leitl.org> <4D6DBD4E.8050608@mac.com> <20110302112623.GJ23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: 2011/3/10 Amon Zero : > On 2 March 2011 11:26, Eugen Leitl wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 07:45:18PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: >> >> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 >> >> Android headup goggles, check, accelerometers, check, magnetic compass, >> check, GPS, check, multiple cameras, check, 3G/4G, check, decent >> batteries, check. >> >> Any day now. > > I seem to be increasingly confronted with anecdotal evidence that mainstream > awareness of these possibilities is spreading rapidly. I'm trawling through > old mails, so only just saw this, and as it happens I was sent the link > above last night. By my extremely nontechnical Mother in Law. That video seems to be much more about the interoperability of devices made by, presumably, companies who had little to do with one another, and on the possibilities of touch interface. (I noticed several examples of vertical-mount touch interfaces, which have been found to be a be a bad thing for extended use - see "gorilla arm" - although the depicted uses were short enough to likely avoid that.) From painlord2k at libero.it Thu Mar 10 18:48:55 2011 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 19:48:55 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D791D17.7050001@libero.it> Il 10/03/2011 8.02, Emlyn ha scritto: > It strikes me that there are many circumstances (eg: geographic or > cultural communities) where the ability to form a special purpose > currency would be really useful. Maybe when culturally cohesive > groups are too big for gift economies, and scarce resources are in > play, and there is some reason that government money isn't a good > choice? The disincentive though is that it can be difficult to > interact with other currencies (eg: regular money!). > > So, a couple of things: > > 1 - Where is the theory on this stuff; where should I begin to look? > I am guessing there's some useful libertarian writing on this, for > example. I suggest the Mises Institute. It is online and have many books available to be downloaded free. I would you start reading the first chapters of "Man, Economy and State with Power an Market" of Rothbard. There is explained how a currency is adopted freely from people and it is an emergent feature of any and all minimally complex economies. Also the the rest of the book is very enlightening about economics. Understanding what really is a currency help further analysis in the field. -- Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog Leggimi su Estropico Blog *Mirco Romanato* ----- Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 10.0.1204 / Database dei virus: 1497/3497 - Data di rilascio: 10/03/2011 From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 10 18:50:45 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:50:45 -0800 Subject: [ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic Message-ID: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes ... >> >> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 ... >...That video seems to be much more about the interoperability of devices made by, presumably, companies who had little to do with one another, and on the possibilities of touch interface... Adrian Ja. I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household appliances. It needs to be some freeware open source universal language that devices can transmit via Bluetooth that will allow it to tell the other appliances what it is doing, how it is feeling, and to issue or take orders from other appliances. I don't even yet know what that can be used for, and I recognize it carries its own risks. I still want that capability in every home appliance that has any processors. I want the appliances to be able to do self-diagnostics and diagnostics on each other. If I have a security camera for instance, I want it to be able to get orders from my computer if my computer senses it is being moved about while the camera knows that I and my family are away. I want my computer to call out to the security system to swing around and take a picture of it, and then page me, and if I don't respond, to tell my landline to call 911. Then set off my smoke detectors, all of them. The neighbors will not do anything if my burglar alarm goes off, but if my smoke detectors imply that they may burn the neighbors' houses, that gets their full and undivided. I want my bed to be able to detect if I have had a stroke for instance, and alert my cell phone to dial and inform Alcor for instance, then the 911, then unlock the doors so the medics can get to me, and once they get there tell them who to contact. Forget community organizers, I want a household organizer. I want to get my appliances talking to each other. If they will just do that, I don't even mind if they form a union. spike From atymes at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 20:21:02 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:21:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic In-Reply-To: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> References: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, spike wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes > ... >>> >> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 > >>...That video seems to be much more about the interoperability of devices > made by, presumably, companies who had little to do with one another, and on > the possibilities of touch interface... Adrian > > Ja. ?I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household > appliances. ?It needs to be some freeware open source universal language > that devices can transmit via Bluetooth that will allow it to tell the other > appliances what it is doing, how it is feeling, and to issue or take orders > from other appliances. ?I don't even yet know what that can be used for, and > I recognize it carries its own risks. ?I still want that capability in every > home appliance that has any processors. That exists today - in appliances that have implemented it. Almost none do. The problem is, having a refrigerator that can display images on its touch screen front, can receive image files from other devices (say, via Bluetooth or USB), and support a standard Web browsing experience is of practically no extra value beyond just having a refrigerator. http://www.pcworld.com/article/47184/what_happened_to_internet_appliances.html has more info on that. Granted, the article is about 10 years old - it's still relevant, though http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20009592-56.html details progress since then (but note that, even then, the gadgets still have a solid value add for having the interactivity; it's still not general purpose "computing just because we can"). It's kind of like how, even today, a $100 laptop is just barely possible - and that's a dedicated computing object. A lot of these future additions fall into the gap between "Would you use it even once if it was already there", "Would you use it regularly if it was already there", and "Would you pay to have it added". People think they want stuff when the first one is a yes, but then there's the second (which lots of fitness equipment infamously falls prey to) - and if the third isn't a yes, it's too expensive for anyone to make. From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 20:27:32 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:27:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl Message-ID: Anders, congratulations on your very cool writing endeavor for the Transhuman Space roleplaying game! I have been waiting for a new supplement to come out... http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=SJG37-6711 John : ) From spike66 at att.net Thu Mar 10 21:39:09 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 13:39:09 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00a101cbdf6b$97394a40$c5abdec0$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of John Grigg >Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl >Anders, congratulations on your very cool writing endeavor... >http://e23.sjgames.com/item.html?id=SJG37-6711 Cool, I remember Waldemar Ingdahl! He was at one of them, Extro4? Anders do pass along my greetings and best wishes. spike From algaenymph at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 22:10:38 2011 From: algaenymph at gmail.com (AlgaeNymph) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 14:10:38 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D794C5E.70502@gmail.com> Wow. Good job, Anders. How'd you get accepted to write for SJG? From kanzure at gmail.com Thu Mar 10 23:51:24 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:51:24 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [luf-team] Re: maybe im crazy, but why is most of these projects not working? In-Reply-To: <3441CFD0-E0C3-4FEC-846D-2326A87A542A@gmail.com> References: <1299152606.319.79549.m7@yahoogroups.com> <3441CFD0-E0C3-4FEC-846D-2326A87A542A@gmail.com> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Eric Hunting Date: Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:42 PM Subject: [luf-team] Re: maybe im crazy, but why is most of these projects not working? To: luf-team at yahoogroups.com I can only speculate on causes of stagnation with other groups like the Seasteading Institute (though I have my suspicions. Objectivists don't play well with others...) but I don't think there's much mystery to our own slow pace of progress and I would expect others to be facing many of the same issues. Money is the perennial problem but it's more symptom than cause. The availability of money is a reflection of the size, trust, and commitment of the community of TMP supporters and those things are all quite low and have been for a while. The reasons for that are many but the core issue is plain; membership. There simply aren't enough people here and who otherwise know about TMP given the very small margin of capable people in the general population. Communication is critical to increasing membership. We need public attention. But I can't cultivate that from just web sites with a lot of words when we now live in a reading-averse culture. The original TMP book was our chief generator of membership for most of our history and worked remarkable well. It's draw was far above the average for space futurist books, putting it up there with Gerard O'Neill's "The High Frontier", Robert Zubrin's "Entering Space", and Wernher von Braun's "Man Will Conquer Space Soon!" But it couldn't reach and continually sustain a big enough audience by itself. Now the book is out of print with nothing to effectively replace it. THAT is the root cause of our group's current ennui. Bottom-line; we MUST increase membership and to do that we MUST create new and copious media to communicate our vision. For that to have broad appeal that media needs to be visually oriented and have high production value. People will read novels. They won't read anything more sophisticated and 'dry' without the lubrication of a lot of visual media. That's why the near-term objective of TMP2 is a very visual book compared to the original TMP and long term I plan for many kinds of media deriving from that. This is a work in progress. It's happening. Though my pace of work on the TMP2 site has slowed this past year, its foundation text is approaching completion. But the critical thing is elaborating on that visually. We need art -illustration especially- and a hell of a lot of it. We have to communicate the TMP narrative through many media forms -cultivate a meme from it. And we also need physical projects and events that visually demonstrate activity and give people something to participate in even if it's not absolutely relevant to building rockets. It's still an important part of holding people's attentions. I understand many people have a hard time comprehending how this relates to actually building things and getting to space, but you have to understand that we need a very large body of supporters to find the modest number of Heinleinesque 'competent people' among them and to impress upon people who might support -with capital- our efforts that there is something here that matters, economically, culturally, and historically. We are out to build the biggest space program ever. That's not a back-yard project. And that means we have to sell the world our story. Even in the 1950s, amidst of a post-war wave of American cultural optimism about the future, Wernher von Braun understood that in order to get his vision of a civilian space program across to the society he needed more than papers, talks at engineering conferences and dry technical books. He needed to cultivate a very awesome story about the future and present that story, visually, tangibly, to the whole world. That's why he teamed up with artists and designers, went to mainstream magazines like Collier's, and ultimately teamed up with Walt Disney. Disney understood the potential entertainment value in narratives about the future. And no matter what you think space is about, space advocacy is ultimately show-biz because if you want people to support what you want to do, you have to show them what you intend to do in a way that holds their attention and motivates their support and participation. You've got to be down with your Robert Preston schtick. Thus a plethora of media and even the theme park attractions of Tomorrowland all worked together to turn this idea of a civilian space program, this narrative about our future in space, into a mass cultural meme and a societal aspiration. And that's why we today have NASA and not a US Space Force as an extension of the Air Force, which von Braun understood would never get us past Earth orbit. (there is no strategic military value to space exploration and settlement) If you want to understand why space has lost its cultural relevance today and why most nations' space programs are on the rocks, just go take a look at Tomorrowland. It's now 'retrofuturist' Tomorrowland. The theme there is no longer the future but the past notions of the future we now, in our current mass cultural dystopianism, consider quaint, funny, and nostalgic. In the Tokyo and Paris Disneyworlds, Tomorrowland has actually gone Steampunk! I often say that the Haunted Mansion is now more about the actual future than Tomorrowland. (if you've read Cory Doctorow's Down And Out in the Magic Kingdom, you know what that means) Some here have mentioned the recent apparent 'success' of the Zeitgeist movement and the related Venus Project. I think there are some important lessons for us in their story. But I'd hazard to call it a success because, in fact, while they have been very successful at gathering attention, they've so far failed quite miserably at doing anything constructive with it. The name Zeitgeist is very apt because that's the key thing in their story. For something around 50 years -yes, 50 years- Jacque Fresco has been cultivating one of the largest bodies of futurist media work ever created, all produced almost entirely by himself. And the production value of this one man's labor is incredible. Though some of his design has become stylistically anachronistic, there is no question of this man's genius. I am so envious of his talent, skill, and energy. The things we could have done with that in the FMF/LUF! And all of this has been done to try and communicate and sell one idea; the great rewards of adopting a Post-Industrial culture based on a sustainable scientifically managed resource based economic system. It's basically the same cultural model Marshal Savage described in TMP as the basis of creating a spacefaring civilization. The same idea for recovering and repurposing the vast amount of social productivity that we squander today on other people's profit and an endless cycle of war and social/racial oppression. Savage just couldn't get into it to the same depth -how much can you pack into one book? But in those 50 years, after the production of a book, countless designs, works of art, and models, numerous media interviews, and a whole series of very nice documentary videos, the only physical accomplishment of The Venus Project is the construction of Fresco's own futuristic home/studio compound in Venus Florida -and they nearly lost that as it went up for sale a few years ago. (folks here may remember I was actually toying with the notion of buying it to use as the LUF HQ because I feared what the knuckle-headed developers in Florida will do with such lovely architecture and because we desperately need the same kind of studio and workshop facilities) What went wrong? Well, the key problem is that the Venus Project narrative is critically incomplete. Fresco is a designer and thinks like one. He does the 'visioneering'. The messy details of implementation is someone else's department -and that someone else never materialized. He believed that if he could just paint a sufficiently compelling picture of the future it would make everyone realize the abject squalor of contemporary life and demand a revolution. But pictures of lovely architecture and sexy cars, planes, and boats don't tell you how to get from A to B. The Venus Project is like a beautiful matt painting of a wonderful city propped-up on the horizon but with no obvious path going there. It's a Greek temple on a golf course model of the future. And so the public never got it. (do you remember when I once suggested here that every settlement in TMP should plan to include a Greek themed miniature golf course?) What has now brought The Venus Project back from the brink of oblivion is Peter Joseph; the man who made the Zeitgeist films. Whatever you might think about the content of these films, you have to respect his talent and their ability to draw attention. (personally, I think the first films were a bit dumb. The latest should have been the first one, because it finally gets to the heart of the concept of a mass social pathology as Fresco has always characterized the contemporary situation and clearly defines what a resource based economy is) The reason these films have been so much more effective than the 50 years of work done by Fresco is that they clued into the actual contemporary zeitgeist. All his life, Fresco has been swimming upstream against a current of middle-class complacency and Cold War propaganda inspired paranoia about alternative cultural models. It's hard to get people to realize they live in abject squalor when everything else around them keeps reinforcing the delusion that they live in the best of all possible worlds and anyone who suggests otherwise is trying to take it away. One aspect of Post-Industrial cultural theory Fresco missed was that the modern middle-class -particularly in the US- was very deliberately cultivated as a stop-gap measure against the tide of cultural revolution that began to rise in the wake of the Great Depression. A big middle-class was, quite literally, created to keep the working and underclasses down. The middle-class is the foreman class -which is why cops always identify themselves as middle-class. (could they be cops otherwise?) I often joke that America positioned itself over the 20th century as the Pointy Haired Boss of the world. But that's not just a joke. We became the world's clueless self-absorbed middle-mananagement. Only now the jig is up. The inherent unsustainability of Industrial Age economics has -as anticipated as far back as the end of WWII- caught up with us. We are in an era of accelerating successive economic and environmental catastrophe and the ruling class is desperately trying to circle the wagons and cash-out in advance of the ultimate collapse they've engineered. And the cultural result of all this is a wave of middle-class anxiety throughout the industrialized world. Joseph has clued into that. Clued into that aspect of Fresco's versions of modern history and economics that basically explain how and why the world got f-ed up. And then he played-up the angle of conspiracy because that very effectively pushes people's buttons. Fresco only talked about a socio-economic pathology inherent to a culture that evolved with the early Industrial Age unable to fully shake-off the vestiges of feudalism and a peasant psychology. Other progressives aren't so moderate. They will point fingers at specific people and institutions benefiting from social exploitation and start declaring it time to build guillotines. I can't say if that's right or wrong, but it's been effective at motivating people by turning unfocused mass despair into directed anger. Combine this with the novelty of the Internet as an alternative to the now tainted and dubious corporate mass media, and you've got a 'movement'. But anger directed to what? As I understand it, the Zeitgeist movement loses people at about the same fast rate it now wins them because once these now motivated folks start joining groups and forums and going to Venus Project conferences and lectures, they discover there is nothing for them to actually do because Fresco simply never had a plan to build his model future. Just a design. Just a Futurama exhibit. Zeitgeist leadership seems to be becoming aware of this problem and is trying to address it, but they've been in denial and operating in a vacuum relative to the larger global progressive movement for a long time. They have a lot of ground to cover while the enthusiasm they've finally won rots on the vine. I wish them the best of luck because their objectives are complimentary to ours and the the world in general needs working solutions to its rapidly escalating crisis. The key lessons here for us are that, while media is critical to communication and motivation, engagement and participatory activity are critical to sustaining that motivation. And this can be difficult when your objectives are very large in scale and/or distant in time. With space advocacy this is exacerbated by unrealistic expectations and that basic and ubiquitous lack of knowledge about how things work in the real world. That delusion that anything short of starting the construction of the first starship in your back yard is irrelevant. We have to stop pretending there are magical shortcuts, because there aren't. We need to accept that space development is the work of civilizations and lifetimes, need to be realistic about what we can actually do in the near-term, and seek the fun, personal accomplishment/empowerment, and larger benefits to society that can be found along that path, not just at the finish line. But, really, it's become rather unproductive for us to forever discus what's 'wrong' with the LUF. We can analyze the situation forever. For a change, I'm going to start telling you people what we need to do -what YOU have to do now, today, if you give a damn about the objectives of TMP. The A#1 task for this group right now is building membership. There is only one way to do that; grabbing eyeballs. We MUST create a replacement for the TMP book and we must elaborate on that far beyond anything the FMF ever did. You simply cannot motivate people with vague ideas. You have to show them what you intend to build. We have a complete and compelling narrative. We have as awesome a story about the future as Wernher von Braun ever did. We have to tell that story to the world. What are the goals here? ?A TMP2 wiki well illustrated in line art. ? A TMP2 book with roughly a 3-4:1 graphics to text ratio and 50% color art. It will look like this in format and visual content; http://www.amazon.com/Cosmic-Motors-Spaceships-Another-English/dp/1933492279/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1299696852&sr=1-1 http://www.amazon.com/Syd-Meads-Sentury-II-Mead/dp/1933492481/ref=sr_1_9?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1299696896&sr=1-9 With a critical mass of illustration for the TMP2 wiki, we will establish Kickstarter and/or Rocket Hub sponsorship drives for this book's independent publishing in print and eBook forms should no other publishers step forward. ?Art and CGI models from this project will be used to develop an expanding portable media exhibit to be used as aerospace shows and space/SciFi events. It will start small like this; http://www.planetsolar.org/fileadmin/user_upload/images/gallery/village/village-yverdon-2009/jmp_20090905_151025.jpg http://www.planetsolar.org/fileadmin/user_upload/images/gallery/village/village-yverdon-2009/jmp_20090905_151001.jpg http://www.planetsolar.org/fileadmin/user_upload/images/gallery/village/village-yverdon-2009/img_0290.jpg It will end up like this; http://www.spaceworld2000.com/exlist.html?section=sw%2Dvideo1%2Eswf ?MiniSpaceWorld Exhibit. MiniSpaceWorld (http://www.minispaceworld.com/) is a developing museum in Hungary intended as a space-themed version of Germany's Miniatur Wunderland. (http://www.miniatur-wunderland.com/) They want exhibits. We can tell our story there and use the experience for our portable exhibits. (the artists of Minatur Wunderland have been very open about the systems they have developed. Their techniques are applicable to our projects and will provide a useful entry into robotics development) ?Art and CGI from the book project will also become the basis of a video series that can be distributed individually on YouTube and Vimeo or collectively on DVD. They will look something like this, but with our narrative; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozkl1OvNvEc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wr7GtaU3v5I http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVJmZmo6kzI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hf07e5h8474 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBZSN_OIamo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBrBydwDpl4 Some have suggested starting out with low-production-value videos based on the TED talk model. That might work, but I probably can't do them myself. Too many years of re-occuring bronchitis thanks to NJ pollution has ruined my voice and I have no stage presence. There is also a problem with the fact that the original TMP imagery is out of date. It is obviously anachronistic. You still need new artwork, even if you're doing a slide presentation. But this is still perfectly feasible. Pulling all this off will take many people. I need help. I can only do so much by myself. Find me a design and production team! Get me a contract with Aldo Spadoni's Aerospace Imagineering. Find me a bunch of Pat Rawlings and Doug Drexlers. Find me a Peter Joseph. James Cameron financed a Mars reference mission and is actively interested in marine colonization. Find a way to get to him! I need artists and designers to collaborate with who have a passion for space, technology, and the future. Enough passion that we might get some volunteer effort to start things going and enough competence that they can keep up with me -people who can read. I have been working on this myself for many years and have spent a lot of my own money on it. But I'm just one person living alone in the desert -literally. My success rate with individual artists has been very poor because there just aren't enough of them in the US with an interest in real space anymore, have skill in industrial design, skill in actual illustration, anything above a high-school level science education, and any effective work ethic. The few that are suited to this are so in demand in the aerospace industry that they have little free time. I currently have a commission in the works for a new front page image for the TMP2 wiki site, but it's proving to be a very protracted project because I can't hire the artist I've found full-time so I cannot get more than small sporadic bits of his spare time. We MUST find a solution to this problem! Next, we need to create events. In TMP2 I describe a mass cultural festival for all TMP settlements celebrating the theme of space and have chosen Yuri's Night as a logical date for this. I want to see someone host a TMP/LUF Yuri's Night party this year. I know it's getting late for that and it's OK if it's a small thing. But we have to start somewhere. I don't care if this is two people meeting up with a plastic Moravian star, a Dobsonian, an iPod, and a bottle of vodka. Let's do this. http://yurisnight.net/ Next, we need activities to engage people with and to foster entrepreneurship. We want people to look at TMP as a career path. I have many concepts for this and several I've been working on lately. Let me set them out and tell you what I want us to do with them; ?Fab Labs. We need production capability if we are to start making real things. I am the first and only person in this group to have started working on this. I've been studying this technology for over a decade and, saving my pennies, I've started work on creating the collection of tools for my own fab lab. This should be a task every member of this group is engaged in. Every one of you reading this! If you're not making stuff or learning to make stuff how the hell do you think you're going to get anywhere -let alone off this planet? If you don't yet know what a fab lab is, what are you even doing in a space advocacy group? I want everyone in this group building and/or learning to use the tools of the fab lab; fabbers/rapid prototypers, CNC cutters (router, hydro, plasma, laser, sign/paper, PCB cutters), CNC mills, multiple types of printing, digital looms/knitting machines, and all the basic tools of simple carpentry, metalworking, electronics, and the various forms of casting and molding. Everyone in this group needs to cultivate a working knowledge of the basics of mechanics, electronics, computing, software, the principles of propulsion, the principles of energy production, the families of fabrication methods, and the families of building systems. Certainly, these digital machine tools have been very expensive up until now. Few people can afford them all and the ideal situation would be to have a common place -like the many hackerspaces and shared fab labs popping up around the globe- where we can collectively assemble and share these tools. But we're too dispersed so we have to do what we can individually until we have some community setting to do it in. Luckily, all these tools are going open-source as people learn to use them to replicate them. There are DIY kits for just about all of them. This is bringing their individual costs down to the level of a personal computer. Everyone here knows what a Makerbot and RepRap are, right? Right? One clever thing we can do is exploit that self-replication capability to enable our community. Anyone who can effectively collect and build enough of these tools has the means to replicate and disseminate them to others. That's one of my objectives for my own personal fab lab. Relating to this, I think everyone in this group needs hands on experience with some of the following; gardening, hydroponics, permaculture, aquariums, mariculture, algaeculture, Living Machines, and renewable/alternative energy systems like wind, PVs, fuel cells, Sterling and Rankin cycle systems. Everyone here should have experience with building at least something like a sub-irrigation planter, a 5 gallon bubbler hydroponic planter, a table-top flood-drain unit, and know how to assemble a home PV/wind power system. This is some of the practical stuff you're going to use all those new tools for. Ultimately, we are going to want to create a sort of Functional University through TMP. A program of public education in science, technology, and industry to cultivate industrial literacy globally. That's a critical aspect of TMP's Foundation efforts toward cultural development. Think this is all busy-work? Ever actually read any serious work about space settlement? I've just described the basic package of knowledge every space settler must have to survive. Anyone who considers himself serious about space advocacy is obligated to be as industrially literate as possible, or they are just a passive audience. So, like Generic Asian Dad says; "Facebook? Why don't you face book and study." ?Utilihab. You've all heard me talk about Utilihab, you've all seen me post the link to the Utilihab wiki (http://utilihab.wikia.com/wiki/Utilihab_Wiki) I spent the past year putting together, but I don't think many have gotten the point of it. People, I invented Utilihab to be the bootstrapping construction kit with which to start the physical development work of TMP. This is our toolkit for starting everything. A tool to build all the initial facilities we need using even dispersed group effort. Studios, labs, workshops, housing, factories, you name it. It's a platform for our founding entrepreneurial businesses. The world needs new housing technology. There's money to be made here. It's our starting industry. It is the basis of construction for our first marine settlements, the infill retrofit construction supporting full-scale Aquarian construction, and the basis of interior construction for space habitats. Utilihab is the branded architecture of TMP. This is the real deal, folks. This is the Mercury rocket in the barn all you aspiring astronaut farmers keep expecting. And most of you haven't even noticed! Why? Because I haven't been able to constantly shower you with pretty pictures of it. So let me tell you what we're going to do with this. Utilihab is not yet a complete system. On the wiki I've laid out the development framework as a catalog of basic components and systems that, individually, need to be prototyped, tested, and refined. Every one of those components is an individual project -and a potential entrepreneurial opportunity. This is our first hardware development project -one that is intended to be readily attainable with modest skills and tools. If you can't handle this, forget about rockets. Utilihab extends the strategy of cultivating industrial literacy to a functional means to build communities and facilities. Everyone who knows how Utilihab works and who knows how to use the tool set of the fab lab knows how to make their own advanced home and community. The first goal here is to build something like this; http://images.wikia.com/utilihab/images/6/6e/T-SlotPavilion1a.jpg The next goal is to build something like this; http://www.dwell.com/slideshows/it-house-joshua-tree.html It won't necessarily be a house -we might do a workshop, lab, or studio- and it might not need to be permanent. (of course, no Utilihab structure is 'permanent' They are all perpetually demountable and their parts reusable) Next, we will put that on these; http://www.nextmarina.com/english/sub01.php And if we can build enough gravitas and sources of capital with these demonstrations, we go on to this; http://tmp2.wikia.com/wiki/File:MarineEcoVillage.jpg I call this Hyokkori Hyoutanjima. This last step is the Aquarius Seed settlement, intended to evolve into the full-scale equatorial Aquarius settlements. Next, the Dymaxion Sea Tent. This is a very modest demonstration project intended to help us get our feet wet, so to speak, with marine construction while developing a kind of structure that will be a useful tool for many applications in both sea and space activities. The structure is a SPAR or pylon buoy that supports a simple radial building based on cable-stayed deck platforms. It is called a Dymaxion Sea Tent because it employs the same structural concept as Buckminster Fuller's original Dymaxion or 4D cable-stayed house design; http://images.artnet.com/artwork_images/112558/410588.jpg http://www.popularmechanics.com/cm/popularmechanics/images/fuller-3-lg-87527993.jpg http://www.scene.org/~esa/search/dymaxionpatents/03_4DHouse_0_0.png Early forms of this may use a single deck and a tent-like enclosure and would be intended for temporary applications and events -much like the Global Warming awareness events of Future Islands. Larger structures may employ many decks and could feature component sets derivative of Utilihab. These would be suited to many research, industrial, and communications applications and so offer potential for entrepreneurial use. Their space applications would include deployable down-range telemetry networks. The largest could rival large oil rigs and be quite permanent structures, though they are probably not suited to concerted marine settlement because they are simply too inconvenient for transportation and cannot self-replicate. (at least, not with available technology) The Dymaxion Sea Tent or Sea Tower, by the way, is the concept the Seasteaders organization appropriated from my earlier FMF articles for use in their designs, though we no longer get any credit for that on their web sites. What's next? The IOSI; the International Open Space Initiative. Part of the problem with TMP is it's implausibly vast scale. It's not that something that big is impossible. It's that we generally have a limited ability to get our heads around things that are large and take a long time. This forum is living proof of that. Many people will never fully get the whole TMP package. So I realized that we needed to define more specific programs that could stand on their own independently of TMP while still supporting its objectives. And so I devised the IOSI. This is essentially the beginning of the Avalon phase of TMP (and possibly the Asgard phase as well) packaged as a self-contained program for the creation of tele-robotic pre-settlments on the Moon and Mars. The IOSI is a global open source space program that will use a Linux development model to develop the hardware for telerobotic settlement. The point to this approach is that robotics is highly accessible to public participation whereas just about everything else involved in space isn't. So whether or not you think humans are 'better' than robots, it's irrelevant. Bottom-line, we can develop robots with a dispersed global participation in development, can send those robots ahead of us on the cheap, and use them to reduce the cost of human arrival through in-situ resource utilization. There is simply no way costly flag-planting jaunts by humans can be more practical than that. The basic technical plan for the IOSI is outlined in the TMP2 section on Avalon; http://tmp2.wikia.com/wiki/Telerobotic_Outpost Asgard ties into this through the MUOL, which in the IOSI context assumes the role of telerobotic space transportation logistics station -a ship-yard for assembling the trans-orbital spacecraft sent to the Moon and Mars using modest scale components lofted on low-reliability high-frequency modest payload launch systems. There is so much awesome and fun stuff in this telerobotic outpost project I can't begin to list it all. This is the greatest Maker project ever. Just look at the TMP2 article. There's enough to keep a million people busy. Now, this all ties into the objective of getting everyone in the LUF industrially literate and fab lab equipped. This program is a key application for all those tools. Our community is going to be the key participants building these systems, setting the development agenda, and hosting the events associated with the development program. And here's what that program looks like; ?Establish an IOSI development web site following the Sourceforge model. ?Use the same media promotion efforts as used for the TMP narrative to tell the IOSI narrative, culminating in a portable exhibit. The full exhibit will include a portable mock-up of the telerobotic bases and demonstration human habitats. (based on Utilihab construction) ?Establish seasonal and continental expo-events for IOSI development, showcasing project team demos, kids activities, and X-prize-style competitions and awards. ?Establish test lab facilities with companion outreach fab labs in disadvantaged communities. These are an important tool for the reverse-flow of technology out of the program and back to terrestrial applications. Remember, figuring out how to inhabit space means figuring out how to go from rocks, dirt, and sunlight to a western middle-class standard of living using hardware on the scale of home appliances. There's no Six Degrees Of Kevin Bacon to that technology transfer. By pursuing space settlement -as opposed to the flag-planting crap- we change EVERYTHING about human civilization on Earth. That's the ultimate objective. Since this tech is open source by definition, outreach fab labs will direct this tech transfer back to where it matters the most. ?Establish a prototype testbed outpost in the Atacama Desert managed by Internet. This will be a fully functional outpost free of human intervention except at special 'drop points'. Designs and systems that make it through the expo-oriented phases of demonstration and testing will earn spaceworthiness certification here. The testbed outpost will have no human presence except in extreme emergencies. Everything is deployed telerobotically. All equipment will be air-dropped by plane or special simulated soft landers based on airships deployed from a distance. Several sections of the outpost will cover beachead, cluster base, and excavated base phases of development and will including mining sites, agricultural facilities, and transport systems such as rover trains and banana monorails. It will be a fully functional outpost prototyped on Earth. The outpost will be heavily canvased by web-cams for public access. People will watch this like it was Meerkat Manor. (in fact, meerkats are my chosen prime candidate for the IOSI mascot) An additional facility in a more accessible location will cover prototypes and demonstrations of human habitat facilities and systems based on the use of excavated and built-up shell structures and using Utilihab-derived component systems for interior outfitting. Testing for these will be more concerned with ergonomics and comfortable interior design and so they have no need of simulating a remote location -at least until the program has advanced to a point where the actual Lunar outpost has been deployed and critical pressurized systems need to be worked on. ?Negotiation with established space programs/firms for assistance in Lunar deployment or co-development of an independent launch service capability. (Exocet and Wizard programs). The Moon is the first target because of telecommunications latency. There is little function different between Lunar and Mars settlement beyond latency and the added challenge of Mars orbital transfer. But at that distance our robotics needs a very high level of autonomous AI to compensate for latency. Thus the Moon is the logical systems development environment for Mars. Next, the Telestat project. The Telestat is a lenticular solar aerostat with a rigid composite hull shell. It is intended as a telecommunications platform with small initial research vehicles developed for the initial application of aerial remote viewing platform and emergency WiFi networks and solar power while larger platforms will be developed as an alternative to satellites for wide area telecommunications services and eventually an optionally manned high altitude research platform and test structure for TransHab and EvoHab hull systems. The Telestat starts out basically like Mike Walden's Cambot, only we're going to leap-frog cruder hull technology and begin working with rigid composite hulls, ultimately looking to experiment with new nanofiber composites to experiment with vacuum lift. This will produce a very resilient vehicle that has a duty life of decades and can operate at stratospheric altitudes for years between servicing. This project builds on both the robotics experience of the IOSI program and its use of airship lander simulators. This is a technically sophisticated project, but can start quite modestly in scale and has huge entrepreneurial potential. Effective telecommunications aerostats are potentially worth billions in continuous revenue. The key purpose of this project in the larger TMP context is to begin development of the Aquarian Airship as well as provide a telecommunications infrastructure for Aquarian settlements -because undersea cable systems will be less practical during transitional settlement development (they still cost about $25,000 per mile and are immobile) while satellite Internet really-really sucks... Next on the agenda; rockets. The Exocet Alpha and Wizard Alpha programs. These semi-professional programs will develop sub-orbital radial aerospike test vehicles in pursuit of developing a low-reliability high-frequency cargo SSTO launch platform that will eventually evolve into the reusable and then manned versions of these vehicle concepts. These programs are the TMP answer to Copenhagen Suborbitals. The Wizard Alpha program may be more immediately accessible a project than the Exocet Alpha because the Exocet is an in-water-launch system that would require a modified catamaran yacht as a carrier/command vessel. However, the Exocet may be the only platform effective at the low-rel launch equation because of the nature of in-water launch. Places on land that 'fail safe' are increasingly scarce. Beyond the advanced model rocket scale, the Wizard starts running into bureaucratic hassle. Both these project will be based on the use of advanced composite hull structures and so both derive from the Telestat project through the composite fabrication experience. However, they could just as easily precede the Telestat project based on personal motivation or the state of development in the IOSI and its demand for a cheap launch capability. So there it is folks. This is our plan to get TMP started, presented in order of what I think is the most to least immediately accessible activity. This is the list of things I intend to do, am currently working on, and have been working on for a long time despite the fact that, apparently, only a few people here have been paying attention. This is what I want you to get involved in and support. I never want to hear anyone say in this forum that we have no idea of what to do. I've been presenting this stuff to this group for years. I cannot make this any plainer without putting it in comic book form. If this was any more detailed a set of concepts, it would be a stack of blueprints, circuit diagrams, and disks full of G-code. I can't do all this by myself and I don't have all the answers to present to you on a silver platter, but I know what we basically need to do and I've just presented it here. If you want to see action in this organization, you now know exactly what has to be done from today on and have no excuse but your own laziness for not picking up a hammer and getting down to it. Eric Hunting erichunting at gmail.com On Mar 3, 2011, at 4:43 AM, luf-team at yahoogroups.com wrote: > maybe im crazy, but why is most of these projects not working? > Posted by: "steve" rward8 at yahoo.com rward8 > Wed Mar 2, 2011 2:23 pm (PST) > > > > i will keep this as short as i can, Why is it i see 1001 very good drawled concepts. buildings mostly but several other projects as well that are vaporware. > > for instance why is luf/sea-stead/etc we have plenty of good drawings and i can not even call them articles. they are so detailed maybe books is a better? > > Yet im lets say mildly confessed why this stuff is so hard to create? Lack of money? That dont explain things too good because there money everywhere. > > Even with my own projects most are dead because it seems that it just dont work? > > ...........ugg now i sound like im ranting, i do know that starting small and growing from there is a good way to do things. > > for instance: > > make your truck run on X > then find out how to mass produce? > > so why is that so hard? im i missing something? ------------------------------------ ______________________________________________________________________ Don't forget to visit these LUF Sites! LUF Home http://www.luf.org/ LUF Team http://groups.yahoo.com/group/luf-team/ LUF Website http://groups.yahoo.com/group/luf-website/ LUF Admin http://groups.yahoo.com/group/luf-admin/ TMP 2.0 http://tmp2.wikia.com/ LUF Blog http://theluf.blogspot.com/ OTEC News http://www.otecnews.org/ Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/luf-team/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/luf-team/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: luf-team-digest at yahoogroups.com luf-team-fullfeatured at yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: luf-team-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 11 01:07:10 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:07:10 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7975BE.8020904@mac.com> On 03/09/2011 09:13 PM, spike wrote: > ... On Behalf Of John Grigg > > Damien Broderick replied: > >>> Make larvae, not war! >> Damien, when I looked at these metallic sculptures, I thought about the > very small and insect-like robotic drones that are being developed for > war... John > > John, you are aware that Damien used these in a SF book called Transcension? > It was published in 2002. I am astonished at how fresh are the memories of > that story, nine years later. One of my favorites so it is not surprising to me that the story has stuck in my mind. I have been listening for the sound of tempting bees ever since. :) - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 11 01:13:23 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:13:23 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> On 03/10/2011 07:13 AM, spike wrote: > ... On Behalf Of Emlyn > Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies > >> ...It strikes me that there are many circumstances (eg: geographic or > cultural communities) where the ability to form a special purpose currency > would be really useful...Other thoughts?--Emlyn > > > You and plenty of others are thinking along those lines. This explains the > recent popularity of gold. I see the price of silver is going crazy too. > Precious metals are the currency of choice when the US government is > spending itself into oblivion, and Greece is destabilizing the euro. On the > euro, I am waiting to see if the Germany will just say no. Not just Greece. Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain are all possible default timebombs. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 11 01:24:51 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:24:51 -0800 Subject: [ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic In-Reply-To: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> References: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7979E3.7040604@mac.com> On 03/10/2011 10:50 AM, spike wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes > ... >>>>> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 > ... > >> ...That video seems to be much more about the interoperability of devices > made by, presumably, companies who had little to do with one another, and on > the possibilities of touch interface... Adrian > > > Ja. I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household > appliances. Java or Java ME was proposed for that ages ago. Due to Oracle now owning all that IP and Java ME being far less open/free than regular Java, I am not holding my breath. But it doesn't have to be Java. Ruby, Python or most anything tossing XML (yes, ugh!) around could work. > It needs to be some freeware open source universal language > that devices can transmit via Bluetooth that will allow it to tell the other > appliances what it is doing, The data structure problem is the core along with some ability to download functionality that may be missing to talk to some particular device/system it becomes dynamically worthwhile to interact with. Java was good at the second and not bad at the first. Some equivalent of Jars and sandboxed code are needed. Lisp would be great if used more and available more generally on embedded devices (tiny Scheme). > how it is feeling, and to issue or take orders > from other appliances. I don't even yet know what that can be used for, and > I recognize it carries its own risks. I still want that capability in every > home appliance that has any processors. I want the appliances to be able to > do self-diagnostics and diagnostics on each other. You want the whole to be smarter than the sum of the parts. Hence trading some code as well as data. > If I have a security camera for instance, I want it to be able to get orders > from my computer if my computer senses it is being moved about while the > camera knows that I and my family are away. You could just have the computer "scream" and anything that screams gets handled by the security system part of which is turning on local to the scream cameras. > I want my computer to call out > to the security system to swing around and take a picture of it, and then > page me, and if I don't respond, to tell my landline to call 911. Then set > off my smoke detectors, all of them. The neighbors will not do anything if > my burglar alarm goes off, but if my smoke detectors imply that they may > burn the neighbors' houses, that gets their full and undivided. > Kick up too much racket and you will be sued or charged. > I want my bed to be able to detect if I have had a stroke for instance, and > alert my cell phone to dial and inform Alcor for instance, then the 911, > then unlock the doors so the medics can get to me, and once they get there > tell them who to contact. Before we get there I want to have microphones around the house to talk to all those largely idle computers and have them do reasonable things about the house (lights, TV, stereo, looking up information on the net, taking voice notes of that brilliant idea I had in the shower and so on. > Forget community organizers, I want a household organizer. I want to get my > appliances talking to each other. If they will just do that, I don't even > mind if they form a union. You will not be a happy camper when your computer[s] the toilet and the fridge all go on strike. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Fri Mar 11 01:26:29 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:26:29 -0800 Subject: [ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic In-Reply-To: References: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D797A45.80505@mac.com> On 03/10/2011 12:21 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, spike wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org >> [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes >> ... >>>>>> [1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Cf7IL_eZ38 >>> ...That video seems to be much more about the interoperability of devices >> made by, presumably, companies who had little to do with one another, and on >> the possibilities of touch interface... Adrian >> >> Ja. I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household >> appliances. It needs to be some freeware open source universal language >> that devices can transmit via Bluetooth that will allow it to tell the other >> appliances what it is doing, how it is feeling, and to issue or take orders >> from other appliances. I don't even yet know what that can be used for, and >> I recognize it carries its own risks. I still want that capability in every >> home appliance that has any processors. > That exists today - in appliances that have implemented it. Almost none do. > The problem is, having a refrigerator that can display images on its touch > screen front, can receive image files from other devices (say, via Bluetooth or > USB), and support a standard Web browsing experience is of practically no > extra value beyond just having a refrigerator. > http://www.pcworld.com/article/47184/what_happened_to_internet_appliances.html > has more info on that. Granted, the article is about 10 years old - it's still > relevant, though http://news.cnet.com/8301-13860_3-20009592-56.html > details progress since then (but note that, even then, the gadgets still have > a solid value add for having the interactivity; it's still not general purpose > "computing just because we can"). > > It's kind of like how, even today, a $100 laptop is just barely possible - and > that's a dedicated computing object. A lot of these future additions fall into > the gap between "Would you use it even once if it was already there", > "Would you use it regularly if it was already there", and "Would you pay to > have it added". People think they want stuff when the first one is a yes, but > then there's the second (which lots of fitness equipment infamously falls prey > to) - and if the third isn't a yes, it's too expensive for anyone to make. Some of these may be cheaper with some kind of projector and fine enough grain hand/body position reader. Cheaper than actual large touchscreens at least. - s From spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 11 02:04:05 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 18:04:05 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: <4D7975BE.8020904@mac.com> References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> <4D7975BE.8020904@mac.com> Message-ID: <00d101cbdf90$9a72a380$cf57ea80$@att.net> >... Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... > >> John, you are aware that Damien used these in a SF book called Transcension? >One of my favorites so it is not surprising to me that the story has stuck in my mind. I have been listening for the sound of tempting bees ever since. :) - samantha Hmmm, it was liar bees as I recall. You might be right, but I think it was liar bees. Either way, I thought it most insightful for a decade ago. spike From spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 11 02:15:02 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 18:15:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic In-Reply-To: <4D7979E3.7040604@mac.com> References: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> <4D7979E3.7040604@mac.com> Message-ID: <00d801cbdf92$21d88b90$6589a2b0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... > >> Ja. I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household appliances. >...Java or Java ME was proposed for that ages ago...But it doesn't have to be Java. Ruby, Python or most anything tossing XML (yes, ugh!) around could work. Ruby would be fine. It doesn't even need to be all that capable, for what I have in mind. The internal software in the appliances can be anything, but I am thinking about a universal interface of some sort. It only needs to have a very small vocabulary, universally understood. >...You want the whole to be smarter than the sum of the parts. Hence trading some code as well as data... Ja, that sounds cool. >...Kick up too much racket and you will be sued or charged... If it stops a burglary it will be worth it. I am pretty popular with the neighbors, being the local fix-it guy. We have 28 houses all with the same problems, all with the same solutions. I'm the guy who has solved them. >... taking voice notes of that brilliant idea I had in the shower and so on... - samantha NO! What happens in the shower stays in the shower. That's what happened to my parrot: he was hanging out near my shower, always blabs everything, had to roast the feathered beast just to make sure he quit talking. spike From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 04:52:47 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:22:47 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <20110310080142.GR23560@leitl.org> References: <20110310080142.GR23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 10 March 2011 18:31, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 05:32:09PM +1030, Emlyn wrote: > >> So, a couple of things: >> >> 1 - Where is the theory on this stuff; where should I begin to look? I >> am guessing there's some useful libertarian writing on this, for >> example. > > You're aware of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_currency > of course? I am now, of course! That's an excellent page, with even better linkage. A good rabbit hole for a quiet weekend, thanks! > >> 2 - If it is useful, it seems that it's something that needs a >> technological platform to make it really go. If you can set up a >> currency somewhere trusted, which will enforce your local rules, track >> who has how much of what, and provide the ability to for people to >> make trades between currencies, with copious APIs for third parties to >> work with it, then you have the basis for a decentralisation of >> currency that could be really interesting. > > A good experiment would be to hack a bitcoin http://www.bitcoin.org/ > app for Android that can do remote interactions and would also > support NFC for newer Androids. I'm impressed by Bitcoin, but not convinced. I'll address it separately. Nevertheless, someone should do that. If you're trying to get an electronic currency off the ground, it really wants to be on a mobile device! > >> Other thoughts? > > -- > Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 > -- 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 emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 05:27:14 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:57:14 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 10 March 2011 18:25, Aleksei Riikonen wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:02 AM, Emlyn wrote: >> It strikes me that there are many circumstances (eg: geographic or >> cultural communities) where the ability to form a special purpose >> currency would be really useful. Maybe when culturally cohesive groups >> are too big for gift economies, and scarce resources are in play, and >> there is some reason that government money isn't a good choice? The >> disincentive though is that it can be difficult to interact with other >> currencies (eg: regular money!). >> >> So, a couple of things: >> >> 1 - Where is the theory on this stuff; where should I begin to look? I >> am guessing there's some useful libertarian writing on this, for >> example. >> >> 2 - If it is useful, it seems that it's something that needs a >> technological platform to make it really go. If you can set up a >> currency somewhere trusted, which will enforce your local rules, track >> who has how much of what, and provide the ability to for people to >> make trades between currencies, with copious APIs for third parties to >> work with it, then you have the basis for a decentralisation of >> currency that could be really interesting. >> >> Other thoughts? > > Here's the solution you are looking for, it has been up and operating > for a while now: > > https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Main_Page > > -- > Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei It's a solution, but not the one I'm looking for. What's on my mind is that Money is, fundamentally, imaginary. Something it seems to do, which we understand viscerally, is provide us with "conservation of value"; similar to intuitions such as conservation of volume. If I give you something, you should give me back something of equal value. "Fairness" is mixed up in there somewhere. Except, that it doesn't look like that if you make the money. In that case, it's now something else, a confidence game. What is money worth? Whatever we think other people think other people think it is worth. So if I can convince enough other people that their confederates think their other confederates will attribute value to it, then it will have value, and I can go ahead, mint it, and hand it out. Which governments do (and is one reason why the intuition about national government budgets being like a household budget are dead wrong). So I'm thinking that really, any group should have the power to make its own currency and work with it if they want to. They decide how much of it there is, when to issue more, and what the rules are. There's a lot of power in that, great links in the wikipedia local currency article talk about it. And I guess we see it all the time. Online games and social networks create new currencies all the time. There are lots of historical examples. But, it never seems to take off as a mainstream concept. And meanwhile, I think we often have opportunities for creative and productive endeavour stifled simply due to there not being enough currency around to make them go, largely because the community that understands the opportunity doesn't have the cash, and the people with the cash don't understand the opportunity. The ability for any group to just define and implement a new currency at the drop of a hat (and then another and another) seems to me like something that wants a platform. Particularly, if you could easily interoperate between currencies (because there was a smooth technical platform which provided for allowed automated administration and trading), the concept would be more appealing, because if you build up real value in a mini currency, you could realise that value in trades outside of the currency's community. And communities get to take advantage of the benefits (and bear the risks) of making their own currencies; micro-economies stop looking like a zero sum game in that context I think. Relating this back to bitcoin, that's trying to do something different. It appears to be trying to be a single currency (not designed to make many separate currencies), and the ideas about the money supply seem to be about trying to tie it to something external and objective and non-manipulable with respect to the participants, which goes in a different direction to what I'm thinking about (ie: actually giving that power of creation and manipulation of the collective delusion of money to the participants themselves). It also looks like it's trying to be digital cash, which is a laudable aim, taking away the power of the central institutions; I would propose to do that rather by groups simply abandoning currencies where the central institutions are letting them down. -- 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 emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 05:29:27 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:59:27 +1030 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 90, Issue 18 In-Reply-To: <20110310175943.GY23560@leitl.org> References: <20110310175943.GY23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On 11 March 2011 04:29, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 09:51:01AM -0700, Max More wrote: > >> > How many of you are signed up? ?I am. >> > >> Me too. :-) > > Not me. Pretty poor value for the moment, in my location. Me either. Best chance of freezing in South Australia is to take a boat south until you run into something. > -- > Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 > -- 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 spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 11 06:02:41 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:02:41 -0800 Subject: [ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 90, Issue 18 In-Reply-To: References: <20110310175943.GY23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <00ed01cbdfb1$ef5d36a0$ce17a3e0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Emlyn >...Best chance of freezing in South Australia is to take a boat south until you run into something. -- Emlyn EMLYN! That's a great idea! Why not set up a long-term cryonics facility in Antarctica? Other than periodically tanking up with LN2, does a dewar need any kind of regular attention, once it is full of clients? Once a dewar is full of long-term paid-up clients, Alcor could haul it south, lower it into a 30 meter deep hole in the snow. Such a facility could reduce the amount of heat gained from the environment. The delta T between liquid nitrogen and a typical room is about 220K, whereas the delta T between liquid nitrogen and a typical Antarctic snow cave might be ~170-ish. Newton's law of cooling tells me we could save about a quarter of the heat gain from the environment. But wait, there's more. (I always like to use that comment.) If we had the dewar completely buried in snow, the air-entrained in snow would make an excellent insulator. Anyone who has ever camped overnight in a snow cave knows that fluffy snow makes a great blanket. Furthermore, land would be really cheap down there. Also the clients would be less vulnerable to radicalized Amish intent on destroying infidels, invasion of hungry hordes from the south, nuclear war, and such unpleasantness as that. If you set up down there, I can guarantee you would never be invaded from the south. Max, what are the annual liquid nitrogen needs for one of your dewars? Could we set it to boil off for a year at a time between fill-ups? spike From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 07:30:25 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:30:25 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Neuromap software freely available In-Reply-To: <4D79CE02.7050902@u-bordeaux1.fr> References: <4D79CE02.7050902@u-bordeaux1.fr> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Blaise Yvert Date: Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 1:23 AM Subject: [mea-users] Neuromap software freely available To: mea-users at yahoogroups.com Dear colleagues, dear friends, We are pleased to announce the recent publication of the following paper describing Neuromap, a matlab-based software that we make available to the community under the GNU GPL license. Please, feel free to download and use it ! Abdoun O, Joucla S, Mazzocco C, Yvert B. (2011) *NeuroMap : A spline-based interactive open-source software for spatiotemporal mapping of 2D and 3D MEA data.* Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 4:119. doi:10.3389/fninf.2010.00119. A major characteristic of neural networks is the complexity of their organization at various spatial scales, from microscopic local circuits to macroscopic brain-scale areas. Understanding how neural information is processed thus entails the ability to study them at multiple scales simultaneously. This is made possible using microelectrodes array (MEA) technology. Indeed, high-density MEAs provide large-scale coverage (several square millimeters) of whole neural structures combined with microscopic resolution (about 50 ?m) of unit activity. Yet, current options for spatiotemporal representation of MEA-collected data remain limited. Here we present NeuroMap, a new interactive Matlab-based software for spatiotemporal mapping of MEA data. NeuroMap uses thin plate spline interpolation, which provides several assets with respect to conventional mapping methods used currently. First, any MEA design can be considered, including 2D or 3D, regular or irregular, arrangements of electrodes. Second, spline interpolation allows the estimation of activity across the tissue with local extrema not necessarily at recording sites. Finally, this interpolation approach provides a straightforward analytical estimation of the spatial Laplacian for better current sources localization. In this software, coregistration of 2D MEA data on the anatomy of the neural tissue is made possible by fine matching of anatomical data with electrode positions using rigid-deformation-based correction of anatomical pictures. Overall, NeuroMap provides substantial material for detailed spatiotemporal analysis of MEA data.The package is distributed under GNU General Public License and available at http://sites. google.com/site/neuromapsoftware. Best wishes from Bordeaux, Blaise. -- Research Director CNRS and Universit? de Bordeaux UMR 5287 The Aquitaine Institute for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience (INCIA) PI Team 4: Neurotechnology and Network Dynamics Batiment Biologie Animale B2 Avenue des facult?s 33405 TALENCE Cedex FRANCE Tel. +33 5 40 00 25 73 Fax. +33 5 40 00 25 61http://services.incia.u-bordeaux1.fr/article.php3?id_article=161 -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 07:40:28 2011 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 08:40:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Neuromap software freely available In-Reply-To: References: <4D79CE02.7050902@u-bordeaux1.fr> Message-ID: 404. That?s an error. The requested URL /site/neuromapsoftware was not found on this server. That?s all we know. 2011/3/11 Bryan Bishop : > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Blaise Yvert > Date: Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 1:23 AM > Subject: [mea-users] Neuromap software freely available > To: mea-users at yahoogroups.com > > > Dear colleagues, dear friends, > > We are pleased to announce the recent publication of the following paper > describing Neuromap, a matlab-based software that we make available to the > community under the GNU GPL license. Please, feel free to download and use > it ! > > Abdoun O, Joucla S, Mazzocco C, Yvert B. (2011) NeuroMap?: A spline-based > interactive open-source software for spatiotemporal mapping of 2D and 3D MEA > data. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 4:119. doi:10.3389/fninf.2010.00119. > > A major characteristic of neural networks is the complexity of their > organization at various spatial scales, from microscopic local circuits to > macroscopic brain-scale areas. Understanding how neural information is > processed thus entails the ability to study them at multiple scales > simultaneously. This is made possible using microelectrodes array (MEA) > technology. Indeed, high-density MEAs provide large-scale coverage (several > square millimeters) of whole neural structures combined with microscopic > resolution (about 50 ?m) of unit activity. Yet, current options for > spatiotemporal representation of MEA-collected data remain limited. Here we > present NeuroMap, a new interactive Matlab-based software for spatiotemporal > mapping of MEA data. NeuroMap uses thin plate spline interpolation, which > provides several assets with respect to conventional mapping methods used > currently. First, any MEA design can be considered, including 2D or 3D, > regular or irregular, arrangements of electrodes. Second, spline > interpolation allows the estimation of activity across the tissue with local > extrema not necessarily at recording sites. Finally, this interpolation > approach provides a straightforward analytical estimation of the spatial > Laplacian for better current sources localization. In this software, > coregistration of 2D MEA data on the anatomy of the neural tissue is made > possible by fine matching of anatomical data with electrode positions using > rigid-deformation-based correction of anatomical pictures. Overall, NeuroMap > provides substantial material for detailed spatiotemporal analysis of MEA > data.The package is distributed under GNU General Public License and > available at http://sites. google.com/site/neuromapsoftware. > > Best wishes from Bordeaux, > Blaise. > > -- > Research Director > CNRS and Universit? de Bordeaux UMR 5287 > The Aquitaine Institute for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience (INCIA) > PI Team 4: Neurotechnology and Network Dynamics > Batiment Biologie Animale B2 > Avenue des facult?s > 33405 TALENCE Cedex FRANCE > Tel. +33 5 40 00 25 73 > Fax. +33 5 40 00 25 61 > http://services.incia.u-bordeaux1.fr/article.php3?id_article=161 > > > > > > -- > - Bryan > http://heybryan.org/ > 1 512 203 0507 > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > From atymes at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 07:48:11 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:48:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Neuromap software freely available In-Reply-To: References: <4D79CE02.7050902@u-bordeaux1.fr> Message-ID: There's a break in the URL, pointing to google.com instead of sites.google.com. However, it's 404 on sites.google.com too. CCing the original poster so he knows the link's broken. It would be interesting to see this software. On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > 404. That?s an error. > The requested URL /site/neuromapsoftware was not found on this server. > That?s all we know. > > 2011/3/11 Bryan Bishop : >> >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Blaise Yvert >> Date: Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 1:23 AM >> Subject: [mea-users] Neuromap software freely available >> To: mea-users at yahoogroups.com >> >> >> Dear colleagues, dear friends, >> >> We are pleased to announce the recent publication of the following paper >> describing Neuromap, a matlab-based software that we make available to the >> community under the GNU GPL license. Please, feel free to download and use >> it ! >> >> Abdoun O, Joucla S, Mazzocco C, Yvert B. (2011) NeuroMap?: A spline-based >> interactive open-source software for spatiotemporal mapping of 2D and 3D MEA >> data. Frontiers in Neuroinformatics, 4:119. doi:10.3389/fninf.2010.00119. >> >> A major characteristic of neural networks is the complexity of their >> organization at various spatial scales, from microscopic local circuits to >> macroscopic brain-scale areas. Understanding how neural information is >> processed thus entails the ability to study them at multiple scales >> simultaneously. This is made possible using microelectrodes array (MEA) >> technology. Indeed, high-density MEAs provide large-scale coverage (several >> square millimeters) of whole neural structures combined with microscopic >> resolution (about 50 ?m) of unit activity. Yet, current options for >> spatiotemporal representation of MEA-collected data remain limited. Here we >> present NeuroMap, a new interactive Matlab-based software for spatiotemporal >> mapping of MEA data. NeuroMap uses thin plate spline interpolation, which >> provides several assets with respect to conventional mapping methods used >> currently. First, any MEA design can be considered, including 2D or 3D, >> regular or irregular, arrangements of electrodes. Second, spline >> interpolation allows the estimation of activity across the tissue with local >> extrema not necessarily at recording sites. Finally, this interpolation >> approach provides a straightforward analytical estimation of the spatial >> Laplacian for better current sources localization. In this software, >> coregistration of 2D MEA data on the anatomy of the neural tissue is made >> possible by fine matching of anatomical data with electrode positions using >> rigid-deformation-based correction of anatomical pictures. Overall, NeuroMap >> provides substantial material for detailed spatiotemporal analysis of MEA >> data.The package is distributed under GNU General Public License and >> available at http://sites. google.com/site/neuromapsoftware. >> >> Best wishes from Bordeaux, >> Blaise. >> >> -- >> Research Director >> CNRS and Universit? de Bordeaux UMR 5287 >> The Aquitaine Institute for Cognitive and Integrative Neuroscience (INCIA) >> PI Team 4: Neurotechnology and Network Dynamics >> Batiment Biologie Animale B2 >> Avenue des facult?s >> 33405 TALENCE Cedex FRANCE >> Tel. +33 5 40 00 25 73 >> Fax. +33 5 40 00 25 61 >> http://services.incia.u-bordeaux1.fr/article.php3?id_article=161 >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> - Bryan >> http://heybryan.org/ >> 1 512 203 0507 >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 07:42:12 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:12:12 +1030 Subject: [ExI] household organizer, was :RE: Serious topic In-Reply-To: <00d801cbdf92$21d88b90$6589a2b0$@att.net> References: <006a01cbdf54$109af9f0$31d0edd0$@att.net> <4D7979E3.7040604@mac.com> <00d801cbdf92$21d88b90$6589a2b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 11 March 2011 12:45, spike wrote: > > >>... On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > ... >> >>> Ja. ?I am waiting for something analogous to Java for various household > appliances. > >>...Java or Java ME was proposed for that ages ago...But it doesn't have to > be Java. > Ruby, Python or most anything tossing XML (yes, ugh!) around could work. Built in web servers, html REST interfaces, use whatever language you like. -- 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 Fri Mar 11 08:20:33 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:20:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> Message-ID: <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 05:13:23PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Not just Greece. Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain are all > possible default timebombs. I'm trying to draft a list of who won't default, long-term, and it contains no major players. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Fri Mar 11 08:46:08 2011 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:46:08 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: If there were a referendum in my country I would vote for getting out of the EU and the Euro. On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 05:13:23PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > >> Not just Greece. ?Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain are all >> possible default timebombs. > > I'm trying to draft a list of who won't default, long-term, and > it contains no major players. > > -- > Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 > From giulio at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 08:49:56 2011 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:49:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <20110310080142.GR23560@leitl.org> References: <20110310080142.GR23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > A good experiment would be to hack a bitcoin http://www.bitcoin.org/ > app for Android that can do remote interactions and would also > support NFC for newer Androids. I have been thinking of this, and may well start developing something similar. However, Bitcoin has received some media attention recently but it is still known only by a few geeks. I hope Bitcoin will take off, but this can only happen if people start buying and selling _real_ products and services in Bitcoin. http://giulioprisco.blogspot.com/2011/02/bitcoin-cryptocurrency-for-free.html http://giulioprisco.blogspot.com/2011/02/donate-bitcoins-to-pioneer-one.html >> Other thoughts? > > -- > Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 > From deimtee at optusnet.com.au Fri Mar 11 09:37:45 2011 From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (David) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 20:37:45 +1100 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Neuromap software freely available In-Reply-To: References: <4D79CE02.7050902@u-bordeaux1.fr> Message-ID: <20110311203745.0eab409f@optusnet.com.au> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 23:48:11 -0800 Adrian Tymes wrote: > There's a break in the URL, pointing to google.com instead of > sites.google.com. > > However, it's 404 on sites.google.com too. > > CCing the original poster so he knows the link's broken. It > would be interesting to see this software. > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:40 PM, Giulio Prisco > wrote: > > 404. That?s an error. > > The requested URL /site/neuromapsoftware was not found on this > > server. That?s all we know. > > > > 2011/3/11 Bryan Bishop : > >> Works for me. You need to take the space out. Try cutting and pasting this:- http://sites.google.com/site/neuromapsoftware -David From bbenzai at yahoo.com Fri Mar 11 10:01:25 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 02:01:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] household organizer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <513351.89465.qm@web114416.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Nice idea, Spike. If that could be done, and shown to be practical and useful, I'd love to see the same idea extended (or, rather in-troduced) to the body itself. Each organ or maybe every few cubic ccs of the body would have a processor and suite of sensors, and be able to talk to each other and to the brain. Would be a great start to a gradual upload path, while giving some very real benefits in the meanwhile. > something analogous to Java Seems to me that Java would be fine for this. It's free and open-source, you'd just need to build some "household organizer" libraries for it. > I don't even yet know what that can be used for Read "Makers" by Cory Doctorow, if you haven't already. There's a neat idea for rfids that fits right in with this. And I'm sure people would be brimming with ideas once they get the concept. > I want that capability in every > home appliance that has any processors. ... > I want my bed to be able to detect .. You already have a processor in your bed? ... I won't ask what that's for! ;> Adrian Tymes wrote: > That exists today - in appliances that have implemented it. > Almost none do. > The problem is, having a refrigerator that can display images > on its touch > screen front, can receive image files from other devices (say, via > Bluetooth or > USB), and support a standard Web browsing experience is of > practically no > extra value beyond just having a refrigerator. I imagine most people might not be so enthused about the above rfid idea, as most people are actually capable of finding their socks in the morning, but maybe tying entertainment devices into a household network would be appealing. Busy mothers could turn doing the washing and vacuuming into a game for small children, and maybe at last it would be practical and easy to get your computer to tell your tv what to record in a more controlled way than the built-in schedulers, and intelligently allocate storage space as needed. Of course, you'd have to convince the manufacturers to allow a suitable interface to their closed-source software. So that's probably a non-starter. Give your house your list of things needed for going on holiday, so it can realise that you left your passport in your bedroom before you leave the house (come on, I can't be the only one to have done this). Countless medical and care-of-the-elderly applications, of course. As Spike indicated, home security could be much more adaptable and useful (and potentially, unpredictable for the intruders, which is not to be underestimated). I'm sure it would even be possible to have your valuable hardware shouting for help all the way to the villain's lair, on various wireless bands, and other people's houses co-operate in tracking it. A kind of machine 'neighbourhood watch' scheme. This could extend to cars, of course. Oh, yes, how about a nice warmed-up car on winter mornings, all ready to go, because it started itself while you were having breakfast, detected that there was frost on the windscreen and put the demister on? Feeding the pets while you're away would be easy too. I'd better stop now, but there are dozens, maybe even hundreds, of applications for a system like this. Ben Zaiboc From eugen at leitl.org Fri Mar 11 14:13:28 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:13:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <20110311141328.GJ23560@leitl.org> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 09:46:08AM +0100, Giulio Prisco wrote: > If there were a referendum in my country I would vote for getting out > of the EU and the Euro. Yeah, it was Germany who profited most by far, though of course the people on the street don't see it that way (since very little of it trickled down to the bottom). The other partners got badly shafted. The only way to fix it would be to prune down EURoland to the barest essentials. Plus introducing second and third tier currencies, maybe. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Fri Mar 11 14:59:05 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 06:59:05 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <002401cbdffc$de2e25b0$9a8a7110$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Eugen Leitl Subject: Re: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 05:13:23PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: >>... Not just Greece. Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain are all possible default timebombs. >...I'm trying to draft a list of who won't default, long-term, and it contains no major players. -- Eugen* Leitl Oh no, Eugen don't tell us that. We are all counting on Germany to support the Euro, and keeping those cool beemers flowing over htere. You guys can't let Europe down. We have the red states over here to pick up the tab. Germany is Europe's fiscally responsible red state. spike From painlord2k at libero.it Fri Mar 11 15:35:36 2011 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:35:36 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <20110311141328.GJ23560@leitl.org> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> <20110311141328.GJ23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D7A4148.8010208@libero.it> Il 11/03/2011 15.13, Eugen Leitl ha scritto: > On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 09:46:08AM +0100, Giulio Prisco wrote: >> If there were a referendum in my country I would vote for getting >> out of the EU and the Euro. > Yeah, it was Germany who profited most by far, though of course the > people on the street don't see it that way (since very little of it > trickled down to the bottom). > The other partners got badly shafted. The only way to fix it would be > to prune down EURoland to the barest essentials. Plus introducing > second and third tier currencies, maybe. Germany profited most from the Euro as much as it profited most from the Deutsche Mark. And other countries and their people were shafted badly by their currencies as much they are by the Euro. What the Euro changed is that Greece and the others could not use inflation to rob their people. The government were forced to use debts or cut spending to balance the budget instead of the printing presses. Economics Theory don't need to postulate rational actors. And economy don't need them. But irrational actors are showed for the fools they are more than often. -- Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog Leggimi su Estropico Blog *Mirco Romanato* ----- Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 10.0.1204 / Database dei virus: 1497/3500 - Data di rilascio: 11/03/2011 From painlord2k at libero.it Fri Mar 11 15:24:19 2011 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:24:19 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7A3EA3.201@libero.it> Il 11/03/2011 6.27, Emlyn ha scritto: > What's on my mind is that Money is, fundamentally, imaginary. Imaginary as in "foresight" or in "delusion"? Money is money when the value for future exchange is greater than the value for use for self. For example, gold become money when its actual value for industrial/personal use is lower than the value you assign it for use as a mean of exchange for other goods you want (value is an individual perception, not a group perception, apart when the group share the same or similar individual perception). And this is true for anything. > Something it seems to do, which we understand viscerally, is provide > us with "conservation of value"; similar to intuitions such as > conservation of volume. If I give you something, you should give me > back something of equal value. "Fairness" is mixed up in there > somewhere. In a market exchange, the exchange happen only if both parties value the things they give up less than the things they receive. If they value them more or the same, the exchange don't happen. Gold is often used as money, like silver, because there are a limited supply and production and limited consumption . Increasing both is difficult and require efforts. Gold is used in industry, so it have a value for someone that is linked to its use and this is the floor. The storage of value is given from the fact that more gold is hold, more its price will not fall (usually it will raise) and no one is able to make gold from thin air at will. Fairness is a concept it is better to keep out of economics. > Except, that it doesn't look like that if you make the money. In > that case, it's now something else, a confidence game. What is money > worth? Whatever we think other people think other people think it is > worth. So if I can convince enough other people that their > confederates think their other confederates will attribute value to > it, then it will have value, and I can go ahead, mint it, and hand it > out. > Which governments do (and is one reason why the intuition about > national government budgets being like a household budget are dead > wrong). They are not, because confidence is not something governments or individuals can build at will. At the end, government budget are like household budget. It simply work at a very large level, where many interactions are obscured and lied about. When government print money it is robbing money holders (the poor more than the rich, because rich people have less money in share of wealth than poor people) and giving the value stolen to its components, friends, allies and cronies. > So I'm thinking that really, any group should have the power to make > its own currency and work with it if they want to. They decide how > much of it there is, when to issue more, and what the rules are. > There's a lot of power in that, great links in the wikipedia local > currency article talk about it. In jails inmates use cigarettes as currency, because they can not have or use money. They surely didn't meet and agree on using it. They simply did it and of all commodities, cigarettes were the best fit to the use. No one is forced to accept them as money but at the end they are used for this. > And I guess we see it all the time. Online games and social networks > create new currencies all the time. There are lots of historical > examples. But, it never seems to take off as a mainstream concept. If you understood how money emerge from a free market you would understand why it is really difficult for an virtual currency backed by nothing or by something of very limited use to take off. In the past we talked about how in Africa the people are using the cellphone pre-paid time to exchange value (pay for fish, fruit and transfer money from a place and person to another place and person) instead of using inexistent banks. Cellphone minutes have a real value. People can not create them by fiat. Cellphone carriers can not create them by fiat, because they must deliver them at some point. All that is needed is a carrier that price its time in gold and allow inexpensive exchange of the credit between users and there would be a gold money available. > And meanwhile, I think we often have opportunities for creative and > productive endeavor stifled simply due to there not being enough > currency around to make them go, largely because the community that > understands the opportunity doesn't have the cash, and the people > with the cash don't understand the opportunity. Here you mistake the money for the resources priced with it. It is not lack of money, because if you print it and hand it around it will not change nothing or make things worse. Lack of money is rarely the real show-stopper. > The ability for any group to just define and implement a new > currency at the drop of a hat (and then another and another) seems to > me like something that wants a platform. Particularly, if you could > easily interoperate between currencies (because there was a smooth > technical platform which provided for allowed automated > administration and trading), the concept would be more appealing, > because if you build up real value in a mini currency, you could > realise that value in trades outside of the currency's community. And > communities get to take advantage of the benefits (and bear the > risks) of making their own currencies; micro-economies stop looking > like a zero sum game in that context I think. This is really strange for me. When and where are micro-economies zero-sum games? They are positive sum games by default. The interoperability of these local currencies is only dependent on their exchange with the outside. Do they have something to sell? If they have, they will be able to buy. If they don't, they will not be able to buy. I don't need yen if I don't go visit Japan. If no one commerce with Japan no one will need yen, apart the Japaneses that will commerce between themselves. Your "easy interoperability" between local currencies go against the reason because local currencies are established: local lack of liquid money. But, for fiat money, this is usually cause by the meddling of the government with the money supply and demand. > Relating this back to bitcoin, that's trying to do something > different. It appears to be trying to be a single currency (not > designed to make many separate currencies), and the ideas about the > money supply seem to be about trying to tie it to something external > and objective and non-manipulable with respect to the participants, > which goes in a different direction to what I'm thinking about (ie: > actually giving that power of creation and manipulation of the > collective delusion of money to the participants themselves). It > also looks like it's trying to be digital cash, which is a laudable > aim, taking away the power of the central institutions; I would > propose to do that rather by groups simply abandoning currencies > where the central institutions are letting them down. In the end, there is never a real local currency. Something is a currency if others are willing to accept it as a payment. A local currency can and will become global if it have real value. And, in the end, people want a single currency because it is easier to calculate the value of things. -- Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog Leggimi su Estropico Blog *Mirco Romanato* ----- Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 10.0.1204 / Database dei virus: 1497/3500 - Data di rilascio: 11/03/2011 From rpwl at lightlink.com Fri Mar 11 16:37:37 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:37:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <4D7A4148.8010208@libero.it> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> <20110311141328.GJ23560@leitl.org> <4D7A4148.8010208@libero.it> Message-ID: <4D7A4FD1.2090005@lightlink.com> Money is a concept that *emerges* from a complex system. It is a combination of: (a) What most people believe it is, and (b) What various powerful actors (i.e. governments and market speculators) force it to be. The mistake, I think, is for people to get confused about the second of these, and to think that if governments all decide to, say, adopt the gold standard, that therefore that IS what money is. In truth, the second factor (governments + market speculators) is really only a particularly big and heavy group of "people", who happen to believe a particular thing. Conclusion: trying to argue about what money "really" is, or what it "really ought to be" is somewhat nonsensical, since it emerges as a result of beliefs and interactions of a complex nature. Richard Loosemore From atymes at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 17:05:21 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:05:21 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Neuromap software freely available In-Reply-To: <20110311203745.0eab409f@optusnet.com.au> References: <4D79CE02.7050902@u-bordeaux1.fr> <20110311203745.0eab409f@optusnet.com.au> Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 1:37 AM, David wrote: > Works for me. You need to take the space out. ?Try cutting and > pasting this:- > > http://sites.google.com/site/neuromapsoftware I tried that yesterday, and it was 404ing. Now it works, though. Perhaps there was a temporary site outage? From spike66 at att.net Fri Mar 11 17:28:13 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 09:28:13 -0800 Subject: [ExI] tsunami in japan Message-ID: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Comparing yesterday's tsunami in Japan to the one in the Indian Ocean on 26 December 2004: the death toll in this one will likely be on the order of a tenth of a percent of the 2004 incident, yet the property damage as measured in anything we recognize as currency will likely be far greater in 2011 than in 2004. Currencies do odd things like that. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jonkc at bellsouth.net Fri Mar 11 18:43:16 2011 From: jonkc at bellsouth.net (John Clark) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 13:43:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Eleven nuclear reactors in Japan have been shut down and 2 of them are on red alert and thousands have been evacuated; the earthquake was so strong the emergency cooling system was destroyed in those two. No radiation leaks yet but Japanese officials say they are "bracing for the worst"; they can't get enough water into them to cool them down. At least they still have the containment building, I think. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 21:08:56 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:08:56 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Video of Self-Biohacking talk @ BIL In-Reply-To: <11409595.302.1299876913176.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqae3> References: <11409595.302.1299876913176.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqae3> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: William J. Croft Date: Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 2:55 PM Subject: Re: Video of Self-Biohacking talk @ BIL To: biocurious at googlegroups.com Great video, thanks. Interesting that he puts neurofeedback / biofeedback as #1 on his list. I believe Asprey has done the very expensive Biocybernauttraining. (James Hardt's system.) And Asprey also mentions Brain State Technologies as another example of an outrageously priced neurofeedback training system. (Both of these are in the tens of thousands of dollars range.) But he does not mention Peter Van Deusen's very affordable Brain-trainer resources, which is what I have been using for several years: http://brain-trainer.com/ and associated Yahoo group http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/braintrainer/ Van Deusen's approach is basically open-source, once you are setup with the technology. Cost is about $1000 for the wireless neurofeedback hardware and Bioexplorer software. Then a few hundred for Pete's package of neurofeedback "protocol designs" -- but these are easily modifiable since the Visual Programming Language (Bioexplorer is a VPL) circuit layouts are customizable and extendable. Having a user community that is open to questions, advise, collaboration, brainstorming, sharing protocols -- makes all the difference. William Croft Lightfield Systems -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From amon at doctrinezero.com Fri Mar 11 22:03:17 2011 From: amon at doctrinezero.com (Amon Zero) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 22:03:17 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/11 John Clark > Eleven nuclear reactors in Japan have been shut down and 2 of them are on > red alert and thousands have been evacuated; the earthquake was so strong > the emergency cooling system was destroyed in those two. No radiation leaks > yet but Japanese officials say they are "bracing for the worst"; they can't > get enough water into them to cool them down. At least they still have the > containment building, I think. > TV here is saying that they have containment, but temps are 150% normal and rising in the worst one. Coolant levels are low, with more coolant en route from the US. They're saying they may have to vent some "very low radiation vapour" to reduce the pressure. Sounds bad. - A -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 23:42:56 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:42:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] tsunami in japan In-Reply-To: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/11 spike : > Comparing yesterday?s tsunami in Japan to the one in the Indian Ocean on 26 > December 2004: the death toll in this one will likely be on the order of a > tenth of a percent of the 2004 incident, yet the property damage as measured > in anything we recognize as currency will likely be far greater in 2011 than > in 2004. > > Currencies do odd things like that. I don't understand how this is a currency thing. If indeed there is more financial damage, it would be because the level of infrastructure (thus value) of Japan is higher. This also explains to some extent why the death toll will also be so much lower. Compare Hurricane Katrina to a similar storm hitting Bangladesh (whatever they are calling themselves these days). -Kelly From emlynoregan at gmail.com Fri Mar 11 23:52:47 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 10:22:47 +1030 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <4D7A4FD1.2090005@lightlink.com> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> <20110311141328.GJ23560@leitl.org> <4D7A4148.8010208@libero.it> <4D7A4FD1.2090005@lightlink.com> Message-ID: On 12 March 2011 03:07, Richard Loosemore wrote: > > Money is a concept that *emerges* from a complex system. ?It is a > combination of: > > (a) What most people believe it is, and > > (b) What various powerful actors (i.e. governments and market speculators) > force it to be. > > The mistake, I think, is for people to get confused about the second of > these, and to think that if governments all decide to, say, adopt the gold > standard, that therefore that IS what money is. > > In truth, the second factor (governments + market speculators) is really > only a particularly big and heavy group of "people", who happen to believe a > particular thing. > > Conclusion: ?trying to argue about what money "really" is, or what it > "really ought to be" is somewhat nonsensical, since it emerges as a result > of beliefs and interactions of a complex nature. > > Richard Loosemore I totally agree with you Richard. However, you can affect group belief, and a good way to do this is to introduce cultural constructs, complex idea frameworks, which help people to think about it in different ways. I'm not a believer in Sapir-Whorf at the individual level, but I do believe that at a cultural level we mainly only work with pre-existing concepts. New conceptual elements are hugely useful, and can especially get foothold in times when the existing constructs have been found wanting, and we collectively are groping for the next idea but can't think of it in aggregate because of a lack of framework. -- 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 Fri Mar 11 23:38:41 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 16:38:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/11 Amon Zero : > 2011/3/11 John Clark >> >> Eleven nuclear reactors in Japan have been shut down and 2 of them are on >> red alert and thousands have been evacuated; the earthquake was so strong >> the emergency cooling system was destroyed in those two. No radiation leaks >> yet but Japanese officials say they are "bracing for the worst"; they can't >> get enough water into them to cool them down. At least they still have the >> containment building, I think. > > TV here is saying that they have containment, but temps are 150% normal and > rising in the worst one. Coolant levels are low, with more coolant en route > from the US. They're saying they may have to vent some "very low radiation > vapour" to reduce the pressure. Sounds bad. There was some talk about running on batteries, and flying new batteries in by helicopter. Seems like a really big generator would be a better idea, but who knows... The crap has certainly hit the fan. Japan's economy has been in the drink for twenty years, this isn't going to help. -Kelly From kanzure at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 01:43:34 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 19:43:34 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Copyrights and patents in charities Message-ID: http://www.pdfernhout.net/open-letter-to-grantmakers-and-donors-on-copyright-policy.html An Open Letter to All Grantmakers and Donors On Copyright And Patent Policy In a Post-Scarcity Society *Contents* * executive summary * introduction to the problem * post-scarcity information economics and non-profits * how copyright ownership corrupts the non-profit mission * is it "self-dealing" to exchange public property for salary? * how new alternatives can work * why "new" alternatives need to work * examples of fine-grained cooperation in action * how things go wrong with current practice * the tragedy of the New Alchemy Institute * proprietary vs. free content producer example * digital public works are not physical public works * patents, blueprints, and journal articles are "leftovers" today=== * the cycle of failure * encouraging successful collaboration * what about special case like drug research? * please keep charitable content free; ask peers to do likewise An Open Letter to All Grantmakers and Donors On Copyright And Patent Policy In a Post-Scarcity Society executive summary Foundations, other grantmaking agencies handling public tax-exempt dollars, and charitable donors need to consider the implications for their grantmaking or donation policies if they use a now obsolete charitable model of subsidizing proprietary publishing and proprietary research. In order to improve the effectiveness and collaborativeness of the non-profit sector overall, it is suggested these grantmaking organizations and donors move to requiring grantees to make any resulting copyrighted digital materials freely available on the internet, including free licenses granting the right for others to make and redistribute new derivative works without further permission. It is also suggested patents resulting from charitably subsidized research research also be made freely available for general use. The alternative of allowing charitable dollars to result in proprietary copyrights and proprietary patents is corrupting the non-profit sector as it results in a conflict of interest between a non-profit's primary mission of helping humanity through freely sharing knowledge (made possible at little cost by the internet) and a desire to maximize short term revenues through charging licensing fees for access to patents and copyrights. In essence, with the change of publishing and communication economics made possible by the wide spread use of the internet, tax-exempt non-profits have become, perhaps unwittingly, caught up in a new form of "self-dealing", and it is up to donors and grantmakers (and eventually lawmakers) to prevent this by requiring free licensing of results as a condition of their grants and donations. introduction to the problem Consider this license fragment from a foundation supported (PRI) project from 1993: "You will not modify, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale, create derivative works, or in any way exploit, any of the content, in whole or in part, found on the Service." The non-profit collaborative communications ecosystem is polluted with endless anti-collaborative restrictive terms of use for charitably funded materials (both content and software) produced by a wide range of public organizations. These restrictions are in effect acting like "no trespassing -- toxic waste -- keep out -- this means you" signs by prohibiting making new derived works directly from pre-existing digital public works. The justification is usually that tight control of copyright and restricting communications of those materials will produce income for the non-profit, and while this is sometimes true, the cost to society in the internet age in terms of limiting cooperation is high, and in fact, I would argue, too high. Unfortunately, the situation is even worse than that, because even without a copyright notice or license, the default under the law http://www.loc.gov/copyright/circs/circ03.html is now that all works are copyrighted upon creation. So basically everything on the internet put up by non-profits without an explicit license granting permission to use, communicate, and/or make derivative works also has an invisible implicit "no trespassing" sign on it as well. Perhaps allowing content producing 501(c)3 non-profits to tightly control their copyrights made sense in the past. Driven by cuts in much non-profit funding in the 1980s and early 1990s, many non-profits moved to funding models requiring more entrepreneurship. For many non-profits, that has meant selling copyrighted materials, and they effectively became no different than commercial publishers -- except for receiving a charitable subsidy that perhaps allows break-even cost production for smaller audiences otherwise underserved by the the mainstream for-profit press. Acting as subsidized presses has been an important mission for non-profits, and both my wife and I have helped with it. We assisted NOFA-NJ in producing two versions of the New Jersey Organic Market Directory -- which was subsidized by among others the Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation. But, I would argue, it no longer makes sense to enable non-profits to function mainly as subsidized publishers operating in an otherwise conventional for-profit way through selling copyrighted material. Assuming subsidized publishing made sense at some point, what has changed recently? Widespread internet use is one obvious thing. In general, the bigger picture is that a more cooperative "post-scarcity" economy is emerging. http://www.google.com/search?q=post-scarcity This post-scarcity economy is made possible by such things as: * the exponential growth of technological capacity (including the internet), * increasingly widespread knowledge, and * new ways of collaborating pioneered by free software and open source developers. post-scarcity information economics and non-profits Even in a "post-scarcity" or "gift" economy, some things remain scarce, like human attention or trust. This new economy is driven in part by peer status, which does have indirect physical, economic, and other benefits. http://www.well.com/user/mgoldh/natecnet.html James P. Hogan wrote a novel "Voyage from Yesteryear" around 1982 on a similar premise describing a gift economy governed by status: http://www.jamesphogan.com/books/voyage/baen99/titlepage.shtml Nowhere is a post-scarcity economy more visible today than with content on the internet. However, does the funding plan for most digital public works made by non-profits incorporate a post-scarcity perspective? There are a lot of non-profit projects being funded out there (especially educational and digital library ones) which have a component of attempting to charge for access to the results of charitably funded work as part of their business plan. Some completely restrict access (and redistribution) to a local paying community. In fact, most government funding agencies and foundations encourage such restrictions, on the (often flawed) assumption that such restrictions will make the project self-sustaining financially. Rather than single out another example, let me point as a contrast to a foundation: http://www.centerforthepublicdomain.org/ and an organization it funds: http://www.ibiblio.org/ that are both doing a great job at enlarging the public domain as opposed to shrinking it. An outdated scarcity perspective in the non-profit community is still manifesting itself, however. There remains a continued emphasis on charitable projects which include plans for restricting access to the resulting publicly funded digital works now, in the hopes of creating revenue streams later. The funded organization usually proposes continuing to improve the work itself under its solitary control using money derived from selling licenses to the work. Contrast this with, for example, the post-scarcity development of the GNU/Linux operating system, made by thousands of volunteers contributing improvements to an initial base contributed by Linus Torvalds and the Free Software Foundation (FSF) GNU project. The old scarcity criterion towards selecting what makes a viable project (based on a recurring royalty stream for static content) is completely at odds with the new post-scarcity model (based more on streams of attention, status, service, and customization). The new collaborative development process made possible by the internet (resulting in a work made by sharing licenses to copyrights made by a distributed network of authors funded indirectly by other means) is fundamentally different than the old process (resulting in a work made by centralized copyright ownership with a development process funded by selling licenses to the result). how copyright ownership corrupts the non-profit mission One problem with the current approach is that non-profits who are paid to create proprietary content and then sell access to it are unfairly competing with for-profit companies who do the same thing. While there may always be an issue with how contributions to the public domain affect other peoples proprietary profit-making plans, conflicts between for-profit and non-profit work might be greatly lessened if all non-profit content development work was put in the public domain or under some sort of free license (copylefted or not), http://www.fsf.org/copyleft/copyleft.html so everyone, for-profit and non-profit alike, could build on it in some way. This would mean there would be no situation where a non-profit, having developed some copyrighted or patented system, could use it to gain unfair advantage over a for-profit entity, because the for-profit company could always build on and extend the non-profit's work. Such policies might help foster a related worldwide culture of benevolence, cooperation, and sharing in non-profits might also improve things among an increasingly competitive non-profit culture shift, because free access to each others copyrights and patents might in turn do more to promote an attitude of friendly competition in non-profit staff instead of combat over what might seem at first to be finite resources. This is more than anything a plea to think about how the tightly controlled ownership of copyrights can be corrupting people and organizations in the non-profit world -- because we have seen that first hand to our dismay. Please think deeply about the difference between "free" content and "subsidized" content. There is a world of difference in terms of making derived works, since free content can be given away with permission to make derived works, whereas subsidized content can't. Similarly, the common notion of "matching funds" breaks down when applied to whether a product is free (as in the French "libre" sense [think free speech], not necessarily "gratuit" sense [think free beer]) http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/categories.html Since half the match needs to come from selling licenses to the work, this means derived works can't be easily allowed. Problems also arise when a developer matches free funds with a free license to a proprietary underlying platform, because the combination can then never be free in the sense of allowing derived works. In both cases, the "free" funds from charity are contaminated by the "proprietary" contribution and the result is essentially proprietary (even when the price of the result is $0). It might be much better to have half as many truly free projects as opposed to twice as many proprietary ones, because everyone could potentially benefit from building on the free projects, so their value each might be (arbitrarily) ten to one hundred times that of proprietary ones. is it "self-dealing" to exchange public property for salary? Consider this way of looking at the situation. A 501(c)3 non-profit creates a digital work which is potentially of great value to the public and of great value to others who would build on that product. They could put it on the internet at basically zero cost and let everyone have it effectively for free. Or instead, they could restrict access to that work to create an artificial scarcity by requiring people to pay for licenses before accessing the content or making derived works. If they do the latter and require money for access, the non-profit can perhaps create revenue to pay the employees of the non-profit. But since the staff probably participate in the decision making about such licensing (granted, under a board who may be all volunteer), isn't that latter choice still in a way really a form of "self-dealing" -- taking public property (the content) and using it for private gain? From that point of view, perhaps restricting access is not even legal? Self-dealing might be clearer if the non-profit just got a grant, made the product, and then directly sold the work for a million dollars to Microsoft and put the money directly in the staff's pockets (who are also sometimes board members). Certainly if it was a piece of land being sold such a transaction might put people in jail. But because the content or software sales are small and generally to their mission's audience they are somehow deemed OK. To be clear, I am not concerned that the developers get paid well for their work and based on technical accomplishments. What I am concerned about is the way that the proprietary process happens such that the public (including me) never gets full access to the results of the publicly funded work (other than perhaps a few publications without substantial source). I've restricted this to talking about copyrights, but patents only make this situation worse. Right now, a patent on MP3 technology held by a non-profit (the Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft, commissioned and funded by the Federal and L?nder governments) http://www.iis.fhg.de/amm/legal/index.html http://www.fhg.de/english/company/index.html is causing distress to free software developers, and their response is to invent a new audio encoding system. http://www.vorbis.com/ (My response to similar distress could be seen as this effort to reinvent the non-profit sector entirely. :-) This example is from Germany, but one could find similar examples in the United States. Likewise, Germany has many outstanding developers of free and open software, "Germany Leads In Open-Source Development" http://content.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20001101S0016 so this situation reflects internal conflicts in German society as well. I admit this self-dealing analogy may sound at first far fetched, but perhaps that is another sign of how bad the situation has become as old economic models of paper-based content distribution break down in the internet age. Note: this is not to argue non-profits should not be able to assert "moral rights" or "privacy rights" over various types of content they produce as the situation applies. For example an artist collective might not want their digital paintings modified (even if they can be freely redistributed), or clients at a clinic might not want their digital records made publicly available. Both are digital works, but in one case "moral rights" may apply, and in the other "privacy rights" may apply. There will undoubtedly be gray areas as works fall between categories (e.g. a work of art telling how to do something). how new alternatives can work Assuming people need to make a living, how can people who deal in public domain works get paid? One may object that such a "new" scheme of sharing non-proprietary knowledge created by charitable means can never work economically. However, there are perfectly capitalistic examples where it has worked already. The "new" model of making money with public domain content is actually an old one related to guilds. Doctors and lawyers both make excellent livings working with a large body of public domain knowledge, interpreting it, customizing it, and applying it to client's specific situations. Both doctors and lawyers create new knowledge that is effectively put into the public domain in the form of medical journal articles or court proceedings. While the average person can be their own doctor or lawyer to an extent, there is so much to know including certain ways of reasoning that in practice one is usually better off getting some assistance from a professional (as well as getting some self-education to work well with that professional) than trying to go it alone. Many times grants help researchers create more information for the medical or legal public domain. But those grants don't corrupt the process, because the results are essentially available to all practitioners on an equal basis. There are some medical grants that produce drug or plant patents that probably are corrupting, but that is another issue. Patents are an example when science (which thrives on reference chains of journal articles) crosses over into technology (which thrives on incrementally improved artifacts -- and artifacts can be copyrighted or patented to prevent others from using them for a time). To help a lawyer to understand free or open source software for example, just ask her or him to think about it in terms of the law itself -- from court proceedings to legislative records. While lawyers may pay for a service like Westlaw for convenience or practical necessity, http://www.westlaw.com/about/ they are not paying to use the law itself, say when they make an argument in court. Surely nobody would suggest the world was better off in the days of 18th-century England when a medical student had to crawl on top of a roof and look in from a skylight to find out the proprietary technique used by one group of secretive obstetricians to have a lower rate of infant and maternal mortality than their competitors: http://web.archive.org/web/20030405130500/http://www.ogilvy.com/memorial/html/onads.htm Yet, in some ways, are drug patents or other medical technology patents really that much different than simply hiding the information to those with no choice about needing the drug and can't afford it (such as in developing nations with AIDS epidemics)? And if the answer is that they are different things, still, should charitable or tax dollars be subsidizing proprietary techniques, even for limited times? And as a deeper issue, as copyrights are effectively extended indefinitely, and as technology moves increasingly faster and faster, rendering even twenty years and eternity of many generations of technical development, any sense of a public bargain that copyrights and patents someday become public domain in a *useful* way, is starting to break down. Granted, that is an issue that goes beyond the one of purely charitably funded works, but it still is an issue charitable donors should consider. This guild-like process has already started with public software such as GNU/Linux. Competent GNU/Linux system configuration experts are now in high demand and can get good wages for dealing in purely free software. One of the things that helps prove competence in this "guild" is having contributed to the GNU/Linux kernel. [Note that historically guilds often kept their methods secret from outsiders; I'm not advocating that here.] why "new" alternatives need to work How different is the basic issue in the secretive obstetricians example above from when publicly funded non-profits put "no trespassing" signs around their copyrighted works, preventing anyone else from improving on them, or benefiting from them without paying a toll to the non-profit itself? Toll collecting imposes other external costs. Once I heard a collision happen between a few cars two lanes over while driving at the Whitestone bridge's toll plaza -- another hidden cost of tolls. People could have died, say if an airbag killed a child improperly secured in a front seat. Likewise, I had my license plate scanned and checked as I paid a toll leaving an airport parking field (according to the automated display), resulting in an extra "privacy" toll not recorded on the receipt. The tolls imposed by non-profits for licensing their copyrights can have similar negative external costs. Such tolls can contribute to causing people in developing nations to die because of lack of access to how-to information on agriculture. Such tolls can also contribute to creating a closed bureaucratic Orwellian society without privacy where every viewing of information is monitored so it can be billed (consider Acrobat Reader 5 which includes technology to scan your computer and communicate the results across the internet -- pick "Edit | DocBox | Preferences" to see the InterTrust warning and license). As mentioned earlier, such restrictions can also (through temptation) create criminals where none might have existed. Frankly, if the non-profit world of copyright creation cannot provide a model by slowly moving to a post-scarcity economic structure, when such creation is already funded in large part by charity, how can the for-profit world survive the transition without complete and painful chaos? Naturally, many non-profits like soup kitchens or Habitat for Humanity are already working on a service basis, and if they collect fees for services rendered, I'm not against that. I'm talking specifically about copyright and patent work here. examples of fine-grained cooperation in action How could post-scarcity economics be reflected in new ways of doing things by the non-profit sector? The current growth level of the internet makes possible fine-grained voluntary collaboration on an unprecedented scale to cooperatively develop enormous creative works, exemplified by these three collaboratively developed sites: http://www.everything2.org/ http://dmoz.org/ http://www.slashdot.org/ In a sense, these sites are promoting a concept which in biology is called "stigmergy". An example is how African termites build large mounds -- by getting excited at the partial structures other termites have made and adding to them, which gets even more termites excited in new ways. Essentially, these web sites are "artifact coordinated cooperation". Without some form of a free license, this form of advanced cooperation can not take place among peer, because there is neither free access to the artifact or legal permission to change it in any way to make a new derived work. Post-scarcity collaboration has also long been shown by many of the internet newsgroups, which include discussions and information on most topics of human interest, somewhat archived and indexed here: http://groups.google.com/googlegroups/deja_announcement.html At this point, I rely on these newsgroups to do a good job as a software developer when starting a new project with new technology. My technical questions are almost always asked and answered already. In short, non-profits could work together to create in total a continually improving distributed library of free digital public works covering all human needs. This would be a very different side of the internet than the one full of tolls and restrictions that many for-profit interests are working towards. For a hint of what this might someday become, read Theodore Sturgeon's short story written in the 1950s entitled "The Skills of Xanadu". That story helped inspire our (hibernating) OSCOMAK project: http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/index.htm and a related "moral license" concept: http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/license.htm how things go wrong with current practice However, most non-profit organizations dealing with "know-what", "know-how", or "know-why" content (i.e. science, technology, and art/philosophy) still follow the common practice of supporting their continued existence as they transition to the internet age by attempting to make money directly selling digital public works funded by grants, the same way they used to sell text books, blueprints, or art prints. This model of fund raising has some serious negative consequences. The main one revolves around preventing collaboration by preventing easily making derived works. There are more subtle moral and ethical implications as well, which Richard Stallman points out, as the age old civic duty of sharing with a neighbor is made immoral and illegal (and repositioned linguistically as "piracy"). http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/philosophy.html Naturally, promoting sharing still needs to balance both "moral rights" of authors getting credit for their works or controlling some aspects of the presentation or alteration of aesthetic or opinion works (as opposed to functional ones), and "privacy rights" related to personal information. For more on these distinctions, see for example: http://www.ipmatters.net/webcaught/interview_stallman.html or: http://www.fsf.org/events/rms-nyu-2001-transcript.txt Given the ease of free content distribution on the internet, to make money from content, organizations must create an artificial scarcity of their content (including text and software). This entails using copyright to impose restrictions preventing anyone from making copies of their content, so people will pay for licenses to use their content. Since derived works are also copies in a way, organizations must also prevent others from making derived works. This derived-works restriction in turns prevents cooperation through others easily building on the works. In theory, money changing hands will let things continue to happen, and sublicensing of content for derived works does happen to an extent in the commercial world. However, even if a non-profit organization is willing to license their works to others for a fee for making derived works, this entails royalty payments, carefully evaluating complex binding legal contracts, and other arrangements whose initial cost to set up and operate generally exceed any expected revenue of most subsequent charitable projects, and, further, force all derived works to be handled as commercial, not gift, transactions. Essentially, instead of having permanent lasting benefits, the initial charitable investment made by some foundation or government agency into supporting a non-profit organization's content creation process just devalues over time as the content becomes obsolete or is forgotten by the very organization that created it -- since no one else with an interest in the work can maintain it. The ironic thing is that most non-profits will probably fail to make enough money from selling their content to even justify the expenses of doing so, so the loss to humanity is for nothing more than a funding fantasy. the tragedy of the New Alchemy Institute Yet, there are millions of individuals on the internet who might continue to improve content developed initially by non-profits, if these individuals only had the right to do so (rights that can only be granted by the copyright holder). For example, I have a large selection of publications created by the New Alchemy Institute on things like compost pile management, indoor fish farming, and geodesic dome greenhouse construction. I paid for those copies both for the information and to help support the institute. The New Alchemy Institute is now defunct. I have no right under copyright law to put these materials on a web site or to improve them , as much as I would like to do so (until about 100 years from now). Quite possibly obtaining such rights might cost more in time and money than creating such materials from scratch or completely rewriting them. Even if I got permission from someone previously affiliated with the New Alchemy Institute or its successors to do something with the materials, how could I be sure their information was accurate and their permission meaningful and legally binding? Sadly, decades of innovative and alternative non-profit R&D work done by dedicated and hardworking people at NAI is effectively lost as far as the internet audience is concerned. And that means, that R&D work is effectively lost to everyone in the world as the internet continues to supplant other forms of content distribution and use (like using inter-library loan). In the past, when most information was sold on paper and was difficult to modify, perhaps it made sense for non-profits to raise funds by selling documents (as when I purchased the New Alchemy Institute materials). But now, this old habit based on an out-dated paradigm is preventing cooperation and collaboration to create the informational underpinnings of a post-scarcity society demonstrating knowledge democratization. For me, the deepest tragedy of the New Alchemy Institute is somewhat personal. I visited NAI around 1989 and later gave an invited talk there to some interns, while a graduate student at Princeton. I wanted to make a library on sustainable technology and related simulations, and NAI had an extensive library on such topics and an interested member base and even some Macintosh computers. But we never connected -- in part because I was too shy and couldn't think of something coherent and fair to propose as a way out of my boxes of being a PhD graduate student and thinking in terms of a for-profit company selling proprietary software requiring a substantial investment, and out of their boxes of being mainly an agricultural technology R&D facility, selling products and papers via their catalogue, and giving interns room and board for doing manual labor. I was very saddened by the newsletter announcing their demise around 1991, because I felt that working together on a digital library of alternative technology we might have prevented that. [And ironically Richard Stallman with his Free Software vision in Cambridge was only about seventy-five miles away from NAI.] For reference, all the NAI publications themselves are supposedly available through inter-library loan at the American Archives of Agriculture (AAA), located at Iowa State University. The library itself became part of a "Green Center" at the same location, but I am not sure if that is still in operation, and in any case NAI would have no way to grant permissions for putting any works but its own on-line. Such works would ultimately have to be rewritten from multiple sources to be put on-line, a project probably worth doing, but something that would take far more effort than putting on-line what exists. proprietary vs. free content producer example How can we prevent such tragedies from happening again and again, even for internet-connected non-profits? One possibility is simply for non-profits from the start to put their creative works under licenses allowing redistribution and the making of derived works. As a corollary, they must then obtain their funding from ways other than selling licenses to use copyrighted works. They can still sell permission to access an archive, as long as the works including the entire archive are freely redistributable once accessed. Contrast, for example, this proprietary work of hundreds of appropriate technology publications sold as micro-fiche or CD-ROM which is still pretty much as it was ten years ago: "The Appropriate Technology Library" http://www.villageearth.org/ATLibrary/cdrom.htm with this blossoming free library to aid developing nations which is available directly over the web: "The Humanity Libraries Project" http://www.humaninfo.org/ Which one has more of a future given the internet? Which one could continue be improved if the supporting organization were to suddenly become defunct? Which organization and development process is then really the lower risk "investment" for a foundation grant? The Humanity Libraries Project is the exception to the rule. The difficulties they face and the solutions they see to them (for example, starting a petition just to get the UN to freely license its content so people who need it can get it) just show how bad the situation has gotten and how ingrained the old habits are. Their petition idea helped inspire this essay on enlarging the issue to being about the copyrights of all non-profits, no just the UN and directly related NGOs. Copyright for most government funded work goes to the for-profit contractor, who usually just sits on the work because it is more expensive and risky to market a copyright than to get another government contract. Copyright for most foundation supported work goes to the non-profit, who also usually just sits on the work or makes only token efforts at marketing because it is more expensive and risky to market a copyright than to get another foundation grant. Perhaps an occasional exception is museums who show in-house created digital works until they become obsolete in a restricted setting (generally entered only after the patron pays a general admission fee). In some ways, the state of non-profit copyright ownership and licensing is so bad we don't even notice the issue anymore. digital public works are not physical public works The fundamentally flawed concept is that digital public works are like physical public works. When one creates a physical public work like a bridge, it may make sense to charge a toll to pay for its construction or upkeep -- although even that is questionable, see for example: http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/shouldbefree.html This physical public works paradigm is unfortunately then applied to thinking about most digital public works, and there is a major flaw in the analogy. A bridge does not require much marketing. It's highly visible by the nature of what it is and how it is built. Things are different in the content and software realm. Marketing costs for any commercially successful software product are typically ten times that of creation costs. Many well funded marketing efforts fail. So, almost all projects funded by foundations with an intent to be marketed later using other funds will fail because the funds won't materialize. Likewise, because the costs of production are small relative to marketing, there is usually little value in other's licensing the works (at typically inflated fees) as opposed to just making new ones since the marketing costs are the dominating factor. Word-of-mouth marketing strategies can lower marketing costs, but it may increase support costs, and it also often takes years. This is far beyond the funding horizon of most non-profits with paid staff. Freely distributed collaborative efforts like GNU/Linux may survive long enough for word-of-mouth to help them -- but that requires a different approach to licensing. patents, blueprints, and journal articles are "leftovers" today=== Plenty of public money is being spent -- it just is not connecting to the community as digital public works. This failure to connect is also in part because of another notion -- that patents and scientific journal articles as funding "leftovers" are sufficient detail to support a free technological civilization. For an example of why this doesn't work, researchers at NASA just discovered NASA doesn't have the rights to the 3D CAD models of the International Space Station or the Space Shuttle. They had wanted to make a virtual reality model of those for further research and development of ergonomic design. Such plans are now on hold until new arrangements can be worked out with the contractors. Funding organizations need to break out of the mindset that the organization doing the work to create something (in this case a NASA contractor) should necessarily be the one to shepherd that work in the future, and that in order to shepherd the work, their exclusive ownership of most of the aspects of the work is justified. Both these premises are flawed in the internet age. One group can create something under a free license and another group can extend it if they have the interest. A group who initially creates something under a free license can shepherd a process involving members of the public contributing under similar free licenses. There is a real question here of how our society will proceed -- mainly closed or mainly open. It is reflected in everything the non-profit world does -- including the myths it lives by. The choice of myth can be made in part by the funding policies set by foundations and government agencies. The myth that funders may be living by is the scarcity economics myth. How does that myth effect the digital public works funding cycle? the cycle of failure Essentially, most digital public works funded by the government or foundations follow this process: * public money is paid to some organization to develop some seemingly useful digital work either as a "prototype" or as a "product", * the contractor argues it is important to create an artificial scarcity for the work through copyright to ensure future support of new versions of the work by the contractor without the need for future grants, * without marketing, which is almost always more expensive than expected (everyone hopes word-of-mouth will be enough for an overnight success), the work fails to attract enough interest to justify continued distribution and minimal support costs, * the work is quickly outdated given limited original investment in it and rapidly changing platforms and needs, plus the PI wants to move onto other things, and so, * the cycle repeats, since an organization that has learned how to get one grant probably knows better than anything else how to get another. Very rarely, the project is a "success" in the sense of being able to become self sustaining economically after generally a large number of funding cycles. At that point, the idea is "commercialized" often by the private sector and often someone makes a lot of money. Essentially, a lottery ticket has paid off -- for one group out of hundreds or thousands. To an extent, the logic behind all this is similar to when the US Forest service puts in $100 of logging roads for $1 in logging fees, because supposedly cheap access to timber will promote the US economy and welfare of US citizens (even if the timber gets sold to Japan). In the forest example, it is the public wilderness and those who would enjoy it spiritually or physically who suffer. In the non-profit example, it is the public domain of copyright that suffers, and likely also public privacy and public safety. However, the same logic could be applied to the results of creating a directory of organic food suppliers or a book about how to achieve world peace. Restricting access to all of them is a result of the same scarcity mythology, and the exponential growth of technology requires a new funding mythos. encouraging successful collaboration To break that cycle, what needs to be done? The mythology of funding needs to shift to fostering the creation of free works of public value. There needs to be a faith that such works if they are of value will eventually attract further support (from public or private sources). How can that new mythology be implemented on a practical basis? Here are some ideas: 1. Support free content creation processes more than specific products. 2. Support people and organizations participating in those processes, either those making free content or those shepherding free processes. 3. Don't encourage organizations to become self supporting by selling licenses for copyrights or patents. Suggest instead they sell services, customization, or memberships if they want to become self-supporting -- but such things are hard to do so don't insist on them. 4. Reward with more grants people and organizations who actually make important free content (however that is judged). It is very hard to make effective grants, no matter how knowledgeable, hardworking, and dedicated the foundation staff and board is. Michael Phillips talks about this in the book "The Seven Laws of Money" based on his experience on the board of the Point Foundation. So obviously, this is all easier said than done. Actually, Michael Phillips argues in practice it is impossible to give successful external grants, but perhaps this new funding mythology of supporting free content may change the granting landscape enough that some external grants will produce good things, since at some point grant applicants could be judged on a portfolio of previously developed free content in addition to perceived public value for proposed new efforts. what about special case like drug research? One can make a point on the issue of exclusive rights as far as attracting additional investment to get something so it is generally acceptable for widespread use. In the case of new drugs, it may take hundreds of millions of dollars in investment in clinical studies beyond a drugs initial invention. Still, would it really ever be the case that if all drug research was done in the public domain our society could never under any circumstance find a way to put into production new drugs, even if it meant making some changes to how drugs are tested or produced? The private sector should IMHO provide value added to the public domain, and if it can't, the situation needs to be rethought. Clearly with trillions of dollars a year spent on health care, there is a huge incentive for insurance companies and the government (Medicare/Medicaid) to fund the creation of effective drugs to reduce other long term care costs, even at half a billion a drug. >From what little I understand of the drug industry, most drug research by drug companies is actually to make "me too" clones of existing drugs (with the original novel drugs typically derived from government funded research and studies and signed over cheaply to drug companies), so drug companies are one of the worst examples of dysfunctional public/private sector investment patterns. Additionally, drug companies generally don't invest in research on drugs of great value to large numbers of people (e.g. river blindness or malaria) if they don't see as much profit in it as the next version of something already popular (and not really needed as much if at all). One approach is to disconnect drug manufacturing and sales from drug research and drug testing. Why should the two go together? Certainly after a drug patent expires, I can still buy Aspirin or other generic drugs, and drug vendors can compete on price, availability, packaging, and quality. So if research and studies were done purely using public funds then there wouldn't be this issue. Granted, if FDA approval is excessively costly for novel drugs, ways should be considered to streamline it without compromising safety excessively. In general, the future prospect is for "designer drugs" targeted to individuals' biochemistries in the future (perhaps based on genetic and other individual based testing), so this whole expensive drug approval process is going to have to be rethought anyway. please keep charitable content free; ask peers to do likewise In conclusion, please, please look seriously at the copyright policies of individuals and organizations you do fund. Please insist all the creative work you fund is communicated to the public under free or open licenses or returned to the public domain. http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html http://www.opensource.org/ And please encourage other peers in foundations and government agencies to do likewise. That way, at least others can build on top of the efforts of people you do fund. That would at least be a big improvement over the current situation. --Paul Fernhout Copyright 2001-2004 Paul D. Fernhout License: Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire email is permitted in any medium, provided this notice is preserved. Note: I believe "fair use" of this work includes copying of sections with attribution for the purpose of discussion. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Mar 12 02:15:11 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:15:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] tsunami in japan In-Reply-To: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7AD72F.4030407@mac.com> On 03/11/2011 09:28 AM, spike wrote: > > Comparing yesterday's tsunami in Japan to the one in the Indian Ocean > on 26 December 2004: the death toll in this one will likely be on the > order of a tenth of a percent of the 2004 incident, yet the property > damage as measured in anything we recognize as currency will likely be > far greater in 2011 than in 2004. > > Currencies do odd things like that. > Also, this quake hit very densely populated areas with lots of very high ticket real estate, many businesses, power plants, fuel depots and infrastructure damaged or destroyed. Japan is in for a rough time recovering. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sat Mar 12 02:17:21 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:17:21 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: <00d101cbdf90$9a72a380$cf57ea80$@att.net> References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> <4D7975BE.8020904@mac.com> <00d101cbdf90$9a72a380$cf57ea80$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7AD7B1.5060100@mac.com> On 03/10/2011 06:04 PM, spike wrote: > >> ... Behalf Of Samantha Atkins > ... >>> John, you are aware that Damien used these in a SF book called > Transcension? > >> One of my favorites so it is not surprising to me that the story has stuck > in my mind. I have been listening for the sound of tempting bees ever > since. :) - samantha > > Hmmm, it was liar bees as I recall. You might be right, but I think it was > liar bees. Either way, I thought it most insightful for a decade ago. > It was liar bees. Thanks for jogging the memory as it deteriorates here in slow time. - s From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 12 03:51:19 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 19:51:19 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Resend after a bounce: Steampunk insects created from bullets In-Reply-To: <4D7AD7B1.5060100@mac.com> References: <4D7849B5.9070006@satx.rr.com> <000801cbdee1$f3debda0$db9c38e0$@att.net> <4D7975BE.8020904@mac.com> <00d101cbdf90$9a72a380$cf57ea80$@att.net> <4D7AD7B1.5060100@mac.com> Message-ID: <002101cbe068$bf9c8e40$3ed5aac0$@att.net> >>> On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins ... >>> ... I have been listening for the sound of tempting bees ever since. :) - samantha > >>... You might be right, but I think it was liar bees. Either way, I thought it most insightful for a decade ago. > >...It was liar bees. Thanks for jogging the memory as it deteriorates here in slow time. - s Hey mine too. There are certain stories that have characters that just stay in one's mind. Transcension has Matthewmark, Amanda, Abdel-Malik, the liar bees. Calling them tempting bees is logical: that's what they actually did. They suggested to the True Believer that there might be something seriously wrong with his memetic infrastructure. The liar bees were simultaneously a plot device and a symbol. Consider for instance a man who observes beasts but has always been a creationist. He sees things that are remarkable consistent with the notion of evolution, tempting the True Believer to doubt, like the liar bees in Transcension. The liar bees eventually come in swarms. Damien Transcension is brilliant work pal. spike From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Sat Mar 12 07:29:50 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 23:29:50 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 04:38:41PM -0700, Kelly Anderson wrote: > The crap has certainly hit the fan. Japan's economy has been in the > drink for twenty years, this isn't going to help. Some economist think it will help, with the recovery spennding triggering a breakout of the deflation trap. I'm agnostic. Though Japan's economy hasn't been quite as bad as rumored, if you look at GDP/capita growth. -xx- Damien X-) From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Sat Mar 12 07:28:16 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 23:28:16 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110312072816.GB14834@ofb.net> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:03:17PM +0000, Amon Zero wrote: > 2011/3/11 John Clark <[1]jonkc at bellsouth.net> > >> Eleven nuclear reactors in Japan have been shut down and 2 of them are Automatic response to seismic activity, AIUI, with most of them being back online. The two damaged ones were closest to the epicenter, and fairly old to boot. > TV here is saying that they have containment, but temps are 150% normal > and rising in the worst one. Coolant levels are low, with more coolant > en route from the US. They're saying they may have to vent some "very The "from the US" seems to be a false rumor. The coolant is water. Light water with less deuterium in it for preference, but right now they're just pouring water in. -xx- Damien X-) From phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu Sat Mar 12 07:26:03 2011 From: phoenix at ugcs.caltech.edu (Damien Sullivan) Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 23:26:03 -0800 Subject: [ExI] tsunami in japan In-Reply-To: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110312072603.GA14834@ofb.net> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 09:28:13AM -0800, spike wrote: > > Comparing yesterday's tsunami in Japan to the one in the Indian Ocean > on 26 December 2004: the death toll in this one will likely be on the > order of a tenth of a percent of the 2004 incident, yet the property > damage as measured in anything we recognize as currency will likely be > far greater in 2011 than in 2004. > > > Currencies do odd things like that. Government building codes also do things like that. (I.e. the low death toll part, here and in Chile's 8.8 last year.) Helps to be rich enough to build good buildings, of course (though Chile's 1/3 the per capita income of the US) but also helps to officially minimize people gambling with their lives. -xx- Damien X-) From eugen at leitl.org Sat Mar 12 09:49:49 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 10:49:49 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: <4D7A4FD1.2090005@lightlink.com> References: <003301cbdf35$c3aa74e0$4aff5ea0$@att.net> <4D797733.9090404@mac.com> <20110311082033.GF23560@leitl.org> <20110311141328.GJ23560@leitl.org> <4D7A4148.8010208@libero.it> <4D7A4FD1.2090005@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <20110312094949.GM23560@leitl.org> On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 11:37:37AM -0500, Richard Loosemore wrote: > Conclusion: trying to argue about what money "really" is, or what it > "really ought to be" is somewhat nonsensical, since it emerges as a > result of beliefs and interactions of a complex nature. I've talked with operators of successful regional currencies, so you can say 'hey presto, fiat money', and it will come. Ditto a number of cryptocurrencies which were in operation, mostly shut down for fraud/money laundering. If the consensus money sucks badly enough it's pretty easy to get people to adopt an alternative system. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Sat Mar 12 10:38:22 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:38:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics dinners Message-ID: <4D7B4D1E.6030007@aleph.se> Here is a new tradition we have started in Oxford (if you do something twice in Britain it is a tradition, and must be continued until the end of time): every time someone newly signed up gets their cryonics bracelet (or similar thing) we (the other cryonicists) invite them to a celebratory dinner at some suitably posh restaurant. A mild motivator, but most importantly a way of building a social cluster. We are getting a nice little cluster of people signed up over here; four that I know of, two at early stages of signing up and at least one likely to do it sooner or later. Creating a supportive social community seems to produce very good feedback effects - both for helping motivate the sign-up process, giving advice and to help keep track of each other's state. It is of course easier in a small, dense location like Oxford. Now I really ought to get working on that paper on the ethics of cryonics. -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Sat Mar 12 10:20:57 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:20:57 +0100 Subject: [ExI] tsunami in japan In-Reply-To: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7B4909.2030806@aleph.se> On 2011-03-11 18:28, spike wrote: > Comparing yesterday?s tsunami in Japan to the one in the Indian Ocean on > 26 December 2004: the death toll in this one will likely be on the order > of a tenth of a percent of the 2004 incident, yet the property damage as > measured in anything we recognize as currency will likely be far greater > in 2011 than in 2004. The major thing I learned when I took a class in natural disasters was that human vulnerability matters much more than the physical size of the disturbance itself, and that almost by definition the poor are going to be most vulnerable. Japan is an amazingly resilient society in many ways. It has long experience with earthquakes and tsunami ('harbor wave' in Japanese). Many vulnerable coastal towns run regular civil defense exercises, and of course building codes and emergency services have plenty of earthquake planning. Not to mention an extremely strong civil society, which is usually what really counts for immediate aftermath saving. So when I first heard the news my intuitive guess at the number of fatalities was around 10; that is sadly likely two orders of magnitude too low, but given the size of that thing - 8.9 is amazingly big! - it could have been far, far worse. The cost issue is interesting. When you look at economic losses due to natural disasters they seem to be growing exponentially. This is not because the disasters are becoming more common, but because more people with expensive stuff live near disasters are likely. In the 80s and early 90s some people feared that should Japan be hit by a big one they would sell off all their foreign investments to pay for fixing it; given the 80s idea that Japan would be running/buying the world (like today many think China will) it made some sense. However, the 95 Kobe quake proved less problematic than believed, and of course the Japanese economy has not been doing too well over the past two decades either. This disaster will likely not be terribly different, although we got a shakier world economy at present, so it might scare the markets (lots of big factories closed right now). In any case, the Japanese construction industry (always a close friend of the government) will be getting rich now - I would invest in concrete. It is intriguing to look at the time course of the preceding quakes - one can see how an earlier quake caused a sequence of smaller quakes along one faultline... then a few hours of silence, the big one, and a widespread set of secondary quakes: http://www.flickr.com/photos/arenamontanus/5518010037/ -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Sat Mar 12 10:27:43 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:27:43 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7B4A9F.4070905@aleph.se> On 2011-03-10 21:27, John Grigg wrote: > Anders, congratulations on your very cool writing endeavor for the > Transhuman Space roleplaying game! I have been waiting for a new > supplement to come out... Thanks! It has been a long road - I wrote the supplement a long time ago, but then things got confused at my end and at SJG, so it has taken until now. The irony is that the future is already changing (had I written it today there would have been a lot more Geoffrey West and a lot less Richard Florida). It is fun imagining a fairly transhumanist city. How do you handle firework AR spam? How much tunnels can you dig with cheap robotics? What do you do in an earthquake? How do you handle local transparent societies and people with really off bioenhancements? Now I just wish I get to write for Eclipse Phase too. -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 11:57:45 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 04:57:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl In-Reply-To: <4D7B4A9F.4070905@aleph.se> References: <4D7B4A9F.4070905@aleph.se> Message-ID: Anders Sandberg wrote: It is fun imagining a fairly transhumanist city. How do you handle firework AR spam? How much tunnels can you dig with cheap robotics? What do you do in an earthquake? How do you handle local transparent societies and people with really off bioenhancements? Now I just wish I get to write for Eclipse Phase too. >>> Anders, you are going to make roleplaying game supplement writing the new "cool thing" for academics! I think you need to start a peer reviewed journal... John : ) On 3/12/11, Anders Sandberg wrote: > On 2011-03-10 21:27, John Grigg wrote: >> Anders, congratulations on your very cool writing endeavor for the >> Transhuman Space roleplaying game! I have been waiting for a new >> supplement to come out... > > Thanks! > > It has been a long road - I wrote the supplement a long time ago, but > then things got confused at my end and at SJG, so it has taken until > now. The irony is that the future is already changing (had I written it > today there would have been a lot more Geoffrey West and a lot less > Richard Florida). > > It is fun imagining a fairly transhumanist city. How do you handle > firework AR spam? How much tunnels can you dig with cheap robotics? What > do you do in an earthquake? How do you handle local transparent > societies and people with really off bioenhancements? > > Now I just wish I get to write for Eclipse Phase too. > > -- > Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford University > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sat Mar 12 13:34:30 2011 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 08:34:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> Message-ID: <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Damien Sullivan wrote: > > Some economist think it will help, with the recovery spennding > triggering a breakout of the deflation trap. > That surely has got to be a load of carp. Maybe we should burn down a house, that would help with recovery. Or wreck a car. What? So all that money and those resources go to catching up with where we *were* instead of moving forward. A Red Queen's race, IMHO. Of course some people will benefit. But not the country as a whole. Regards, MB From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 14:05:44 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 15:05:44 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics dinners In-Reply-To: <4D7B4D1E.6030007@aleph.se> References: <4D7B4D1E.6030007@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 12 March 2011 11:38, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Here is a new tradition we have started in Oxford (if you do something > twice in Britain it is a tradition, and must be continued until the end of > time): every time someone newly signed up gets their cryonics bracelet (or > similar thing) we (the other cryonicists) invite them to a celebratory > dinner at some suitably posh restaurant. A mild motivator, but most > importantly a way of building a social cluster. > Sounds like a very good idea, also taking into account that those concerned are in a better position to appreciate it than the average guest of honour in funeral banquets. :-D > > -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat Mar 12 15:22:11 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 16:22:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl In-Reply-To: References: <4D7B4A9F.4070905@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4D7B8FA3.9050806@aleph.se> On 2011-03-12 12:57, John Grigg wrote: > Anders, you are going to make roleplaying game supplement writing the > new "cool thing" for academics! I think you need to start a peer > reviewed journal... Journal of Cool Research? I'm up for it. :-) Actually, I think there is merit in running roleplaying scenarios as a way of testing out certain scenario situations. Traditional scenario planning might be on a too abstract level sometimes. Hmm, I might be able to smuggle some consideration of this into my new grant project... -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From atymes at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 16:08:11 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 08:08:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 5:34 AM, MB wrote: > Damien Sullivan wrote: >> Some economist think it will help, with the recovery spennding >> triggering a breakout of the deflation trap. >> > > That surely has got to be a load of carp. > > Maybe we should burn down a house, that would help with recovery. Or wreck a car. What? > > So all that money and those resources go to catching up with where we *were* instead > of moving forward. > > A Red Queen's race, IMHO. > > Of course some people will benefit. But not the country as a whole. The point is to kick loose money that people had been hoarding. They might not have invested it otherwise, but they will invest in rebuilding. It's the (small) total amount of money moving around the system, and its (small) velocity, that has been the economic problem. Money doesn't do any good if no one's spending it. From atymes at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 16:47:24 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 08:47:24 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Cities on the Edge, by Anders Sandberg and Waldemar Ingdahl In-Reply-To: <4D7B8FA3.9050806@aleph.se> References: <4D7B4A9F.4070905@aleph.se> <4D7B8FA3.9050806@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 7:22 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Actually, I think there is merit in running roleplaying scenarios as a way > of testing out certain scenario situations. Traditional scenario planning > might be on a too abstract level sometimes. Hmm, I might be able to smuggle > some consideration of this into my new grant project... Well, yeah. I've been doing it for years - informally, as more of an art form than anything formal and fundable, but still with that objective. (Another objective is making sure I keep imagining new stuff, as a general mental health thing.) It especially helps with visualizing quality of life issues. If you take someone from a given society, and walk that person through a standard daily routine, that can make issues in need of attention stand out a lot more than numbers and figures (even, to continue the analogy, the figures that make up the character's sheet). For example, I've recently had cause to imagine someone living on a "research arcology". Easy to visualize dramatic element, yes? But what exactly does that mean, how does it function, what's its economy like - going through the factors that influence this person's life (as relates to the scenario at hand - and since a lot of action for said character has taken place on and around this arcology, a lot of the details relate), I've had to think through all of those. (Eventually I came up with: research is their ideology, but the core economic outputs are "Drug testing for pharmaceutical companies, design and testing of new sorts of equipment, and ever-improving simulations", supplemented by mining of international waters and manufacturing. While unflagged and thus technically "pirate", they are able to defend themselves and try to avoid trouble - e.g., they simply don't do any of the US DEA's banned substances list, partly to avoid the ire of the US Navy, but partly because they want to keep their minds sharp, and they would rather export things that help others do the same. If some country's navy suspects them, they can negotiate and allow inspection under guard; if this is a pretext to seize the arco, they can outrun any ship - it's technically a seaplane with fusion-powered scramjets - and shoot down most missiles and fighters. If this had gone on long enough, there might have been pressure for them to either throw in with an existing country - likely a port of convenience - or flag up as their own country and lobby for recognition, to handle this sort of thing.) Another example, done by countless sci-fi authors, is to imagine one specific change - perhaps the introduction of a device with not previously available capabilities - and imagine life with it. This is how, for instance, it was realized that teleporters might lead to flash mobs: if it is easy to quickly go wherever something interesting (and not too obviously dangerous) is happen, wouldn't a lot of people milling around a typical downtown do exactly that? Alternately, imagine if you had a radio transceiver wired into your sensory/motor cortex, as a sixth sense where you could communicate with anyone within radio range. How would you use it? What would happen if there were a few other people in your range who had it? What would happen if there were a lot? What about computers - yes, they can "speak" radio, but would the same issues as come up in voice recognition come up here, or would the medium inherently solve them, and/or introduce new ones? What about the fact that no one on Earth has this as a native language yet (and won't until children have grown up with it - which would be at least a decade after the first child gets such an implant, which itself is probably going to be a while) - how does that affect the radio "language"? Further, all this assumes use of otherwise unused frequencies, which are few - how does this interact with the various uses of radio already in place, and might those pre-existing uses influence the development of the radio "language"? All of which come into play simply by thinking through how someone would use this sort of thing. From pharos at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 17:12:45 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 17:12:45 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > The point is to kick loose money that people had been hoarding. ?They > might not have invested it otherwise, but they will invest in rebuilding. > > It's the (small) total amount of money moving around the system, and > its (small) velocity, that has been the economic problem. ?Money doesn't > do any good if no one's spending it. > Possibly not quite correct? Surely it is the concentration of wealth that is the problem? You can't spend money if you haven't got any. And once the bankers have several mansions, a private jet and a few Lamborghinis, Ferraris, etc. then what will they spend much money on? BillK From atymes at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 18:09:17 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 10:09:17 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 9:12 AM, BillK wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Adrian Tymes ?wrote: >> The point is to kick loose money that people had been hoarding. ?They >> might not have invested it otherwise, but they will invest in rebuilding. >> >> It's the (small) total amount of money moving around the system, and >> its (small) velocity, that has been the economic problem. ?Money doesn't >> do any good if no one's spending it. > > Possibly not quite correct? > > Surely it is the concentration of wealth that is the problem? > > You can't spend money if you haven't got any. > And once the bankers have several mansions, a private jet and a few > Lamborghinis, Ferraris, etc. then what will they spend much money on? That's a large part of the cause, yes. The wealth is concentrating in the hands of those who see no need to spend it. Concentration of wealth, by itself, is not a problem so long as the wealth is then invested. It is the concentration without investment that is the problem. A billion dollar business empire that has most of its assets in play is far different from a billion dollar business empire that's sitting on most of its wealth. From spike66 at att.net Sat Mar 12 18:52:02 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 10:52:02 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes ... >...Concentration of wealth, by itself, is not a problem so long as the wealth is then invested. It is the concentration without investment that is the problem. A billion dollar business empire that has most of its assets in play is far different from a billion dollar business empire that's sitting on most of its wealth. Ja. I trace most of that sitting on wealth behavior back to these comments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-aLcbr63ME What is "skyrocket?" Double? Triple? If so, the consumer class will have far less money as businesses must cut salaries to pay higher power bills. Most of the consumers' remaining money will be spent on food. If so, many investments make no sense. In the US, the investing class is sitting on its money, waiting to see what those energy costs are going to be. Without some means of modeling that cost, most investment options become too risky. Result: note the price of gold and silver in the recent past. It becomes difficult to derive a cost matrix for energy futures when the coal industry is under political threat. Nuclear and solar together are the way, but we will still need coal power for a long time to come. Events like Japan's earthquake remind us that nuclear power is an answer but may not be the universal answer. spike From eugen at leitl.org Sat Mar 12 19:54:57 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 20:54:57 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20110312195457.GY23560@leitl.org> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:52:02AM -0800, spike wrote: > Events like Japan's earthquake remind us that nuclear power is an answer but > may not be the universal answer. It is not an answer economically, ecologically, or sustainably, or even in the ability to deliver (500 GW/year substitution rate every year, for the next 40 years, or twice that for 20 years). Continuous belief into a failed steampunk technology to magically, eventually deliver is touching, but rational it's not. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 20:44:23 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:44:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > The point is to kick loose money that people had been hoarding. ?They > might not have invested it otherwise, but they will invest in rebuilding. Japan will get an "investment" in the form of loans and charitable donations from around the world. This will help lessen the impact of the earthquake economically. It will jump start the construction industry in Japan, but at the expense of other industries. Japan's real long term economic difficulty is partially in the demographic of it's aging populace. They aren't having children, and they aren't allowing many people to immigrate. This leads to more and more young people taking care of more and more old people. The old people aren't as productive as the young, and the overall economy suffers terribly. If the earthquake leads to more births, then it will help. :-) -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sat Mar 12 20:47:31 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:47:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 10:27 PM, Emlyn wrote: > What's on my mind is that Money is, fundamentally, imaginary. > Something it seems to do, which we understand viscerally, is provide > us with "conservation of value"; similar to intuitions such as > conservation of volume. If I give you something, you should give me > back something of equal value. "Fairness" is mixed up in there > somewhere. One of the best books I've ever read on ANY topic is Frozen Desire: Meaning of Money by James Buchan He really captures what money is, what it's good for, some of the good and bad things about it. I haven't read it for a decade, but it was a marvelous read!! One thesis, stated in the title, is that money is desire, frozen in a form for convenient interchange. And, that it is good for nothing particularly until it is 'defrosted' by spending it in exchange for something you desire. > Except, that it doesn't look like that if you make the money. In that > case, it's now something else, a confidence game. What is money worth? > Whatever we think other people think other people think it is worth. No, it's worth what the consensus think it is worth. In other words, the things you desire are desired by others to the point that they value them in today's money. Depending upon the currency, and exchange rates, and trust in a particular currency, different sellers will accept differing amounts of money in exchange for goods and services (in a free market). > So if I can convince enough other people that their confederates think > their other confederates will attribute value to it, then > it will have value, and I can go ahead, mint it, and hand it out. Assuming that it is legal... it might not be in many places. > Which governments do (and is one reason why the intuition about > national government budgets being like a household budget are dead > wrong). > > So I'm thinking that really, any group should have the power to make > its own currency and work with it if they want to. They decide how > much of it there is, when to issue more, and what the rules are. > There's a lot of power in that, great links in the wikipedia local > currency article talk about it. > > And I guess we see it all the time. Online games and social networks > create new currencies all the time. There are lots of historical > examples. But, it never seems to take off as a mainstream concept. And > meanwhile, I think we often have opportunities for creative and > productive endeavour stifled simply due to there not being enough > currency around to make them go, largely because the community that > understands the opportunity doesn't have the cash, and the people with > the cash don't understand the opportunity. The Second Life money (Linden Dollars) is an interesting case study. > The ability for any group to just define and implement a new currency > at the drop of a hat (and then another and another) seems to me like > something that wants a platform. Particularly, if you could easily > interoperate between currencies (because there was a smooth technical > platform which provided for allowed automated administration and > trading), the concept would be more appealing, because if you build up > real value in a mini currency, you could realise that value in trades > outside of the currency's community. And communities get to take > advantage of the benefits (and bear the risks) of making their own > currencies; micro-economies stop looking like a zero sum game in that > context I think. > > Relating this back to bitcoin, that's trying to do something > different. It appears to be trying to be a single currency (not > designed to make many separate currencies), and the ideas about the > money supply seem to be about trying to tie it to something external > and objective and non-manipulable with respect to the participants, > which goes in a different direction to what I'm thinking about (ie: > actually giving that power of creation and manipulation of the > collective delusion of money to the participants themselves). It also > looks like it's trying to be digital cash, which is a laudable aim, > taking away the power of the central institutions; I would propose to > do that rather by groups simply abandoning currencies where the > central institutions are letting them down. The holy grail of digital money IMHO is some successful method for micro-payments. I am convinced that when this gets implemented and widely accepted that it will create new opportunities in the economy that don't exist now, and that this will be a very good thing. -Kelly From santostasigio at yahoo.com Sat Mar 12 22:59:15 2011 From: santostasigio at yahoo.com (giovanni santostasi) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 14:59:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ExI] Joining list Message-ID: <868778.91968.qm@web31306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi,Can you add to your chat list my new email address:gsantostasi at gmail.comThank you,Giovanni -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 13 02:50:11 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 18:50:11 -0800 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans Message-ID: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> A few days ago, someone posted archives from about ten years ago. I read through a few of them to remind myself what we were talking about in those days. Did anyone else here do that? That was interesting, but I noticed something that jumped out at me. Comparing the ExI-list to ten years ago, it is remarkable how long the typical posts were. Now we are so hit-and-run. Then we had a longer attention span. I was reminded of this when I read an offhanded comment in a movie review, an animated feature called "Mars Needs Moms." A positive feature of the movie according to this reviewer is that it is short: .and with its splendid use of computer-generated motion-capture animation and 3-D effects, the movie is also visually magnificent -- modestly so. Plus, it's half the length of "Avatar." http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/Movies/03/11/review.mars.needs.moms/index.ht ml?hpt=Sbin So it isn't only me. We want our media-streams to say it, make it short and to the point, and on to the next thing. Apparently Avatar could be improved by breaking it into two segments, charging for tickets twice, each half the length? I have seen this phenomenon in so many places, including magazines. I have 26 year old bike magazines reviewing my bike when it was new. I was astounded at how long it went on and on, for several pages. Today, even brainy magazines such as Scientific American and Astronomy have short crackly articles. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Sun Mar 13 03:21:15 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 20:21:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Cryo-Paleo Solution Message-ID: There's a huge amount I'd like to say about the topic of the paleo diet ("the cave man diet"), but I managed to limit myself to an overview/introduction here: http://www.alcor.org/magazine/2011/03/07/the-cryo-paleo-solution/ Arriving at the paleo diet (or neo-paleo, since I don't think paleo purism makes much sense) was a major revision in my views about optimally healthy nutrition. If you want to live longer in good health and are not really familiar with this line of thinking, I hope you'll take a look at my article and follow up with the resources listed. After submitting the article, I came across a web page that I would have added to the resources. It summarizes the paleo perspective nicely and if you click on the plus signs you'll find links to more information: http://www.modernpaleo.com/principles.html --- 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: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 13 03:38:44 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 19:38:44 -0800 Subject: [ExI] economy limku Message-ID: <004101cbe130$27f8aec0$77ea0c40$@att.net> .On Behalf Of spike Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans . Now we are so hit-and-run. Then we had a longer attention span. In keeping with the shortened attention span, I realized that many of us may not have the patience to read all the way to the end of a limerick. As the movie which made extra points for being half the length of Avatar, a typical haiku compared to a limerick, has just over half the number of lines, and about half the syllables in each line. Haiku ordinarily doesn't rhyme, whereas limericks are rhyme intensive. I propose an artform which would combine the shortness of haiku with the clever rhyming scheme of the limerick, while trying to inject actual memes. We could call it Haimrick, but that term sounds like a Chinese guy doing a maneuver, and besides, the term limku is shorter. Here's an economy limku for you: Hayek is the way, Keynes makes pay stay away, Oy vey, they may say. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Sun Mar 13 03:52:19 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 20:52:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> Message-ID: Spike: You post seemed really interesting, but I quite reading after the second paragraph. Please keep it shorter next time. :-D --- Max 2011/3/12 spike > > > > > A few days ago, someone posted archives from about ten years ago. I read > through a few of them to remind myself what we were talking about in those > days. Did anyone else here do that? That was interesting, but I noticed > something that jumped out at me. Comparing the ExI-list to ten years ago, > it is remarkable how long the typical posts were. Now we are so > hit-and-run. Then we had a longer attention span. > > > > I was reminded of this when I read an offhanded comment in a movie review, > an animated feature called ?Mars Needs Moms.? A positive feature of the > movie according to this reviewer is that it is short: > > > > > > ?and with its splendid use of computer-generated motion-capture animation > and 3-D effects, the movie is also visually magnificent -- modestly so. > Plus, it's half the length of "Avatar." > > > > > > > http://www.cnn.com/2011/SHOWBIZ/Movies/03/11/review.mars.needs.moms/index.html?hpt=Sbin > > > > > > So it isn?t only me. We want our media-streams to say it, make it short > and to the point, and on to the next thing. Apparently Avatar could be > improved by breaking it into two segments, charging for tickets twice, each > half the length? > > > > I have seen this phenomenon in so many places, including magazines. I have > 26 year old bike magazines reviewing my bike when it was new. I was > astounded at how long it went on and on, for several pages. Today, even > brainy magazines such as Scientific American and Astronomy have short > crackly articles. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 13 04:26:36 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 20:26:36 -0800 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More Subject: Re: [ExI] shortening attention spans Spike: You post seemed really interesting, but I quite reading after the second paragraph. Please keep it shorter next time. :-D --- Max OK. {8-] Anything to keep my mind off of you-know-what. Note to future archive readers: you-know-what is the Japanese nuclear disaster. Damn. {8-[ spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 03:53:17 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:53:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Cryo-Paleo Solution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/12 Max More > There's a huge amount I'd like to say about the topic of the paleo diet > ("the cave man diet"), but I managed to limit myself to an > overview/introduction here: > > http://www.alcor.org/magazine/2011/03/07/the-cryo-paleo-solution/ > > Arriving at the paleo diet (or neo-paleo, since I don't think paleo purism > makes much sense) was a major revision in my views about optimally healthy > nutrition. If you want to live longer in good health and are not really > familiar with this line of thinking, I hope you'll take a look at my article > and follow up with the resources listed. > > After submitting the article, I came across a web page that I would have > added to the resources. It summarizes the paleo perspective nicely and if > you click on the plus signs you'll find links to more information: > http://www.modernpaleo.com/principles.html > > --- Max > > As of about 2 months ago I started following the paleo diet. Awesome stuff! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Sun Mar 13 05:21:07 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:21:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> Message-ID: In fact, your extremely lengthy and challenging post was so trying to my little brain that I allowed two typos to slip through in one line in my reply. Please keep all responses to Twitter-length. Thank u. --- Max 2011/3/12 spike > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *Max More > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] shortening attention spans > > > > Spike: You post seemed really interesting, but I quite reading after the > second paragraph. Please keep it shorter next time. > > > > :-D > > > > --- Max > > > > OK. {8-] > > > > Anything to keep my mind off of you-know-what. > > > > Note to future archive readers: you-know-what is the Japanese nuclear > disaster. > > > > Damn. {8-[ > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > 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: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 13 05:30:37 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:30:37 -0800 Subject: [ExI] legacies Message-ID: <008301cbe13f$d55dbab0$80193010$@att.net> Robert Bradbury's recent passing has me really pondering since that one hit close to home: he was not much older than I am, yet he perished of an age-related condition. I started thinking about what he left us, his ideas. Some of that is written in my green notebooks, notes I jotted down whenever he visited. Most of his legacy is probably in his files somewhere, some of it is in the form of his posts to ExI-chat. Tragically, he is perhaps best remembered by some unguarded public comments he made shortly after the 9-11-01 attacks. But that wasn't him, and that isn't his real legacy. None of us want to be forever remembered by something we did or said while we were half crazy with grief at the funeral of our most cherished dreams. It caused me to think about what I would leave behind should I suddenly have a stroke or something. Most of my interesting ideas I have loaded into the internet over the years, much of that to Extropians, a little to Mensa, a little to various math groups and other stuff like that. But I now have a lot of regrets in that if I perished suddenly, I will be known primarily by the stuff I wrote in extropians. Oh dear. I have a few cool ideas in there, but much of it is far more freeform than I would like, just silly brain barfs and goofiness. It was fun at the time, but it occurs to me that if I don't write a book, then I would be forever known as the guy who wrote those ExI-posts. I have mixed feelings about that. I could go the denial route, different spike66, never heard of him. Or I could focus on just outliving everyone I care about. Otherwise I need to write a book, just so that will be my legacy instead of this. Oy. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 13 05:54:45 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:54:45 -0800 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Max More Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2011 9:21 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] shortening attention spans In fact, your extremely lengthy and challenging post was so trying to my little brain that I allowed two typos to slip through in one line in my reply. Please keep all responses to Twitter-length. Thank u. --- Max 2011/3/12 spike When twitter started, I FLATLY REFUSED to go there, and facebook too. Reasoning: in order to have even a slim chance of formulating reasonably good ideas, one must control one's information inputs. I don't want to be flooded with vacuous HOW R U's from old friends from high school mindlessly HOW R Uing me all day and night, until I fear for my sanity should I be senselessly HOW R Ued even once more. So I never signed up, and don't even text on my phone. It's too easy to drown in mindless chatter, all 140 character or less. The only advantage to that form of communication* is that it has NO PERMANENCE for one to regret should one perish. Those 140s are here and gone, evanescent, an ethereal wisp, none worthy of the term "idea." *Sayings* can fit on bumper stickers and twitter, ideas cannot. I understand why Eugen used to get after us back when he was moderating, with his notion of No one-line replies. I didn't get that then, but I do now. He didn't want Extropians to become twitterized. spike *tweet, they call it. TWEET! I flatly refuse, I will not tweet. Picture naming that, the meeting where actual humans decided on that term. What, if anything, were they thinking? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 06:14:59 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:14:59 -0800 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> Message-ID: tl;dr: Too long, I didn't read it. From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Mar 13 05:38:17 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:38:17 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <20110312195457.GY23560@leitl.org> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> <20110312195457.GY23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <075DB234-3712-4F6F-8FAB-4A5C47682B56@mac.com> On Mar 12, 2011, at 11:54 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:52:02AM -0800, spike wrote: > >> Events like Japan's earthquake remind us that nuclear power is an answer but >> may not be the universal answer. > > It is not an answer economically, ecologically, or sustainably, > or even in the ability to deliver (500 GW/year substitution rate > every year, for the next 40 years, or twice that for 20 years). I see no reason for such pessimism on all types of nuclear power, especially molten salt thorium designs. I don't propose to run them for 40 years though. Only run them until we have something better. Run them to get the world off of oil and coal without huge spikes in cost. Or do you propose to simply wring our hands and give it up as hopeless? - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Mar 13 05:45:21 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:45:21 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:44 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> The point is to kick loose money that people had been hoarding. They >> might not have invested it otherwise, but they will invest in rebuilding. > > Japan will get an "investment" in the form of loans and charitable > donations from around the world. This will help lessen the impact of > the earthquake economically. It will jump start the construction > industry in Japan, but at the expense of other industries. Japan is the most indebted successful economy on the planet. They have been running national debt over 200% of GDP for some time. Fortunately they have a tremendously strong balance of trade. The recovery will be painful. Calling savings "hoarding" is counter-productive and borders on evil. We in the US would be much better off if we had done a great deal more of this "hoarding". > > Japan's real long term economic difficulty is partially in the > demographic of it's aging populace. They aren't having children, and > they aren't allowing many people to immigrate. This leads to more and > more young people taking care of more and more old people. The old > people aren't as productive as the young, and the overall economy > suffers terribly. This is not their primary problem. They over-stimulate in the 80s including a huge housing/land bubble then suffered a crash from it in the early 90s. They have not to date fully recovered. They are strong enough in some aspects to not get sucked under by their huge debt and the amount of centralized meddling in the economic ecology that they "enjoy". But the cost of losing a lot of productive capacity and the costly infrastructure that supported it is going to be a blow. It is too early to have a reasonable guess as to how much of a blow. > > If the earthquake leads to more births, then it will help. :-) Children are not a great deal cheaper to support than the elderly much of the time. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Mar 13 05:32:31 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:32:31 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> Message-ID: <280BCE2C-72A5-4A26-8019-C198AB634311@mac.com> On Mar 12, 2011, at 10:52 AM, spike wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes > ... > >> ...Concentration of wealth, by itself, is not a problem so long as the > wealth is then invested. It is the concentration without investment that is > the problem. A billion dollar business empire that has most of its assets > in play is far different from a billion dollar business empire that's > sitting on most of its wealth. > > > Ja. I trace most of that sitting on wealth behavior back to these comments: > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4 > > and > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y-aLcbr63ME > > What is "skyrocket?" Double? Triple? If so, the consumer class will have > far less money as businesses must cut salaries to pay higher power bills. > Most of the consumers' remaining money will be spent on food. If so, many > investments make no sense. In the US, the investing class is sitting on its > money, waiting to see what those energy costs are going to be. What is this "investing class"? The largest part of the money in the US stock market is from 401K plans and the equivalent. That means that a lot of people are included in this class (for better or worse). It is not energy costs that are worrying the rational investor. It is the seriously damaged economy and the capricious and arguably extremely ill-adivsed actions of government in response. Sure you may temporarily make a tidy sum if the latest "stimulus" flows your way and you time it right. Or you could lose everything very very quickly when the next shoe drops. Long range value investment? What does even mean if you believe, as many rational investors do, that spiraling interest rates and major inflation are a certainty some time in the next few years? Buying tangibles that are likely to retain or go up in value makes sense. Buying known non-perishable consumers at todays prices makes sense. Buying hedges such as gold and silver makes sense. But not a lot else. > Without some > means of modeling that cost, most investment options become too risky. > Result: note the price of gold and silver in the recent past. It becomes > difficult to derive a cost matrix for energy futures when the coal industry > is under political threat. Partially although there is no conceivable way you are going to turn out the lights by making it nearly impossible politically to derive electricity at affordable rates from coal. At least not until a just as cheap alternative is widely deployed. > Nuclear and solar together are the way, but we > will still need coal power for a long time to come. Yep. For about a decade if we clear the tracks of all but necessary delays on the right types (thorium primarily) of nuclear power. > > Events like Japan's earthquake remind us that nuclear power is an answer but > may not be the universal answer. > In a molten salt thorium plant such an event would not have been much of an issue. See http://energyfromthorium.com/2006/10/27/molten-salt-reactors-safety-options-galore-paper/ - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sun Mar 13 05:52:54 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 21:52:54 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: >> >> And I guess we see it all the time. Online games and social networks >> create new currencies all the time. There are lots of historical >> examples. But, it never seems to take off as a mainstream concept. And >> meanwhile, I think we often have opportunities for creative and >> productive endeavour stifled simply due to there not being enough >> currency around to make them go, largely because the community that >> understands the opportunity doesn't have the cash, and the people with >> the cash don't understand the opportunity. > Actually they are very careful to say their monies are in world game tokens and not currency. The reason is because the financial restrictions are so onerous that it would be nearly impossible to run a game if you said otherwise. If your in-game tokens are currency then the exchange thereof makes you effectively a financial institution with all the hassle and limitations that implies. > The Second Life money (Linden Dollars) is an interesting case study. I did at one time spend some energy thinking about a new in game currency where each unit is rigorously pegged to say 0.001 g of gold. The gold would be held by something equivalent to e-gold or GoldMoney and convertible to from various RL currencies with the customary gold buy/sell margins. It has the advantage and disadvantage of drawing a lot of money into the game[s] that use it as a hedge against RL currency problems and as a play on gold. - samantha From atymes at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 06:36:31 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2011 22:36:31 -0800 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 9:45 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > Calling savings "hoarding" is counter-productive and borders on evil. ?We in the US would be much better off if we had done a great deal more of this "hoarding". Sure, when it's invested in something - even a savings account, where the bank loans it out and gives you a cut of the expected return. >From what I hear, most of the savings aren't even invested that much. They're just sitting around doing nothing, like the dollars are on strike or something. From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 08:06:53 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 01:06:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: <005701cbe011$b3766de0$1a6349a0$@att.net> <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Message-ID: On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:44 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > Japan is the most indebted successful economy on the planet. ?They have been running >national debt over 200% of GDP for some time. ?Fortunately they have a tremendously strong >balance of trade. ? The recovery will be painful. Thankfully, Tokyo was not severely damaged. While the damage is significant, it could have been much worse had the capital been severely damaged. Japan's society is nearly uniquely suited to recovering from things of this sort. In 1923, Japan suffered an even greater set back in the earthquake and subsequent fires that killed around 140,000 people, and destroyed their capital city (also the economic center of the nation). On September 18, 1931, around eight years later, Japan had recovered sufficiently to successfully invade Manchuria. > Calling savings "hoarding" is counter-productive and borders on evil. ?We in the US would be >much better off if we had done a great deal more of this "hoarding". Agreed. Just to be clear, it wasn't I who said that. We need a lot more savings in the US for a healthy economy IMHO. Without savings, all we can do to keep the capital system running is print money. Not a good plan. >> Japan's real long term economic difficulty is partially in the >> demographic of it's aging populace. They aren't having children, and >> they aren't allowing many people to immigrate. This leads to more and >> more young people taking care of more and more old people. The old >> people aren't as productive as the young, and the overall economy >> suffers terribly. > > This is not their primary problem. It is, however, a big problem. China has similar difficulties, but doesn't care for their elderly to the extent that the Japanese do. Looking at age demographics around the world is extremely interesting, and I believe there is a lot to learn from such things. The important thing for a healthy economy is to have a large number of people in the 20-60 age group, where the people are highly productive. A lot of countries are having problems with this. Europe, China and Japan due to the low reproductive rates. Many African countries due to AIDs. The United States has avoided this problem with immigration, even though the birth rate has dropped some. We still have a smaller issue with the baby boomers beginning to retire. The variation of age demographics between different countries is very interesting. South America has lots of young people, so things should be interesting there too. There was a very interesting article on all this in National Geographic a few years back. I've heard that the low birth rate in China has been helpful to their growth. I've also heard that the low birth rate in Japan is a big problem. It is a complex issue that I would like to understand better. I do believe it has a pretty big impact on societies. For one, Japan leads the world in robots to care for the elderly, since it's a problem they are highly focused on. > They over-stimulate in the 80s including a huge housing/land bubble then suffered a crash from it in the early 90s. ?They have not to date fully recovered. ?They are strong enough in some aspects to not get sucked under by their huge debt and the amount of centralized meddling in the economic ecology that they "enjoy". ?But the cost of losing a lot of productive capacity and the costly infrastructure that supported it is going to be a blow. ?It is too early to have a reasonable guess as to how much of a blow. > I suspect that they'll recover much faster than Sumatra. :-) >> If the earthquake leads to more births, then it will help. :-) > > Children are not a great deal cheaper to support than the elderly much of the time. But they do grow up to be productive citizens. Elderly people rarely become productive again, although transhumanism COULD change that eventually. -Kelly From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 08:30:47 2011 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 01:30:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Hm, I'm thinking here how easy it is for even a pretty normal human to not feel like 'one of >us'. ?I've even felt a touch of that myself, on occasion (and I bet there are quite a few people >nodding their heads as they read this). ?Sometimes it doesn't take much of a difference to >make you feel totally alienated from other people. ?I know that that's mostly just a subjective >thing, and finding your peer group helps a lot, but where's the peer group for the first AI? I think we're only going to get one chance at this. I think that's why it's so important that we select really good parents to raise these first AGIs. They might even find themselves watched, like in the Truman Show, to make sure they get it right. > I expect that the first efforts at full AI (What some people call 'AGI') will be dysfunctional or unbalanced, maybe full-blown psychotic. ?This is a separate issue from the 'friendliness problem' though. ?It's just about learning to make a stable mind. ?Once you've got that, *then* you have the - probably insoluble - problem of guaranteeing it's 'friendliness'. > If we screw up on the first generation of AGI, then humanity is toast, IMHO. -Kelly From eugen at leitl.org Sun Mar 13 09:34:35 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 10:34:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <075DB234-3712-4F6F-8FAB-4A5C47682B56@mac.com> References: <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> <20110312195457.GY23560@leitl.org> <075DB234-3712-4F6F-8FAB-4A5C47682B56@mac.com> Message-ID: <20110313093435.GB23560@leitl.org> On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 09:38:17PM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > It is not an answer economically, ecologically, or sustainably, > > or even in the ability to deliver (500 GW/year substitution rate > > every year, for the next 40 years, or twice that for 20 years). > > I see no reason for such pessimism on all types of nuclear power, All types but breeders. Breeders have failed. Fuel reprocessing has mostly failed, too. > especially molten salt thorium designs. We need to build 100 new reactors per year, for the following 40 years. Starting this year (check how many have been built). Can I order one MSR from Areva? No? Can I order one in 20 years? That's too late. > I don't propose to run them for 40 years though. In order for reactors to ROI and EROEI at marginally economically competitive prices you need to run them for half a century at least. So when you build 100 new reactors, annually, for 40 years (yes, that's 4000 reactors, each 5 GW) you need to operate them for 50, 60 and more years. Unfortunately, building nonbreeders at that rate will make you run into peak uranium by 2040. So you'll run out of fuel before you'll decomission them. > Only run them until we have something better. We already have something better. > Run them to get the world off of oil and coal without huge spikes in cost. > Or do you propose to simply wring our hands and give it up as hopeless? You know full well what I propose. In fact, I'm increasingly feeling like a broken record, playing in a home for the deaf. I should stop. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 Sun Mar 13 09:42:14 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 09:42:14 +0000 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> Message-ID: 2011/3/13 spike tweeted: > So I never signed up, and don?t even text on my phone.? It?s too easy to > drown in mindless chatter, all 140 character or less.? The only advantage to > that form of communication* is that it has NO PERMANENCE for one to regret > should one perish.? Those 140s are here and gone, evanescent, an ethereal > wisp, none worthy of the term ?idea.?? *Sayings* can fit on bumper stickers > and twitter, ideas cannot. > > Really? What makes you think tweets have NO PERMANENCE? If you type something into the web it is recorded forever. See: Quote: Every single public tweet, dating back to the very first missive posted on March 21, 2006, will now be housed in the government's Library of Congress. Plus, Google is making the Twitter archive searchable. ------------ Facebook have their own archives. To date they have not yet agreed to make them generally available. (You have to ask a judge first). BillK From anders at aleph.se Sun Mar 13 10:12:38 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 11:12:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7C9896.5030507@aleph.se> Quick summary: it is not our attention spans that are getting shorter, it is the opportunity costs of wasting time on boring stuff that are getting larger. I wonder if we really have shorter attention spans. It certainly *feels* that way, but a few years in Oxford and too much cognitive bias literature has made me distrust my own judgment. Case in point: novels have become extremely thick over the past two generations. Sitting here in my mother's apartment watching the bookshelves, I note that most of the novels from the early 7/10th of the 20th century, both fine literature and detective stories, are pretty thin books (with a few exceptions). In the 80s they started to swell. These days most novels are thick, and I think it is indeed word thickness. Now that would suggest that attention spans are not flagging (and that word processors allow authors to write more). Looking around the net I see that writers claim there is a trend towards shorter novels again because of economic reasons of bookstore shelf space, but ebooks could certainly change that. Doing some statistics suggests that it is not the average length that is going up, but the minimum length. Similarly, movies have for technical reasons become able to be epic in length, and I assume there are economic reasons too (how much would you pay for a ticket to a 50 minute movie?). Yet the clipping has become far faster - seeing young people encounter Kubrick's 2001 for the first time is instructive. They better not try Tarkovsky's Solaris. So my theory is that we can pay attention for a long time - but we want a lot to happen per unit of time too. We want faster rewards, more action. Why? Perhaps because there is so much stuff out there, so the alternative cost of spending a lot of time on something that does not turn out to be worthwhile is higher. In the time you have spent reading this post (and I writing it) we could have read several RSS entries and short blog posts, watched a YouTube clip, browsed Wikipedia or run a calculation in our favorite math program. If this is true, then we should expect the trend to continue: it is rational to demand quick and reliable evidence that whatever we have in front of us is relevant or interesting. Spending a lot of time finding out if it actually is by just consuming it would mean we would often waste precious time and attention on things that are not as good. There is of course a tradeoff here, since some important things do not look inviting (since they were made before the current attention economy) and some unimportant things masquerade as important. Smart agents balance the exploration with exploitation. This is why reliable filtering and reviewing actually are key transhuman technologies. And why training to recognize the real cost and value of what you are doing is such a key transhuman virtue. -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun Mar 13 13:29:11 2011 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 09:29:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <005e01cbe136$d79c9d40$86d5d7c0$@att.net> <008801cbe143$28b1caf0$7a1560d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <34be4d78577c8cc9c1617ce8c6d99ae8.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> > *tweet, they call it. TWEET! I flatly refuse, I will not tweet. Picture > naming that, the meeting where actual humans decided on that term. What, if > anything, were they thinking? > They were thinking "bird brain", in the older pejorative sense? Regards, MB From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 15:00:30 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 08:00:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This year so far Message-ID: I don't think it is just me, but this year seems to have spiked in terms of things happening. Or maybe it's just been the class of things I pay attention too. Started off with Wikileaks/Assange, the really amazing Anon/HBGary business, the revolutions still going on and the Japanese 9.0 quake. Almost lost in the noise is the continued decline of a cult I should not mention. Keith From rpwl at lightlink.com Sun Mar 13 15:17:36 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 11:17:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <20110313093435.GB23560@leitl.org> References: <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> <20110312195457.GY23560@leitl.org> <075DB234-3712-4F6F-8FAB-4A5C47682B56@mac.com> <20110313093435.GB23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D7CE010.9060701@lightlink.com> This appears to be a very comprehensive and cogent analysis of the present situation, with links: http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/ The overall message seems to be that (a) multiple backup systems did fail, but that (b) the in-depth planning was sufficiently deep that even with all of those backups failing, there were still enough lines of defence that the system is under control. Give or take a few explosions. Richard Loosemore From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 15:15:01 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 08:15:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Energy options Message-ID: Re the business of powering the world with nuclear reactors, there may be better and less expensive ideas. It's easy to make an engineering/economic case for low cost space based solar power *if* you have a way to get the cost into space down to around $100/kg (to GEO). That takes raising the exhaust velocity to~ 9 km/sec and the only way we know to do that is beamed energy. It's not going to happen soon, but even Fox news has covered beamed energy proposals recently. First pass estimate ~$100 B to build the spacecraft and lasers to power them. After the day-night problem (except for SBSP) the big problem with solar is that it is dilute and often obscured by clouds. So you need to spread out huge areas to capture it. StratoSolar is a proposal to take weightless (floated by hydrogen) collectors up above the clouds and most of the atmosphere. I have been working on it for over a year. It's a very difficult and wide ranging engineering problem, but there are some rather interesting concepts. For example, a 150 year old technology allows the plants to run full time for an incremental cost of around 1/8 of a cent per kWh. To build a full scale unit (1 GW) would take on the order of 1 percent of the estimate to build the transport infrastructure to do SBSP. But even after a year and a dozen spread sheets I am not sure makes sense to build one. Keith From spike66 at att.net Sun Mar 13 15:14:36 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 08:14:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: References: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <006401cbe191$5d82ecc0$1888c640$@att.net> ... On Behalf Of Kelly Anderson ... >...I think we're only going to get one chance at this. I think that's why it's so important that we select really good parents to raise these first AGIs... Indeed? We select? Agreed it is *important* we select, but we do not and cannot select. Whoever is successful in figuring out how to create AGI selects themselves. >... They might even find themselves watched, like in the Truman Show, to make sure they get it right. Indeed? Watched by who? How would the watchers know what to watch for? > ...If we screw up on the first generation of AGI, then humanity is toast, IMHO. -Kelly Indeed. spike From rpwl at lightlink.com Sun Mar 13 15:42:24 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 11:42:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: <006401cbe191$5d82ecc0$1888c640$@att.net> References: <38863.80896.qm@web114406.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <006401cbe191$5d82ecc0$1888c640$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7CE5E0.9010004@lightlink.com> spike wrote: > Kelly Anderson wrote: >> ...I think we're only going to get one chance at this. I think that's why > it's so important that we select really good parents to raise these first > AGIs... > > Indeed? We select? Agreed it is *important* we select, but we do not and > cannot select. Whoever is successful in figuring out how to create AGI > selects themselves. First of all, the "parenting" of the first AGI will not be a Mom and Pop operation (so to speak) because the process of development will involve multiple trials during which the dynamics will be meticulously observed. My own current plan involves running very large numbers of (contained) child development experiments to see how the dynamics of the systems motivation mechanism actually works in practice. During these experiments there will be automatic systems looking for "errant" patterns of thought - if the system starts to dwell on ideas that involve negativity (of various kinds) we will want to know about it, and be able to do a trace to find out how it got into that state. Only after sorting through different types of motivation mechaism (or, more likely, different balances of parameters within the main MM) will some AGIs be allowed to go through longer periods of development, toward full maturity. And even then the thoughts inside will be monitored continually, with automatic alarms set to go off if the system begins to think about the idea of breaking free of its motivation mechanism and experimenting with violent motivations. Finally, I anticipate that this process will take place under the scrutiny of a large organization dedicated to safety. No "lone inventor" is going to have the resources to do this, so when you talk about the selection of parents being somehow out of your control, I think you are imagining a situation that is unlikely to occur. At least, that is the goal of organizations like IEET and FHI: to ensure that the process is transparent. (It was supposed to be the goal of Lifeboat Foundation as well, but that, as they say, is another story). Richard Loosemore From gsantostasi at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 15:44:57 2011 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 10:44:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Energy options In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hydrogen balloons would be cheaper but are they not dangerous? I thought we always use helium (that I know is expensive and increasingly rarer). Giovanni On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > Re the business of powering the world with nuclear reactors, there may > be better and less expensive ideas. > > It's easy to make an engineering/economic case for low cost space > based solar power *if* you have a way to get the cost into space down > to around $100/kg (to GEO). > > That takes raising the exhaust velocity to~ 9 km/sec and the only way > we know to do that is beamed energy. ?It's not going to happen soon, > but even Fox news has covered beamed energy proposals recently. > > First pass estimate ~$100 B to build the spacecraft and lasers to power them. > > After the day-night problem (except for SBSP) the big problem with > solar is that it is dilute and often obscured by clouds. ?So you need > to spread out huge areas to capture it. > > StratoSolar is a proposal to take weightless (floated by hydrogen) > collectors up above the clouds and most of the atmosphere. ?I have > been working on it for over a year. ?It's a very difficult and wide > ranging engineering problem, but there are some rather interesting > concepts. ?For example, a 150 year old technology allows the plants to > run full time for an incremental cost of around 1/8 of a cent per kWh. > > To build a full scale unit (1 GW) would take on the order of 1 percent > of the estimate to build the transport infrastructure to do SBSP. > > But even after a year and a dozen spread sheets I am not sure makes > sense to build one. > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From kanzure at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 17:23:19 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:23:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [sl4] META: closing the list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Gwern Branwen Date: Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 12:00 PM Subject: [sl4] META: closing the list To: sl4 The recent emails reminded me of the existence of SL4; I think it may be time to discuss shutting down the list. I'm not the only one thinking this, it seems: > BTW, as far as I know the interesting parts of this list have mostly moved to lesswrong. or > I'm not sure if this list even exists anymore, but just in case it does... In 2010, there were a grand total of 144 emails on SL4, or less than 1 email every 2 days. Looking through http://sl4.org/archive/ , most of those emails seem to be joins, link posting, or announcements. The SL4 home page claims that 'The SL4 list currently has around 200 members. Usual volume is five to ten messages per day, with occasional intervals of pleasant silence, and flurries of high activity.' but I suspect both sentences are drastic over-estimations now. The last really interesting thing I can remember reading on SL4 is Clark's review of a biography of Everett (http://sl4.org/archive/1008/21012.html); conversations over the last 3 years - since Overcoming Bias started up, in fact - have tended to be on a very low level. Perhaps I am simply growing up intellectually (I joined SL4 in ~2004 as 'maru') but I think it is simply that people are no longer using SL4 and have begun using LessWrong instead. LessWrong is very active. SL4 gets 144 emails a year - LessWrong gets more like 144 comments a *day* (http://lesswrong.com/comments and http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/comments). SL4 gets an email every few days - LessWrong gets an article every day (http://lesswrong.com/recentposts). Eliezer's fanfiction ( http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5782108/1/Harry_Potter_and_the_Methods_of_Rationality ) has 11,729 reviews, and has motivated many people to start reading LessWrong and even come to meetups (I met 2 or 3 people who had been lured in when I visited a SF Bay meetup). There are a lot of visitors to LessWrong and they stay for a very long time reading material (http://www.sitemeter.com/?a=stats&s=s18lesswrong http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/lesswrong.com#), while SL4 traffic is so low that it cannot be measured (http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/http%3A%2F%2Fsl4.org#) (Similar stats are true of Overcoming Bias, which is now just Robin Hanson.) It's interesting to note that the SL4 homepage links to 5 or 6 other mailing lists - and almost every link is dead. There might be an argument that email as a medium has unique advantages, but as time passes, this is less true; and for those advantages to be worthwhile, the medium needs to actually be used. Demonstrably, email is no longer a major medium for transhumanist discussion. Forums can die with dignity, at a specific date, with the last one out turning off the lights; or they can die bit by bit, messily, like someone dying of Alzheimer's or senile dementia - dead long before they died. The worth of a forum is not measured by how long it can drag out its existence (a decade is not bad), but by what is done or written because of it. Many classic LW/OB posts were inspired by comments or emails here; that's a fine legacy. There's no shame in shutting down the list. Let's provide a tarball of emails for archival purposes (the Internet Archive has up to February 2009: http://replay.waybackmachine.org/20090319140021/http://sl4.org/archive/), and turn off the listserv. -- gwern http://www.gwern.net -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From painlord2k at libero.it Sun Mar 13 19:04:53 2011 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 20:04:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bottom-up currencies In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7D1555.4060601@libero.it> Il 13/03/2011 6.52, Samantha Atkins ha scritto: > On Mar 12, 2011, at 12:47 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > I did at one time spend some energy thinking about a new in game > currency where each unit is rigorously pegged to say 0.001 g of gold. > The gold would be held by something equivalent to e-gold or GoldMoney > and convertible to from various RL currencies with the customary gold > buy/sell margins. It has the advantage and disadvantage of drawing a > lot of money into the game[s] that use it as a hedge against RL > currency problems and as a play on gold. A "virtual" cellphone carrier metering its calls in gold? Get a credit of one or ten grams of gold and use it for calling or for paying your bills or transfer the credit to another subscriber account. What could go wrong, apart it be made unlawful immediately? -- Leggimi su Extropolitica Blog Leggimi su Estropico Blog *Mirco Romanato* ----- Nessun virus nel messaggio. Controllato da AVG - www.avg.com Versione: 10.0.1204 / Database dei virus: 1498/3504 - Data di rilascio: 13/03/2011 From max at maxmore.com Sun Mar 13 19:25:23 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:25:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <20110313093435.GB23560@leitl.org> References: <20110312072950.GC14834@ofb.net> <14e2cc03522669dff0a6e50b3a3c3046.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> <009b01cbe0e6$933adf40$b9b09dc0$@att.net> <20110312195457.GY23560@leitl.org> <075DB234-3712-4F6F-8FAB-4A5C47682B56@mac.com> <20110313093435.GB23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 2:34 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote: > > > Only run them until we have something better. > > We already have something better. > Eugene: I don't share your pessimism regarding nuclear as a (major but partial) solution to future energy needs, although I do have great respect for your study of the area. However, while I recall you frequently critiquing nuclear as a solution, I don't recall ever seeing your view on the "something better". I may well have missed it. Please elaborate or else point me to what you might have posted on your preferred solution. > > > Run them to get the world off of oil and coal without huge spikes in > cost. > > Or do you propose to simply wring our hands and give it up as hopeless? > > You know full well what I propose. ** Based on my own experience, I suspect that Samantha does NOT in fact know what you propose. --- 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: From max at maxmore.com Sun Mar 13 20:02:56 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 13:02:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? Message-ID: I'm not certain my brain is working as sharply as it was 20 years ago. At the same time, I have to deal with decisions that are more weighty in their ramifications than they were 20 years ago. Of course I'm doing my best to optimize my nutrition and exercise, which should be good for my neurological function. However, I'd like to draw on the probably extensive knowledge of everyone on this email list to get suggestions on currently-available cognition-enhancing drugs (that lack significant undesirable side-effects, i.e. nootropics). My knowledge of these is a bit dated, so I'm interested in suggestions based on recent as well as older research. For the record, I've tried several purported cognitive enhancers in the past. These include: vasopressin nasal spray, reputed to improve memory (though I didn't --15 to 20 years ago -- notice any substantial difference); hydergine (don't recall noticing a significant difference); provigil (definitely reduced need for sleep, but unsure whether it improved cogition); caffeine (no detectable difference, probably due to habituation); piracetam (definite improvement, but only at very high doses). I'd appreciate any pointers to reasonably current research on cognitive enhancers, and even personal experiences, and pointers to evidence-based web resources. --- 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: From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sun Mar 13 19:51:29 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:51:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <954458.48807.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Kelly Anderson declared: > If we screw up on the first generation of AGI, then > humanity is toast, IMHO. If we screw up, and if we don't screw up, Humanity, as it is now (circa 2011), will be toast. Humanity as it is now is a path on top of a hill that is getting narrower and narrower, with the fall-off on each side getting steeper and steeper. How long we can keep walking along the path without falling off is unknown, and which side we will fall down is also unknown. The only thing that is certain, is that the path will get so narrow that nobody can stay on it, and it will end sooner or later. Some of us (transhumanists) are rooting for one side, some (luddites, bioconservatives) for the other. Most people just shut their eyes and keep walking, in the hope that the path will continue forever. It won't. Status Quo is not an option. (Led Zeppelin, however, ...) Ben Zaiboc From bbenzai at yahoo.com Sun Mar 13 19:57:47 2011 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben Zaiboc) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 12:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <859204.34124.qm@web114403.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Anders Sandberg observed: > Quick summary: it is not our attention spans that are > getting shorter, > it is the opportunity costs of wasting time on boring stuff > that are > getting larger. ... etc. Very good point, Anders. And very encouraging, imo. It suggests there's at least some hope that us poor humans may be able to keep up with the accelerating pace of change, and be able to keep adopting adaptive strategies to Time to watch the latest news on Japan! Oh look, a squirrel! kthksbai. Ben Zaiboc From natasha at natasha.cc Sun Mar 13 20:12:47 2011 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 15:12:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] SXSW - The SINGULARITY: Humanity's Huge Techno Challenge" Message-ID: <31A0EC74EC644C70972C7F61FFCDE11A@DFC68LF1> Featured Interactive Panel: Monday @ 11:00 AM CST. http://schedule.sxsw.com/events/event_IAP5705 Will supercomputing intelligences outsmart human-level intelligence? Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines" is the world's most known advocacy of a technology breakthrough that will change the face of humanity and the entire world. Kurzweil claims that the accelerating, exponential growth of technology will result in such a Singularity. But not all technological luminaries agree with Kurzweil. In fact, some suggest nanotechnology as superseding artificial intelligence. Others argue for humanity's future as being located in biosynthetics and virtuality. Outside the technological sphere, a new culture of DIY citizen scientists could either speed up or halt the Singularity. With a finger on the pulse, ethicists and policy-makers are arguing for a new strategy for assessing our possible futures. This panel dissects the very core of the Singularity, if and when it will occur, and what we can expect to happen. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 21:25:02 2011 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 16:25:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Max, In the most serious manner possible, I recommend taking a dose of serotonin-pathway-affecting psychedelics. The most commonly known of these are LSD and psilocybin-containing mushrooms. The experiences I have had with these substances are the most profound form of cognitive enhancement I have ever encountered, and the positive aftereffect/takeaway is long-lasting and integrable into normal life. When you think under the influence of these psychedelics, the way you proceed through concepts is not the same as sober life. It is no longer linear; instead of taking one route from a concept to an endpoint you view the proverbial vector bundle of all possible thought routes out of this concept. In this way, instead of beating around the bush to conceive an idea, one has the choice to *engage totally* with any idea. The platonic nature of the concept is revealed by an exhaustive (and incomprehensibly fast) understanding of its causes and effects. Also unique is the ability to blur the lines of the ego, so we may see our place in a very large, complicated universe. It gives you more appreciation for both nature and the incredible specimen that the human brain is. It is sad that many people who do not understand the effects of the aforementioned substances take them and give them a 'bad rap.' For intelligent enough people, the only effect these drugs can have is a wider, more comprehensive perspective on reality. If one never partakes in these fruits of knowledge in his or her lifetime, that one will have lived an incomplete life. These chemicals are the essence of humanity and intelligence. Please, do consider. -Will -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Sun Mar 13 23:17:33 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 19:17:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/13 Will Steinberg : > In the most serious manner possible, I recommend taking a dose of > serotonin-pathway-affecting psychedelics. ?The most commonly known of these > are LSD and psilocybin-containing mushrooms. ?The experiences I have had > with these substances are the most profound form of cognitive enhancement I > have ever encountered, and the positive aftereffect/takeaway is long-lasting > and integrable into normal life. Perhaps equally important: Why are these substances illegal? Sure, they're "dangerous" but in a very different way than alcohol (for example). I ask who is threatened by mind-expanding substances - even discounting those currently classified as schedule I. Google caffeine+industrial+revolution. Could this stimulus really be responsible for a productivity enhancement that jumped humanity into a new (current) age? Might there be a similar jump if cognitive enhancement were similar applied? I see a considerable interest in keeping us not well-fed, but overfed to the point of lethargy and carelessness. We're so much easier to control on the edge of carb/sugar coma and tuned-in to the TV (modern opiate of the masses?) Sorry Spike, I have to admit I don't feel very confident even attempting to put more effort into expounding on these ideas - either the reader will already have had similar thoughts or there is likely a language/meme barrier that would precludes easily making the point. From js_exi at gnolls.org Sun Mar 13 23:58:29 2011 From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 16:58:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More information, technical and otherwise, about paleo diet and life Message-ID: <4D7D5A25.8050302@gnolls.org> [I apologize if this is seen twice, but I have major problems posting to this list. Over half the time my posts do not appear, and occasionally they appear only after a long delay. Recently a post which I had thought lost, and which I revised heavily before reposting, finally appeared in its original form *over two weeks after I sent it!*] Since Max has broached the subject again, I feel it's OK to note my detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining "paleo diet/exercise for beginners" guide: "Eat Like A Predator, Not Like Prey: Paleo In Six Easy Steps" http://www.gnolls.org/1141/eat-like-a-predator-not-like-prey-paleo-in-six-easy-steps-a-motivational-guide/ Followed by Part I and Part II of the "Paleo Starter Kit": http://www.gnolls.org/1517/the-paleo-starter-kit-part-i-a-functional-paleo-kitchen/ http://www.gnolls.org/1525/the-paleo-starter-kit-part-ii-the-paleo-scramble-a-basic-technique-for-real-world-cooking/ The end of the article contains a list of science-based nutrition resources that I've found instrumental, most notably the following: Dr. Stephan Guyenet: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com Chris Masterjohn: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/ Dr. Kurt Harris: http://www.paleonu.com Like Max, I subscribe to the Neo-Paleo/Paleo 2.0 view that prizes science and research over re-enactment -- most eloquently expounded by people like Dr. Harris, who notes that most of healthy eating is avoiding what he calls "the Neolithic agents of disease": -Wheat and all gluten grains -Omega-6 fats and trans fats from seed oils (misnamed 'vegetable oil') -Fructose To add to Max's list of books, I would also note: -The Drs. Jaminet's "Perfect Health Diet", a heavily science-based approach to healthy eating which is basically high-fat paleo plus rice, and falls into the "Paleo 2.0/Neo-Paleo" category. It's also much easier to sell to skeptical spouses as it's got a bunch of fruit and a yin-yang on the cover. Their website is good reading too: http://perfecthealthdiet.com -Dr. Mary Enig's "Know Your Fats", if you're still scared of saturated fat or want to know the biochemistry -Both books titled "The Great Cholesterol Con": Dr. Kendrick's is much more professional and easy to read, but less comprehensive. Anthony Colpo's is far more exhaustive, but tougher going and a bit amateurishly done. I will also note that I disagree with what Max appears to be saying about not eating starchy tubers: humans have many more copies of the AMY2 (amylase) gene in their saliva than mostly-fructivorous chimpanzees, which makes no sense except for consuming root starches, and the evidence for root starch consumption from the Middle Paleolithic on (and possibly earlier) is very well established. And while I agree that meat is a better source of nutrients than (say) sweet potatoes, my experience, and that of most active athletes, is that VLC/zero-carb is a weight-loss tool or for people whose metabolisms are broken. I can't keep weight on with VLC. However, even at the high end, my carbohydrate consumption is very low compared to before. (My opinion is that fructose is doing much more damage than glucose...otherwise you have a very hard time explaining the Kitavans and Okinawans.) Essentially I view Devany and Cordain as the "first wave" of paleo: they focus more on re-enactment than on the science, and Cordain in particular does some shaky data manipulation in order to 'prove' that all the differences between what he claims to be a Paleolithic diet and the modern diet are equally important. Example: 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 And his advice (which he has, to his credit, since recanted) to fry steaks in flaxseed oil is simply insane, as anyone with a lick of chemistry knowledge can tell you. (Hello, oxidation and glycation! You're frying your steak in furniture varnish!) http://gnolls.org/1154/flaxseed-oil-for-the-greatest-shine-you-ever-tasted/ Either diet is still far superior to the modern diet, and I give them (along with people like Dr. Wolfgang Lutz and Ray Audette) all credit for being pioneers. Dr. Cordain has done some great and instrumental work. However, I'm with Max as far as wanting to look forward, not backward. JS http://www.gnolls.org From atymes at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 00:01:09 2011 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:01:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > Perhaps equally important: ?Why are these substances illegal? ?Sure, > they're "dangerous" but in a very different way than alcohol (for > example). ? I ask who is threatened by mind-expanding substances - > even discounting those currently classified as schedule I. Those who become addicted, to the point where they are unable to think normally (and thus, hold a job or do other things commonly required to participate in society - and laws are, mainly, for those participating in society) because they're constantly in altered states. Now, if they want to pack up, withdraw from society, and go off elsewhere to be in this, fine. Note that they will be unable to obtain food (they'll be off on their own with no one to buy from - and unable to farm in that state of mind), for one, making this a suicidal choice. Thus the problem: addicts *don't* actually withdraw from society. They stick around but become unable to play by the rules. Thus, the law wishes to prevent that from happening in the first place. ...or such is the justification given. Personally, I think it may have a grain of truth but the degree is vastly overstated, metaphorically resulting in using sledgehammers to swat flies on china. From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 14 00:03:08 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:03:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:02 PM, Max More wrote: > I'm not certain my brain is working as sharply as it was 20 years ago. At the same time, I have to deal with decisions that are more weighty in their ramifications than they were 20 years ago. Of course I'm doing my best to optimize my nutrition and exercise, which should be good for my neurological function. However, I'd like to draw on the probably extensive knowledge of everyone on this email list to get suggestions on currently-available cognition-enhancing drugs (that lack significant undesirable side-effects, i.e. nootropics). My knowledge of these is a bit dated, so I'm interested in suggestions based on recent as well as older research. I am 56 and I am quite certain that my brain does not work as well in some respects as it did 20 years ago. There is not a doubt in my mind about that. I have also gained in some areas, mainly of self-knowledge and more clarity of what is more important to me and what is less so. But I am quite clear that my brain is hesitant in places it didn't used to be and that it is more difficult to do some types of cognitive tasks than it once was. I did go in and get a reasonably full work up by an anti-aging clinic a few years ago. Their work with me tuning up supplements, nutrients, and a some meds indicated by thorough blood work certainly made a large difference. But there are still areas that don't come as easily as they once did. The best cognitive enhancing drug for me to date, after tuning up HRT and in my case, my thyroid meds, was modafinil. It is pricey as hell in the states. But even paying full US prices and even if I took it every day (not always the best course) I am still talking less than the price of a cheap meal out. I tried most of the standard nootropics without a lot of experienced benefit. Deprenyl was of some help but not nearly as much so as modafinil. I was also on HGH for some time. Very very pricey and not great benefit in my case. Raising the dosage bit by bit still did not change the relevant blood work numbers very much. There was a certain "smooth" increase in feelings of well being and some benefits combined with exercise. But I didn't find them extensive enough to justify the high cost. > > For the record, I've tried several purported cognitive enhancers in the past. These include: vasopressin nasal spray, reputed to improve memory (though I didn't --15 to 20 years ago -- notice any substantial difference); hydergine (don't recall noticing a significant difference); provigil (definitely reduced need for sleep, but unsure whether it improved cogition); caffeine (no detectable difference, probably due to habituation); piracetam (definite improvement, but only at very high doses). > > I'd appreciate any pointers to reasonably current research on cognitive enhancers, and even personal experiences, and pointers to evidence-based web resources. Me too. Always interested in that next edge. I think the best things for me to tune next are diet, exercise, sleep patterns and several internal psychological adjustments. Oh, and leaving the computer and getting out the door more. :) - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 14 00:15:08 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:15:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Universally versus 'locally' Friendly AI In-Reply-To: <954458.48807.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> References: <954458.48807.qm@web114407.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Mar 13, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Ben Zaiboc wrote: > Kelly Anderson declared: > >> If we screw up on the first generation of AGI, then >> humanity is toast, IMHO. > > If we screw up, and if we don't screw up, Humanity, as it is now (circa 2011), will be toast. When I hear this argument re getting the first AGI right I am increasingly unimpressed. First, there is only a very limited amount of guaranteed not screwing up something so much on the edge of our abilities that is remotely possible for beings with our limitations. The notion that we can not only build an AGI but one that provably will always do the "best thing" (which we can't define well) regarding us no matter how it improves, grows, and expands upon its original state and goal set is simply incredible to me. We cannot even guarantee the behavior across all conditions of perfectly mundane, relatively simple computational systems. Second, it is not at all clear to me that there is any chance of continued human survival under accelerating change without inventing AGI within the next twenty to thirty years max. The reason for this opinion is the limits of human cognitive capacity and inter-working with one another and non-AGI computational systems. The capacity of this combined system, especially in terms of timely good decision making and implementation, is not at all boundless. At some point the requirements of what is needed will certainly go beyond our pre-AGI capacity. Many days, I am nearly convinced that our capacity is already grossly inadequate to current challenges. If this is so then AGI is our only real hope. Enhancement of ourselves and our systems will help but not as quickly in potential as skipping substrate. > > Humanity as it is now is a path on top of a hill that is getting narrower and narrower, with the fall-off on each side getting steeper and steeper. How long we can keep walking along the path without falling off is unknown, and which side we will fall down is also unknown. The only thing that is certain, is that the path will get so narrow that nobody can stay on it, and it will end sooner or later. Some of us (transhumanists) are rooting for one side, some (luddites, bioconservatives) for the other. Most people just shut their eyes and keep walking, in the hope that the path will continue forever. It won't. Yep. We are at the species challenge point where our evolved characteristics and limits are increasingly inadequate to the environment we find ourselves within. - samantha From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 14 00:27:31 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:27:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] SXSW - The SINGULARITY: Humanity's Huge Techno Challenge" In-Reply-To: <31A0EC74EC644C70972C7F61FFCDE11A@DFC68LF1> References: <31A0EC74EC644C70972C7F61FFCDE11A@DFC68LF1> Message-ID: <9AD4F532-9129-4080-96D7-E95C607DCDD1@mac.com> On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: > Featured Interactive Panel: Monday @ 11:00 AM CST. http://schedule.sxsw.com/events/event_IAP5705 > Will supercomputing intelligences outsmart human-level intelligence? Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines" is the world's most known advocacy of a technology breakthrough that will change the face of humanity and the entire world. > It is less relevant whether one advocates technological advancement or not. What is important in Kurzweil's work is waking people up to radically better possibilities that can be attained via positive use of technological advancements. > Kurzweil claims that the accelerating, exponential growth of technology will result in such a Singularity. > This tosses in a not so helpful term, Singularity. There are at least three major notions of what it means as you are quite aware. And it brings up a lot of unhelpful hopes and fears. > But not all technological luminaries agree with Kurzweil. In fact, some suggest nanotechnology as superseding artificial intelligence. > Superseding seems an odd choice of words. If nanotechnology arrives first, real machine phase nanotechnology, then it will make AGI more likely sooner. If AGI comes first in sufficient degree and quantity then it is likely to make it much easier to achieve nanotechnology quickly. > Others argue for humanity's future as being located in biosynthetics and virtuality. > This is not particularly different from what Kurzweil says and is part of what he has advocated or dream of as future viable improvements. > Outside the technological sphere, a new culture of DIY citizen scientists could either speed up or halt the Singularity. With a finger on the pulse, ethicists and policy-makers are arguing for a new strategy for assessing our possible futures. > Many of these ethicist have rather scary philosophical and ethical views. I have said for some time that the most critically important need for achieving the future of our dreams is preserving sufficient freedom to continue the work. Whether this is by "policy makers" agreeing or by moving to where no/fewer blocking policies are in effect or simply going underground, the work must go on. > This panel dissects the very core of the Singularity, if and when it will occur, and what we can expect to happen. > I don't believe we are capable of a meaningful, in the sense of deep understanding and high likelihood achieving the most good, dissection of such a thing. I think it is dangerously hubristic, especially as a driver for regulation and enforcement, to act as if we can. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 14 00:36:49 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:36:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <29AB92BD-7609-47BA-8351-001D8196C89F@mac.com> On Mar 13, 2011, at 2:25 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > Max, > > In the most serious manner possible, I recommend taking a dose of serotonin-pathway-affecting psychedelics. The most commonly known of these are LSD and psilocybin-containing mushrooms. The experiences I have had with these substances are the most profound form of cognitive enhancement I have ever encountered, and the positive aftereffect/takeaway is long-lasting and integrable into normal life. > > When you think under the influence of these psychedelics, the way you proceed through concepts is not the same as sober life. It is no longer linear; instead of taking one route from a concept to an endpoint you view the proverbial vector bundle of all possible thought routes out of this concept. In this way, instead of beating around the bush to conceive an idea, one has the choice to engage totally with any idea. The platonic nature of the concept is revealed by an exhaustive (and incomprehensibly fast) understanding of its causes and effects. In my youth I did follow this school of mind-expansion pretty closely including running many many personal "experiments". Except for a few episodes of extreme hyper-lucidity, hyper-focus and extreme insight the overall results were not so good for cognitive enhancement. The hyper-lucid, etc. states were not at all dependably producible. The spaced out and other side effects were large. I would not recommend this path as a way to cognitive enhancement. I might recommend parts of it for other things for some people but not for that. Now if you are or have access to a very excellent underground chemist and brilliant trustworthy researches that have found otherwise and can help in applying their findings then please set up a secure channel and let me know. > > Also unique is the ability to blur the lines of the ego, so we may see our place in a very large, complicated universe. It gives you more appreciation for both nature and the incredible specimen that the human brain is. > Ego death is a common brain based phenomenon under some drugs and under many types of meditation. It is not significant for enhancing cognition. It can be a great help in reorienting personality and worldview though. That is one of the reasons psychedelics were and are interesting from a therapeutic point of view. > It is sad that many people who do not understand the effects of the aforementioned substances take them and give them a 'bad rap.' For intelligent enough people, the only effect these drugs can have is a wider, more comprehensive perspective on reality. Well, not the only effect but I agree they are given more of a 'bad rap' than deserved. Of course it would help tremendously if what was actually being talked about was quality sources rather than street drugs that vary tremendously. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Mon Mar 14 00:42:38 2011 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 19:42:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] SXSW - The SINGULARITY: Humanity's Huge Techno Challenge" In-Reply-To: <9AD4F532-9129-4080-96D7-E95C607DCDD1@mac.com> References: <31A0EC74EC644C70972C7F61FFCDE11A@DFC68LF1> <9AD4F532-9129-4080-96D7-E95C607DCDD1@mac.com> Message-ID: <1380F78AF15E453CADACD92846679C81@DFC68LF1> Why not just enjoy the fact that this panel is at SXSW. For goodness sakes. Natasha Vita-More _____ From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Samantha Atkins Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 7:28 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] SXSW - The SINGULARITY: Humanity's Huge Techno Challenge" On Mar 13, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Natasha Vita-More wrote: Featured Interactive Panel: Monday @ 11:00 AM CST. http://schedule.sxsw.com/events/event_IAP5705 Will supercomputing intelligences outsmart human-level intelligence? Ray Kurzweil's "The Age of Spiritual Machines" is the world's most known advocacy of a technology breakthrough that will change the face of humanity and the entire world. It is less relevant whether one advocates technological advancement or not. What is important in Kurzweil's work is waking people up to radically better possibilities that can be attained via positive use of technological advancements. Kurzweil claims that the accelerating, exponential growth of technology will result in such a Singularity. This tosses in a not so helpful term, Singularity. There are at least three major notions of what it means as you are quite aware. And it brings up a lot of unhelpful hopes and fears. But not all technological luminaries agree with Kurzweil. In fact, some suggest nanotechnology as superseding artificial intelligence. Superseding seems an odd choice of words. If nanotechnology arrives first, real machine phase nanotechnology, then it will make AGI more likely sooner. If AGI comes first in sufficient degree and quantity then it is likely to make it much easier to achieve nanotechnology quickly. Others argue for humanity's future as being located in biosynthetics and virtuality. This is not particularly different from what Kurzweil says and is part of what he has advocated or dream of as future viable improvements. Outside the technological sphere, a new culture of DIY citizen scientists could either speed up or halt the Singularity. With a finger on the pulse, ethicists and policy-makers are arguing for a new strategy for assessing our possible futures. Many of these ethicist have rather scary philosophical and ethical views. I have said for some time that the most critically important need for achieving the future of our dreams is preserving sufficient freedom to continue the work. Whether this is by "policy makers" agreeing or by moving to where no/fewer blocking policies are in effect or simply going underground, the work must go on. This panel dissects the very core of the Singularity, if and when it will occur, and what we can expect to happen. I don't believe we are capable of a meaningful, in the sense of deep understanding and high likelihood achieving the most good, dissection of such a thing. I think it is dangerously hubristic, especially as a driver for regulation and enforcement, to act as if we can. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 14 00:34:47 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:34:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty Subject: Re: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? 2011/3/13 Will Steinberg : > In the most serious manner possible, I recommend taking a dose of ... Sorry Spike, I have to admit I don't feel very confident even attempting to put more effort into expounding on these ideas - either the reader will already have had similar thoughts or there is likely a language/meme barrier that would precludes easily making the point. Spike? It was Will Steinberg who posted the above comments. I am no hipster on these matters, this being waaaay outside of my area of expertise. I haven't commented at all on nootropics. I am listening to those who know. Oh wait, perhaps you are referring to a comment I made recently where I suggested leaving all of it alone? OK, ja no problem. Still I want to see what others say about this topic. The notion of nootropics is big stuff in the chess world. There was a lot of buzz that this whiz kid Magnus Carlsen had discovered something fundamental which rocketed him to #1 or #2 in the world while still in his teens. My theory is that he is extraordinarily talented, and his nootropic is a small amount of good old alcohol, mixed with caffeine, both taken with fructose. He has orange juice during every match game. It has long been thought that a blood alcohol content in the .04 to .05 might be a temporary concentration enhancer. spike From js_exi at gnolls.org Mon Mar 14 00:51:53 2011 From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 17:51:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? Message-ID: <4D7D66A9.1040805@gnolls.org> Max: Ghrelin is strongly neurotrophic. I find fasting to be an extremely effective nootropic due to the action of ghrelin. And high-fat paleo dieting makes it much easier to fast without being distracted by hunger pangs. I seem to recall that centrophenoxine potentiates the effects of *racetam, which might be worth a try. Frankly, removing gluten and seed oil from my diet, combined with a high intake of delicious fatty meat, coconut oil, butter, etc. and adequate n-3 intake from fatty fish and fish oil, has been such a great cognitive benefit to me that I haven't felt the need to push into artificial substances. Oh, egg yolks. There is lots of choline in egg yolks, among other critical brain nutrients. Anyone who throws away egg yolks is throwing away all the nutrition in an egg: whites are just protein. > I see a considerable interest in keeping us not well-fed, but overfed > to the point of lethargy and carelessness. We're so much easier to > control on the edge of carb/sugar coma and tuned-in to the TV (modern > opiate of the masses?) If you want to fatten an animal for slaughter, you feed it a grain-based diet. Furthermore, a population dependent on insulin, Toprol, metformin, Paxil, and Ambien is much easier to manipulate. You're not going to foment revolution if you're dependent on daily medication to survive. JS http://www.gnolls.org From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 03:32:12 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 20:32:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert Message-ID: > http://morgsatlarge.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/why-i-am-not-worried-about-japans-nuclear-reactors/ "Within the 8 hours, another power source had to be found and connected to the power plant. The power grid was down due to the earthquake. The diesel generators were destroyed by the tsunami. So mobile diesel generators were trucked in. "This is where things started to go seriously wrong. The external power generators could not be connected to the power plant (the plugs did not fit). So after the batteries ran out, the residual heat could not be carried away any more. Not knowing what they actually had perhaps I am being harsh on this, but an crew of Americans would have taken the plugs off and spliced the wires. There are significant cultural differences between the two societies. It has been ages since I read the story, but as I understand it, the reason the fire at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Browns_Ferry_Nuclear_Power_Plant didn't cause a melt down was because a guy with a broomstick kept a pump motor relay closed with a broom handle while standing in smoke from burning wires. (The fire in a wiring bundle had shorted the relay control wires, causing the operators to lose control over the relay and the cooling water pump.) Keith From msd001 at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 03:05:36 2011 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 23:05:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 8:34 PM, spike wrote: > Spike? ?It was Will Steinberg who posted the above comments. ?I am no > hipster on these matters, this being waaaay outside of my area of expertise. > I haven't commented at all on nootropics. ?I am listening to those who know. > Oh wait, perhaps you are referring to a comment I made recently where I > suggested leaving all of it alone? ?OK, ja no problem. ?Still I want to see > what others say about this topic. Well, I knew you were reading. :) Consider it a public aside then that I gave a nod to another thread where you expressed some dismay at our shortening attention span. I too was once a multi-page poster. I have since tried to be more succinct in appreciation of others' time as well as my own. I agreed with Will regarding the perspective shift granted by psychedelics. I then went to the specific legality of that class of drugs. It's not a long leap to imagine there are good reasons that those who maintain the status quo would keep any demonstrably effective cognitive-enhancing drugs from being widely available. Either keep them pricey enough that only those already well-off can afford them or make them outright illegal. If both of those fail, discredit them as "silly ineffectual herbs, not FDA approved." I take a ginko extract in the morning and most times don't stop to even think about lunch. If I don't restock when I run out, I do find myself watching the clock around 11:30 for lunch. I'm not suggesting this has anything to do with appetite control, but when I'm focused on work (which requires thinking) then I'm just not paying attention to hunger. As far as the reported memory improvement, I've not tried to be aware of memory performance. Ginko is a vasodilator, so it makes some sense that improved blood circulation in the brain would have some benefit (even if all it does is get nutrients in and help improved cooling) I also don't take it on weekends because my wife doesn't appreciate the attention to detail that my employer prefers - I become pedantic about the use of words and their meaning, so it's better to be casual on weekends. :) I have also had some positive experience with Gotu Kola. I have a slightly increased alertness much like a cup of coffee, but without caffeine's somatic effects (including sleeplessness). I just looked it up again, there may be some concern for impact on the liver - so it might not be a long-term daily supplement. I mention it as an occasional study aid (yeah, right) or for 3-days-to-deadline long work hours. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 03:10:24 2011 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 20:10:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Energy options Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Hydrogen balloons would be cheaper but are they not dangerous? I > thought we always use helium (that I know is expensive and > increasingly rarer). > Giovanni When you need 5000 tons of hydrogen per GW to hold it up, helium is not an option. My thought is to keep at least a meter of nitrogen between the hydrogen and air. Keith From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 04:14:24 2011 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 21:14:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> Message-ID: My recommendation to Max and everyone is to get a GOOD NIGHT'S SLEEP. I think so many people look for a way to cut corners in this key area that strongly supports proper brain function. And the many tech and entertainment distractions out there make it easy to try to fudge in this area... John : ) On 3/13/11, Mike Dougherty wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 8:34 PM, spike wrote: >> Spike? ?It was Will Steinberg who posted the above comments. ?I am no >> hipster on these matters, this being waaaay outside of my area of >> expertise. >> I haven't commented at all on nootropics. ?I am listening to those who >> know. >> Oh wait, perhaps you are referring to a comment I made recently where I >> suggested leaving all of it alone? ?OK, ja no problem. ?Still I want to >> see >> what others say about this topic. > > Well, I knew you were reading. :) Consider it a public aside then > that I gave a nod to another thread where you expressed some dismay at > our shortening attention span. I too was once a multi-page poster. I > have since tried to be more succinct in appreciation of others' time > as well as my own. > > I agreed with Will regarding the perspective shift granted by > psychedelics. I then went to the specific legality of that class of > drugs. It's not a long leap to imagine there are good reasons that > those who maintain the status quo would keep any demonstrably > effective cognitive-enhancing drugs from being widely available. > Either keep them pricey enough that only those already well-off can > afford them or make them outright illegal. If both of those fail, > discredit them as "silly ineffectual herbs, not FDA approved." > > I take a ginko extract in the morning and most times don't stop to > even think about lunch. If I don't restock when I run out, I do find > myself watching the clock around 11:30 for lunch. I'm not suggesting > this has anything to do with appetite control, but when I'm focused on > work (which requires thinking) then I'm just not paying attention to > hunger. As far as the reported memory improvement, I've not tried to > be aware of memory performance. Ginko is a vasodilator, so it makes > some sense that improved blood circulation in the brain would have > some benefit (even if all it does is get nutrients in and help > improved cooling) I also don't take it on weekends because my wife > doesn't appreciate the attention to detail that my employer prefers - > I become pedantic about the use of words and their meaning, so it's > better to be casual on weekends. :) > > I have also had some positive experience with Gotu Kola. I have a > slightly increased alertness much like a cup of coffee, but without > caffeine's somatic effects (including sleeplessness). I just looked > it up again, there may be some concern for impact on the liver - so it > might not be a long-term daily supplement. I mention it as an > occasional study aid (yeah, right) or for 3-days-to-deadline long work > hours. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Mon Mar 14 05:16:45 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 22:16:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> Message-ID: <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of John Grigg Subject: Re: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? >...My recommendation to Max and everyone is to get a GOOD NIGHT'S SLEEP... John : ) NO! There will be plenty of time for sleeping after we are dead and frozen. No time for that now. When that paleo diet discussion came up, I was interested in how I had drawn many of the same conclusions, not by reading but by far too many years of just experimenting and doing what works best for me. For instance, occasional fasting for a day seems to sharpen the mind, to focus the senses, and remind the digestive system of how lucky it is to get steady nutrition the rest of the time. spike From giulio at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 07:35:23 2011 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 08:35:23 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 6:16 AM, spike wrote: > >>... On Behalf Of John Grigg > Subject: Re: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? > >>...My recommendation to Max and everyone is to get a GOOD NIGHT'S SLEEP... > John ?: ) > > NO! ?There will be plenty of time for sleeping after we are dead and frozen. > No time for that now. I will agree with John. After sleeping enough I am happier, more energetic and more productive, my brain works much better, and I can do much more. It is not only about quantity, it is also about quality. From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 09:19:49 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 09:19:49 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: > I will agree with John. After sleeping enough I am happier, more > energetic and more productive, my brain works much better, and I can > do much more. It is not only about quantity, it is also about quality. > > And there are studies backing up the dangers of lack of sleep. Gadget usage causes lack of sleep, study finds Mon Mar 7, 9:09 am ET The growing repertoire of gadgets at our disposal, from smartphones to televisions, may make it easier to work, play and connect with one another. Unfortunately, these devices may also be making us very, very tired. ----------------- Lack of sleep, drug use linked 2010-02-21 22:52 Teens who sleep fewer than seven hours per night are more likely to use illegal drugs. "Adolescents are embedded in complex social networks and are especially vulnerable to peer effects - possibly not only with respect to drugs, but also with respect to sleep," said the study. --------------------- And, John should know, as it was 2.18 am (his time) when he posted his comment. :) BillK From anders at aleph.se Mon Mar 14 12:17:10 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 13:17:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7E0746.1000707@aleph.se> My own list of useful cognition enhancers is topped by sugar, caffeine and modafinil. Slightly elevated blood sugar levels improve memory and mental function (and maybe willpower, according to some studies). Maintaining a steady glucose level through proper diet of course has other benefits, but for certain mental exertions it might be useful to supplement it temporarily (the memory enhancement effects appear to happen at a level above the normal level). Caffeine is surprisingly safe and effective if one does not overdo it and adapt too much to it. Modafinil is my mainstay for having a productive day or when I really need to focus on complex reasoning. Definite stimulant effect, but seems to be good for planning functions. Safety doesn't look too bad, although I am a bit concerned about blood pressure. I also use it only intermittently rather than chronically, in order to get minimal adaptation. The hunger-ghrelin link is interesting. I don't know whether it is ghrelin that makes me efficient while being peckish or just the motivating effects of hunger (consider the study mentioned a while ago about self-control and a full bladder - there are plenty of odd overspills in our minds). It also seems to be highly individual. This is of course true for all enhancers: we need to check how well they work for us individually and in what situations. Fine-tuning and being able to tell what works for what (ideally be gathering real data) is important. Aerobic exercise does seem to be a pretty decent enhancer too, both by preventing health problems and by some neuromodulatory effects. Unlike the drugs this has an ongoing chronic effect. Getting enough sleep also works - we want to maximize the integral of useful moments across our waking lives, and that means that if sleeping a bit more improves their utility it might be quite worthwhile. Again, this is highly individual, but especially since older people sleep less it might become an issue over time. Generally older brains seem to produce less neuromodulators, which might be a reason to tune up the levels through some enhancers (there is of course much more literature on them for older people than the young healthy adults that I have focused on collecting papers about). However, older brains also tend to have learned plenty of efficient strategies too - while the thinking might be moment-to-moment be less effective it can be in practice quite adaptive. -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 12:39:22 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:39:22 +0000 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: <4D7E0746.1000707@aleph.se> References: <4D7E0746.1000707@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > However, older brains also > tend to have learned plenty of efficient strategies too - while the thinking > might be moment-to-moment be less effective it can be in practice quite > adaptive. > > Translation - Experience counts. The new kids on the block might be rushing around like headless chickens, giving the impression of furious activity, but ol' Ebenezer has been there, seen it before, and quietly gets the job done. BillK From pharos at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 13:00:06 2011 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 13:00:06 +0000 Subject: [ExI] If you are worried about the future.......... Message-ID: The CEO of Asda (UK Walmart) has a trenchant comment about the public reaction to the current stressful economic situation. Quote: Take Andy Clarke, chief executive of Asda, who is worried about the impact of consumer confidence on his business, and said that shoppers at his stores faced a ?perfect storm? ? with less money to spend, and anxiety about higher costs and fear of unemployment. Sales of National Lottery scratch cards, which correlate to customer anxieties, were rising at Asda. ------------ The solution to worries is to buy more scratch cards!!!!!!! BillK From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 15:13:59 2011 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (Mr Jones) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:13:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] If you are worried about the future.......... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 9:00 AM, BillK wrote: > The solution to worries is to buy more scratch cards!!!!!!! > > > BillK > I plan on hitting the Mega Millions to solve all my problems. I've been perfecting it for 20yrs. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 17:24:04 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 12:24:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [Open Manufacturing] Fwd: [luf-team] Re: maybe im crazy, but why is most of these projects not working? In-Reply-To: <4D7E1CC9.1040909@kurtz-fernhout.com> References: <1299152606.319.79549.m7@yahoogroups.com> <3441CFD0-E0C3-4FEC-846D-2326A87A542A@gmail.com> <4D7E1CC9.1040909@kurtz-fernhout.com> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul D. Fernhout Date: Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 8:48 AM Subject: Re: [Open Manufacturing] Fwd: [luf-team] Re: maybe im crazy, but why is most of these projects not working? To: openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com On 3/10/11 6:51 PM, Bryan Bishop wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Eric Hunting > Date: Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 5:42 PM > Subject: [luf-team] Re: maybe im crazy, but why is most of these projects > not working? > To: luf-team at yahoogroups.com > [snip] > But in those 50 years, after the production of a book, countless designs, > works of art, and models, numerous media interviews, and a whole series of > very nice documentary videos, the only physical accomplishment of The Venus > Project is the construction of Fresco's own futuristic home/studio compound > in Venus Florida -and they nearly lost that as it went up for sale a few > years ago. (folks here may remember I was actually toying with the notion > of > buying it to use as the LUF HQ because I feared what the knuckle-headed > developers in Florida will do with such lovely architecture and because we > desperately need the same kind of studio and workshop facilities) What went > wrong? Well, the key problem is that the Venus Project narrative is > critically incomplete. Fresco is a designer and thinks like one. He does > the > 'visioneering'. The messy details of implementation is someone else's > department -and that someone else never materialized. He believed that if > he > could just paint a sufficiently compelling picture of the future it would > make everyone realize the abject squalor of contemporary life and demand a > revolution. But pictures of lovely architecture and sexy cars, planes, and > boats don't tell you how to get from A to B. The Venus Project is like a > beautiful matt painting of a wonderful city propped-up on the horizon but > with no obvious path going there. It's a Greek temple on a golf course > model > of the future. And so the public never got it. (do you remember when I once > suggested here that every settlement in TMP should plan to include a Greek > themed miniature golf course?) > I've been watching the 1960s Thunderbird TV series by Gerry and Sylvia Anderson (who later made UFO and Space 1999). They had a vision of the future, too. And it was a pretty good one in a lot of ways. I think one issue with the Venus Project is this notion that we have, say, about five different types of economies (growing as someone suggested I add another): * Subsistence * Gift * Planned * Exchange * Parisitical/Theft Fresco is very right about pointing out a lot of contemporary problems, including the waste from competition and how we need a better understanding of the possibilities of good engineering. But, just because you are right in pointing out some problems, or you are right in pointing out some general areas needing improvement, that does not mean you are right about the particulars for any solution. (I could say the same thing about myself and what I talk about.) Fresco focuses essentially on the planned economy, and in particular, cybernetically planned. Apparently, he won't admit to the issue that the values of the programmers would be embodied in the cybernetic system. As soon as we talk about values, we talk about culture, and politics, and conflicts. And then we are back to square one of a lot of social issues. I think we can resolve a lot of values conflict issues, but not by denying them or thinking some big machine is going to make them go away. A big machine might, actually make them go away, but only by taking away a lot of other things most people like, such as in the book by Madeline L'Engle "A Wrinkle in Time". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Wrinkle_in_Time "The children travel to Camazotz to rescue Meg's father. They find that all the inhabitants behave in a mechanistic way and seem to be all under the control of a single mind. They look for the central headquarters on the planet (described as CENTRAL Central Intelligence) and they discover a man with red eyes with telepathic abilities who can cast a hypnotic spell over their minds. He claims to know the whereabouts of their father. Charles Wallace looks into his eyes and becomes taken over by the mind controlling the planet. Under its influence, he takes Meg and Calvin to the place where Dr. Murry is being held prisoner because he would not succumb to the group mind. The planet turns out to be controlled by an evil disembodied brain with powerful telepathic abilities, which the inhabitants of Camazotz call "IT". Charles Wallace takes them to the place where IT is held, and in close proximity to IT, all of them are threatened by a possible telepathic takeover of their minds. " Anyway, so while the Venus Project is full of great ideas, it still has a high technocratic focus, and that probably turns a lot of people off. In general, I like what Fresco says, but there is this issue of "the machine is going to make all our decisions for us perfectly" that is going to not be very appealing (even to me). I feel some reasons the Millennial Project has not succeeded more (beyond Savage somehow stepping away from the movement?) is that there is so much to still do on Earth that is quite interesting. It is dual-use in a lot of ways. So, TMP or for that matter the Venus Project asks for a person of two conflicting characters: * a practical minded down-to-Earth nose-to-the-grindstone do-all-the-heavy-lifting type of engineering/politician person, and * a pie-in-the-sky dreamer who is going to focus all the practical skill and energy on long term dreams even as the world in many ways is desperately crying out for a lot of basic infrastructure hear and now (renewable energy, cold fusion, passive solar homes, organic agriculture, 3D printers that can also recycle what they print, a better understanding of human health and nutrition, and so on). So, I think that fundamental conflict is why something like TMP has trouble recruiting. Now, there are some few people in the world who have strong aspects of both, but they are very rare. And, even when you find someone like that, TMP might have a better long term chance of success if they work at short-term on Earth goals. That is why, like with the OSCOMAK project as an extension of my own interests in building space habitats, I gradually became more and more focused on understanding on-Earth issues. There is so much overlap that it just makes sense to make the Earth work first, IMHO. Granted, at some point people may have to choose, especially if the Earth embroils itself in self-destructive wars from focusing on a scarcity socioeconomics with the tools of abundance turned into superweapons, but that day is not quite hear, and even if it was, it might well be too late, since the mental war-mongering contagion would spread to space no doubt. This conflict is not made easier by knowing, while you make personal sacrifices, that there are literally hundreds of thousands of people paid good salaries with benefits to be working in the aerospace field (civilian, NASA, military) and who are doing aerospace stuff (like building cruise missiles), but at the same time who are mostly disconnected politically from the idea of building a future for humanity in space. Most of that energy outside of civilian aviation sadly seems to go to either stunts (President Kennedy essentially said the trip to the Moon was to prove to the USSR that the USA could bomb them with rockets) or conflict (Predator drones). Most civilian aviation is pointless (replaceable by telecommuting) or luxury (related to consumerism) or supports a parasitical business apparatus. Even express movement of parts by air can be replaced by local fabrication. And when aviation is needed, like to visit relatives abroad, civil aviation speaks more to dysfunctional social dynamics in our society destroying families and communities by forcing people apart (including by displacement through war, as happened with my parents). Anyway, so we see vast amounts of money poured into aerospace, but mostly being misused relative to making the world work for everyone and creating a chance for humans to access new resources in space. Still, that's a little harsh, I know. :-) I'm not against aviation, especially if it can be made non-polluting and put to good ends; I do think travel and visiting other cultures is in general a good thing. My point is just that when you think about being part of some big TMP movement, the obvious question is, if the globe is spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year on aerospace activities, why are those people not making something better happen with all those resources than shuttling around business executives to resort hotels or shuttling around people to visit relatives they have been separated from by war or merciless socioeconomic trends? Bucky Fuller kept asking, how can aerospace technology and thinking help the planet in a deep way? It seems like the world has not entirely deeply thought that through yet... Anyway, I know TMP has the Aquarius stage, which is on Earth in the ocean. But, even that is so ambitious. What about urban homesteads? Or community gardens? (See Isles, Inc.). It seems the bigger issues with all this are social at this point more than technical, although there is value in making the technical more understandable or better organized, since a lot of the social problems come from misunderstanding what is technically possible or how trends are changing the technical landscape (thus fears over Peak Oil when we have endless solar power and rapidly dropping PV costs, due to basic misunderstanding and related fear mongering). We are in an era of > accelerating successive economic and environmental catastrophe and the > ruling class is desperately trying to circle the wagons and cash-out in > advance of the ultimate collapse they've engineered. And the cultural > result > of all this is a wave of middle-class anxiety throughout the industrialized > world. > I agree with your point about the middle class as "guards" in the sense that Howard Zinn said it too: http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/zinncomrev24.html "That will happen, I think, only when all of us who are slightly privileged and slightly uneasy begin to see that we are like the guards in the prison uprising at Attica?expendable; that the Establishment, whatever rewards it gives us, will also, if necessary to maintain its control, kill us. " But with that said, I think the reason our scarcity-ideology-based socioeconomic system is failing is widespread material abundance, not increasing scarcity. :-) The environment has taken a lot of abuse, it's true, including problems with collapsing fisheries, pollution, and so on. But the environment has always been going through ups and downs (like from supervolcano explosions and asteroid hits and Tsunamis and ice ages and so on). Anyway, I'm not sure one can focus on an environmental catastrophe as the end of our way of life, because there is little I know of in the current way of things that could not be set right environmentally (as far as humans having a nice personal environment) with a couple decades on enlightened policies that don't focus on short-term benefits. We can move people to higher ground for rising sea levels if that is a problem, we can change our fishing practices, we can stop burning forest in the Amazon, we can remediate superfund sites, and so on. Yes there will be continuing species loss, but on the plus side we are getting better at genetic engineering. We should do what we can to protect the environment, but I see that more as a moral issue than a practical one (even as there are practical aspects of it) -- I'm just trying to put those issues in perspective on a big planet that has been constantly changing. Joseph has clued into that. Clued into that aspect of Fresco's versions of > modern history and economics that basically explain how and why the world > got f-ed up. And then he played-up the angle of conspiracy because that > very > effectively pushes people's buttons. Fresco only talked about a > socio-economic pathology inherent to a culture that evolved with the early > Industrial Age unable to fully shake-off the vestiges of feudalism and a > peasant psychology. Other progressives aren't so moderate. They will point > fingers at specific people and institutions benefiting from social > exploitation and start declaring it time to build guillotines. I can't say > if that's right or wrong, but it's been effective at motivating people by > turning unfocused mass despair into directed anger. Combine this with the > novelty of the Internet as an alternative to the now tainted and dubious > corporate mass media, and you've got a 'movement'. > I agree the Zeitgeist movie series has been influential, but I feel it also is weak by focusing purely or Jacque Fresco. What about Amory Lovins? What about Nancy and John Todd? What about Buckminster Fuller? What about Fidel Castro and the Cuban miracle related to distributed agriculture when the Soviet oil was cut off to adapt to living with less oil after some rough spots? What about Western Europe and its universal health care? What about the free software movement? What about Paul Hawken and "Blessed Unrest"? What about the Google founders helping fund Nanosolar? What about Alan Kay and Doug Engelbart and Ted Nelson and Tim Berners-Lee and personal computing and the internet? What about the Whole Earth Catalog? What about... The list goes on and on... But anger directed to what? As I understand it, the Zeitgeist movement > loses > people at about the same fast rate it now wins them because once these now > motivated folks start joining groups and forums and going to Venus Project > conferences and lectures, they discover there is nothing for them to > actually do because Fresco simply never had a plan to build his model > future. Just a design. Just a Futurama exhibit. Zeitgeist leadership seems > to be becoming aware of this problem and is trying to address it, but > they've been in denial and operating in a vacuum relative to the larger > global progressive movement for a long time. They have a lot of ground to > cover while the enthusiasm they've finally won rots on the vine. I wish > them > the best of luck because their objectives are complimentary to ours and the > the world in general needs working solutions to its rapidly escalating > crisis. > I think it is easy to get caught up in "the sky is falling" even when the sky is falling. :-) It's a big planet. There is a lot going on. As you say, there is a global progressive movement (and that includes the Greens no some extent, even if they are sometimes technophobic rather than focusing on the right technology for the right values). It is easy, given the mass media, to not see all that is going on, and all that has been going on. So, in that sense, the Zeitgeist movie (and even the Venus Project) are misleading... Maybe in a deep way people begin to realize that when they start to look around? See also: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/science_freshstart.html "#1. The People Are Not Bamboozled ... Based on these findings, it seems likely that everyday people don't opt for social change in good part because they don't see any plausible way to accomplish their goals, and haven't heard any plans from anyone else that make sense to them. But why don't they just say "the hell with it" and head to the barricades? Why aren't they "fed up?" The answer is not in their false consciousness or a mere resigned acquiescence, as many leftists seem to believe, but in a very different set of factors. On the one hand, for all the injustices average Americans experience and perceive, there are many positive aspects to everyday life that make a regular day-to-day existence more attractive than a general strike or a commitment to building a revolutionary party. They have loved ones they like to be with, they have hobbies and sports they enjoy, and they have forms of entertainment they like to watch. In fact, many of them also report in surveys that they enjoy their jobs even though the jobs don't pay enough or have decent benefits. (And as of late 2005, 93% of individuals earning over $50,000 a year describe themselves as "doing well.") They also understand that they have some hard-won democratic rights and freedoms inherited from the past that are much more than people in many other countries have. They don't want to see those positive aspects messed up. ..." The key lessons here for us are that, while media is critical to > communication and motivation, engagement and participatory activity are > critical to sustaining that motivation. And this can be difficult when your > objectives are very large in scale and/or distant in time. With space > advocacy this is exacerbated by unrealistic expectations and that basic and > ubiquitous lack of knowledge about how things work in the real world. That > delusion that anything short of starting the construction of the first > starship in your back yard is irrelevant. We have to stop pretending there > are magical shortcuts, because there aren't. We need to accept that space > development is the work of civilizations and lifetimes, need to be > realistic > about what we can actually do in the near-term, and seek the fun, personal > accomplishment/empowerment, and larger benefits to society that can be > found > along that path, not just at the finish line. > I agree we need more coherent alternatives. But here is a simple one... Why not just build a new town somewhere on Earth, like the middle of upstate New York, ideally near a train line, converting some land to a nice eco-city-like development for 50,000 people? Just make it a nice place to live, with walkable streets, a tech shop, a homeschool resource center, high bandwidth, renewable energy, a great library, maybe personal mass transit, and so on. Or rebuild Braddock, PA, instead. Or help improve another place. Anyway, if those things are still beyond us, how are we going to build space habitats? One step at a time. See the picture here, interpretable as (among other things) people building a new village as a step towards building a new space habitat: http://www.oscomak.net/ "OSCOMAK supports playful learning communities of individuals and groups chaordically building free and open source knowledge, tools, and simulations which lay the groundwork for humanity's sustainable development on Spaceship Earth and eventual joyful, compassionate, and diverse expansion into space (including Mars, the Moon, the Asteroids, or elsewhere in the Universe)." I think a successful TMP etc. movement has to blend both the present Earthly issues and the future space/ocean/metaverse issues... Still, I'd agree more videos would help. But rather than celebrate one particular project like TMP, it might help more to present very basic issues about abundance, technology, the resources in the universe, and so on. As I suggest here: "Specific consciousness raising points for short videos?" http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing/msg/eff0aa5033106bb5 I have been working on > this myself for many years and have spent a lot of my own money on it. But > I'm just one person living alone in the desert -literally > Anyway, I hear your plea. I know how it feels (replace desert with forest, at the moment). I think it is a big challenge to think what we, as individuals, can realistically do to further some good causes without spinning our wheels and getting nothing done. The general advice is "Think globally, act locally, plan modestly", and to find something that: * Advances the project and otherwise does no big harm; * You like; * You are good at or want to become good at; * Is approachable in reasonable chunks to create a sense of flow; * The world needs; * The world will pay for (sales, grants, loans, donations, whatever) or is so cheap to do that you can do it anyway on the side; * Is feasible with the resources you have access too (including by advocating for more if you are good at it); * Ideally, lets you be part of some group or can be approached in some collective way (that is, not focused on secrecy or proprietary or some other isolating approach). Find intersections of all those is great when it happens. The less all those things fit together, the more distress there is pursuing the project. There is also a central problem that the people good at lobbying socially for resources often have the exact opposite personality it takes to make good use of resources technically. :-) Which is why Michael Philips says (in the Seven Laws of Money) most granting agencies fail to accomplish anything. I struggle with finding those combination in my own life. And sometimes come up with half-baked compromises I'm not very proud of and find ultimately demotivating, like this time-limited "artificial scarcity" approach: :-) http://www.artificialscarcity.com/ http://www.musicalphrases.com/ Anyway, all that is in the context of greater learning, greater thinking on all this. I still think there are obvious gaps as a far as a tool to help make sense of manufacturing webs in an open public way, as well as thinking through socioeconomic issues. I think I have a better handle on them with the four (or five) economies, but I think there is a lot of content that could be made on these basic things: http://peswiki.com/index.php/OS:Economic_Transformation Anyway, it is easy to get lost in advocating one specific thing that you know is good based on lots of past thinking. But to present useful stuff to the public, maybe it makes sense to go way back to the basics, and talk about them? Why is TMP possible? What basics about the universe (like abundance and technological possibilities) do you understand (and why) that the average person might need to know to accept something like TMP as a good idea? I mean, here we have the entire population being frightened (possibly to death by irony) by fears about Peak Oil, and there TMP is, saying we can have trillions of people living in space (which I agree with the TMP there). What bridges the gap? If you can get at that basic thing via an educational video, maybe you can plant a seed that will sprout later? Everyone in this group needs to > cultivate a working knowledge of the basics of mechanics, electronics, > computing, software, the principles of propulsion, the principles of energy > production, the families of fabrication methods, and the families of > building systems. > Nice, but everyone has their own strengths and weaknesses. Everyone has what they can contribute. You earlier said something about the importance of artists and filmmakers, as well as people to create events. There may be little overlap there with mechanical skill. A community may have lots of different personalities representing lots of different skill sets... A program of public education in science, technology, and > industry to cultivate industrial literacy globally. That's a critical > aspect > of TMP's Foundation efforts toward cultural development. > I agree, and I'm not against learning the basics, though despite my previous comment. As I wrote above on videos, I think you really have to reach people on that basic level at this point, to move them beyond Peak Oil fears. But it's one thing to see the basics as educational, "here is what is possible", as opposed to skill-oriented, as in "and now we're going to turn you into a machinist/designer to build a space ship" (as important as it is that some people can build stuff that really works, but then see my point about hundreds of billions of US dollars a year already spent on that and it being misdirected). In the same way, I think it would be great if everyone learned a little programming and electronics to understand the basics (the lower level the better in some ways), but I don't expect most people are going to have the interest in spending decades full-time learning to build quality software. Likewise, sure, as you suggest it would be great if everyone learned something about gardening, but that does not mean everyone is going to want to have a big garden. Maybe there is room for another space academy themed school in your local area somehow? Not that I'm big on compulsory schooling... It could just be a space themed resource center for schools, homeschoolers, and other interested people? Anyway, the greater the ambition, the more I'd also suggest going virtual. You could create, in an open way, 3D models of all these things in a simulation. Then your publicity videos become screen captures from the working simulation... Anyway, with programming skills, that's how I see it. Somehow, we need to team up more. :-) I just wish I had more time for all this. Imagine, hypothetically, I help provide a computing/simulation infrastructure, and you provide a lot of 3D content that a community keeps refining? Although even there, here is a big hurdle: how do we simulate this stuff in a useful way? So, out of the gate, there is not an obvious solution and it becomes a research project... Anyway, it might become like a working "thingiverse" where the objects were in use in a simulated environment and you could also grab the files under a free license and print them at home. I know that is not what you aspire to though, because it focuses more on the virtual. Also, then you have to ask, how is this different from the space-themed MMORPGs that are out there like Eve Online? http://www.eveonline.com/ I think there are differences, but one has to think them through. Also, it's not clear to me how exactly aspects of sensemaking about manufacturing interact with issues of a shared simulation space (where the whole thing is constantly changing and improving). One can organize information without a simulation and without a laboratory. But they will all work best interacting together. But, that is sort of what happens in real life. Look at how Eve Online is teaching people about banking as a confidence game. :-) http://news.softpedia.com/news/Eve-Online-Economy-Suffers-700-billion-ISK-Scam-33737.shtml Establish a prototype testbed outpost in the Atacama Desert managed by > Internet. This will be a fully functional outpost free of human > intervention > except at special 'drop points'. > The Mars Society has been doing this... There is Open Luna too. We need a way for these organizations to work together. But that was: :-) http://www.openvirgle.net/ "OpenVirgle's mission is, first and foremost, the consolidation of information. There are many pro-space-settlement groups out there, each with great ideas. The problem is, they are all competitive for funding, and they can't seem to agree on space settlement tactics and technologies. We will attempt to bring together all of these ideas and all of this information, and put it all up for proper comparison and discussion. Hopefully, future groups, or future iterations of OpenVirgle ourselves, will be able to use this collected knowledge to "put our eggs into a few more baskets" than just Earth. We hope to end a history of secrecy and paranoia surrounding high technology development, and bring us all together towards a larger shared purpose, pooling resources and sharing the benefits of our combined work with the entirety of the human race. Yes, it's idealistic, but all the best grassroots efforts are, and if you don't shoot for the stars, you will never leave the planet." We could use better tools for that, as well as using the tools we have in better ways to grapple with all that content in an open way. I checked in some code here about three years ago to that end, and have been working on related stuff since on-and-off: http://code.google.com/p/openvirgle/source/browse/trunk Anyway, I think doing a lot of this virtually lowers the bar enough that some gets done (you can have virtual conferences, for example). However, I know that just won't appeal the same way to hands-on types. And that's unfortunate. It's just an issue of resources. Ideally we'd have future-oriented hands-on technology centers everywhere. "Build 21000 flexible fabrication facilities across the USA " http://pcast.ideascale.com/a/dtd/44897-8319 So there it is folks. This is our plan to get TMP started, presented in > order of what I think is the most to least immediately accessible activity. > Anyway, individuals can only do so much. So, it's important to prioritize. Which three items on that list you made are most important? The first three? Wiki, book, Art and CGI models? They could all fit into a virtual approach. How could we at least create a virtual TMP world that people could visit? And where it could have increasing levels of realism over time as it got improved? And where it was linked somehow to at least 3D printing with RepRap, MakerBot, Fab at Home (and maybe subtractive machining too, like with ShopBot "Desktop", which I aspire to get someday. :-) I had not realized there was a small version of ShopBot until just the other day (though pricey and more for real production than tinkering with the thing itself): http://www.shopbottools.com/mProducts/desktop.htm Anyway, as I said at an SSI conference a decade ago: http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak/SSI_Fernhout2001_web.html "At this moment nearly every engineer on earth has a powerful and globally networked computer in his or her home. Collaborative volunteer efforts are now possible on an unprecedented scale. Moores's Law predicts continued reductions (see for example the writings of Raymond Kurzweil at http://www.kurzweilai.net/ or Hans Moravec at http://www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/~hpm) in the cost of bandwidth, storage, CPU power, and displays - which will lead to computers a million times faster, bigger or cheaper in the next few decades. Collaboration software such as for sending email, holding real-time video conferences, and viewing design drawings is also reducing in cost; much of it is now effectively free. This means there are now few technical or high-cost barriers to cooperation among engineers, many of whom even now have in their homes (often merely for game playing reasons) computing power and bandwidth beyond anything available to the best equipped engineers in the 1970s. However, the internet is already littered with abandoned collaborative projects. Productive collaboration requires more than technology; it requires the sustained energy of many positive contributions and interactions, which arise from common goals and mutual trust. The refinement of commonly shared purposes and principles takes time and work. Intellectual property licensing is often overlooked, primarily because collaborators would rather be working toward a common goal than arguing legal issues. An appropriate licensing strategy based on a shared purpose and principles helps to build and maintain trust and promote spontaneous participation. But there are many licensing options, each with compelling arguments for its use, making it difficult for collaborators to choose the best licensing strategy for their needs. In the long term, these issues can make or break a collaborative effort. It is our hope that more spontaneous productive collaboration will occur if the entire space-settlement community is better informed on these issues. ... We believe that thousands of individuals (such as the people at this conference) are ready and willing to make compromises in their own lives to nurture the space settlement dream at the grassroots level - but in a more direct way than has been attempted thus far. In particular, individuals could collaborate on the iterative development of detailed space habitat designs and simulations using nothing more than the computers they already have at home for playing games. While excellent progress has been made on the general engineering design of space habitats (in terms of basic physics and proof-of-concept projects), many of the details remain to be worked out. There have been individual attempts in some of these areas (e.g., the SSI Matrix effort), but a persistent collaborative community has not yet coalesced around constructing a comprehensive and non-proprietary library of such details. What sort of things could such a far-flung collaboration produce? We envision a collaboratively developed and universally available library http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com/oscomak of detailed CAD files, simulations and scenarios that describe the required manufacturing processes, products and machines, ecological web management practices, and means for bootstrapping space settlements from asteroidal, lunar, or Martian ore. For example, such a library could form the knowledge component of a self-replicating space habitat system capable of duplicating itself from asteroidal ores and sunlight like a huge algae cell in space, such as was envisioned by J.D. Bernal in the 1920s. One reason more cooperation on such a library hasn't happened to date is that the various societies people support have (seemingly) very different objectives. For example, numerous space-settlement related efforts (such as SSI, the Mars Society http://www.marssociety.org, the Living Universe Foundation http://www.luf.org, PERMANENT http://www.permanent.com, and the Artemis Project http://www.asi.org) each have a different approach towards space settlement. Since so many bright people want similar things, the question arises of how we can work together to help all of these projects develop. Rather than argue whether L5 or Mars or the asteroids or the Moon or the rings of Saturn should be humankind's first space settlement, we could be asking what is common between those efforts so that that groundwork can be shared." Anyway, I still think that challenge awaits. :-) Sadly, I myself have not proven up to it so far. :-( Often I have gotten lost in infrastructure issues, and while there, the world has passed me by (like with RDF instead of the Pointrel system). But, in any case, we are seeing this happen. But not so much with one group, but more with emerging standards of data exchange, of spreading knowledge, of common practices, of a variety of hubs (thingiverse, makezine, Appropedia, SKDB, GitHub, etc.).. So, stuff is happening. It just not is so centralized. That just seems the nature of how this stuff happens on the internet. Still, could there be a little more focus, probably yes. :-) But, then the question is, maybe we should focus more on making the Earth work well for everyone over the next decade, especially given the overlap with learning how to live in space? Still, I like the space challenge, because it makes you really think hard about supporting human life when you can't take the natural biosphere for granted... And it makes you think hard about things like social dynamics of small communities in a space settlement. Space habitats are an interesting lens from which to view the human condition. But they are not the only lens. Ideally, one can find a way to overlap all this. That's why the OSCOMAK proposal said: "The Oscomak project will foster a community in which many interested individuals will contribute to the creation of a distributed global repository of manufacturing knowledge about past, present and future processes, materials, and products." All three. History buffs, real right-now needs people, and future-oriented people. All time perspectives. See also: "RSA Animate - The Secret Powers of Time " http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3oIiH7BLmg And orienting those time perspectives towards engaging in various ways with the 21st century we are living in: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AC7ANGMy0yo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6XAPnuFjJc http://johncr8on.com/projects/21st-century-institutions/ Anyway, wish I had more time to do that all myself. Including a little local group of apprentices and a workshop. But I don't. But I can still do what little I can. And then I just circle back to needing better tools for organizing information and communicating about it, and then using those tools to design better infrastructures. By itself, that seems like a huge task. And we of course already have such tools in various forms. But, we also have productive machinery and rockets and so on in various forms. How does one take part in that process of redesign, of improvement, of expansion according to values, or re-examining the past values with an eye to present needs and future possibilities? It is a life-long task... I seem to forget about old tools at about the rate I am learning about new ones these days, there is so much going on... And then when is the time to use them? If I'd say one thing though, in summary, it is, don't assume that people understand the most basic things you assume, like abundance is possible in the universe. You may need to get that point across before people might be receptive about the rest. Issues like how much energy humanity uses compared to how much power the sun puts out. And so on. From a Native American perspective: http://www.marcinequenzer.com/creation.htm#The%20Field%20of%20Plenty "The Field of Plenty is always full of abundance. The gratitude we show as Children of Earth allows the ideas within the Field of Plenty to manifest on the Good Red Road so we may enjoy these fruits in a physical manner. When the cornucopia was brought to the Pilgrims, the Iroquois People sought to assist these Boat People in destroying their fear of scarcity. The Native understanding is that there is always enough for everyone when abundance is shared and when gratitude is given back to the Original Source. The trick was to explain the concept of the Field of Plenty with few mutually understood words or signs. The misunderstanding that sprang from this lack of common language robbed those who came to Turtle Island of a beautiful teaching. Our "land of the free, home of the brave" has fallen into taking much more than is given back in gratitude by its citizens. Turtle Island has provided for the needs of millions who came from lands that were ruled by the greedy. In our present state of abundance, many of our inhabitants have forgotten that Thanksgiving is a daily way of living, not a holiday that comes once a year." Off to a historical society board meeting. :-) I've set up Google Apps for them (sad as it is centralized and subject to Google oversight -- but it is sort of tradeoff of the risk of Big Brother vs. the risk of lack of community in the context of my own limited time). I'm not 100% certain we will keep it. I was toying with GitHub as an alternative. :-) Or something else. But I also don't want to make them that dependent on me. Even as Google Apps has warts, and even just Drupal on a shared host might have been good enough (but not "free" as in cost, and they are a recognized 501-c-3 non-profit and so get Google Apps for education as a free upgrade). Anyway, I wrote a long email about working with historical societies for the list months ago, but never sent it, related to my time perspective posts. There is a lot of "historical" interest in making things. Why not also figure out a way to connect TMP ideal to historical societies? Even if you don't, just thinking about things from that perspective may help give you new insights into what TMP could be about, as well as how to do it in the context of the complex subsistence/gift/planned/exchange/parasitical economic system we have... --Paul Fernhout http://www.pdfernhout.net/ ==== The biggest challenge of the 21st century is the irony of technologies of abundance in the hands of those thinking in terms of scarcity. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Manufacturing" group. To post to this group, send email to openmanufacturing at googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to openmanufacturing+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openmanufacturing?hl=en. -- - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Mon Mar 14 17:32:25 2011 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 10:32:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D7E5129.3040104@mac.com> On 03/14/2011 02:19 AM, BillK wrote: > On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: >> I will agree with John. After sleeping enough I am happier, more >> energetic and more productive, my brain works much better, and I can >> do much more. It is not only about quantity, it is also about quality. >> >> > And there are studies backing up the dangers of lack of sleep. > > > > Gadget usage causes lack of sleep, study finds Doesn't seem to make any difference for me re a sleep/gadget connection. Well, not unless I stayed up too late because I couldn't extricate myself from some game. > Mon Mar 7, 9:09 am ET > The growing repertoire of gadgets at our disposal, from smartphones to > televisions, may make it easier to work, play and connect with one > another. Unfortunately, these devices may also be making us very, very > tired. > ----------------- > > > > Lack of sleep, drug use linked > 2010-02-21 22:52 > Teens who sleep fewer than seven hours per night are more likely to > use illegal drugs. Yawn. And I bet they drank milk when young too. But seriously, some of the brightest people I have known slept a lot. More like 9-10 hours than 5 or 6 or even my own normal 7. - samantha From max at maxmore.com Mon Mar 14 18:31:05 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:31:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More information, technical and otherwise, about paleo diet and life In-Reply-To: <4D7D5A25.8050302@gnolls.org> References: <4D7D5A25.8050302@gnolls.org> Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 4:58 PM, J. Stanton wrote: > > Since Max has broached the subject again, I feel it's OK to note my > detailed, comprehensive, and entertaining "paleo diet/exercise for > beginners" guide: > It's always okay. Health and life extension are always germane for this email list! Thanks for the additional resources and links. One issue I'd like to hear your view on (if you haven't expressed it in the links I'll be working through...) is how protein is optimal. Gedgaudas suggesting limiting protein to what seem to me low levels (the RDA of 46 to 53g, no more than 60 to 70g for large, highly physically active people). If one is eating almost no carbs and only a small amount of protein, that means the great majority of calories will come from fat. I'm not sure how you would eat that much fat without also eating more protein. I'm not going to eat lots of spoonsful of coconut oil... > -Dr. Mary Enig's "Know Your Fats", if you're still scared of saturated > fat or want to know the biochemistry > Is that to be preferred to her more recent book, Eat Fat, Lose Fat? > I will also note that I disagree with what Max appears to be saying > about not eating starchy tubers: Actually I was relating what Cordain says in his paleo principles, not necessarily agreeing with them. > Essentially I view Devany and Cordain as the "first wave" of paleo: they > focus more on re-enactment than on the science, I think that's being too tough on Cordain. He clearly does rely on the science, but also clearly misses out on some of it. As you say, he's revised his views on a couple of things, including his former advocacy of flaxseed oil. Onward! --- 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: From stefano.vaj at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 18:46:14 2011 From: stefano.vaj at gmail.com (Stefano Vaj) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:46:14 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Cryo-Paleo Solution In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/13 Max More > There's a huge amount I'd like to say about the topic of the paleo diet > ("the cave man diet"), but I managed to limit myself to an > overview/introduction here: > > http://www.alcor.org/magazine/2011/03/07/the-cryo-paleo-solution/ > This is an exceptionally good introduction to paleo lifestyle for everybody, but I was indeed surprised by how much it reflects my own "transhumanist" views on the subject and the various "paleo-debates". -- Stefano Vaj -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at harveynewstrom.com Mon Mar 14 18:41:26 2011 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (mail at harveynewstrom.com) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:41:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics dinners Message-ID: <20110314114126.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.de0bb40f3d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net> Anders Sandberg wrote, > Here is a new tradition we have started in Oxford (if you do something > twice in Britain it is a tradition, and must be continued until the end > of time): every time someone newly signed up gets their cryonics > bracelet (or similar thing) we (the other cryonicists) invite them to a > celebratory dinner at some suitably posh restaurant. A mild motivator, > but most importantly a way of building a social cluster. Not frozen dinners? -- Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From mail at harveynewstrom.com Mon Mar 14 18:37:27 2011 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (mail at harveynewstrom.com) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 11:37:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Which_nootropics_work_best=3F?= Message-ID: <20110314113727.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.fcc5788d0b.wbe@email09.secureserver.net> John Grigg wrote, > My recommendation to Max and everyone is to get a GOOD NIGHT'S SLEEP. I second this. Reviewing the literature shows that sleep restores memory and cognitive function much more effectively than any nootropic. We know that the effect of sleep deprivation and the speed at which sleep restores function is extremely dramatic. We know that even minor disruptions to sleep quantity or quality have dramatic measurable effects on performance. Most nootropics show only a few percent improvement. And many of these are within the possible range of the placebo effect. Therefore, I have endorsed a new theory for my personal life in the past few years: - If the alarm clock always wakes me up, I am not getting enough sleep. - I now schedule 9 hours for sleep and almost always wake up refreshed before the alarm clock goes off. - I feel like I am more effective and have a better attitude when I am better rested. - I now believe that boredom, tedium, and frustration at work are really symptoms of a lack of mental energy. Being more completely rested allows me to develop more interesting solutions, finish projects quicker, and more willingly spend more energy facing distractions. Nootropics might provide a few percentage points of increased effectiveness. But they pale in comparison to sleep, exercise, and basic nutrition in my experience. -- Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP From thirdeyeoferis at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 18:23:51 2011 From: thirdeyeoferis at gmail.com (Thirdeye Of Eris) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 14:23:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: <4D7E5129.3040104@mac.com> References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> <4D7E5129.3040104@mac.com> Message-ID: Hydergine, Piracetam, and Deprenyl in combination is very effective. Modafinil is fantastic as well, of course. My insurance company covered it so it was not expensive at all. --I On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > On 03/14/2011 02:19 AM, BillK wrote: > >> On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:35 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote: >> >>> I will agree with John. After sleeping enough I am happier, more >>> energetic and more productive, my brain works much better, and I can >>> do much more. It is not only about quantity, it is also about quality. >>> >>> >>> And there are studies backing up the dangers of lack of sleep. >> >> < >> http://news.yahoo.com/s/digitaltrends/20110307/tc_digitaltrends/gadgetusagecauseslackofsleepstudyfinds_1 >> > >> >> Gadget usage causes lack of sleep, study finds >> > > Doesn't seem to make any difference for me re a sleep/gadget connection. > Well, not unless I stayed up too late because I couldn't extricate myself > from some game. > > > Mon Mar 7, 9:09 am ET >> The growing repertoire of gadgets at our disposal, from smartphones to >> televisions, may make it easier to work, play and connect with one >> another. Unfortunately, these devices may also be making us very, very >> tired. >> ----------------- >> >> < >> http://www.news24.com/SciTech/News/Lack-of-sleep-drug-use-linked-20100221 >> > >> >> Lack of sleep, drug use linked >> 2010-02-21 22:52 >> Teens who sleep fewer than seven hours per night are more likely to >> use illegal drugs. >> > Yawn. And I bet they drank milk when young too. > > But seriously, some of the brightest people I have known slept a lot. More > like 9-10 hours than 5 or 6 or even my own normal 7. > > - samantha > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- "A rational anarchist believes that concepts such as ?state? and?society? and ?government? have no existence save as physically exemplified in the acts of self-responsible individuals. He believes that it is impossible to shift blame, share blame, distribute blame... as blame, guilt, responsibility are matters taking place inside human beings singly and nowhere else. But being rational, he knows that not all individuals hold his evaluations, so he tries to live perfectly in an imperfect world... aware that his effort will be less than perfect yet undismayed by self-knowledge of self-failure." -- Professor De La Paz from The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress by Robert Heinlein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From max at maxmore.com Tue Mar 15 01:01:56 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:01:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: <20110314113727.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.fcc5788d0b.wbe@email09.secureserver.net> References: <20110314113727.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.fcc5788d0b.wbe@email09.secureserver.net> Message-ID: John and Harvey: Yes, I agree completely. Despite the pressure of things to do, I almost always these days get a minimum of 7 hours and mostly closer to 8 hours sleep, with extra at weekends. As a (Neo)Paleo advocate, I'm definitely in tune with the idea of waking up without an alarm clock. I find that more difficult now that I must keep office time, but I'm working toward that goal. I'm already doing my best with nutrition and exercise, so I'm looking for those extra few percent improvements. --- Max On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 11:37 AM, wrote: > John Grigg wrote, > > My recommendation to Max and everyone is to get a GOOD NIGHT'S SLEEP. > > I second this. Reviewing the literature shows that sleep restores > memory and cognitive function much more effectively than any nootropic. > We know that the effect of sleep deprivation and the speed at which > sleep restores function is extremely dramatic. We know that even minor > disruptions to sleep quantity or quality have dramatic measurable > effects on performance. Most nootropics show only a few percent > improvement. And many of these are within the possible range of the > placebo effect. > [snip] > > Nootropics might provide a few percentage points of increased > effectiveness. But they pale in comparison to sleep, exercise, and > basic nutrition in my experience. > > -- > Harvey Newstrom, Security Consultant, > > > CISSP CISA CISM CGEIT CSSLP CRISC CIFI NSA-IAM ISSAP ISSMP ISSPCS IBMCP > > -- > 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: From max at maxmore.com Tue Mar 15 01:39:47 2011 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 18:39:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Scientific American on keeping nuclear risks in perspective Message-ID: I haven't liked the bias of Scientific American on some issues in recent years, but was please to see this item: http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=beware-the-fear-of-nuclearfear-2011-03-12 --- 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: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon Mar 14 21:28:21 2011 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 16:28:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 2011/3/13 Max More > I'd appreciate any pointers to reasonably current research on cognitive > enhancers, and even personal experiences, and pointers to evidence-based web > resources. > I don't think extropy-chat has the critical mass of nootropic knowledge any more. From what I've read in the responses, there's been the standard drugs and pills mentioned. Immortality Institute's forum has a ridiculous amount of nootropics-related activity; from what I can tell, this might be due to a lower average age of their posters and more disposable income-- some of their regiments seem to be upwards $50/day in some cases. super awesome linking power, activate! http://www.longecity.org/forum/forum/169-nootropics/ - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 15 01:25:57 2011 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:25:57 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Now I've checked your link, Keith. A passing remark on an MIT blog. Puleeeeeese! Jeff Davis On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Keith Henson wrote: >> >> Not knowing what they actually had perhaps I am being harsh on this, ?but an crew of Americans would have taken the plugs off and spliced the wires. ?There are significant cultural differences between the two societies. > > Yes, that was my immediate thought as well, 'Splice 'em!". ?But c'mon! > ?Just on that account, the story makes no sense. ?You've got a > billion dollar nuke plant you risk losing to a melt down, plus the > potential human safety catastrophe of a full reactor vessel breech! > The guys working the emergency response would have been the best of > the best. ?They would have known to splice, and done it with their > teeth if necessary. ?There just HAS to be something else to this > story, some other problem we haven't heard about yet. > > Jeff Davis > From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 15 01:21:24 2011 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:21:24 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > Not knowing what they actually had perhaps I am being harsh on this, but an crew of Americans would have taken the plugs off and spliced the wires. ?There are significant cultural differences between the two societies. Yes, that was my immediate thought as well, 'Splice 'em!". But c'mon! Just on that account, the story makes no sense. You've got a billion dollar nuke plant you risk losing to a melt down, plus the potential human safety catastrophe of a full reactor vessel breech! The guys working the emergency response would have been the best of the best. They would have known to splice, and done it with their teeth if necessary. There just HAS to be something else to this story, some other problem we haven't heard about yet. Jeff Davis From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 15 01:32:12 2011 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 19:32:12 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The original article, from which Keith quotes, is now found here: http://mitnse.com/ The part about the plugs is nowhere to be found (at least not now) in the main article. Jeff Davis On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:25 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > Now I've checked your link, Keith. ?A passing remark on an MIT blog. > Puleeeeeese! > > Jeff Davis From jrd1415 at gmail.com Tue Mar 15 02:05:44 2011 From: jrd1415 at gmail.com (Jeff Davis) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:05:44 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 14, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Jeff Davis wrote: > The original article, from which Keith quotes, is now found here: > > http://mitnse.com/ > At the top of the article we find the following comment: Modified version of original post written by Josef Oehmen Posted on March 13, 2011 by mitnse This post originally appeared on Morgsatlarge. It has been migrated to this location which is hosted and maintained by the MIT Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering. Members of the NSE community have edited the original post and will be monitoring and posting comments, updates, and new information. Please visit to learn more. The original post written by Dr Josef Oehmen ?Why I am not worried about Japan?snuclear reactors.? are being reposted in different languages. They have not been checked / verified. *********************************** Note in particular: ...Members of the NSE community have edited the original post..." > The part about the plugs is nowhere to be found (at least not now) in > the main article. Googling further, I find what I think is the original, here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2688108/posts Complete with "plugs" comment, since edited out presumably by the MIT NSE folks. Jeff Davis From emlynoregan at gmail.com Tue Mar 15 05:13:23 2011 From: emlynoregan at gmail.com (Emlyn) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:43:23 +1030 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: <4D7C9896.5030507@aleph.se> References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <4D7C9896.5030507@aleph.se> Message-ID: Anders wrote: > Similarly, movies have for technical reasons become able to be epic in > length, and I assume there are economic reasons too (how much would you pay > for a ticket to a 50 minute movie?). Yet the clipping has become far faster > - seeing young people encounter Kubrick's 2001 for the first time is > instructive. They better not try Tarkovsky's Solaris. Take any 80s action movie. "Predator" is a great example. How fast was it? I've been rewatching some recently (to my detriment!), and wow, they move slooowly. You'd be amazed. Give it a shot. -- 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 js_exi at gnolls.org Tue Mar 15 06:25:22 2011 From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 23:25:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] More information, technical and otherwise, about paleo diet and life Message-ID: <4D7F0652.1020906@gnolls.org> Max More wrote: > One issue I'd like to hear your view on (if you haven't expressed it > in the links I'll be working through...) is how protein is optimal. > Gedgaudas suggesting limiting protein to what seem to me low levels > (the RDA of 46 to 53g, no more than 60 to 70g for large, highly > physically active people). If one is eating almost no carbs and only > a small amount of protein, that means the great majority of calories > will come from fat. I'm not sure how you would eat that much fat > without also eating more protein. I'm not going to eat lots of > spoonsful of coconut oil... It sounds like Gedgaudas is coming from the same place as the Perfect Health Diet folks, who recommend a relatively low protein diet on the theory that protein beyond the biologically necessary intake will simply be converted to glucose, and further, that some amount of protein restriction leads to beneficial autophagy (i.e. it's like caloric restriction, but without the misery). There is also the satiation/protein leverage hypothesis: http://perfecthealthdiet.com/?p=2046 Personally, I pay little attention to the macronutrient ratio of my diet, on the theory that avoiding gluten/n-6 fats/fructose is far more important than anything else. But I find a high-fat diet to be far more tasty and satiating. It took me about a day to shift from "Ew, that's got a lot of fat on it" to "Mmmm, fat!" As far as dietary fat sources: -Untrimmed steaks and meat. There's a lot of fat that normally gets thrown away. And if I'm stuck with a lean cut in a fried dish I'll add extra beef tallow. -I also have a mini deep-fryer full of tallow, for the best potato chips EVER. -I eat a lot of eggs. -Refined coconut oil is great because it doesn't taste like coconuts at all. (I still use cold-pressed, not RBD oil) -Few things taste worse with added butter. -I break the rule "don't drink calories" because I'm trying to keep weight on, not lose it, and I seem to tolerate lactose. Half and half is delicious. So is full-fat Greek yogurt. (Interestingly, I don't find myself craving cheese now that I'm getting plenty of fat from other sources.) -Thai curries are delicious, and entirely based on coconut cream. Note: the curry paste at your local Asian market will be dramatically better than the "Thai Kitchen" stuff in the supermarket. I'm probably still somewhat higher-protein and lower-fat than the Gedgaudas/PHD recommendations...but as I said, I don't worry about it much. I have the strange idea that our bodies have been shaped by millions of years of evolution to crave the nutrients we need, so long as we don't allow ourselves the Neolithic processed foods that trigger drug-like highs (e.g. grains and sugars). Even butterflies know to lick water off of mineralized rocks. >> -Dr. Mary Enig's "Know Your Fats", if you're still scared of saturated >> fat or want to know the biochemistry >> > Is that to be preferred to her more recent book, Eat Fat, Lose Fat? I believe so. "Know Your Fats" is basic biochemistry, and much better for understanding the underlying issues. EFLF is a diet book with recipes and some background information. Note that KYF is somewhat expensive ($30) and may therefore be worth finding through a library. > Actually I was relating what Cordain says in his paleo principles, not > necessarily agreeing with them. Point taken. Again, all respect to him for being one of the pioneers, back when the entire concept was a fringe activity. And he's co-authored a recent paper which is basically "Origins and evolution of the Western diet, 2011 edition" in which he moderates his anti-SFA stance somewhat. But there are a lot of copies of "The Paleo Diet" out there, and my opinion is that trying to eat low-fat "paleo" is the primary cause of being unable to stick with it....particularly for active people. You get protein-satiated and simply don't eat enough calories, leading to being hungry, miserable, and falling off the wagon. JS http://www.gnolls.org From spike66 at att.net Tue Mar 15 06:16:33 2011 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2011 23:16:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] shortening attention spans In-Reply-To: References: <003601cbe129$5f56bda0$1e0438e0$@att.net> <4D7C9896.5030507@aleph.se> Message-ID: <001401cbe2d8$8971a1d0$9c54e570$@att.net> ... > - seeing young people encounter Kubrick's 2001 for the first time is instructive. Anders Funny story: 2001 came out in 1968 or so as I recall. It was just before the moon landings, and being as I was in second grade and living on the Space Coast of Florida, and liked AC Clarke, and space was the happening thing, we looooved 2001. Near the end of that film when Dave Bowman is in the process of doing whatever the hell is happening right there, Kubric decided to attempt an ethereal cinematic description of Clarke's already vague prose using a color reversed image of what looked to us Florida kids like the Everglades. So the story was going along fine, all out in space and such, then suddenly we were asking "Why are we flying upside down over the Everglades with the wrong color filters on the cameras?" The local theatres showed that film every day for months. That crowd just kept lapping it up, couldn't get enough 2001. The only reason they ever did take it away is that the stoners discovered the cool thing to do was "drop acid" or "turn on" I think they called it, and have the LSD hit right when they went into the "psychedelic" bit there. They reported that it was "groovy" and "far out" and such, but Titusville was a flat top, squared off military town, and by god they were just not having that kind of goings on. So out went Kubric, and I don't think that local theatre ever did bring back another Kubric film. Can't trust em, dontcha know, even the name Kubric sounds a little too much on the commie side, corrupt the youth and such. {8^D spike From scerir at alice.it Tue Mar 15 07:34:09 2011 From: scerir at alice.it (scerir) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 08:34:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <33235A73367A4B3A82C9F81FDFE3E22F@PCserafino> some more info here http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/03/13/fukushima-simple-explanation/ From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com Tue Mar 15 09:15:38 2011 From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 10:15:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 2:21 AM, Jeff Davis wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 9:32 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: > > > > Not knowing what they actually had perhaps I am being harsh on this, but > an crew of Americans would have taken the plugs off and spliced the wires. > There are significant cultural differences between the two societies. > > Yes, that was my immediate thought as well, 'Splice 'em!". But c'mon! > Just on that account, the story makes no sense. You've got a > billion dollar nuke plant you risk losing to a melt down, plus the > potential human safety catastrophe of a full reactor vessel breech! > The guys working the emergency response would have been the best of > the best. They would have known to splice, and done it with their > teeth if necessary. There just HAS to be something else to this > story, some other problem we haven't heard about yet. The NYT has a piece on the subject with a comment that makes a lot more sense: "The problem, he said, was that the hookup is done through electric switching equipment that is in a basement room flooded by the tsunami, he said" http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/14/world/asia/japan-fukushima-nuclear-reactor.html?_r=2&pagewanted=2 Basically, the plant was not designed for external power supplies, since it had plenty of auxiliary generators on site. Thus the hooking up of emergency generators is not a simple matter of plugging in a connector. And the switching room is in the basement... Alfio -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 15 11:47:56 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 12:47:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Cryonics dinners In-Reply-To: <20110314114126.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.de0bb40f3d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net> References: <20110314114126.d32794d095cdfcc0018508d9c136b552.de0bb40f3d.wbe@email09.secureserver.net> Message-ID: <4D7F51EC.8040203@aleph.se> On 2011-03-14 19:41, mail at harveynewstrom.com wrote: > Anders Sandberg wrote, >> Here is a new tradition we have started in Oxford (if you do something >> twice in Britain it is a tradition, and must be continued until the end >> of time): every time someone newly signed up gets their cryonics >> bracelet (or similar thing) we (the other cryonicists) invite them to a >> celebratory dinner at some suitably posh restaurant. A mild motivator, >> but most importantly a way of building a social cluster. > > Not frozen dinners? It would have been suitable. We also considered whether to drop an ice cube down the shirt of the new sign-up :-) -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 15 12:13:54 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 13:13:54 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7F5802.6070304@aleph.se> On 2011-03-14 22:28, Bryan Bishop wrote: > I don't think extropy-chat has the critical mass of nootropic knowledge > any more. From what I've read in the responses, there's been the > standard drugs and pills mentioned. Immortality Institute's forum has a > ridiculous amount of nootropics-related activity; from what I can tell, > this might be due to a lower average age of their posters and more > disposable income-- some of their regiments seem to be upwards $50/day > in some cases. But maybe that is also because we do a bit more critical thinking? A regimen of lots of pills makes sense if you think you know how they are going to interact, or you have reason to think the combination gives you such an edge that it is worth the risk and inconvenience. But the real evidence for most of the enhancers discussed there is slim - sure, you can always find a few Pubmed abstracts that look good, but actual solid evidence based medicine is very scarce for cognitive enhancers. There will be significant placebo effects. Since normal medications and supplements have interactions and side effects we should expect them for the enhancers too. Just look at an apparently well-regarded post like http://www.longecity.org/forum/topic/36691-ten-months-of-research-condensed-a-total-newbies-guide-to-nootropics/ It is crammed with claims that are problematic because they are unsupported (where is the evidence for the safety of chronic use?) or wrong (no, increasing ACh levels does not do the same thing as inhibiting AChE!) This is a mixture of wishful thinking and guesswork. Not necessarily wrong, but seriously overconfident. I have collected a library of papers on cognitive enhancement, and I think that only sugar and *maybe* caffeine has good enough data to pass a Cochrane review. Stimulants could probably pass for their stimulating effects (duh) but proper characterization of their cognitive enhancing functions is limited. This is of course demanding a high level of evidence, but I'd rather do that than waste money, time and risk on something that is unlikely to give an enormous benefit even if it works as advertised. Check out http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/subtopics/56.html In particular http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab006220.html (memory training +) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab005381.html (exercise +) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab005379.html (PUFA vs dementia -?) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab003122.html (HRT vs dementia -) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab005993.html (Procaine -) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab004514.html (B12 vs dementia -) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab006221.html (DHEA -) http://www2.cochrane.org/reviews/en/ab003120.html (Ginkgo vs dementia -) Not too encouraging, but then again, most medicine is not too encouraging once you start to scrutinize it closely. -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Tue Mar 15 13:45:46 2011 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:45:46 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Which nootropics work best? In-Reply-To: <4D7E5129.3040104@mac.com> References: <008c01cbe1df$9fc18e90$df44abb0$@att.net> <003101cbe207$036d1500$0a473f00$@att.net> <4D7E5129.3040104@mac.com> Message-ID: <4D7F6D8A.6060402@aleph.se> On 2011-03-14 18:32, Samantha Atkins wrote: > But seriously, some of the brightest people I have known slept a lot. > More like 9-10 hours than 5 or 6 or even my own normal 7. There are some studies linking late morning habits to higher intelligence. Sleeping a lot is on the other hand correlated to higher mortality, even when controlling for depression and other obvious causative disease. But the individual variations are big. Maybe being able to get up when it suits your biological clock rather than forcing a certain time has good psychological effects? Here in Oxford at the philosophy department we joke about the dayshift and nightshift philosophers. The dayshift researchers come in in the morning and leave in the afternoon - many have families and lead fairly ordinary lives. The nighshift starts showing up in the afternoon and work all evening and night. The nice thing about philosophy is that it is a discipline where this works very well - we are not too dependent on working side by side. Might be harder to do well in a biology lab or company office. -- Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford University From rpwl at lightlink.com Tue Mar 15 13:56:59 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 09:56:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4D7F702B.7000603@lightlink.com> What distresses me about the nuclear plants is the Morgsatlarge post, (the one now lodged in modified form at http://mitnse.com/) describes a very reassuring "defense in depth" strategy, where things are allowed to fail but the designers have done such a good job that there is always another line of defense to fall back to. Only problem with this: those fallback positions have been going down like dominoes. It seems to me that the safety systems were all "Looks Good In Powerpoint Presentations To Senior Management" safety systems. On paper, great. On the ground, as thin as paper. Richard Loosemore From eugen at leitl.org Tue Mar 15 14:23:21 2011 From: eugen at leitl.org (Eugen Leitl) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:23:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <4D7F702B.7000603@lightlink.com> References: <4D7F702B.7000603@lightlink.com> Message-ID: <20110315142321.GA23560@leitl.org> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:56:59AM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote: > On paper, great. > > On the ground, as thin as paper. You sound surprised. -- Eugen* Leitl leitl 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 rpwl at lightlink.com Tue Mar 15 14:51:51 2011 From: rpwl at lightlink.com (Richard Loosemore) Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 10:51:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Two Japanese reactors on red alert In-Reply-To: <20110315142321.GA23560@leitl.org> References: <4D7F702B.7000603@lightlink.com> <20110315142321.GA23560@leitl.org> Message-ID: <4D7F7D07.20502@lightlink.com> Eugen Leitl wrote: > On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 09:56:59AM -0400, Richard Loosemore wrote: >> On paper, great. >> >> On the ground, as thin as paper. > > You sound surprised. I sound ... frustrated, and let down. These things are not (it turns out) about physics and engineering, they are about organizational psychology, and politics. Too often, those who focus on the benefits