From pharos at gmail.com Thu May 1 09:54:37 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 10:54:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neanderthals weren't exterminated - they were assimilated Message-ID: In the past few decades, however, anthropological discoveries have contradicted those stereotypical views. Neanderthals actually had slightly larger brains than modern humans! Moreover, they were accomplished big game hunters, crafted advanced tools, ritualistically buried their dead, and utilized language and symbols. According to archaeologists Paola Villa and Wil Roebroeks, these recent discoveries counter the notion that human superiority somehow led to the demise of the Neanderthals. They state their case in the form of a systematic review of archaeological records, published in the online open-access journal PLoS ONE. The extinction and competition hypotheses for the demise of the Neanderthals, notably suggested by interdisciplinary scientist and author Jared Diamond, hinge on the idea that humans were more advanced than Neanderthals. Commonly claimed are the following: that humans had more communicative abilities, were more efficient hunters, had superior weaponry, ate a broader diet, and had more extensive social networks. But the archaeological record doesn't back any of those claims, the authors found. According to Villa and Roebroeks, the best explanation now is familiar to anyone who's acquainted with the Borg, a ruthless collective of cybernetic beings from Star Trek. Neanderthals were assimilated... by us. That's right: Humanity is the Borg. In 2010, scientists discovered that between one and four percent of the DNA of modern humans living outside of Africa is derived from Neanderthals, providing clear evidence that the two species were interbreeding to some extent tens of thousands of years ago. In January of this year, Benjamin Vernot and Joshua Akey of the University of Washington published a paper in Science that corroborated those results. They found that a fifth of Neanderthals' genetic code lives on within our species as a whole. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu May 1 15:35:14 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 10:35:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <009001cf63b9$e46752f0$ad35f8d0$@att.net> References: <009001cf63b9$e46752f0$ad35f8d0$@att.net> Message-ID: I read where the human brain is firing at a rate of four quadrillion time a second. Of course we don't want a computer to do all that our brain is doing but still....... On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 9:47 AM, spike wrote: > > > I don't know how much of this is the usual hype that sticks to this topic > like moss on an oak, but if I find more info I will post it here. I hope > we can create some kind of standard specialized device such as the > Neurogrid which would allow the geek masses to experiment. spike > > > http://news.stanford.edu/pr/2014/pr-neurogrid-boahen-engineering-042814.html > > April 28, 2014 > > Stanford bioengineers create circuit board modeled on the human brain > > Stanford bioengineers have developed faster, more energy-efficient > microchips based on the human brain ? 9,000 times faster and using > significantly less power than a typical PC. This offers greater > possibilities for advances in robotics and a new way of understanding the > brain. For instance, a chip as fast and efficient as the human brain could > drive prosthetic limbs with the speed and complexity of our own actions. > > BY TOM ABATE > > The Neurogrid circuit board can simulate orders of magnitude more neurons > and synapses than other brain mimics on the power it takes to run a tablet > computer. Stanford bioengineers have developed a new circuit board modeled > on the human brain, possibly opening up new frontiers in robotics and > computing. > > For all their sophistication, computers pale in comparison to the brain. > The modest cortex of the mouse, for instance, operates 9,000 times faster > than a personal computer simulation of its functions. > > Not only is the PC slower, it takes 40,000 times more power to run, writes > Kwabena Boahen, associate professor of bioengineering at Stanford, in an > article for the Proceedings of the IEEE. > > "From a pure energy perspective, the brain is hard to match," says Boahen, > whose article surveys how "neuromorphic" researchers in the United States > and Europe are using silicon and software to build electronic systems that > mimic neurons and synapses. > > Boahen and his team have developed Neurogrid, a circuit board consisting of > 16 custom-designed "Neurocore" chips. Together these 16 chips can simulate > 1 million neurons and billions of synaptic connections. The team designed > these chips with power efficiency in mind. Their strategy was to enable > certain synapses to share hardware circuits. The result was Neurogrid ? a > device about the size of an iPad that can simulate orders of magnitude more > neurons and synapses than other brain mimics on the power it takes to run a > tablet computer. > > The National Institutes of Health funded development of this > million-neuron prototype with a five-year Pioneer Award. Now Boahen stands > ready for the next steps ? lowering costs and creating compiler software > that would enable engineers and computer scientists with no knowledge of > neuroscience to solve problems ? such as controlling a humanoid robot ? > using Neurogrid. > > Its speed and low power characteristics make Neurogrid ideal for more than > just modeling the human brain. Boahen is working with other Stanford > scientists to develop prosthetic limbs for paralyzed people that would be > controlled by a Neurocore-like chip. > > "Right now, you have to know how the brain works to program one of these," > said Boahen, gesturing at the $40,000 prototype board on the desk of his > Stanford office. "We want to create a neurocompiler so that you would not > need to know anything about synapses and neurons to able to use one of > these." > > Brain ferment > > In his article, Boahen notes the larger context of neuromorphic research, > including the European Union's Human Brain Project, which aims to simulate > a human brain on a supercomputer. By contrast, the U.S. BRAIN Project ? > short for Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies ? > has taken a tool-building approach by challenging scientists, including > many at Stanford, to develop new kinds of tools that can read out the > activity of thousands or even millions of neurons in the brain as well as > write in complex patterns of activity. > > Zooming from the big picture, Boahen's article focuses on two projects > comparable to Neurogrid that attempt to model brain functions in silicon > and/or software. > > One of these efforts is IBM's SyNAPSE Project ? short for Systems of > Neuromorphic Adaptive Plastic Scalable Electronics. As the name implies, > SyNAPSE involves a bid to redesign chips, code-named Golden Gate, to > emulate the ability of neurons to make a great many synaptic connections ? > a feature that helps the brain solve problems on the fly. At present a > Golden Gate chip consists of 256 digital neurons each equipped with 1,024 > digital synaptic circuits, with IBM on track to greatly increase the > numbers of neurons in the system. > > Heidelberg University's BrainScales project has the ambitious goal of > developing analog chips to mimic the behaviors of neurons and synapses. > Their HICANN chip ? short for High Input Count Analog Neural Network ? > would be the core of a system designed to accelerate brain simulations, to > enable researchers to model drug interactions that might take months to > play out in a compressed time frame. At present, the HICANN system can > emulate 512 neurons each equipped with 224 synaptic circuits, with a > roadmap to greatly expand that hardware base. > > Each of these research teams has made different technical choices, such as > whether to dedicate each hardware circuit to modeling a single neural > element (e.g., a single synapse) or several (e.g., by activating the > hardware circuit twice to model the effect of two active synapses). These > choices have resulted in different trade-offs in terms of capability and > performance. > > In his analysis, Boahen creates a single metric to account for total > system cost ? including the size of the chip, how many neurons it simulates > and the power it consumes. > > Neurogrid was by far the most cost-effective way to simulate neurons, in > keeping with Boahen's goal of creating a system affordable enough to be > widely used in research. > > Speed and efficiency > > But much work lies ahead. Each of the current million-neuron Neurogrid > circuit boards cost about $40,000. Boahen believes dramatic cost reductions > are possible. Neurogrid is based on 16 Neurocores, each of which supports > 65,536 neurons. Those chips were made using 15-year-old fabrication > technologies. > > By switching to modern manufacturing processes and fabricating the chips > in large volumes, he could cut a Neurocore's cost 100-fold ? suggesting a > million-neuron board for $400 a copy. With that cheaper hardware and > compiler software to make it easy to configure, these neuromorphic systems > could find numerous applications. > > For instance, a chip as fast and efficient as the human brain could drive > prosthetic limbs with the speed and complexity of our own actions ? but > without being tethered to a power source. Krishna Shenoy, an electrical > engineering professor at Stanford and Boahen's neighbor at the > interdisciplinary Bio-X center, is developing ways of reading brain signals > to understand movement. Boahen envisions a Neurocore-like chip that could > be implanted in a paralyzed person's brain, interpreting those intended > movements and translating them to commands for prosthetic limbs without > overheating the brain. > > A small prosthetic arm in Boahen's lab is currently controlled by > Neurogrid to execute movement commands in real time. For now it doesn't > look like much, but its simple levers and joints hold hope for robotic > limbs of the future. > > Of course, all of these neuromorphic efforts are beggared by the > complexity and efficiency of the human brain. > > In his article, Boahen notes that Neurogrid is about 100,000 times more > energy efficient than a personal computer simulation of 1 million neurons. > Yet it is an energy hog compared to our biological CPU. > > "The human brain, with 80,000 times more neurons than Neurogrid, consumes > only three times as much power," Boahen writes. "Achieving this level of > energy efficiency while offering greater configurability and scale is the > ultimate challenge neuromorphic engineers face." > > Tom Abate writes about the students, faculty and research of the School of > Engineering. Amy Adams of Stanford University Communications contributed to > this report. > > For more Stanford experts in bioengineering and other topics, visit > Stanford Experts. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Thu May 1 15:40:40 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 10:40:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] language In-Reply-To: References: <7B1F113A-ABC6-4F3C-ABB3-37711ED7A905@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: Been down - tornadoes. Everything OK (Yes, it's a government, just no hierarchy - totally egalitarian) What if people decided not to degrade the language and add to it only by vote? The we could quit nicknaming and acronyming etc. What if people are so genetically constructed that they can do any job and everyone rotates jobs? What if everyone had the highest IQ possible after thousands of years of genetic experiments? Ditto creativity. Spoiler alert: my book will be a satire. Everyone and everything is extremely well-designed. But men and women are in a huge battle over how to invent their future, including themselves. So, no nuclear or robot wars, but the battle of the sexes goes on forever. And Big Computer knows everything about everybody but cannot reveal anything except by 95% vote. Privacy concerns satirized, as everything everyone does is recorded by Big Computer, and so lies, which could never result in any sort of gain whatsoever, could be checked. And all kids go through extensive face-reading classes, social and emotional intelligence. On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > If everyone has one vote, there is a government by definition. > > While there may not be personal property, there is property that some > people are allowed to use more than others - by law, or just the fact that > they do use it more. Some people might see this allocation as unfair. > > This leads directly to politicians, who make a living out of manipulating > opinion. (Not being able to lie just makes it harder.) > > > On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:57 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Curiously, my future humans cannot lie, and there are no politicians, no >> government, no hierarchy - everyone has one vote. This is also no personal >> property, so nothing to steal. >> >> >> On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Tara Maya wrote: >> >>> You forgot the language of politicians and lawyers, used to obfuscate, >>> intimidate and mislead. >>> >>> Tara Maya >>> Blog | Twitter | >>> Facebook | >>> Amazon | >>> Goodreads >>> >>> >>> >>> On Apr 26, 2014, at 8:22 AM, William Flynn Wallace >>> wrote: >>> >>> In my far future book the people use two languages: one is extremely >>> objective - no synonyms, no homonyms, nothing to confuse - designed for >>> conveying strictly factual information with little to no room for >>> misunderstanding. The second language is meant for nuance: prose and >>> poetry, puns and word play, rich in adjectives and adverbs, etc. >>> >>> Aside from mathematics and computer languages, what more is needed? >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu May 1 16:06:34 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 09:06:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <009001cf63b9$e46752f0$ad35f8d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:35 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain I read where the human brain is firing at a rate of four quadrillion time a second. Of course we don't want a computer to do all that our brain is doing but still....... Indeed. We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. Consider the above calculation. We have about 1E11 brain cells (I think that is the standard estimate, do correct me if I err.) If the above calculation of 4E15 is correct, then the average brain cell would need to fire 4E4 times per second. The standard estimate I have heard is a typical brain cell fires at about 200 Hz, for a 2E13 rate. BillW, have you a source please on your 4E15 number? Compare to a typical microprocessor. We have about a billion transistors (processor gurus, is this number approximately up to date?) so about a quarter of a billion gates, operating at about 4 billion Hz. If they all switched every cycle that would be about 1E18 ?firings? (ignore for the moment the term may or may not be applicable.) If I go into task manager, I see that about 1% of the CPU is busy as a rough estimate. So perhaps 1E16, or I would be OK with your 4E15, give back another factor of 2. So the computer makes that specification, but the brain is a factor of 200 short? Over to you BillW. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu May 1 16:17:16 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 09:17:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] language In-Reply-To: References: <7B1F113A-ABC6-4F3C-ABB3-37711ED7A905@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: <007001cf6558$d23d16a0$76b743e0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:41 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] language Been down - tornadoes. Everything OK Damn the tornadoes, full speed ahead! Glad to hear all are well BillW. What if people decided not to degrade the language and add to it only by vote? The we could quit nicknaming and acronyming etc? That?s kinda what we do. Terms are introduced, sometimes the proles take them and use them, sometimes not. That process is analogous to voting on introducing new terms for a vote. What if people are so genetically constructed that they can do any job and everyone rotates jobs? This wouldn?t require genetically constructing people, it requires constructing the jobs. This is what is happening too: jobs are not so much dumbed down (actually they are, but that?s another discussion) as jobs are generalized to match the most common skills. I have seen the aerospace industry evolve to where it doesn?t take a rocket scientist to do them. For most of those remaining jobs, it doesn?t really even take an engineer. I have seen some of the most successful ones come in with degrees in accounting. I am not kidding. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com Thu May 1 16:31:59 2014 From: ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com (Gina Miller) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 10:31:59 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Please help! Word/Open office document In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I still need help! On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Gina Miller wrote: > I need a little help. I have Open office, basically a free version of Word > that can be saved in .doc format. I have a large background picture that I > want locked so that you can type over it without being moved. I can't seem > to figure it out, I set it up so it looks great but then I close the file > and open it up again and it isn't there, or it's crooked. Can I send some > one the background picture to help me out? I'd really appreciate it. > > > Thanks > Gina "Nanogirl" Miller > -- Gina Miller www.nanogirl.com www.nanoindustries.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu May 1 16:53:27 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 12:53:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> References: <009001cf63b9$e46752f0$ad35f8d0$@att.net> <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, spike wrote: > We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. > Yes. > > We have about 1E11 brain cells > And even with today's primitive technology we could pack about 10^10 transistors in the volume that just 2 of those neurons occupy, and the signals that transistors use move nearly a billion times faster than the signals brain cells use, and transistors keep getting better but brain cells don't; so I have a hunch who will ultimately win the battle between biology and electronics. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From wincat at swbell.net Thu May 1 16:43:23 2014 From: wincat at swbell.net (Norman Jacobs) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 11:43:23 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Please help! Word/Open office document In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <010901cf655c$78a8d1c0$69fa7540$@net> Gina, Try to copy the graphic and paste it into Infranview, which is a free simple graphics editor. In Infranview you may be able to do as you wish. Then copy the graphic back to your word doc. Infranview allows you to place text in graphics so check the dropdown menus to find how to add the text. I hope this works for you. Norman From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Gina Miller Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 11:32 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Please help! Word/Open office document I still need help! On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Gina Miller wrote: I need a little help. I have Open office, basically a free version of Word that can be saved in .doc format. I have a large background picture that I want locked so that you can type over it without being moved. I can't seem to figure it out, I set it up so it looks great but then I close the file and open it up again and it isn't there, or it's crooked. Can I send some one the background picture to help me out? I'd really appreciate it. Thanks Gina "Nanogirl" Miller -- Gina Miller www.nanogirl.com www.nanoindustries.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rtomek at ceti.pl Thu May 1 17:45:17 2014 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 19:45:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Please help! Word/Open office document In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20140501174516.GC11464@tau1.ceti.pl> On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 10:31:59AM -0600, Gina Miller wrote: > I still need help! > > > On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 9:44 PM, Gina Miller > wrote: > > > I need a little help. I have Open office, basically a free version of Word > > that can be saved in .doc format. I have a large background picture that I > > want locked so that you can type over it without being moved. I can't seem > > to figure it out, I set it up so it looks great but then I close the file > > and open it up again and it isn't there, or it's crooked. Can I send some > > one the background picture to help me out? I'd really appreciate it. > > > > > > Thanks > > Gina "Nanogirl" Miller I'm not sure if I will be of much help, but perhaps you are using wrong tool for this? My prejudice is that "office" is poor choice for doing brochures/posters, which I think you are trying to do (actually, my prejudice goes as far as to state that "offices" are suitable for almost nothing, the more complicated the harder is making them work and perhaps their best accomplishment is successfull advertising of their own usefulness - but of course I must be prejudiced). Anyway, if you have enough time, try some desktop publishing software. I am no expert in office and no expert in DTP but scribus may save you. Or maybe not. But it is free. Have a look, is this the kind of stuff you want to make? http://all-geo.org/volcan01010/2012/04/conference_posters_with_scribus/ In an ideal world people would have used TeX (or LaTeX) for this, but we were never ideal and since you don't mention them, I don't think you want to know them :-). They are more like programming languages (I think that TeX is Turing-complete and LaTeX is just a huge macro(s) on top of this). And they bring what programming langs do best (well, sometimes) - automation of sophisticated (more or less) batches of work, at a cost of learning. Just my prejudice, no need to point me wrong :-). Other suggestion - try to convert image to other format, before importing into the doc. Don't know if this will work but my prejudice about office suits is this low that I would try it. Seems like you need to experiment. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu May 1 18:27:50 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 13:27:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] language In-Reply-To: <007001cf6558$d23d16a0$76b743e0$@att.net> References: <7B1F113A-ABC6-4F3C-ABB3-37711ED7A905@taramayastales.com> <007001cf6558$d23d16a0$76b743e0$@att.net> Message-ID: Thanks Spike I am something of a word snob (well, actually all-around snob sans sneering) and dislike the dumbing down by the plebes. It's just so lazy. I had a kid at the math school named Sebastian and he DID NOT have a nickname or shortening (maybe some lard, though). I was just amazed. Do you (plural) think that it will be possible in the not near but not far future to say to a computer "I want you to write and execute a program to do xyz." ?? bill w On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:17 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn > Wallace > *Sent:* Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:41 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] language > > > > Been down - tornadoes. Everything OK > > > > Damn the tornadoes, full speed ahead! > > > > Glad to hear all are well BillW. > > > > What if people decided not to degrade the language and add to it only by > vote? The we could quit nicknaming and acronyming etc? > > That?s kinda what we do. Terms are introduced, sometimes the proles take > them and use them, sometimes not. That process is analogous to voting on > introducing new terms for a vote. > > > > What if people are so genetically constructed that they can do any job and > everyone rotates jobs? > > This wouldn?t require genetically constructing people, it requires > constructing the jobs. This is what is happening too: jobs are not so much > dumbed down (actually they are, but that?s another discussion) as jobs are > generalized to match the most common skills. I have seen the aerospace > industry evolve to where it doesn?t take a rocket scientist to do them. > For most of those remaining jobs, it doesn?t really even take an engineer. > I have seen some of the most successful ones come in with degrees in > accounting. I am not kidding. > > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Thu May 1 19:37:19 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 14:37:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <009001cf63b9$e46752f0$ad35f8d0$@att.net> <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> Message-ID: Spike, surely you jest. No, that number just stuck in my head. Sorry. Many studies show that we tend to forget sources quickly. So that 'fact' you remember coming from a journal article may have come from Men's Health, or whoknowswhere. I do seem to recall that 200 is a 'resting rate' or idle speed. Neurons can fire up to about 2000 times a second depending on the type of neuron and where it is located. I do not know how many processes are going on in the brain at any given time, but I do know that there are about 100,000 enzymes in our bodies and of course that many chemical reactions. We are staying upright, digesting food, regulating all the hormones etc. And you want a computer to do thousands of different things at one time? Talk about parallel processing. billw On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 11:53 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 12:06 PM, spike wrote: > > > We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. >> > > Yes. > > >> > We have about 1E11 brain cells >> > > And even with today's primitive technology we could pack about 10^10 > transistors in the volume that just 2 of those neurons occupy, and the > signals that transistors use move nearly a billion times faster than the > signals brain cells use, and transistors keep getting better but brain > cells don't; so I have a hunch who will ultimately win the battle between > biology and electronics. > > John K Clark > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Thu May 1 19:42:41 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 14:42:41 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Death follows European contact (Mirco Romanato) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Just what errors are there? Gimme page numbers and I'll write Pinker directly. Current wars are of course not included in the vast amount of data he presents. Problem: the Pinker effect has been going on now for a few hundred years, most of which was lead-free. Still, 20% of the variance is no small thing. A Pearson r of .40 often is quite satisfactory in psychological studies. I suspect that as people get safer, they commit less violence and that may turn off some genes, which can be passed on to their offspring a la the epigenetic effect. Pinker mentions epigenetics but not much, and most of what we know about it (as far as I know) has been gathered in the last few years. bill w One scathing commentator described Pinker's article - >> >> This optimistic theme coincides with the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize >> laureate's ongoing wars on at least four continents (Asia, Africa, >> Europe, and South America) and the US military's spread to more than >> eight hundred bases worldwide; the US-led NATO bloc's rapid >> post-Soviet growth and proclamation of "out-of-area" responsibilities; >> and the United States' declaration of a right to kill its "enemies" >> anywhere on the planet. >> Such a propaganda windfall for the imperial bloc could only be >> purchased with a denial of reality. Indeed, it is in the ideological >> and error-ridden narrative with which Pinker sustains this denial for >> more than eight hundred pages that the book's real appeal lies. >> ------------ >> > > > Rafal > > _______________________________________________ > 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 hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu May 1 21:19:50 2014 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Thu, 1 May 2014 14:19:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Japan and power sats Message-ID: Thought I had sent this, but google mail says no. http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/how-japan-plans-to-build-an-orbital-solar-farm Keith From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 3 00:51:56 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 19:51:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: Taking things further - and later on, I imagine -, neural interfaces would be useful in the process of 'gradual uploading', where rather than replacing parts of the brain, or 'scanning' it, which are the usual uploading ideas, we instead expand the mind into non-biological brain machinery over a period of time, so that eventually the original biological brain becomes only a small (and ultimately redundant) part of what produces the mind. At some point, you'd be able to ditch the original brain without even noticing it. So we all have the Superman fantasy: better body, better brain, etc. Everything I know about psychology says this will happen: it will become the new normal. We will adjust to it and be no happier than when we started. It's sort of like heroin addiction - even money. $75k is the upper limit of what makes people happy. Above that there is no improvement in happiness. Fact.bill w On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 6:44 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *Kelly Anderson > > >?I think I'd just remap my sexual pleasure centers to the tips of my > fingers so that I enjoyed programming more. ;-) ?Kelly > > > > > > No way. If I did that, I would waste too much time typing off. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat May 3 02:21:01 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 2 May 2014 22:21:01 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 8:51 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > So we all have the Superman fantasy: better body, better brain, etc. > Everything I know about psychology says this will happen: it will become > the new normal. We will adjust to it and be no happier than when we > started. > ### I don't think this will be the case. The development of uploading technologies, whether by BMI or by destructive scanning, is likely to be associated with gaining an intimate understanding of, and the ability to precisely modify, the motivational and hedonic substructures of minds being uploaded. I do not know if e.g. totally removing the hedonic and aversive components of subjective experience is compatible with survival of a mind in a social milieu but I am convinced that our present human personality repertoire is only a minute subset of all viable mind designs. Therefore, once the technological limitations to deeply modifying minds are gone, there will be an adaptive radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary pressures within the social computational substrate that will generate a variety of mind types, and few of them will be "normal" by our present human standards. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sat May 3 10:05:06 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 12:05:06 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: rafal: > there will be an adaptive radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary pressures within the social computational substrate that will generate a variety of mind types Very likely, but not entirely necessary. We could put some rules in advance, what is permitted and what not. At the trivial case, where no change beyond the current human mind architecture is allowed and even possible, we would have no new variety. We could have only certain type of them. For this, some rules should be adopted in advance. I don't say it's easy, I say it's possible to put certain limits. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 4:21 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 8:51 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> >> So we all have the Superman fantasy: better body, better brain, etc. >> Everything I know about psychology says this will happen: it will become >> the new normal. We will adjust to it and be no happier than when we >> started. >> > > ### I don't think this will be the case. The development of uploading > technologies, whether by BMI or by destructive scanning, is likely to be > associated with gaining an intimate understanding of, and the ability to > precisely modify, the motivational and hedonic substructures of minds being > uploaded. I do not know if e.g. totally removing the hedonic and aversive > components of subjective experience is compatible with survival of a mind > in a social milieu but I am convinced that our present human personality > repertoire is only a minute subset of all viable mind designs. Therefore, > once the technological limitations to deeply modifying minds are gone, > there will be an adaptive radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary > pressures within the social computational substrate that will generate a > variety of mind types, and few of them will be "normal" by our present > human standards. > > Rafal > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Sat May 3 11:48:37 2014 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 07:48:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 3, 2014 6:06 AM, "Tomaz Kristan" wrote: > Very likely, but not entirely necessary. We could put some rules in advance, what is permitted and what not. > > At the trivial case, where no change beyond the current human mind architecture is allowed and even possible, we would have no new variety. Would you legislate what types of minds are currently allowed? I see this as another -ism like racism or sexism. You may choose not to associate with mind types you feel are incompatible with your own, but unless you own the computation hardware then you have no right to make rules regarding my liberties. Now that ownership issue is interesting (to me) because it is similar to the lawmaking privileges of government. I could theoretically move to another country but I practically cannot. What freedoms are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of your uploaded-selves' social contract? Uploaded state sounds less Utopian the more people move in with rules for how others should be. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sat May 3 12:01:12 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 14:01:12 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: Mike, Yes, you can call it racism, if you want to. In fact, you can call it any way you find suitable. I still think, that my liberty to kill you and then stand trail for murder - can go away. I would rather have the impossibility of killing you. And the impossibility of you, killing me. Absolute freedom is not possible to maintain. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > > On May 3, 2014 6:06 AM, "Tomaz Kristan" wrote: > > > Very likely, but not entirely necessary. We could put some rules in > advance, what is permitted and what not. > > > > At the trivial case, where no change beyond the current human mind > architecture is allowed and even possible, we would have no new variety. > > Would you legislate what types of minds are currently allowed? > > I see this as another -ism like racism or sexism. You may choose not to > associate with mind types you feel are incompatible with your own, but > unless you own the computation hardware then you have no right to make > rules regarding my liberties. Now that ownership issue is interesting (to > me) because it is similar to the lawmaking privileges of government. I > could theoretically move to another country but I practically cannot. > > What freedoms are you willing to sacrifice for the sake of your > uploaded-selves' social contract? > > Uploaded state sounds less Utopian the more people move in with rules for > how others should be. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat May 3 12:09:09 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 13:09:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > Absolute freedom is not possible to maintain. > > Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) BillK From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sat May 3 12:12:10 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 14:12:10 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: > Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) I know. ;) On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:09 PM, BillK wrote: > On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > > > Absolute freedom is not possible to maintain. > > > > > > Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 3 16:49:54 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 11:49:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: I am convinced that our present human personality repertoire is only a minute subset of all viable mind designs. Therefore, once the technological limitations to deeply modifying minds are gone, there will be an adaptive radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary pressures within the social computational substrate that will generate a variety of mind types, and few of them will be "normal" by our present human standards. (rafa) There is no evolution anymore affecting humans, except perhaps in 3rd world countries. We have taken over evolution and will bend it to our will, by uploading, eugenics and all the rest. I am interested in just what kinds of minds you are contemplating. We have thousands of adjectives describing human behavior but only five have reliable heritability (plus IQ). What would you add? billw On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > > Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) > > I know. ;) > > > On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:09 PM, BillK wrote: > >> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: >> >> > Absolute freedom is not possible to maintain. >> > >> > >> >> Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) >> >> BillK >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > > -- > https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 bbenzai at yahoo.com Sat May 3 17:11:31 2014 From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben) Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 18:11:31 +0100 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <53652343.80607@yahoo.com> Tomaz Kristan wrote: "We could put some rules in advance, what is permitted and what not. At the trivial case, where no change beyond the current human mind architecture is allowed and even possible, we would have no new variety. We could have only certain type of them. For this, some rules should be adopted in advance. I don't say it's easy, I say it's possible to put certain limits." 'Permitted'? By whom, and to whom? And how enforced? And how does this hypothetical enforcer decide just what kinds of mind should be 'permitted?' Have a think about the kinds of people/organisations that have a desire to 'permit' certain things, and not others. Be careful what you wish for! Ben Zaiboc From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sat May 3 17:44:37 2014 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (kellycoinguy) Date: Sat, 03 May 2014 11:44:37 -0600 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain Message-ID: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> Kurtzweil??Does the analysis you seek in TSIN spike. Kelly Sent on the new Sprint Network from my Samsung Galaxy Note? 3
-------- Original message --------
From: spike
Date:05/01/2014 10:06 AM (GMT-07:00)
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain
From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:35 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain I read where the human brain is firing at a rate of four quadrillion time a second. Of course we don't want a computer to do all that our brain is doing but still....... Indeed. We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. Consider the above calculation. We have about 1E11 brain cells (I think that is the standard estimate, do correct me if I err.) If the above calculation of 4E15 is correct, then the average brain cell would need to fire 4E4 times per second. The standard estimate I have heard is a typical brain cell fires at about 200 Hz, for a 2E13 rate. BillW, have you a source please on your 4E15 number? Compare to a typical microprocessor. We have about a billion transistors (processor gurus, is this number approximately up to date?) so about a quarter of a billion gates, operating at about 4 billion Hz. If they all switched every cycle that would be about 1E18 ?firings? (ignore for the moment the term may or may not be applicable.) If I go into task manager, I see that about 1% of the CPU is busy as a rough estimate. So perhaps 1E16, or I would be OK with your 4E15, give back another factor of 2. So the computer makes that specification, but the brain is a factor of 200 short? Over to you BillW. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sat May 3 18:01:16 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 20:01:16 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: William! True, there are plenty of possible configurations, architecture of minds who are even self aware. Some are non-problematic for themselves and for others. We should concentrate on those. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 6:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I am convinced that our present human personality repertoire is only a > minute subset of all viable mind designs. Therefore, once the technological > limitations to deeply modifying minds are gone, there will be an adaptive > radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary pressures within the > social computational substrate that will generate a variety of mind types, > and few of them will be "normal" by our present human standards. (rafa) > > There is no evolution anymore affecting humans, except perhaps in 3rd > world countries. We have taken over evolution and will bend it to our > will, by uploading, eugenics and all the rest. > > I am interested in just what kinds of minds you are contemplating. We > have thousands of adjectives describing human behavior but only five have > reliable heritability (plus IQ). What would you add? billw > > > On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 7:12 AM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > >> > Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) >> >> I know. ;) >> >> >> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 2:09 PM, BillK wrote: >> >>> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:01 PM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: >>> >>> > Absolute freedom is not possible to maintain. >>> > >>> > >>> >>> Sorry, statements like that are forbidden. ;) >>> >>> BillK >>> _______________________________________________ >>> extropy-chat mailing list >>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu Sat May 3 18:11:20 2014 From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 14:11:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > There is no evolution anymore affecting humans, except perhaps in 3rd > world countries. Soon, but we are not there yet. Plenty of gene pools (in the first world) are still going extinct via lack of sexual reproduction or adaptive fitness. They won't have a chance to participate or be represented in self-directed mutation/adaptation when the technology to do so is widely available. -Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat May 3 18:47:06 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 11:47:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Japan and power sats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah, there's no question we could do this. And JAXA is known to have been working on it. The question is, how far will they get before cutting funding and putting the project on indefinite hiatus? On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > Thought I had sent this, but google mail says no. > > > http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/how-japan-plans-to-build-an-orbital-solar-farm > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 3 18:50:15 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 13:50:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> Message-ID: Indeed. We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. How is it better to have one computer do thousands of things at one time versus several (or however many) computers dedicated to doing one thing well? Seems you'd have a nightmare to debug one doing so many things? (no one yet has answered my question about a computer programming itself) bill w On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:44 PM, kellycoinguy wrote: > Kurtzweil Does the analysis you seek in TSIN spike. > > Kelly > > Sent on the new Sprint Network from my Samsung Galaxy Note? 3 > > > -------- Original message -------- > From: spike > Date:05/01/2014 10:06 AM (GMT-07:00) > To: 'ExI chat list' > Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human > brain > > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn > Wallace > *Sent:* Thursday, May 01, 2014 8:35 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the > human brain > > > > I read where the human brain is firing at a rate of four quadrillion time > a second. Of course we don't want a computer to do all that our brain is > doing but still....... > > > > > > > > > > Indeed. We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. > > > > Consider the above calculation. We have about 1E11 brain cells (I think > that is the standard estimate, do correct me if I err.) If the above > calculation of 4E15 is correct, then the average brain cell would need to > fire 4E4 times per second. The standard estimate I have heard is a typical > brain cell fires at about 200 Hz, for a 2E13 rate. > > > > BillW, have you a source please on your 4E15 number? > > > > Compare to a typical microprocessor. We have about a billion transistors > (processor gurus, is this number approximately up to date?) so about a > quarter of a billion gates, operating at about 4 billion Hz. If they all > switched every cycle that would be about 1E18 ?firings? (ignore for the > moment the term may or may not be applicable.) If I go into task manager, > I see that about 1% of the CPU is busy as a rough estimate. So perhaps > 1E16, or I would be OK with your 4E15, give back another factor of 2. > > > > So the computer makes that specification, but the brain is a factor of 200 > short? > > > > Over to you BillW. > > > > 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 Sat May 3 18:44:09 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 11:44:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> Message-ID: <019e01cf66ff$ad826010$08872030$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of kellycoinguy Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 10:45 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain >>?Compare to a typical microprocessor. We have about a billion transistors (processor gurus, is this number approximately up to date?) so about a quarter of a billion gates, operating at about 4 billion Hz. If they all switched every cycle that would be about 1E18 ?firings? (ignore for the moment the term may or may not be applicable.) If I go into task manager, I see that about 1% of the CPU is busy as a rough estimate. So perhaps 1E16, or I would be OK with your 4E15, give back another factor of 2. ? spike >?Kurtzweil Does the analysis you seek in TSIN spike. Kelly Sent on the new Sprint Network from my Samsung Galaxy Note? 3 ? Indeed he does. Kurzweil is indistinguishable from god. Thanks for the reminder Kelly. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat May 3 18:48:30 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 11:48:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: <01a301cf6700$47ded300$d79c7900$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Tomaz Kristan Subject: Re: [ExI] hard science >?True, there are plenty of possible configurations, architecture of minds who are even self aware. ? Tomaz Consider the software based intelligences which claim to be self-aware. I think they are lying. So electro-psychotic are these programs that they don?t even know they are lying. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat May 3 19:02:22 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 12:02:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> Message-ID: <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2014 11:50 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain >>?Indeed. We want the computer to do far more than our brain is doing. >?How is it better to have one computer do thousands of things at one time versus several computers dedicated to doing one thing well? No need to choose. Have one computer that does thousands of things at one time and does them all well. >?Seems you'd have a nightmare to debug one doing so many things? Each routine is debugged individually. Computers multitask very effectively. >? (no one yet has answered my question about a computer programming itself) bill w BillW, the very first version of Excel macros by Microsloth (from 1993) allowed recursive algorithms and self-modifying code. One could accidently write a virus; I did. Over the years, Microsloth has intentionally defeated the features that allowed self-modifying macro code, since plenty of people got themselves in trouble with that early version; it had no guardrails. You could generate files automatically, which could fill your hard disk quickly for instance. I have the notion that to have software program itself requires removal of those guardrails. We might use something like Excel version 5 to do something like that. Have we any Excel 5 gurus left among us? Has anyone here tried to run that on a modern platform? We have script-gurus here who can tell us what are the modern capabilities of self-modifying code. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 3 19:24:42 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 14:24:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: <01a301cf6700$47ded300$d79c7900$@att.net> References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> <01a301cf6700$47ded300$d79c7900$@att.net> Message-ID: Spike - here is your answer, and I was wrong - it's a lot more than 4 quadrillion. https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/human-biology/neuron-nervous-system/v/neuronal-synapses--chemical On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 1:48 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *Tomaz Kristan > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] hard science > > > >?True, there are plenty of possible configurations, architecture of > minds who are even self aware. ? Tomaz > > > > > > Consider the software based intelligences which claim to be self-aware. I > think they are lying. So electro-psychotic are these programs that they > don?t even know they are lying. > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rhanson at gmu.edu Sat May 3 15:47:23 2014 From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin D Hanson) Date: Sat, 3 May 2014 15:47:23 +0000 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 2, 2014, at 10:21 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: So we all have the Superman fantasy: better body, better brain, etc. Everything I know about psychology says this will happen: it will become the new normal. We will adjust to it and be no happier than when we started. ### I don't think this will be the case. The development of uploading technologies, whether by BMI or by destructive scanning, is likely to be associated with gaining an intimate understanding of, and the ability to precisely modify, the motivational and hedonic substructures of minds being uploaded. I do not know if e.g. totally removing the hedonic and aversive components of subjective experience is compatible with survival of a mind in a social milieu but I am convinced that our present human personality repertoire is only a minute subset of all viable mind designs. Therefore, once the technological limitations to deeply modifying minds are gone, there will be an adaptive radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary pressures within the social computational substrate that will generate a variety of mind types, and few of them will be "normal" by our present human standards. Eventually uploading will help us understand human mind design, but there could be a substantial delay between the two. So in an early period, minds might be copiable but not usefully modified much except via a limited set of known "tweaks." For the purpose of using uploads as productive workers, I don't see much advantage to motivational and hedonic hacking. We can already motivate humans to work well and hard, and we've been doing that for millennia. So if there was a substantial chance of messing up their ability to work when you messed with their motives, profit-seeking orgs that manage uploads would probably skip the motive hacking. Robin Hanson http://hanson.gmu.edu Res. Assoc., Future of Humanity Inst., Oxford Univ. Assoc. Professor, George Mason University Chief Scientist, Consensus Point MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun May 4 06:59:21 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 08:59:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: spike: > Consider the software based intelligences which claim to be self-aware. I think they are lying. Well, some are lying. If the sense of self is physical and NOT informational process, then all of them are lying. I think however, it's an informational process to be self-aware, too. So some are telling us the truth. They are magnificent and they are feeling good. On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 5:47 PM, Robin D Hanson wrote: > On May 2, 2014, at 10:21 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > So we all have the Superman fantasy: better body, better brain, etc. >> Everything I know about psychology says this will happen: it will become >> the new normal. We will adjust to it and be no happier than when we >> started. >> > > ### I don't think this will be the case. The development of uploading > technologies, whether by BMI or by destructive scanning, is likely to be > associated with gaining an intimate understanding of, and the ability to > precisely modify, the motivational and hedonic substructures of minds being > uploaded. I do not know if e.g. totally removing the hedonic and aversive > components of subjective experience is compatible with survival of a mind > in a social milieu but I am convinced that our present human personality > repertoire is only a minute subset of all viable mind designs. Therefore, > once the technological limitations to deeply modifying minds are gone, > there will be an adaptive radiation of mind designs driven by evolutionary > pressures within the social computational substrate that will generate a > variety of mind types, and few of them will be "normal" by our present > human standards. > > > Eventually uploading will help us understand human mind design, but > there could be a substantial delay between the two. So in an early period, > minds might be copiable but not usefully modified much except via a limited > set of known "tweaks." > > For the purpose of using uploads as productive workers, I don't see much > advantage to motivational and hedonic hacking. We can already motivate > humans to work well and hard, and we've been doing that for millennia. So > if there was a substantial chance of messing up their ability to work when > you messed with their motives, profit-seeking orgs that manage uploads > would probably skip the motive hacking. > > Robin Hanson http://hanson.gmu.edu > Res. Assoc., Future of Humanity Inst., Oxford Univ. > Assoc. Professor, George Mason University > Chief Scientist, Consensus Point > MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030 > 703-993-2326 FAX: 703-993-2323 > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun May 4 16:37:16 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 11:37:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: > Consider the software based intelligences which claim to be self-aware. I think they are lying. > Well, some are lying. If the sense of self is physical and NOT > informational process, then all of them are lying. I think however, it's an > informational process to be self-aware, too. So some are telling us the > truth. They are magnificent and they are feeling good. > > ?Just how would anyone know that a machine is self-aware? We can't even > prove that another person is self-aware (and we can't prove that people in > a coma are not aware of something even if it's just their subjective > experience - unless there is no function above the hindbrain). Psychology > (and philosophy) is full of this crap: do others experience the same > things we do? Unanswerable question ('probably not' is the best we can > do). We might as well ask those women who have additional color vision > what they see that we can't.? bill w > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun May 4 17:18:20 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 18:18:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 5:37 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> Just how would anyone know that a machine is self-aware? We can't even >> prove that another person is self-aware (and we can't prove that people in a >> coma are not aware of something even if it's just their subjective >> experience - unless there is no function above the hindbrain). Psychology >> (and philosophy) is full of this crap: do others experience the same things >> we do? Unanswerable question ('probably not' is the best we can do). We >> might as well ask those women who have additional color vision what they see >> that we can't. bill w >> >> Don't worry. Any women will soon tell a man that they are colour blind as soon as they try to choose decorating colours. :) BillK From atymes at gmail.com Sun May 4 17:40:42 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 10:40:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:02 PM, spike wrote: > BillW, the very first version of Excel macros by Microsloth (from 1993) > allowed recursive algorithms and self-modifying code. One could accidently > write a virus; I did. > > Over the years, Microsloth has intentionally defeated the features that > allowed self-modifying macro code, since plenty of people got themselves in > trouble with that early version; it had no guardrails. You could generate > files automatically, which could fill your hard disk quickly for instance. > > I have the notion that to have software program itself requires removal of > those guardrails. We might use something like Excel version 5 to do > something like that. Have we any Excel 5 gurus left among us? Has anyone > here tried to run that on a modern platform? > > We have script-gurus here who can tell us what are the modern capabilities > of self-modifying code. > That we do. If you want to write self-modifying code, there are far, FAR better platforms for that. One might even ascribe to Microsoft a motive of encouraging people who want to write such, to use said better tools instead of wasting their time with Excel (and making Microsoft's employees wait that much longer for the Singularity). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun May 4 17:55:25 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 10:55:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: <03a101cf67c2$076a0a20$163e1e60$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] hard science On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 5:37 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> ... We might as well ask those women who have additional color vision what they see that we can't. bill w >...Don't worry. Any women will soon tell a man that they are colour blind as soon as they try to choose decorating colours. :) BillK _______________________________________________ When my first house was being constructed, I was presented with the onerous task of choosing patterns for the kitchen linoleum, the countertops, the cabinets and the appliance style. I had not a clue. I could vaguely sense that there were subtle differences between different decorative patterns in floors and kitchen things, but this awareness was the limit of my perception of these matters. So my bride-to-be, who was at college at the time, chose the patterns from photos. A couple months later when the house was completed, my former college roommate's wife walked in and immediately uttered the question "Who helped you pick out these patterns?" I evaded the question a bit: "What do you mean, I don't understand. What makes you think I need help?" She: "When a man picks out patterns, he picks out his favorite countertop, his favorite linoleum, his favorite cabinets and his favorite appliance style, all very nice patterns, but none of it matches. This all matches. So my question is, what woman helped you pick out these patterns?" I don't know how the heck women do that. My bride is just as much an engineer and math geek as I am, yet she also has this aesthetic thing going. It is hard to say if that sense is somehow embedded in ovaries or if somehow that talent is blocked by testicles. spike From spike66 at att.net Sun May 4 18:38:20 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 11:38:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] iDnA Message-ID: <03c001cf67c8$0673b480$135b1d80$@att.net> Big Brother is watching, but what Orwell really missed the real problem for bad guys: a million little brothers are watching too. Scenario: murder/rapist/burglar/generic-sleazeball perpetrates crime, gets away, but leaves traces of DNA. The authorities recover the DNA signature but it doesn't match any of those from states which require DNA samples from all felons, soon it's a cold case. But wait, there's more. We have two huge databases (23&Me and Ancestry.com) along with several smaller ones now, filled with people who help adoptees figure out who are their birth parents. (I don't want to debate the ethics of that activity under this subject line; it's a separate discussion.) Adoptee-assistant writes software and learns techniques that help identify common ancestors for two related people. It occurs to adoptee-assistant that he could help bag perps by using this database, comparing with those in the two major DNA databases. We probably couldn't go directly to the answer, but could perhaps identify (assuming enough patience) four or five sets of his great grandparents, and from that trace it downward, and see what we find. Perhaps there is an obvious common descendant from a given two pairs of great grandparents. The real idea is this: we know this is a laborious process. We know it is time consuming, but it is an example of an activity that might be taken on by groups of volunteers, and in some cases highly motivated victims. If a person survives an attempted murder for instance, it would be a worthwhile activity for the surviving victim to find the bastard before she kills someone else. Perhaps the perp is in prison in some state where DNA is not required, perhaps on a minor charge and will get out soon. We could get a crowd of volunteers, perhaps figure out a way to compare the perp's DNA with one of the two big databases, contact her cousins, etc. Any thoughts? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun May 4 18:48:07 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 May 2014 11:48:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:02 PM, spike wrote: >>?We have script-gurus here who can tell us what are the modern capabilities of self-modifying code. >?That we do. If you want to write self-modifying code, there are far, FAR better platforms for that. One might even ascribe to Microsoft a motive of encouraging people who want to write such, to use said better tools instead of wasting their time with Excel (and making Microsoft's employees wait that much longer for the Singularity). Cool Adrian, I was hoping you would show up in this discussion. What scripting language would you recommend? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon May 5 07:04:17 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 00:04:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 11:48 AM, spike wrote: > Cool Adrian, I was hoping you would show up in this discussion. > Yeah - RL's busy randomly. Speaking of which, if you have time and availability to help (especially if you can help w/CFD on your own time), poke me offlist about CubeCab. It's getting more serious. > What scripting language would you recommend? > Any of 'em that are made to be actual programming languages. Specifics depend on what exactly you're trying to do with it. Although, Bill's question seemed to be more about parallel processing than about self-modifying code. Most popular programming languages have ways to handle this, either natively or via extensions. And he's right: it is easier to design for modularity, so you can have one processor set doing one thing while another handles a different task. This is why most people can not directly consciously control their heart rate, immune system, and so on: consciousness is yet another module, and one that was added fairly recently in the evolutionary process. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 5 11:21:21 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 13:21:21 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Slow Tuesday Night In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3423604062-15296@secure.ericade.net> Keith Henson , 30/4/2014 2:06 AM: http://web.archive.org/web/20071012204844/www.scifi.com/scifiction/classics/classics_archive/lafferty5/lafferty51.html Read this decades ago. ?It's still a hoot. Fun! Reminds me of Pohl's "Day Million" and Vinge's "Fast times at Fairmont High".http://www.sfcenter.ku.edu/Sci-Tech-Society/stored/day_million.pdfftp://24.10.225.252/AiDisk_a1/eBooks/V/Vinge,%20Vernor/Vernor%20Vinge%20-%20Fast%20Times%20at%20Fairmont%20High.pdfSlightly different takes on the same core concept. I find Pohl amusing because what was shocking in 1969 is pretty standard today (I am reading Ann Leckie's "Ancilliary Justice" right now). Unlike Lafferty and Pohl who are in some sense lampooning the present, Vinge tries to sketch out how the near future might actually be - and hence also lampooning the present. Now I'm off to write some philosophy. I think Lafferty got it right: "A thoughtful man named Maxwell Mouser had just produced a work of actinic philosophy. It took him seven minutes to write it. To write works of philosophy one used the flexible outlines and the idea indexes; one set the activator for such a wordage in each subsection; an adept would use the paradox feed-in, and the striking analogy blender; one calibrated the particular-slant and the personality-signature. It had to come out a good work, for excellence had become the automatic minimum for such productions. "I will scatter a few nuts on the frosting," said Maxwell, and he pushed the lever for that. This sifted handfuls of words like chthonic and heuristic and prozymeides through the thing so that nobody could doubt it was a work of philosophy."Hmm, I wonder if I can smuggle in "prozymeides" in my next work? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 5 10:58:30 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:58:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Neanderthals weren't exterminated - they were assimilated In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3423136967-16385@secure.ericade.net> BillK , 1/5/2014 11:59 AM: In the past few decades, however, anthropological discoveries have contradicted those stereotypical views. Neanderthals actually had slightly larger brains than modern humans! Of course, brain size isn't everything. Here is an interesting interview with some hot-off-the-presses neuroscience about neuron numbers and how they relate to brain scaling:?http://intelligence.org/2014/04/22/suzana-herculano-houzel/ Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 5 11:05:01 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 13:05:01 +0200 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> Message-ID: <3423305653-15296@secure.ericade.net> spike , 1/5/2014 6:23 PM: ?? Consider the above calculation.? We have about 1E11 brain cells (I think that is the standard estimate, do correct me if I err.)? If the above calculation of 4E15 is correct, then the average brain cell would need to fire 4E4 times per second.? The standard estimate I have heard is a typical brain cell fires at about 200 Hz, for a 2E13 rate. Yup. 1E11 is the standard guess, with 86 billion neurons the latest number I heard (the cortex seems to be slightly less numerous than we previously thought, while there are 4 times as many neurons in the cerebellum as in the cortex). Firing rates vary *a lot* but for most neurons it is usually way below 200 Hz; most of the activity is below 40 Hz. At any time only a fraction are in "up-states" where they fire bursts. So quadrillions of firings is likely a bit of an overstatement.? Still. *Lots* of action potentials.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon May 5 12:42:36 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 13:42:36 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Neanderthals weren't exterminated - they were assimilated In-Reply-To: <3423136967-16385@secure.ericade.net> References: <3423136967-16385@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Of course, brain size isn't everything. Here is an interesting interview > with some hot-off-the-presses neuroscience about neuron numbers and how they > relate to brain scaling: > http://intelligence.org/2014/04/22/suzana-herculano-houzel/ > > True. I have heard rumours that a sperm whale has a larger brain than me! (Hard to believe, I know). :) And considering how intelligent crows and parrots are with really tiny brains, then size is not the major comparison factor. But when discussing very similar species which can interbreed, I think it is worth noting that one species had a larger brain size. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 12:48:36 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 07:48:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <3423305653-15296@secure.ericade.net> References: <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> <3423305653-15296@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: ? consciousness is yet another module, and one that was added fairly recently in the evolutionary process.? ?How do we know this? bill w? > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon May 5 13:49:00 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 06:49:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> Message-ID: <00e901cf6868$c53d9a70$4fb8cf50$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes >?Yeah - RL's busy randomly. Speaking of which, if you have time and availability to help (especially if you can help w/CFD on your own time), poke me offlist about CubeCab. It's getting more serious. Cool! I might have a little time for that, but I am getting more busy now than I was. My son is showing increasing talent in the math department. He is doing high school trigonometry now, with word problems and all the specialized algebra, which I think is remarkable for a second grader. He is doing Khan Academy at school and is working with me at home and doing the Khan Academy graphics programming courses as well, ripping thru it like a hot chainsaw thru butter. Suggestions welcome. This is talent I don?t want to see wasted the way mine was. >?Any of 'em that are made to be actual programming languages. Specifics depend on what exactly you're trying to do with it. Although, Bill's question seemed to be more about parallel processing than about self-modifying code? An example of what BillW has in mind is giving a processor a few thousand games of checkers and seeing if it can figure out the rules and become a checkers player. I think something like this has been done, but I don?t know the details. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 14:36:15 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 07:36:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question Message-ID: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> I had an idea which I am now working up the testicular fortitude to do it, but I would like some moral and ethical guidance please. Recall a few weeks ago, I was thinking of submitting a DNA sample from a female volunteer to 23andMe or Ancestry.com with a phony user profile with some big breezy story that sounds like some British noble (Priscilla Prudence Prufrock) who doesn?t understand why half the names on her cousins list are unfamiliar. The other half are all the dozen family names she knows so well, the ones which have been her ancestors since the days of Henry VIII. It might be funny, but it would be Candid-Camera-ish on the ethics scale, a gag at someone else?s expense. I decided to not do that one. Now I have an even tougher ethics question for you. I am helping some adoptees find their bio-parents. One of my collaborators revealed a horrifying incident that took place a few years ago: her sister was kidnapped, raped, held for several days, managed to escape. They caught the bastard, but somehow he managed to get a light-ish sentence, since it was his first offense, one for which he could be paroled after a few years. Turns out it was arrested in a DNA-collecting state, so they took a sample and eventually found a match from another similar crime ten years ago, where the victim did not survive. So he is no longer in the victim?s nightmares. Today he is a most obedient wife to the brutally affectionate Bubba, who stole a car by carrying it away on his back. OK then. Suppose I get a volunteer, submit his DNA sample, put up a user profile that reads something like this: Name: Slee Z. Perp Occupation: Career criminal. You name it, I done it. About Me: I am on the loose now, scouting around for new victims every day. My last one didn?t have a chance; she was going out to her car in a dark parking lot and there I was, bwaaahaaaahaahaaaaaa. I was careful about not leaving fingerprints, but unfortunately I left behind some DNA, and now here I am. So I moved to a state which doesn?t require DNA samples, just in case I get caught for some minor minor misbehavior, such as burglary, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, that kind of thing. The suckers will never catch me here. OK 23andMe-ers, that was a fictional account, but here?s the real deal: what if someone had posted this, a highly motivated victim for instance? Would you be willing to join a team to help catch criminals who leave DNA in or on the victim? Would it change your mind if the victim is your mother, your sister, your sweetheart, your daughter? If you want to participate in this, just post your .csv file to my @, Mister.E.Solvers at gmail.com. There are no rewards other than just a feeling of having done the right thing. I have written software which compares the .csvs and finds patterns. It can also be used for finding birth parents (which is what it was originally designed to do, but this is an extension.) You can even stay anonymous if you wish; this algorithm doesn?t require knowing who you are. What it does is finds commonalities between your DNA and the sleazy perp?s. It figures out who is his great grandparents by matching with those who have derived family trees. Even if we find a match and ask you for a family tree, you can still be anonymous. All we really need is your four grandparent?s names. We don?t even need to know who your parents are (except in the highly unlikely case the perp is a sibling.) In most cases it will be a second or third cousin if we contact you. If you want to join the team, just send a .csv file to Mister.E.Solvers at gmail.com and let?s catch these bastards before they kill someone else. OK extropians, assume you live in the USA and you know your constitution, and you have a conscience. Would play along? How would you word it differently? Are there ethical considerations I have missed? I have a DNA test case volunteer and I want to push forward on this. Extropians, if you have done 23andMe or Ancestry.com DNA and want to participate in testing my software, you have my email @. Adrian you were a sane voice last time. What do we do now, coach? What can go wrong? What can go right? Anyone else? Anders wan Kanobi? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon May 5 16:05:01 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 17:05:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 3:36 PM, spike wrote: > > I am helping some adoptees find their bio-parents. One of my collaborators > revealed a horrifying incident that took place a few years ago: her sister > was kidnapped, raped, held for several days, managed to escape. They caught > the bastard, but somehow he managed to get a light-ish sentence, since it > was his first offense, one for which he could be paroled after a few years. > Turns out it was arrested in a DNA-collecting state, so they took a sample > and eventually found a match from another similar crime ten years ago, where > the victim did not survive. So he is no longer in the victim's nightmares. > Today he is a most obedient wife to the brutally affectionate Bubba, who > stole a car by carrying it away on his back. > > OK 23andMe-ers, that was a fictional account, but here's the real deal: what > if someone had posted this, a highly motivated victim for instance? Would > you be willing to join a team to help catch criminals who leave DNA in or on > the victim? Would it change your mind if the victim is your mother, your > sister, your sweetheart, your daughter? > > As I understand it, the police can already do this if they want to. All they need is sufficient grounds to get a warrant to get their suspect's DNA sample processed by 23and Me. They probably haven't bothered so far, as the 23andMe database is not big enough yet. And for your delectation, how about using the 23andMe database to *predict* who has the genes that are very likely to commit violent crimes? BillK From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 16:27:10 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 09:27:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> Message-ID: <018501cf687e$ddb41b90$991c52b0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] dna ethics question On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 3:36 PM, spike wrote: > >> ... Would you be willing to join a team to help catch criminals > who leave DNA in or on the victim? > >...As I understand it, the police can already do this if they want to... Indeed not sir. 23 states now require DNA samples from all convicted felons according to Wiki, but that number might be increasing. Some states are still struggling with the 8th amendment issues around this, but I have no problem there: all states require mugshots and fingerprints. Why is DNA any different? Where does the 8th amendment come in? There are sub-categories, where some states have voluntary DNA sampling of those arrested, which makes total sense if the prisoner knows he didn't do it. There are states which collect DNA but do not participate in the Innocence Project, which is aimed more at freeing the wrongly convicted. I would like to participate in that too btw. I would get waaay more joy and personal satisfaction from freeing an innocent person than in bagging a perp. >...All they need is sufficient grounds to get a warrant to get their suspect's DNA sample processed by 23and Me... Ja, but each state differs on the definition of "sufficient grounds." Some states get DNA from anyone who is booked for any reason, including non-violent drug charges, whore-mongering, stuff that doesn't really hurt anyone, so *I do want my extropian friends the THINK carefully* about your opinion on this, and do state it please. You are allowed to state split opinions and that you are personally conflicted on this matter (as I am) such as they should require DNA samples from anyone who is accused of violence. We know how it will play out: most of the perp-database will be men. The database will be disproportionately filled with poor and minority, and it will be based on the local constables' fear rather than reason. Think it, state it, you are among friends here. >... They probably haven't bothered so far, as the 23andMe database is not big enough yet... On the contrary sir. Between 23andMe and Ancestry.com, those databases are approaching a million proles and are growing rapidly. They would make very valuable tools for bagging perps. Regarding your phrase "...haven't bothered..." it isn't that so much, but rather this is an enormously laborious process. It needs to be crowd-sourced. Governments cannot afford to hire people to do this, and probably would not do it anyway. If every violent criminal is caught, you don't really need many constables, and that could risk causing taxes to go down. Perps are the constables' job security. If you get to be trusted friends with the cops and hang out with a lot of them, they sometimes cynically refer to perps as their clients. {8^D >...And for your delectation, how about using the 23andMe database to *predict* who has the genes that are very likely to commit violent crimes? BillK _______________________________________________ We already know how to do that: only those beasts with human DNA are likely to commit violent crimes. spike From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 16:47:32 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 09:47:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> Message-ID: <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Another way to branch off if you wish: what if we could arrange for each state to have its own DNA database but specifically defeat the creation of the national level DNA database? (Somehow.) That makes total sense if you have an army of volunteers, some of which take on each state. Consider also that the USA is trending toward a society where you get extra IRS scrutiny if you hold certain political views. We have clear examples of that happening now, and nothing bad is happening to the IRS agents who perpetrated the acts. Our IRS can convict without evidence. If they call in a taxpayer, they alone are the judge, jury and executioner. The IRS has fifth amendment rights, but the taxpayer does not, when dealing with that agency. The IRS has unlimited power and almost zero accountability. Naturally, corruption ensues. If the DNA database is held at the state level, each state is only able to archive the DNA of felons incarcerated in that state. Then we need to figure out a way to prevent the IRS from discovering genes associated with whichever party is out of power at any given time, and using their power to pre-emptively destroy that genotype. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 17:25:20 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:25:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Message-ID: Whoever is trying to maintain privacy in the 21st century is fighting a losing battle. Eventually all DNA will be obtained at the hospital where you were born (my prediction, anyhow). I think this is a case of only criminals could object to use of DNA to find them/convict them. I fully support Spike's efforts. (But cannot contribute - records burned up in the courthouse long ago - you would not believe how many Washington Wallaces there were in Texas in the late 1800s, but not my father) bill w __________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Mon May 5 17:38:07 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 18:38:07 +0100 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 6:25 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Whoever is trying to maintain privacy in the 21st century is fighting a > losing battle. Eventually all DNA will be obtained at the hospital where > you were born (my prediction, anyhow). I think this is a case of only > criminals could object to use of DNA to find them/convict them. > > The trouble with that is that in the modern state everyone is a criminal. You can't leave the house without breaking many laws during the course of the day. Add in surveillance and you could be arrested anytime you offend officialdom. Obviously everyone won't be arrested. It is sufficient to be able to arrest anyone at any time. And for the population to be made aware of that and avoid causing offence to t' guvmnt. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 17:56:07 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:56:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 12:38 PM, BillK wrote: > On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 6:25 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Whoever is trying to maintain privacy in the 21st century is fighting a > > losing battle. Eventually all DNA will be obtained at the hospital where > > you were born (my prediction, anyhow). I think this is a case of only > > criminals could object to use of DNA to find them/convict them. > > > > > > The trouble with that is that in the modern state everyone is a > criminal. You can't leave the house without breaking many laws during > the course of the day. Add in surveillance and you could be arrested > anytime you offend officialdom. Obviously everyone won't be arrested. > It is sufficient to be able to arrest anyone at any time. And for the > population to be made aware of that and avoid causing offence to t' > guvmnt. > > BillK > ?It might interest you to know that I am a libertarian(!). You are essentially correct, and in the hands of an authoritarian police state, having everyone's DNA could lead to incredible disaster. I don't know how it will sort itself out, but keeping your DNA private is impossible. A spy picks up your glass at Applebee's just after you've left. Or a million other ways. DNA will be (and already is) useful, even essential, for health professionals and who can't hack into those databases?? ? bill w? > _______________________________________________ > 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 atymes at gmail.com Mon May 5 18:21:00 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:21:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <003d01cf6557$53a33a00$fae9ae00$@att.net> <3423305653-15296@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On May 5, 2014 5:49 AM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > ? consciousness is yet another module, and one that was added fairly recently in the evolutionary process.? > > > ?How do we know this? bill w? Evolutionary record - fossils, etc. There is no record of extensive tool use, writing, or other things that we suspect are correlated with consciousness much before humans. True, we can not prove this 100%, but we can never prove anything 100%, so we must go with our best guess that fits with the evidence. In this case as in others, "no consciousness before humans" is the best fit to what historical record we have put together; while alternate cases are possible, they seem sufficiently less likely that we can ignore them unless and until they get their own, equally strong evidence. ("But what if we're wrong, and wasting our time/resources looking down this alley?" is countered with "But what if we're right, and looking elsewhere would be the very waste you seek to prevent? From what we can tell, that is probably the situation here.") -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon May 5 18:29:03 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:29:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <00e901cf6868$c53d9a70$4fb8cf50$@att.net> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> <00e901cf6868$c53d9a70$4fb8cf50$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 5, 2014 7:03 AM, "spike" wrote: > My son is showing increasing talent in the math department. He is doing high school trigonometry now, with word problems and all the specialized algebra, which I think is remarkable for a second grader. He is doing Khan Academy at school and is working with me at home and doing the Khan Academy graphics programming courses as well, ripping thru it like a hot chainsaw thru butter. Suggestions welcome. This is talent I don?t want to see wasted the way mine was. What does he want to do? It is easiest to play to his interests. > An example of what BillW has in mind is giving a processor a few thousand games of checkers and seeing if it can figure out the rules and become a checkers player. I think something like this has been done, but I don?t know the details. Do you mean Blondie24? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 18:24:40 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:24:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Message-ID: <008a01cf688f$483a8340$d8af89c0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] dna ethics question >? I fully support Spike's efforts. (But cannot contribute - records burned up in the courthouse long ago - you would not believe how many Washington Wallaces there were in Texas in the late 1800s, but not my father) bill w __________________________________ Bill me lad, ye of little faith, sir. Did your DNA burn in that fire? Have you any paternal cousins? Was their spit destroyed? Regarding burned archives, my answer to that is simple: records schmecords. We have a more accurate means of knowing who is who today. You and I are mod hipsters, man! We have the technology, we can rebuild his records. Tell ya what, doctor, you send in a spit sample to 23&Me, I will help you interpret the results, figure out who is who among the thousand matches they return, and how to use that effectively, especially if you have any cousins on either side you can talk into doing a test as well. You and your cousin triangulate off of each other to figure out which side of the family tree the matches are on. You send me your .csv file, I use my magic software, trace your ancestry all the way back to Adam and Eve by way of one of Noah?s sons, or the protobonobos if you are a Darwinian heathern as I am. But the question is this: suppose one of your top matches has that user profile in there about having done violence to someone. Would you blow the whistle on your own cousin? (Hint: I would, hell yes.) Your thoughts please sir? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 18:33:19 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 11:33:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Message-ID: <008f01cf6890$7da3f470$78ebdd50$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] dna ethics question On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 6:25 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >>... Whoever is trying to maintain privacy in the 21st century is fighting a losing battle... >...The trouble with that is that in the modern state everyone is a criminal. You can't leave the house without breaking many laws during the course of the day... BillK _______________________________________________ Classic British understatement BillK. You wouldn't even need to leave home. In the US currently we have a sports team owner who made offensive comments to his girlfriend in his own home which she recorded and leaked to the media. Technically it wasn't illegal, but he is ruined in any case. Had he done something illegal, it wouldn't be a problem: sufficient money can deal with criminal prosecution. But a billionaire's money cannot buy him out of this mess. Of course this has little or nothing to do with DNA. I agree in principle with the sentiment of BillW: privacy is history, welcome to the transparent society. spike From rtomek at ceti.pl Mon May 5 18:33:09 2014 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 20:33:09 +0200 Subject: [ExI] language In-Reply-To: References: <7B1F113A-ABC6-4F3C-ABB3-37711ED7A905@taramayastales.com> <007001cf6558$d23d16a0$76b743e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20140505183308.GA17200@tau1.ceti.pl> On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 01:27:50PM -0500, William Flynn Wallace wrote: [...] > Do you (plural) think that it will be possible in the not near but not far > future to say to a computer "I want you to write and execute a program to > do xyz." ?? bill w Depends on perspective. From my point of view it happens routinely. All the elements on technical side are already in place, affordable voice recognition being the last one to have come. The first element, besides working computer, was a programming language - in this case, Plankalkul appeared about 70 years ago. People working on lambda calculus might have done something in this department even earlier, in 1930-ties. So, today, I fire up Emacs (an editor) and write "xyz" as a note to the computer. "xyz" can be up to many kilobytes of text long (hundreds, too, but rarely this long as a one long piece). Then I tell to the computer: "gcc xyz.c -o xyz" which means "write program xyz from description in xyz.c" and if all goes well, I can run it next, sometimes it even works. Actually, most of the times I tell to the computer "make", and it takes another note in Makefile, which describes how to make and what. There are people who do all of this with Emacs paired with trained voice recognition, so here you are. I never so far saw necessity which is why I prefer to write notes. You could now protest that it is not what you meant. But I see no problem. I use simplified English, interspersed with algebraic symbols and numbers and it is in fact a language in which I talk to the computer. How much simplified - depends on actual "dialect". Most langs like C rely on about 30-50 words as their core vocabulary. In Common Lisp there is almost 1000 words and I still have no idea what majority of them mean. Unix-like operating system employs from hundreds to thousands of words, each with special options to choose and modify exact meaning of many of them. As far as I can tell, it is always possible to create new words by defining their meaning with words already known (at least in systems with which I am willing to spend my time). So this is how I see it. I guess such views may be grossly unknown nowadays in the era of point and click "operating (hehe) systems". The "click language" is very poor in meanings and actions. It makes a user equal to foreigner who will never learn a language of a country in which he is supposed to spend the rest of his life - I believe this is only because lack of will, not lack of some brain part (although it is very much possible that certain neuronal wiring patterns help a lot). But this is not my problem, to be frank. Now, I realize what you wanted to ask was "when one can talk to the computer in a natural language like one would to the waitress or car salesman - or one's own personal butler". I hope this will never happen. Human language is too ambivalent in many places, often the act of communication is designed to hide meaning or to lie about it. Besides, it sometimes happens that humans don't know what they want and so they cannot tell it properly. The world goes on somehow, but I have doubts if this is thanks to our intellectual abilities. Pure luck may be better culprit candidate. Likewise, that we can somehow transfer meaning from one head to another is probably lots of luck and common roots. The more different cultures, the more misunderstanding, despite using the same language on the surface. The computers either form or will form another such culture, and a very different from the human one. Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From pharos at gmail.com Mon May 5 18:51:52 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 19:51:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <008a01cf688f$483a8340$d8af89c0$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <008a01cf688f$483a8340$d8af89c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:24 PM, spike wrote: > Tell ya what, doctor, you send in a spit sample to 23&Me, I will help you > interpret the results, figure out who is who among the thousand matches they > return, and how to use that effectively, especially if you have any cousins > on either side you can talk into doing a test as well. You and your cousin > triangulate off of each other to figure out which side of the family tree > the matches are on. You send me your .csv file, I use my magic software, > trace your ancestry all the way back to Adam and Eve by way of one of Noah's > sons, or the protobonobos if you are a Darwinian heathern as I am. > > Did you notice this new tool? Quote: Previously, scientists have only been able to locate where your DNA was formed to within 700kms, which in Europe could be two countries away; however this pioneering technique has been 98 per cent successful in locating worldwide populations to their right geographic regions, and down to their village and island of origin. "What is remarkable is that, we can do this so accurately that we can locate the village where your ancestors lived hundreds and hundreds of years ago -- until now this has never been possible." To demonstrate how accurate GPS predictions are, Dr Elhaik and his colleagues analysed data from 10 villages in Sardinia and over 20 islands in Oceania. The research published today in the journal Nature Communications shows that Dr Elhaik and his team were able to place a quarter of the residents in Sardinia directly to their home village and most of the remaining residents within 50km of their village. The results for Oceania were no less impressive with almost 90 per cent success of tracing islanders exactly to their island. "What is remarkable is that, we can do this so accurately that we can locate the village where your ancestors lived hundreds and hundreds of years ago -- until now this has never been possible." To demonstrate how accurate GPS predictions are, Dr Elhaik and his colleagues analysed data from 10 villages in Sardinia and over 20 islands in Oceania. The research published today in the journal Nature Communications shows that Dr Elhaik and his team were able to place a quarter of the residents in Sardinia directly to their home village and most of the remaining residents within 50km of their village. The results for Oceania were no less impressive with almost 90 per cent success of tracing islanders exactly to their island. ------------- BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 19:23:27 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 14:23:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] language In-Reply-To: <20140505183308.GA17200@tau1.ceti.pl> References: <7B1F113A-ABC6-4F3C-ABB3-37711ED7A905@taramayastales.com> <007001cf6558$d23d16a0$76b743e0$@att.net> <20140505183308.GA17200@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 01:27:50PM -0500, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > [...] > > Do you (plural) think that it will be possible in the not near but not > far > > future to say to a computer "I want you to write and execute a program to > > do xyz." ?? bill w > > Depends on perspective. From my point of view it happens > routinely. All the elements on technical side are already in place, > affordable voice recognition being the last one to have come. The > first element, besides working computer, was a programming language - > in this case, Plankalkul appeared about 70 years ago. People working > on lambda calculus might have done something in this department even > earlier, in 1930-ties. > > So, today, I fire up Emacs (an editor) and write "xyz" as a note to > the computer. "xyz" can be up to many kilobytes of text long > (hundreds, too, but rarely this long as a one long piece). Then I tell > to the computer: "gcc xyz.c -o xyz" which means "write program xyz > from description in xyz.c" and if all goes well, I can run it next, > sometimes it even works. Actually, most of the times I tell to the > computer "make", and it takes another note in Makefile, which > describes how to make and what. > > There are people who do all of this with Emacs paired with trained > voice recognition, so here you are. I never so far saw necessity which > is why I prefer to write notes. > > You could now protest that it is not what you meant. But I see no > problem. I use simplified English, interspersed with algebraic symbols > and numbers and it is in fact a language in which I talk to the > computer. How much simplified - depends on actual "dialect". Most > langs like C rely on about 30-50 words as their core vocabulary. In > Common Lisp there is almost 1000 words and I still have no idea what > majority of them mean. Unix-like operating system employs from > hundreds to thousands of words, each with special options to choose > and modify exact meaning of many of them. As far as I can tell, it is > always possible to create new words by defining their meaning with > words already known (at least in systems with which I am willing to > spend my time). > > So this is how I see it. I guess such views may be grossly unknown > nowadays in the era of point and click "operating (hehe) systems". The > "click language" is very poor in meanings and actions. It makes a user > equal to foreigner who will never learn a language of a country in > which he is supposed to spend the rest of his life - I believe this is > only because lack of will, not lack of some brain part (although it is > very much possible that certain neuronal wiring patterns help a > lot). But this is not my problem, to be frank. > > Now, I realize what you wanted to ask was "when one can talk to the > computer in a natural language like one would to the waitress or car > salesman - or one's own personal butler". I hope this will never > happen. Human language is too ambivalent in many places, often the act > of communication is designed to hide meaning or to lie about > it. Besides, it sometimes happens that humans don't know what they > want and so they cannot tell it properly. The world goes on somehow, > but I have doubts if this is thanks to our intellectual > abilities. Pure luck may be better culprit candidate. Likewise, that > we can somehow transfer meaning from one head to another is probably > lots of luck and common roots. The more different cultures, the more > misunderstanding, despite using the same language on the surface. The > computers either form or will form another such culture, and a very > different from the human one. > > Regards, > Tomasz Rola > ?Ambivalency yes, and also ambiguity. But in my novel the simple language has no ambiguities ? ?in it. I think that we will develop a language only for talking to a computer. This will enormously simplify voice recognition software?. bill w > > -- > ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** > ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** > ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** > ** ** > ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 19:29:38 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 14:29:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] consciousness Message-ID: consciousness is yet another module, and one that was added fairly recently in the evolutionary process.? > > > ?How do we know this? bill w? Evolutionary record - fossils, etc. There is no record of extensive tool use, writing, or other things that we suspect are correlated with consciousness much before humans. True, we can not prove this 100%, but we can never prove anything 100%, so we must go with our best guess that fits with the evidence. In this case as in others, "no consciousness before humans" is the best fit to what historical record we have put together; while alternate cases are possible, they seem sufficiently less likely that we can ignore them unless and until they get their own, equally strong evidence. I would not define consciousness as you do. I think consciousness of a sort extends down to insects or even below. Defining it in such as way as to say that only humans have it seems to make the mistaken conclusion that the mind is a metaphysical thing which only humans have. I also think we will never know what consciousness is like in nonhuman creatures. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Mon May 5 19:22:31 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:22:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> Message-ID: <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> Personally, I think that as a matter of course, all babies' DNA should be checked against the DNA of their parents to confirm paternity and maternity. For maternity, it would merely help prevent rare "switched at birth" scenarios, but eliminating paternity uncertainty would be a dramatic shift in the evolution of mammals. That alone would do more for women's rights and Nice Guys than centuries of lectures about the evils of premarital sex or adultery. Basically every society's oppression of women, every religious hang up about sex, and probably even rape, all derive from paternity uncertainty. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads On May 5, 2014, at 10:25 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Whoever is trying to maintain privacy in the 21st century is fighting a losing battle. Eventually all DNA will be obtained at the hospital where you were born (my prediction, anyhow). I think this is a case of only criminals could object to use of DNA to find them/convict them. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 19:31:43 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:31:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> <00e901cf6868$c53d9a70$4fb8cf50$@att.net> Message-ID: <011d01cf6898$a60ecfe0$f22c6fa0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain On May 5, 2014 7:03 AM, "spike" wrote: >>? My son is showing increasing talent in the math department?Suggestions welcome. This is talent I don?t want to see wasted the way mine was. >?What does he want to do? It is easiest to play to his interests? Ja. Minecraft. Oy vey, his favorite is Stampy Longhead. Spare me. Oh do spare me from that guy. He is the modern version of Pee Wee Herman, who drove parents to distraction a generation ago. I wouldn?t be surprised if someone takes Stampy?s online commentary, chops it into pieces and cobbles together a recording which makes it sound like he is saying something untoward, perhaps racist or creepy in some other way, then leaks it to the public. It wouldn?t be admissible evidence in court, but it wouldn?t need to be in order to ruin him completely. I don?t understand the grip Minecraft has on this generation. They seem to writhe helplessly in its relentless grip. Have we any Minecraft players present who can explain please? >>? An example of what BillW has in mind is giving a processor a few thousand games of checkers and seeing if it can figure out the rules and become a checkers player. I think something like this has been done, but I don?t know the details. >?Do you mean Blondie24? Adrian Cool thanks, that?s the one. We know it is theoretically possible for machines to learn. ?You? are inside one of them right now, a machine which did learn, can and will learn even more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blondie24 spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 19:47:28 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 14:47:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: ?Basically every society's oppression of women, every religious hang up > about sex, and probably even rape, all derive from paternity uncertainty. > ?All? Even genital excision? I surely cannot agree with you about rape. There is several different kinds and not much overlap among them. I do agree about hospital's collecting DNA. bill w? > ? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Mon May 5 20:00:01 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 21:00:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] consciousness In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 8:29 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I would not define consciousness as you do. I think consciousness of a sort > extends down to insects or even below. Defining it in such as way as to say > that only humans have it seems to make the mistaken conclusion that the mind > is a metaphysical thing which only humans have. I also think we will never > know what consciousness is like in nonhuman creatures. bill w > > I think Adrian is talking about self-consciousness. I agree that humans appear to be the only species that sit around thinking about what it means to be human and talk about the meaning of life. On the other hand consciousness does extend to lower species. Animals can be happy, excited, feel pain and enjoy copulation. A bee can fly miles to find nectar and navigate back to the hive and tell other bees where to find the nectar. Amazing really, what a few neurons can do. So I agree with both of you! :) BillK From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 19:54:57 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 12:54:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Tara Maya Sent: Monday, May 05, 2014 12:23 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] dna ethics question >. Basically every society's oppression of women, every religious hang up about sex, and probably even rape, all derive from paternity uncertainty. Tara Maya Odd comment indeed Tara. Religious hangups about rape are likely rooted in an uncertainty about being murdered. The notion of paternity uncertainty is nearly trivial compared to the much more fundamental issue of joint property. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 20:12:36 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 15:12:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> Message-ID: If only people would understand that marriage, for hundreds of years, was about property settlements in cases of death, divorce, etc. (And bride prices, of course). That's why I support gay marriage, even between homosexuals! And they can get access to the partner's room at the hospital ICU. bill w On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 2:54 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *Tara Maya > *Sent:* Monday, May 05, 2014 12:23 PM > *To:* ExI chat list > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] dna ethics question > > > > >? Basically every society's oppression of women, every religious hang up > about sex, and probably even rape, all derive from paternity uncertainty. > > > > Tara Maya > > > > > > Odd comment indeed Tara. Religious hangups about rape are likely rooted > in an uncertainty about being murdered. The notion of paternity > uncertainty is nearly trivial compared to the much more fundamental issue > of joint property. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon May 5 20:45:20 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 13:45:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <011d01cf6898$a60ecfe0$f22c6fa0$@att.net> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> <00e901cf6868$c53d9a70$4fb8cf50$@att.net> <011d01cf6898$a60ecfe0$f22c6fa0$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 5, 2014 12:45 PM, "spike" wrote: > I don?t understand the grip Minecraft has on this generation. They seem to writhe helplessly in its relentless grip. Have we any Minecraft players present who can explain please? Yo. (I haven't played Minecraft itself, but I have played similar games and know the culture.) You have it mostly backward. They are the ones who have Minecraft in their grip. It's about making stuff, shaping the world, far more easily and faster than one might shape the real world. It's not unlike painting in 3D, in the guise of a video game. You might consider getting a low end 3D printer and letting your son play around with it. You might want to try it out too...and do try some Minecraft, just so long as you don't overwrite your son's saves. Or just google on "epic minecraft videos" to start getting a sense of the appeal, but I think for you actually trying it might be better. Get to at least having an iron axe and/or iron pickaxe that you built (not just found or bought). (Do not make the very common mistake, by people your age, of giving up at the first slight difficulty/unfamiliarity and assuming there must be nothing worthy beyond it. Nor make the mistake of believing it to be culturally trash just because it does not ape the patterns you are familiar with...at least, not when that familiarity dates from your own youth, and that is ultimately the only reason you value it.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 5 21:04:49 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 23:04:49 +0200 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3458872376-10839@secure.ericade.net> Adrian Tymes , 5/5/2014 10:49 PM: On May 5, 2014 12:45 PM, "spike" wrote: > I don?t understand the grip Minecraft has on this generation.? They seem to writhe helplessly in its relentless grip.? Have we any Minecraft players present who can explain please? Yo.? (I haven't played Minecraft itself, but I have played similar games and know the culture.) You have it mostly backward.? They are the ones who have Minecraft in their grip.? It's about making stuff, shaping the world, far more easily and faster than one might shape the real world. Exactly. It like doing science, engineering or exploration without the messy bits. I have never dared to touch the thing, I would be addicted in an instant.? My niece and oldest nephew are also deep into minecraft. I am proud of her: she is showing promising evil overlord skills. She has built dark palaces out of obsidian, run animal breeding experiments, added a slave market to her Egyptian-themed city, and most recently was filling her pyramid with devious traps. When playing a tarot-based storytelling game she came up with some court intrigues worthy of Game of Thrones - very cold and ruthless. She is also recruiting her brothers to be her bodyguards. I look forward to her future reign.? What I like about the Minecraft aesthetic is that one can make surprisingly complex things with simple tools and simple graphics. Markus' demonstrated it again with his little existential angst game "Drowning in Problems" a few weeks ago (?http://game.notch.net/drowning/ ) - not open-ended like Minecraft, but still poignant. And quite powerful without using *any* graphics. ? You might consider getting a low end 3D printer and letting your son play around with it.? My sister-in-law is actually writing a thesis on how children learn to use 3D printers. They can definitely produce interesting objects:?https://flic.kr/p/mPqAWD Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 5 21:38:59 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 23:38:59 +0200 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: <03a101cf67c2$076a0a20$163e1e60$@att.net> Message-ID: <3459591207-4823@secure.ericade.net> spike , 4/5/2014 8:12 PM: ?She: "When a man picks out patterns, he picks out his favorite countertop, his favorite linoleum, his favorite cabinets and his favorite appliance style, all very nice patterns, but none of it matches. ?This all matches. ?So my question is, what woman helped you pick out these patterns?" I don't know how the heck women do that. ?My bride is just as much an engineer and math geek as I am, yet she also has this aesthetic thing going. It is hard to say if that sense is somehow embedded in ovaries or if somehow that talent is blocked by testicles. I don't think it is primarily sex-determined. Testosterone is known to affect spatial navigation ability (essentially turning navigation into more dead reckoning-based than landmark-based, which is good in environments low on features) and estrogen is a bit of a memory enhancer. But none of the good papers on gender differences have anything about basic color perception. However, women do have a larger color vocabulary and better matching and memory abilities:?http://academic.csuohio.edu/kneuendorf/frames/color/Aurthur2007.pdf "A substantial amount of research shows that women not only have larger?vocabularies when talking about colors but that they appear to have also superior?abilities to match and discriminate colors. For example, Perez-Carpinell, Baldovi,?de Fez, and Castro (1998) found that women were more accurate for chroma and?hue than men. Also, in a speeded naming task, females named the colors more?quickly than did the males, suggesting that women may possess a faster retrieval?of color labels (Elias, Saucier, Nylen, & Cheesman, 2003). It is perhaps possible?that different patterns of socialization for males and females encourage a greater?awareness of color among women (Bimler, Kirkland, & Jameson, 2004).? Interestingly, such results have been reported across many cultures. Yang?(2000) studied male and female Chinese speakers who were undergraduate?English majors and found women possessed more color vocabulary (both in?English and in Chinese), were more elaborate in the Chinese translations of the?color words, and showed superiority in the accuracy of color-lexicon matching.?In a study in Spain, accessing color words was found to be easier for the females?(Delgado & Prieto, 2003). When Nepalese residents were asked to name all of?the colors that they could, females consistently listed more color terms than did?males (Thomas et al., 1978)." There are also differences in color preferences:http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(07)01559-X.pdfhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886900002312?np=y(which are not affected by sexual preferences, BTW, despite a link between the Bem brain male/female scale and color preferences)? Now, my impression from all this is that for some reason there is just a lot of socialization going on training women across a lot of cultures to be good at color. Including the matching skills.http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7624204 No, this socialization doesn't seem to happen naturally for us gay men: my matching skills are rather mediocre, hence my tendency towards an ultra-boring wardrobe. Presumably the clich? gay interior designer simply chose to somehow get the socialization. So now I just wonder if I missed something, an offering for a "Matching 101" course, when I was a teenager. I probably spent to much time writing BASIC on a black and white computer.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 5 21:55:44 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 16:55:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: <3459591207-4823@secure.ericade.net> References: <03a101cf67c2$076a0a20$163e1e60$@att.net> <3459591207-4823@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: I was speaking of tetrachromacy that a few women have. Here's the link: http://discovermagazine.com/2012/jul-aug/06-humans-with-super-human-vision bill w On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > spike , 4/5/2014 8:12 PM: > > She: "When a > man picks out patterns, he picks out his favorite countertop, his favorite > linoleum, his favorite cabinets and his favorite appliance style, all very > nice patterns, but none of it matches. This all matches. So my question > is, what woman helped you pick out these patterns?" > > I don't know how the heck women do that. My bride is just as much an > engineer and math geek as I am, yet she also has this aesthetic thing > going. > It is hard to say if that sense is somehow embedded in ovaries or if > somehow > that talent is blocked by testicles. > > > I don't think it is primarily sex-determined. Testosterone is known to > affect spatial navigation ability (essentially turning navigation into more > dead reckoning-based than landmark-based, which is good in environments low > on features) and estrogen is a bit of a memory enhancer. But none of the > good papers on gender differences have anything about basic color > perception. However, women do have a larger color vocabulary and better > matching and memory abilities: > http://academic.csuohio.edu/kneuendorf/frames/color/Aurthur2007.pdf > > > "A substantial amount of research shows that women not only have larger > vocabularies when talking about colors but that they appear to have also > superior > abilities to match and discriminate colors. For example, Perez-Carpinell, > Baldovi, > de Fez, and Castro (1998) found that women were more accurate for chroma > and > hue than men. Also, in a speeded naming task, females named the colors > more > quickly than did the males, suggesting that women may possess a faster > retrieval > of color labels (Elias, Saucier, Nylen, & Cheesman, 2003). It is perhaps > possible > that different patterns of socialization for males and females encourage a > greater > awareness of color among women (Bimler, Kirkland, & Jameson, 2004). > > Interestingly, such results have been reported across many cultures. Yang > (2000) studied male and female Chinese speakers who were undergraduate > English majors and found women possessed more color vocabulary (both in > English and in Chinese), were more elaborate in the Chinese translations > of the > color words, and showed superiority in the accuracy of color-lexicon > matching. > In a study in Spain, accessing color words was found to be easier for the > females > (Delgado & Prieto, 2003). When Nepalese residents were asked to name all > of > the colors that they could, females consistently listed more color terms > than did > males (Thomas et al., 1978)." > > There are also differences in color preferences: > http://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(07)01559-X.pdf > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886900002312?np=y > (which are not affected by sexual preferences, BTW, despite a link between > the Bem brain male/female scale and color preferences) > > Now, my impression from all this is that for some reason there is just a > lot of socialization going on training women across a lot of cultures to be > good at color. Including the matching skills. > http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7624204 > > No, this socialization doesn't seem to happen naturally for us gay men: my > matching skills are rather mediocre, hence my tendency towards an > ultra-boring wardrobe. Presumably the clich? gay interior designer simply > chose to somehow get the socialization. So now I just wonder if I missed > something, an offering for a "Matching 101" course, when I was a teenager. > I probably spent to much time writing BASIC on a black and white computer. > > > Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford > University > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon May 5 22:13:04 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 00:13:04 +0200 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> Message-ID: <3461708752-9351@secure.ericade.net> spike , 5/5/2014 4:53 PM: ? Adrian you were a sane voice last time.? What do we do now, coach?? What can go wrong?? What can go right?? Anyone else?? Anders wan Kanobi? Hmm... (trying to look like a crazy old hermit and failing) As I see it, there are three issues: invasion of privacy, risk of error, and what kind of legal evidence is acceptable.? First, do people have a right to genetic privacy? I think this one is problematic, because there is no fundamental right to privacy in the same way as there is a fundamental right to life, liberty and one's body. Having one's privacy respected is good, but what constitutes privacy is very much constructed by a current culture. If I do not want my genes read, I might refuse to volunteer samples and I might assert ownership over my DNA in shed cells; respectful people would refrain from stealing samples. But if they have an unknown sample and sequence it respect doesn't come into play - especially if this is done in pursuit of justice. However, there is an extra twist: identifying people by grandparents also involves affecting the genetic privacy of a family. It is not just one person who might object or be affected (finding out stuff about my genes will tell you stuff about my cousins too). Note that if I volunteer my DNA, I force my family into the scheme too, perhaps without asking them.? The risk of error should not be ignored. Just because it looks objective and exact doesn't mean it is 100% reliable. Would the system detect mismatches or weak signals? Could it avoid causing damaging false alarms? Finally, there is the issue of what kind of evidence is accepted. The US has a much tighter system than for example Sweden, so police evidence must be gathered very carefully and in accordance to the law. But a tip from the genetic sleuths seems to my legal understanding be an acceptable tip: it is not proof of anything, but a reason to look at a group of people. That it is based on DNA makes it a tad more plausible than a tip based on a psychic, but I seem to recall that there have been cases where even very weak tips have turned out to be relevant and led to gathering of evidence that held up in court.? So my view is that a system like this would likely work legally (although I can imagine creative people suing 23andMe or the genetic sleuths for all sorts of things if it happens - especially for false alarms). Ethically, it is equivalent to a sample of people volunteering their DNA and acting as informers: if it was just for themselves, everything would be entirely unproblematic. It is just the family angle that makes it hard to give an unequivocal thumbs up.? I think we will end up with something like this sooner or later anyway. The bigger issue is that US and UK governments normally do not keep track of their citizens very well.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Mon May 5 22:42:23 2014 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 16:42:23 -0600 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <018501cf687e$ddb41b90$991c52b0$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <018501cf687e$ddb41b90$991c52b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 10:27 AM, spike wrote: > >... They probably haven't bothered so far, as the 23andMe database is not > big enough yet... > > On the contrary sir. Between 23andMe and Ancestry.com, those databases are > approaching a million proles and are growing rapidly. They would make very > valuable tools for bagging perps. > If only one in a hundred people were in a database like this, it would be helpful to law enforcement. They could look for a perp in a family of hundreds of people rather than in the entire population. As to it being male centric, rape is primarily a male predilection and that's a case where DNA is very likely to be helpful in capturing said bad guy. The interesting question is how long will it be before they collect everyone's DNA, not just those who have in some small or large way intersected with the criminal justice system. -Kelly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Mon May 5 22:55:15 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 15:55:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> Message-ID: <3B5687D4-8A79-4C1D-8CB6-130B83E36FE8@taramayastales.com> I didn't say paternity certainty would solve ALL problems. But paternity uncertainty explains otherwise inexplicable laws -- fairly common in many older civilizations -- that the penalty for rape FOR THE WOMAN WHO WAS ASSAULTED was to either marry her rapist or be herself murdered. That is not really explainable as a concern about property, but I submit that it is explicable (if still horrid) as a way for a man to ensure that property is inherited by his own heirs. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads On May 5, 2014, at 12:54 PM, spike wrote: > Odd comment indeed Tara. Religious hangups about rape are likely rooted in an uncertainty about being murdered. The notion of paternity uncertainty is nearly trivial compared to the much more fundamental issue of joint property. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Mon May 5 23:20:35 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 16:20:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 5, 2014, at 12:54 PM, spike wrote: > The notion of paternity uncertainty is nearly trivial compared to the much more fundamental issue of joint property. Let me explain further why I believe that paternity uncertainty is at the root of what in the eighties feminists liked to call "the Patriarchy." Of course, there is not one Patriarchy, so the term is a bit quaint, but historically, around the world, there have been two kinds of civilizations. (Yes, I'm greatly simplifying a huge spectrum, but bear with me for the sake of argument). Type One, civilizations which highly restrict women's sexuality. Women are property passed from fathers to husbands, often kept covered and secluded, almost imprisoned by their families their whole lives. The trade-off is that men support their wives and children inherit their father's property. Mothers of the male heirs of the largest estates can be extremely powerful. Examples are the Middle East and East Asia. Type Two, civilizations allow women great sexual freedom? but men provide little paternal support. Women and maternal grandmothers raise the children and husbands and lovers may come and go. Examples are found in Africa and Polynesia. I submit the theory that the reason so many cultures have fallen into one of these two patterns is because of paternity uncertainty. Type Two civilization is actually the common Mammal Pattern, in which families center on females and their offspring, with males competing amongst themselves but contributing little directly to childcare. The dominant males insure that they have a lot of offspring by having a lot of mates, not by caring for children directly. In human societies, where property inheritance ensures the success of children, grandchildren and even many generations of great-grandchildren, males have had to be much more diligent about ensuring that these descendants are biological offspring. Actually, this is not a male vs female thing, because the Paternal Grandmother (for instance) has as much invested in knowing that her daughter-in-law is faithful as her son does. In fact, she may be much more critical and suspicious, because she isn't getting sex out of it. All she's getting is grandchildren, so of course she wants to know her daughter-in-law is a tramp. This is one of many reasons that it's hard to get women in cultures with thinks like the Veil or Honor Killings to all unite against it. They don't all have the same genetic interest in ending the system that restricts women's sexual freedom. Paternal grandmothers in Type Two civilizations are just a ruthless. A study of AIDS orphans in Africa found that almost all orphans who went to live with a grandparent went to live with their Maternal Grandmother. Paternal Grandmothers weren't *certain* the grandchildren were theirs and wouldn't take them. It's arguable that current "Western Civilization" is moving from type One to type Two. Yes, modern women have greater equality and freedom, but at the same time, traditional marriage has fallen apart and many women raise their children on their own, with male companions moving in and out of the picture rather randomly. The modern ideal of two partners, both with equal sexual freedom before marriage, and equal monogamy and child support after marriage is quite rare. Do you see how all of this changes if paternity certainty can be achieved by a simple test rather than cradle-to-grave imprisonment of women? Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon May 5 23:25:48 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 16:25:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <3B5687D4-8A79-4C1D-8CB6-130B83E36FE8@taramayastales.com> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> <3B5687D4-8A79-4C1D-8CB6-130B83E36FE8@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: <03a301cf68b9$597768b0$0c663a10$@att.net> >. On Behalf Of Tara Maya Subject: Re: [ExI] dna ethics question >.I didn't say paternity certainty would solve ALL problems. But paternity uncertainty explains otherwise inexplicable laws -- fairly common in many older civilizations -- that the penalty for rape FOR THE WOMAN WHO WAS ASSAULTED was to either marry her rapist or be herself murdered. Ah yes, that one is odd indeed. To a large extent I am in agreement with your thesis. The culture in which those kinds of laws exist are based on the notion that their leader is a man who is held up as the ideal of human behavior, kinda like their equivalent of the Christian's Hoerkheimer or his twin brother. That culture's ideal of human behavior, that paragon of virtue, when in his 50s married a girl when she was NINE years old, and copulated with her at age 11. They can talk until I fall asleep permanently about how times were different back then, but no, I ain't buying. Times were different indeed, but even then they had to know that if a fifth-grader gets pregnant, she is at a high risk of dying. Her child-body isn't ready for that yet. They will not be able to convince me that it was somehow OK to mate with her at that tender age. This guy is their ideal of human behavior, a man who demonstrated such callous disregard for the safety and well-being of his own child bride. Given that, have we any reason for astonishment when they derive weird laws like the one you mentioned? That is not really explainable as a concern about property, but I submit that it is explicable (if still horrid) as a way for a man to ensure that property is inherited by his own heirs. Tara Maya I heard something like this from a neighbor who fled Vietnam in a small open boat in 1975. She was trying to explain what we heard so much about: the fleeing refugees were raped by pirates. We think of rape as a brutal sex crime, which it is here. For the fleeing Vietnamese, the pirates primarily wanted the gold that some of them, especially the women, had secreted in their private orifices. Oy such a grim topic. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 6 00:19:20 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 02:19:20 +0200 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3470716635-26470@secure.ericade.net> Tara Maya , 6/5/2014 1:25 AM: Do you see how all of this changes if paternity certainty can be achieved by a simple test rather than cradle-to-grave imprisonment of women? Maybe. If it becomes possible to ascertain paternity effectively, does it really turn into an effective social claim? There are many single mothers around who know perfectly well who the father of their children is (and he is certain too), yet that is not enough to keep the relationship. The biological patterns may be grooves we tend to move along, but culture and individual choices are pretty powerful too.? The area where paternity tests really become dangerous is in the Saudi monarchy. Lots of princes waiting... Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Tue May 6 01:08:48 2014 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 20:08:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] consciousness In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Humans are self-conscious. A bunch of animals who pass the mirror test are self-conscious. Humans are the animals with the most advanced technological culture. Myriad animals have technological culture and very simple animals have been shown to pass down memes which are not genetically coded for at all. I haven't seen data but I would also be very confident in saying that lots of plants and "lower beings" use memes to communicate that are mediated by hormones/antibodies and other non-gene chemical messengers. All animals are conscious. And all plants, and bacteria, and rocks, chemical reactions, atoms, etc. The universe. Integrated systems that rely on all information within the system to proceed are the hallmark of consciousness. There may be self-consciousness modules in self-conscious animals, but it is probably a completely psychic module that is different in all animals (down to the individual), and indeed is even CREATED by the mirror test just as we create consciousness in babies by using the logic of language to point them towards the "necessity" of self. C.f. feral children where they call it the "critical period" and relate it to language which I figure is probably a proxy for self-consciousness. I'm pretty sure the last few of my posts on this list have been separated by many months and always pertaining to the more general nature of consciousness and the anthropocentric mistake of ascribing it to humans only! And I have fun every time! ;) Hope this flips the switch, -Will -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu Tue May 6 01:28:02 2014 From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 21:28:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] cool! locals create circuit board modeled on the human brain In-Reply-To: <011d01cf6898$a60ecfe0$f22c6fa0$@att.net> References: <22o9apdhov2hy8kf6kfprx9b.1399139077305@email.android.com> <01b401cf6702$37ab4340$a701c9c0$@att.net> <03cf01cf67c9$64294f30$2c7bed90$@att.net> <00e901cf6868$c53d9a70$4fb8cf50$@att.net> <011d01cf6898$a60ecfe0$f22c6fa0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 3:31 PM, spike wrote: > > ... > > I don?t understand the grip Minecraft has on this generation. They seem > to writhe helplessly in its relentless grip. Have we any Minecraft players > present who can explain please? > Extropians, feel free to join my minecraft server: mc.zerostateofmind.com You can use Mumble with it for voice chat, and it has lots of plug ins. It's kid-friendly so send your kids on in. Right now it's in Creative mode, but with consensus, I can change that. Spike, I made it for my kids (1st and 3rd grade), but now it's also the official Minecraft server of the WAVE Movement and Zero State. So you might find some friendly techno progressive transhumanists, and the like, in there. You know, your kids are smart enough that they could probably build some fancy machines with redstone in Minecraft. Ask them to build you one, and see what they can do. -Henry -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Tue May 6 02:36:38 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 19:36:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <3470716635-26470@secure.ericade.net> References: <3470716635-26470@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <22653760-C496-4D51-9D09-0A922A3510AF@taramayastales.com> On May 5, 2014, at 5:19 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Maybe. If it becomes possible to ascertain paternity effectively, does it really turn into an effective social claim? There are many single mothers around who know perfectly well who the father of their children is (and he is certain too), yet that is not enough to keep the relationship. The biological patterns may be grooves we tend to move along, but culture and individual choices are pretty powerful too. Based on what I've seen of daytime television, a staple is the talk show or family court show where the woman and man are fighting about whether the baby is his or not. She comes out in black leather short-shorts, a gold lame bra and too much make-up and says the baby is his. He comes out in greasy jeans and a wife-beater and says she's a slut and besides, she slept with his best friend. She counters that he slept with his sister. Etc. The show drags out the fight until the end, when the DNA test results are shared?the final judgement that completely sways the audience to either his side or hers. So, anecdotally, I'd say the masses have already made this an effective social claim. I see more resistance from intellectuals, clergy, law officiants, etc. For instance, a judge in Canada made some poor man pay child support to a woman for three children that were proven not to be his. I thought that was grossly unfair; the biological fathers should have been hunted down and made to pay, not the innocent victim. But obviously from the point of view of the State, it was easier to force the punishment on the bird in the hand rather than the birds in the bush. Then there was an article I read by a rabbi who said that the hospital shouldn't reveal to the "father" of a baby that it wasn't his, even when medical procedures revealed it. To the rabbi, this might cause the man to leave the woman and child, which would break up the marriage, so the man should be lied to. Again, this seemed to me to be grossly unfair. If he knew the truth and chose to be a good stepfather, good on him, but it should be his choice. He shouldn't be tricked. And then of course there's the whole privacy argument. It seems to me, an even more basic right is to know who your real parents are. And who your real children are. Again, if you chose to adopt, fine, but to be tricked or lied into it? That's wrong. But actually, all of these anecdotes are unimportant, because the scale I was thinking of was much, much longer. It's an interesting question about how quickly the change would be achieved. I'd say that the introduction of the Pill has had powerful social changes in just a few decades. But real, lasting change to the species is something that must take generations. After all, we are talking about something that is very, very basic, not just to the human species, but to all Mammals. Unlike fish, where (usually) the mother and father are equally ignorant (and therefore uncaring) about which fry are their offspring, in Mammals, the uterus has created an information asymmetry for the entire monphylum. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 6 18:19:55 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 13:19:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing Message-ID: In my book: the hypothalamus has a biological clock which affects the pituitary, which sends messages to the gonads, which turn testosterone on at 7 p.m. and off at 11. An endocrinologist I asked thought this was entirely possible. How many millions of men and boys have been killed preceded by "Watch this!"? How many millions of women have been raped because, basically, of too much testosterone? How many fights between men have gone too far? You likely can think of other situations. We no longer need a high level of need for fat, salt, and, I argue, testosterone. Having a very low level myself has not prevented me from having the sex life of a 25 year old married man (2.5 times a week, and don't ask what half a sex act is) all my life (I am 72). Or from getting road rage. So clearly more than this is just not needed to propagate the species or kill enemies. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Tue May 6 20:03:01 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 13:03:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 6, 2014, at 11:19 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > In my book: the hypothalamus has a biological clock which affects the pituitary, which sends messages to the gonads, which turn testosterone on at 7 p.m. and off at 11. An endocrinologist I asked thought this was entirely possible. Does this mean that in the future most crimes would be committed between 7 and 11 pm? Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 6 20:09:28 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 22:09:28 +0200 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 6/5/2014 8:25 PM: In my book:? the hypothalamus has a biological clock which affects the pituitary, which sends messages to the gonads, which turn testosterone on at 7 p.m. and off at 11.? An endocrinologist I asked thought this was entirely possible. As a neuroscientist, I also believe in it. The SCN (superior chiasmatic nucleus) already modulates the pineal gland and indirectly (largely via hormones) the pituitary; a few extra connections to the posterior pituitary and one could totally have this effect.? How many millions of men and boys have been killed preceded by "Watch this!"?? How many millions of women have been raped because, basically, of too much testosterone?? How many fights between men have gone too far?? You likely can think of other situations. One could even attempt to answer this with a number by looking at mortality curves. Besides the infant mortality and old age increase, there is a noticeable "adolescent bump", largely for males.? We no longer need a high level of need for fat, salt, and, I argue, testosterone. Testosterone is useful when you want to shift into a risk-taking mode: if the environment is such that risks are low, then it does not matter - and in fact, one might want a bit more cognitive diversity.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Tue May 6 20:17:48 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 13:17:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> References: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <453B12EF-83C0-43E3-9602-5281BDAC5BD7@taramayastales.com> On May 6, 2014, at 1:09 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Testosterone is useful when you want to shift into a risk-taking mode: if the environment is such that risks are low, then it does not matter - and in fact, one might want a bit more cognitive diversity. > Could females also use this to increase testosterone, when, for instance, going on job interviews or asking for raises? I could sure use a dose of "I don't give a F&*k" that I sorely lack in such situations... Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue May 6 20:26:47 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 21:26:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> References: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Testosterone is useful when you want to shift into a risk-taking mode: if > the environment is such that risks are low, then it does not matter - and in > fact, one might want a bit more cognitive diversity. > For geeks, talking to real live females counts as risk-taking mode. ;) BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 6 20:37:27 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 15:37:27 -0500 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> References: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 3:09 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > William Flynn Wallace , 6/5/2014 8:25 PM: > > In my book: the hypothalamus has a biological clock which affects the > pituitary, which sends messages to the gonads, which turn testosterone on > at 7 p.m. and off at 11. An endocrinologist I asked thought this was > entirely possible. > > > As a neuroscientist, I also believe in it. The SCN (superior chiasmatic > nucleus) already modulates the pineal gland and indirectly (largely via > hormones) the pituitary; a few extra connections to the posterior pituitary > and one could totally have this effect. > > > How many millions of men and boys have been killed preceded by "Watch > this!"? How many millions of women have been raped because, basically, of > too much testosterone? How many fights between men have gone too far? You > likely can think of other situations. > > > One could even attempt to answer this with a number by looking at > mortality curves. Besides the infant mortality and old age increase, there > is a noticeable "adolescent bump", largely for males. > > > We no longer need a high level of need for fat, salt, and, I argue, > testosterone. > > > Testosterone is useful when you want to shift into a risk-taking mode: if > the environment is such that risks are low, then it does not matter - and > in fact, one might want a bit more cognitive diversity. > > > Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford > University > ?Oh, good one, Tara. Surely there is a level that sustains sexual arousal but does not provoke attacks. Or, as in my book, you control aggression simply by gengineering. My future humans are supersensitive and would not dream of hurting another human (or maybe even another creature), and since there is no privacy anywhere any transgressions are immediately reported. And their gene charts studied intensely. If this doesn't get rid of crime, I just dunno. Remember that there is no money, no ownership. Someone would just have to wish to hurt another person to commit a crime (and their ultimate punishment is to have their genes, or at least the ones deemed responsible, removed from our gene pool). And vice versa: successful people will have their genes moved up the desirability chart. As a thought question: why do we need aggression? Assertiveness, of course. Ability to attack/defend, yes. But no madness, no blood lust, no 'kill em all and let God sort em out'. Just cold-blooded, effective action, stopped when the objective is achieved. (And the first thing to go in personality traits is psychopathy). Anders, surely any sort of risk-taking could be fueled by adrenal hormones, eh?? ? And let the robots take the risks in the future. bill w? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 May 6 21:30:52 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 14:30:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <020e01cf6972$75ccad90$616608b0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace ? >?We no longer need a high level of need for fat, salt, and, I argue, testosterone? bill w In 2017, medical researchers discovered a safe and effective means of reducing testosterone in males. Those who took the pills were much more focused on their studies, committed far fewer crimes, earned higher salaries, were involved in fewer sports and had far lower injury rates in the kinds of accidents known to be immediately preceded by the comment ?Hey yall, watch this shit.? By 2037, most of the genomes associated with those taking the medications were extinct. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue May 6 21:33:46 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 14:33:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] too much of a good thing In-Reply-To: References: <3542198487-1488@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <021301cf6972$dd9dd390$98d97ab0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] too much of a good thing On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 9:09 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: >>... Testosterone is useful when you want to shift into a risk-taking mode: > if the environment is such that risks are low, then it does not matter > - and in fact, one might want a bit more cognitive diversity. >...For geeks, talking to real live females counts as risk-taking mode. ;) BillK _______________________________________________ Unless there is at least some theoretical chance of success, the term "risk" isn't applicable. We hardcore geeks didn't call it risk; we already knew going in that we would make fools of ourselves. If the girl was a geek as well, then we might call it risk. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 6 23:06:25 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 18:06:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] a little fun Message-ID: When some one is really on a tear, ranting and so forth, drop this comment into the conversation. It produces, well, you'll find out. "Well, you don't have to be blind to see that." bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 7 06:10:11 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 02:10:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > There is no evolution anymore affecting humans, except perhaps in 3rd > world countries. We have taken over evolution and will bend it to our > will, by uploading, eugenics and all the rest. > ### To the contrary, evolution is strongly affecting human gene frequencies everywhere, maybe even especially in developed countries. Here, evolutionary pressures have dramatically changed, multiple times in the last 200 years. I would guess that the welfare state and feminism changed the fitness landscape more than the development of dairy farming or the invention of the atl-atl, and these did cause major selective sweeps back at the dawn of history. I am all for eugenics (intentional manipulation of the genepool) but for now this is unfortunately only a minor contributing factor in our evolution. ----------------- > > I am interested in just what kinds of minds you are contemplating. We > have thousands of adjectives describing human behavior but only five have > reliable heritability (plus IQ). What would you add? > ### I don't know. It's really complicated. If I could upload I would most likely bind myself to serve others on condition of preserving my indexical information (name, a personal history narrative) but I don't know if this is going to be a good survival strategy. There may be a lot of selfish gain in (almost) complete altruism but then maybe not. Evolution will tell. A lot of what happens in the substrate will depend on the viability of zero-knowledge proofs and similar cryptographic validation protocols, but that's something for another thread. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 7 06:40:56 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 02:40:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <82D7A70A-3BDE-40A8-BC8C-34B1556E7705@taramayastales.com> <016b01cf689b$e4e5f8d0$aeb1ea70$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:20 PM, Tara Maya wrote: Do you see how all of this changes if paternity certainty can be achieved > by a simple test rather than cradle-to-grave imprisonment of women? > ### Yes, absolutely. I fully agree with Tara. If paternity uncertainty could be eliminated, over a couple dozen generations this could lead to significant changes in many of the human adaptations Tara mentioned. Even without genetic change there could be major meme-driven social change in response to paternity testing over a much shorter time span. The singularity will probably wash away our sins before evolution has the time to act but I am still in favor of widely and by default using paternity testing at birth, with appropriate legal provisions for the protection of men wronged by false paternity claims. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 7 06:52:14 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 02:52:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <22653760-C496-4D51-9D09-0A922A3510AF@taramayastales.com> References: <3470716635-26470@secure.ericade.net> <22653760-C496-4D51-9D09-0A922A3510AF@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Tara Maya wrote: > > > I see more resistance from intellectuals, clergy, law officiants, etc. For > instance, a judge in Canada made some poor man pay child support to a woman > for three children that were proven not to be his. I thought that was > grossly unfair; the biological fathers should have been hunted down and > made to pay, not the innocent victim. But obviously from the point of view > of the State, it was easier to force the punishment on the bird in the hand > rather than the birds in the bush. > ### To say it was grossly unfair may be an understatement: I'd say it is a despicable, evil crime, much worse than rape or even torture. After all, rape is brief and does not deprive the woman of her genetic future. False paternity potentially destroys a man's contribution to the gene pool, and bleeding your life force to feed the offspring of a psychopathic, lying tart and her equally worthless lover is prolonged psychological trauma of the highest degree. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu May 8 05:36:05 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 8 May 2014 01:36:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] hard science In-Reply-To: <267B4E42-31FE-4A64-8924-27CEB320DE88@gmu.edu> References: <983358330-26907@secure.ericade.net> <001001cf3b30$ad2955b0$077c0110$@att.net> <267B4E42-31FE-4A64-8924-27CEB320DE88@gmu.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:39 AM, Robin D Hanson wrote: > > On May 7, 2014, at 1:48 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > I would not be surprised if the most common human-level intelligences in > the substrate were athymhormic - deficient in motivation. Athymhormia > occurs in humans with damage to the frontal cortex, who do not lose their > intelligence and can be directed to act but do not act on their own. A > single motivated mastermind could command a legion of athymhormic drones to > frictionlessly cooperate and achieve greatness. > > > I'd be very surprised if these people today who have this damage > function could effectively in most jobs in large organizations. We usually > give abstract and high level instructions and rely on worker motivation and > initiative to fill in the details. Often we just hint at our instructions, > as we'd be in trouble for stating them explicitly. > ### Well, yes, naturally occurring athymhormics are usually completely incapable of holding a job but you have to remember that they are the result of a crude insult to the brain, usually a tumor or a stroke. Athymhormic minds in the cloud would be the result of careful modification of the general human motivational pattern. It is believed that athymhormia is caused by interruption of the connections between the basal ganglia (nucleus accumbens, olfactory tubercle, striatum) and the prefrontal cortex. The precise pattern of connections between these centers determines many aspects of our motivation, and brutally smashing them removes it - but a judicious rewiring could perhaps disconnect various self-preservation motives (the near-mode) while preserving and externally controlling the non-self-oriented far mode. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu May 8 06:01:32 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 23:01:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 7:36 AM, spike wrote: > Adrian you were a sane voice last time. What do we do now, coach? What > can go wrong? > Aside from what has already been said, let me toss a note to incompetence and laziness. Say the cops have your DNA on file, you having volunteered it - "anonymously". They have DNA that sort of matches yours - a first cousin, perhaps - from a crime scene. Which do you think they will believe to be easier? * Tracing ancestries to see which of your relatives are in town (assuming that correct information is available - e.g., that you won't just cover for your cousin because your cousin is family), hoping that they have registered addresses on file (instead of just being in a hotel) or that you know where your cousins are at all times (shyeah right), and then chasing down the actual perpetrator. * Fudging the DNA a bit, leaning on the service until your donation isn't so anonymous, then picking you up. Doesn't matter that you've got a dozen witnesses placing you in another state at the time: they've got DNA evidence. Any of them succumbing to temptation and going for the latter is too many. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From painlord2k at libero.it Thu May 8 13:12:09 2014 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 15:12:09 +0200 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: <008f01cf6890$7da3f470$78ebdd50$@att.net> References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <008f01cf6890$7da3f470$78ebdd50$@att.net> Message-ID: <536B82A9.8010407@libero.it> Il 05/05/2014 20:33, spike ha scritto: > Of course this has little or nothing to do with DNA. I agree in > principle with the sentiment of BillW: privacy is history, welcome > to the transparent society. The only way to deal with the problem is to have so much transparency the government officials are forced to work in a transparent way. For example, DNA traces found on a crime scene could be made public for the people to look into. The blockchain technology could be useful to publish a censor resistant database of genetic data. When the data is out, it stay out and it stay unchanged. When your data is under years of financial data and cost billions to edit it, no one try to edit it. Mirco From painlord2k at libero.it Thu May 8 13:17:38 2014 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 15:17:38 +0200 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> <01b001cf6881$b65223a0$22f66ae0$@att.net> <008a01cf688f$483a8340$d8af89c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <536B83F2.7090608@libero.it> Il 05/05/2014 20:51, BillK ha scritto: > > Quote: Previously, scientists have only been able to locate where > your DNA was formed to within 700kms, which in Europe could be two > countries away; however this pioneering technique has been 98 per > cent successful in locating worldwide populations to their right > geographic regions, and down to their village and island of > origin. They played easy, with Sardinia and Polynesia. I would like they did it with some Rome resident or some Moscow resident. Mirco From painlord2k at libero.it Thu May 8 13:55:17 2014 From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato) Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 15:55:17 +0200 Subject: [ExI] dna ethics question In-Reply-To: References: <012101cf686f$5f0eae90$1d2c0bb0$@att.net> Message-ID: <536B8CC5.2040409@libero.it> Il 08/05/2014 08:01, Adrian Tymes ha scritto: > * Fudging the DNA a bit, leaning on the service until your > donation isn't so anonymous, then picking you up. Doesn't matter > that you've got a dozen witnesses placing you in another state at > the time: they've got DNA evidence. > > Any of them succumbing to temptation and going for the latter is > too many. If it is shown DNA could be easily produced matching the profile of the accused and the only solid evidence is the DNA, in future, lawyers should be able to have the case dismissed. If the case is not dismissed, I foresee a number of people paying for some samples of their DNA being done and left over some crime scene. "It is the same DNA but I was in jail at the time, so I have a genetic twin/clone somewhere". Mirco From natasha at natasha.cc Fri May 9 18:02:41 2014 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 11:02:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization Message-ID: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> In 2012, at the Humanity+ @ San Francisco conference, my talk was on H+: Beyond Data. I identified something missing in approaching to human enhancement (including HCI/BCI/MCI, DIYbioers, hackers, including grinders). After that, I started the QS Group in Phoenix/Scottsdale, which didn't take me any closer because organizing and visualizing data is tough. Now I just want to visualize ideas. Can anyone suggest fairly easy to learn and cheap software for stunning data visualization that is more design wise than Excel looking? I looked at tableau, which is $500 per year for online use; but then I Googled "free" and found its free public download, so I'm not sure. Thanks! Natasha Natasha Vita-More, PhD Professor, University of Advancing Technology Chair, Humanity+ Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies _______________________________________ New Book at Amazon! cover email -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10577 bytes Desc: not available URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri May 9 20:48:30 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 21:48:30 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Japan and power sats In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Yeah, there's no question we could do this. And JAXA is known to have been > working on it. The question is, how far will they get before cutting > funding and putting the project on indefinite hiatus? > > Optimistic article from Thomas Frey hopes that this is the start of a new Space Race to build space power stations. Quotes: Many other countries won't be comfortable with Japan having the world's only expertise in building space-based power stations. Once the first one proves successful, it will become faster and cheaper to launch the next 10, or even 100 of them. With Japan throwing down the gauntlet, they are effectively forcing China, Russia, and the U.S. to compete in an entirely new kind of space race. Every year of technological advancement brings a drop in the cost of building it. In the 1980s, the cost was estimated to be over $1 trillion. But by 2030, the cost is anticipated to drop to the $20 billion range. At first blush, most will imagine a space-based solar array powering our energy hungry businesses on earth, but that's only part of the equation. It can be used to power an entire solar-system of devices, that will grow exponentially over the coming decades much like an Internet of Things in space. While most haven't acknowledged it yet, the new space race has just begun. -------- BillK From msd001 at gmail.com Fri May 9 23:28:15 2014 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 19:28:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> References: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> Message-ID: On May 9, 2014 2:17 PM, wrote: > visualizing data is tough. Now I just want to visualize ideas. > 1) Yes it is. 2) You and everyone else. There problem is still #1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat May 10 07:29:33 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 10 May 2014 08:29:33 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Bee deaths - More research points to insecticides Message-ID: Harvard study shows neonicotionoids are devastating colonies by triggering colony collapse disorder. Damian Carrington 9 May 2014 Quotes: The mysterious vanishing of honeybees from hives can be directly linked to insectcide use, according to new research from Harvard University. The scientists showed that exposure to two neonicotinoids, the world's most widely used class of insecticide, lead to half the colonies studied dying, while none of the untreated colonies saw their bees disappear. In the new Harvard study, published in the Bulletin of Insectology, the scientists studied the health of 18 bee colonies in three locations in central Massachusetts from October 2012 till April 2013. At each location, two colonies were treated with realistic doses of imidacloprid, two with clothianidin, and two were untreated control hives. "Bees from six of the 12 neonicotinoid-treated colonies had abandoned their hives and were eventually dead with symptoms resembling CCD," the team wrote. "However, we observed a complete opposite phenomenon in the control colonies." Only one control colony was lost, the result of infection by the parasitic fungus Nosema and in this case the dead bees remained in the hive. ------------ BillK From spike66 at att.net Sun May 11 14:43:06 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 07:43:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] christine's recovery Message-ID: <007b01cf6d27$52e78350$f8b689f0$@att.net> Recall a few months ago, a friend from Reno was shot in her own office at Renown Hospital by a deranged patient. We didn't know for a couple weeks if she would live or die. This is a recent photo, as she comes out of reconstructive surgery on the arm. When we enlarged a photo and created a get-well poster, we had only about half of the back of it filled with get-well wishes. The ExI-chat group went to work and filled up most of another column with recovery wishes, so Dr. Lajeunesse is 1/4 Extropians mascot. I recruited some math geeks and some biker buddies to fill the rest of it. We should call ourselves the survivors in honor of her. Happy Mother's Day! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: application/octet-stream Size: 95512 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mbb386 at main.nc.us Sun May 11 19:04:51 2014 From: mbb386 at main.nc.us (MB) Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 15:04:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] christine's recovery In-Reply-To: <007b01cf6d27$52e78350$f8b689f0$@att.net> References: <007b01cf6d27$52e78350$f8b689f0$@att.net> Message-ID: <03ec15f8f7d9dafb41d9203e4d3c3ed6.squirrel@www.main.nc.us> Thanks for the update, spike. Good to see she is doing well, she certainly looks happy enough. :) I hope her path will lead to a new wonderful skillset. Regards, MB From mail at harveynewstrom.com Sun May 11 22:38:32 2014 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 18:38:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Slow Tuesday Night In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000701cf6d69$bffc2440$3ff46cc0$@harveynewstrom.com> I always had a fondness for E.M. Forster's "The Machine Stops". It was written in 1909. It predicted: - a world-wide communication network - everybody self publishing and broadcasting from their homes - counting followers to determine worth - having "friends" via the network instead of in person - everybody staying home and socializing through communications - preferring on-line experiences over real world experiences - and everybody becoming dependent on constant entertainment and support from the -machine. The "Machine Stops" was first published in the Oxford and Cambridge Review in 1909. Brilliant prediction. http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/prajlich/forster.html From max at maxmore.com Mon May 12 02:27:57 2014 From: max at maxmore.com (Max More) Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 19:27:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Slow Tuesday Night In-Reply-To: <000701cf6d69$bffc2440$3ff46cc0$@harveynewstrom.com> References: <000701cf6d69$bffc2440$3ff46cc0$@harveynewstrom.com> Message-ID: The Machine Stops (which I remember reading in English class in the 70s) is now being serialized as a comic book: https://www.comixology.com/The-Machine-Stops-1/digital-comic/76209 On Sun, May 11, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Harvey Newstrom wrote: > I always had a fondness for E.M. Forster's "The Machine Stops". It was > written in 1909. > > It predicted: > - a world-wide communication network > - everybody self publishing and broadcasting from their homes > - counting followers to determine worth > - having "friends" via the network instead of in person > - everybody staying home and socializing through communications > - preferring on-line experiences over real world experiences > - and everybody becoming dependent on constant entertainment and support > from the -machine. > > The "Machine Stops" was first published in the Oxford and Cambridge Review > in 1909. Brilliant prediction. > > http://archive.ncsa.illinois.edu/prajlich/forster.html > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- Max More, PhD Strategic Philosopher Co-editor, *The Transhumanist Reader* http://www.amazon.com/Transhumanist-Reader-Contemporary-Technology-Philosophy/dp/1118334310/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1372225570&sr=1-1&keywords=the+transhumanist+reader President & CEO, Alcor Life Extension Foundation -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at harveynewstrom.com Mon May 12 02:55:18 2014 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Sun, 11 May 2014 22:55:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Slow Tuesday Night In-Reply-To: References: <000701cf6d69$bffc2440$3ff46cc0$@harveynewstrom.com> Message-ID: <000501cf6d8d$9e9b54f0$dbd1fed0$@harveynewstrom.com> Wonderful! I look forward to reading it. Thanks! On Sunday, May 11, 2014 10:28 PM, Max More wrote: > The Machine Stops (which I remember reading in English class in the 70s) > is now being serialized as a comic book: > > https://www.comixology.com/The-Machine-Stops-1/digital-comic/76209 From pharos at gmail.com Tue May 13 08:36:22 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 09:36:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Gene therapy cure for cancer at last! Message-ID: Novartis is betting billions on getting true cures for cancers with major commercialization in a few years but taking 20-30 years for the medical transformation. Developments at the University of Pennsylvania point to what would rank among the great milestones in the history of mankind: a true cure for cancer. Of 22 children and 5 adults with Emily's disease [acute lymphoblastic leukemia], ALL, 27 had a complete remission, in which cancer becomes undetectable. These were gravely ill patients out of options. Some had tried multiple bone marrow transplants and up to 10 types of chemotherapy or other treatments. Novartis , the third-biggest drug company on the Forbes Global 2000, is making this one of the top priorities in its $9.9 billion research and development budget. It's a stunning breakthrough," says Sally Church, of drug development advisor Icarus Consultants. Says Crystal Mackall, who is developing similar treatments at the National Cancer Institute: "It really is a revolution. This is going to open the door for all sorts of cell-based and gene therapy for all kinds of disease because it's going to demonstrate that it's economically viable." Novartis has to run clinical trials in both kids and adults at hospitals around the world, ready a manufacturing plant to create individualized treatments for patients and figure out how to limit the side effects that nearly killed Emily. But Novartis forecasts all that work will be done by 2016, when it files with the FDA. ------------- BillK From anders at aleph.se Tue May 13 10:23:35 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 12:23:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> Message-ID: <4111619054-9295@secure.ericade.net> natasha at natasha.cc?, 9/5/2014 8:22 PM: Can anyone suggest fairly easy to learn and cheap software for stunning data visualization that is more design wise than Excel looking? Hmm. I think the answer depends a lot on what kind of data you have. I have never tried any integrated systems for visualization myself, preferring to work with tools like Matlab/Octave and then export to Illustrator. One reason is that depending on the data, you might want to do very different things, and then it is nice to use software good for that particular kind of data. But most of these tools tend to be more like programming than design.? Tableau looks nice, but I wonder how flexible it is. I guess the best approach is just to try the free version.?http://www.tableausoftware.com/public/ I am a fan of yEd for graph visualisation and layout.http://www.yworks.com/en/products_yed_about.html Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 13 10:11:44 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 12:11:44 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Slow Tuesday Night In-Reply-To: <000501cf6d8d$9e9b54f0$dbd1fed0$@harveynewstrom.com> Message-ID: <4111211956-12395@secure.ericade.net> Harvey Newstrom , 12/5/2014 6:01 AM: Wonderful! ?I look forward to reading it. ?Thanks! On Sunday, May 11, 2014 10:28 PM, Max More wrote: > The Machine Stops (which I remember reading in English class in the 70s) > is now being serialized as a comic book: > > https://www.comixology.com/The-Machine-Stops-1/digital-comic/76209 I have read the comic, and it looks amazing. One curious effect is that since the terminology is somewhat old-fashioned but the pictures modern the society does indeed feel more exotic simply because of the juxtaposition.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at harveynewstrom.com Tue May 13 11:13:50 2014 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 07:13:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <4111619054-9295@secure.ericade.net> References: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> <4111619054-9295@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <000c01cf6e9c$6e4dcde0$4ae969a0$@harveynewstrom.com> natasha at natasha.cc , 9/5/2014 8:22 PM: > Can anyone suggest fairly easy to learn and cheap software for stunning data visualization that is more design wise than Excel looking? I have seen amazing stuff done with the full version of Tableau. But I have not worked with it myself to comment how easy it is to use. Nor have I worked with the public/free version to know how it compares with the expensive version. But the full version can indeed handle massively "big" data and can produce extensively helpful visualizations. From spike66 at att.net Tue May 13 23:28:05 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 May 2014 16:28:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] shaggy nearly killed me today Message-ID: <023501cf6f02$fe31d490$fa957db0$@att.net> OK so this one will take a short introduction. For those born in the early 1960s in the USA, no explanation is necessary, for you already know the toxic wasteland that was children's TV back then, so when Scooby Doo showed up in about 1969, it was a blessed relief. It was a cartoon, but not as brainless as the usual alternating 6 minutes of coyote chasing road runner interspersed with 9 minutes of commercials, repeat. The Scooby Doo show was a half hour, and was an actual story which required at least a modicum of attention span, a detective mystery, where the bad guys were always trying to take advantage of the superstitious nature of the dumb guy (Shaggy) and the dog (Scooby.) The other three meddling kids were smart and not superstitious. They always caught the bad guy. Shaggy's voice was Casey Kasem, who is now missing in action. Kasem also did Americaaaaannnn Top Fortyyyy the weekly radio show countdown of that week's most popular rock and roll songs, a three-hour vaguely-disguised commercial for album sales, interspersed with commercials. We always pictured Shaggy, who was stupid but a kind and gentle soul, a hippie kid would wouldn't harm a flea in the process of biting him even if it carried the plague, a likeable dunce. Likewise Kasem came across as a kind and gentle avuncular type on his radio show, introducing songs and offering fan dedications to sweethearts and such. I liked his show. Kasem is in the news today because he has been ailing (he's 82) and has disappeared. Some yahoo released a tape they made of Kasem in the studio where he was doing the top 40, a long time ago, and had just finished a jumpy happy dance tune, then read the dedication for the next song. It was a touching weepy account of the death of the family dog, a good story but it didn't belong sandwiched between these two particular songs. They played the tape on the radio today as I was coming home from an excellent lecture at SETI in Mountain View. The song was over, he read the solemn tearjerker dedication, and as soon as his mike cut off he started abusing the fool who arranged the show in that order. It was the voice of gentle Shaggy, ".our broken hearts go out to you, Rover; you are gone but not forgotten in our loving memory." {Song starts} "WHO in the BLEEPing BLEEP is the BEEPing idiot who arranged that, and what BLEEP-BLEEP planet did the BLEEB." etc, on and on he went, completely shattering the carefully-crafted illusion. Here was kind, sweet, loving Shaggy, shit-heading this, goddamming that, fucking the other thing, oh my, I got to laughing so hard I had to pull over and stop. I started choking it was so funny, and I thought oh dear, this is it, I am going to die laughing right here right now, so tragic is this, I have been slain by tenderhearted Shaggy, I was such a nice guy too. Fortunately I survived. Casey Kasem, may you be found alive and well, and may you live another 82 years. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Wed May 14 16:50:46 2014 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 09:50:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] "Transhumanism Track" at International Space Development Conference - Los Angeles May 17, 2014 Message-ID: <006e01cf6f94$ab4eb9e0$01ec2da0$@natasha.cc> I hope many of you can attend the International Space Development Conference in Los Angeles on Saturday to participate in the Transhumanism Track. It is going to be great! Transhumanism Track page: http://isdc.nss.org/2014/tracks-transhumanism.html International Space Development website: http://isdc.nss.org/2014/ VP Speakers: http://isdc.nss.org/2014/speakers-vip.html Location: Sheraton Gateway Hotel, Los Angeles Time: 10:00 AM until 5:00 PM If you need more information, please contact me. Cheers! Natasha Natasha Vita-More, PhD Professor, University of Advancing Technology Chair, Humanity+ Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies _______________________________________ New Book at Amazon! cover email -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10577 bytes Desc: not available URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Wed May 14 22:31:00 2014 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 15:31:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <4111619054-9295@secure.ericade.net> References: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> <4111619054-9295@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <004501cf6fc4$2fab91c0$8f02b540$@natasha.cc> Thanks Anders. (I remember many years ago when you taught me yEd while we were at Paddington Station. J) From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 3:24 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Big Data Visualization natasha at natasha.cc , 9/5/2014 8:22 PM: Can anyone suggest fairly easy to learn and cheap software for stunning data visualization that is more design wise than Excel looking? Hmm. I think the answer depends a lot on what kind of data you have. I have never tried any integrated systems for visualization myself, preferring to work with tools like Matlab/Octave and then export to Illustrator. One reason is that depending on the data, you might want to do very different things, and then it is nice to use software good for that particular kind of data. But most of these tools tend to be more like programming than design. Tableau looks nice, but I wonder how flexible it is. I guess the best approach is just to try the free version. http://www.tableausoftware.com/public/ I am a fan of yEd for graph visualisation and layout. http://www.yworks.com/en/products_yed_about.html Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Wed May 14 22:31:30 2014 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 15:31:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <000c01cf6e9c$6e4dcde0$4ae969a0$@harveynewstrom.com> References: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> <4111619054-9295@secure.ericade.net> <000c01cf6e9c$6e4dcde0$4ae969a0$@harveynewstrom.com> Message-ID: <004a01cf6fc4$43565c00$ca031400$@natasha.cc> Thanks Harvey. -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Harvey Newstrom Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2014 4:14 AM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: Re: [ExI] Big Data Visualization natasha at natasha.cc , 9/5/2014 8:22 PM: > Can anyone suggest fairly easy to learn and cheap software for stunning data visualization that is more design wise than Excel looking? I have seen amazing stuff done with the full version of Tableau. But I have not worked with it myself to comment how easy it is to use. Nor have I worked with the public/free version to know how it compares with the expensive version. But the full version can indeed handle massively "big" data and can produce extensively helpful visualizations. _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri May 16 04:48:50 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 00:48:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists Message-ID: Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - that it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with status. A leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably attracted to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream journalism. Given this unflattering opinion I expressed, one might expect me to inveigh against leftists, to urge their expulsion from the corridors of power in order to build a better world without them. However, as a realist I know that this notion is a mirage: How could normal people, who are not obsessed with status, beat the obsessed ones at their own game? For better or worse (well, mostly for the worse), status-obsessed jerks are here to stay, at least until advanced personality-design tools arrive some time late this century. There is interesting research on the role of economic elites (i.e. the upper 10% of income distribution, highly overlapping with high-status leftists) in our so-called democracy: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/05/exploring_eliti.html Turns out that the electoral masses have essentially no impact on government policy. Only elites control the democratic government. This is a lesson: Anybody hoping to influence the government should concentrate his efforts on changing the opinions of elite participants in the game, and can completely disregard outreach to the masses. Of course, retail politicians will woo the public but this is just the expected part of the political theatre. The real decisions will have been made when the candidates are named by parties and paid for by pressure groups or when issues are framed by the media, not when the general public votes. Thus, the rational transhumanist should be nice to high-status leftoids and the occasional non-leftoid power-monger. He should gently persuade them rather than denounce them. They are psychologically dependent on their own self-image as do-gooders and you can use it against them by pointing out the destructive effects of their default recipes for improving the world. Leftists are always on the lookout for yet another "disadvantaged) group to champion (i.e. to use as pawns in the struggle for status), so cast yourself as a victim of oppression, and make them root for you. Cognitive dissonance might make them tune you out but the seed of doubt you planted will shift their daily decisions a bit, maybe make them slightly more hesitant in their convictions. Social change and the law will follow. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Fri May 16 05:59:30 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 22:59:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49BE466A-8D76-4B22-AC7D-6DA57E6CFA30@taramayastales.com> On May 15, 2014, at 9:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Turns out that the electoral masses have essentially no impact on government policy. Only elites control the democratic government. Except it turns out government policy has essentially no impact on human evolution. Only the individual choices of the masses. No ideology is actually sophisticated enough to determine those choices, however: all people are sufficiently hypocritical to save us from that terrible fate. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Fri May 16 07:13:10 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 09:13:10 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: An interesting exploit, if it really works. An interesting weakness of the left fortress. Hm ... On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - > that it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with > status. A leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, > predictably attracted to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, > academia and mainstream journalism. > > Given this unflattering opinion I expressed, one might expect me to > inveigh against leftists, to urge their expulsion from the corridors of > power in order to build a better world without them. However, as a realist > I know that this notion is a mirage: How could normal people, who are not > obsessed with status, beat the obsessed ones at their own game? For better > or worse (well, mostly for the worse), status-obsessed jerks are here to > stay, at least until advanced personality-design tools arrive some time > late this century. > > There is interesting research on the role of economic elites (i.e. the > upper 10% of income distribution, highly overlapping with high-status > leftists) in our so-called democracy: > > http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/05/exploring_eliti.html > > Turns out that the electoral masses have essentially no impact on > government policy. Only elites control the democratic government. > > This is a lesson: Anybody hoping to influence the government should > concentrate his efforts on changing the opinions of elite participants in > the game, and can completely disregard outreach to the masses. Of course, > retail politicians will woo the public but this is just the expected part > of the political theatre. The real decisions will have been made when the > candidates are named by parties and paid for by pressure groups or when > issues are framed by the media, not when the general public votes. > > Thus, the rational transhumanist should be nice to high-status leftoids > and the occasional non-leftoid power-monger. He should gently persuade them > rather than denounce them. They are psychologically dependent on their own > self-image as do-gooders and you can use it against them by pointing out > the destructive effects of their default recipes for improving the world. > Leftists are always on the lookout for yet another "disadvantaged) group > to champion (i.e. to use as pawns in the struggle for status), so cast > yourself as a victim of oppression, and make them root for you. Cognitive > dissonance might make them tune you out but the seed of doubt you planted > will shift their daily decisions a bit, maybe make them slightly more > hesitant in their convictions. Social change and the law will follow. > > Rafal > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com Fri May 16 21:39:46 2014 From: ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com (Gina Miller) Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 15:39:46 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Nanogirl's New Venture! Message-ID: As many of you know I have been involved in the Extropian, futurist, science and nano communities for a very long time. I have also been involved in the artistic realm as well, working with Robert Freitas for example to animate his dermal display from his Nanomedicine book, the animation went on to air on the history channel. I am fortunate that I have been able to create a niche for myself where these two interests meet. I think there is a lot of marketing and visual representation that could be useful for many of our causes - I believe the movie makers and the marketers are not as interested in our ideas. So we are visually quiet. I have set up a marketing company that will launch on Tuesday. While my new marketing company is for anyone, I am very passionate about and have a real understanding of our interests. Nothing would make me happier than to develop things like videos, magazines, animations, newsletters and more to support our vision. Come see what can be created Miller Marketing http://www.millermarketing.co/ And please like the Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/millermarketingco Onward and upward -- Gina Nanogirl Miller www.nanogirl.com www.nanoindustries.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat May 17 08:42:05 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 10:42:05 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> Rafal Smigrodzki , 16/5/2014 6:54 AM: Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - that it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with status. A leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably attracted to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream journalism. I sometimes claim that envy is to the left what greed is to the right (typically after somebody has claimed the political right is only self-serving greedy people). Strangely, this doesn't make the discussion more enlightened. It is hard to get people to realize that all the idiots/bastards cannot be on the other side, and all well-meaning people cannot be on theirs. Which of course shows the real problem with identifying with a political side: it is all about a biased self-serving perception to feel good, rather than figuring out how to get policymaking slightly smarter. As for input to elites vs. spreading it around, it very much depends on the power basis of the elites. Many of the key groups and people are key because they have the strong support of large groups. If you want their ear, it sometimes works well to get their support group concerned with the issue. Typically agenda-setting requires this or a very focused effort at the key points in the elite network.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat May 17 08:45:04 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 10:45:04 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <004501cf6fc4$2fab91c0$8f02b540$@natasha.cc> Message-ID: <156855234-28512@secure.ericade.net> natasha at natasha.cc , 15/5/2014 12:49 AM: Thanks Anders. (I remember many years ago when you taught me yEd while we were at Paddington Station. J) That was fun. And I am still sorry I dragged you across Mayfair and Soho by foot rather than taking the tube. My preliminary experiments with Tableau Public suggest that it looks good, but mainly for corporate-style data and visualisations - useful, but not necessarily what I want for all applications. But I have just scratched the surface.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat May 17 13:14:49 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 14:14:49 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > As for input to elites vs. spreading it around, it very much depends on the > power basis of the elites. Many of the key groups and people are key because > they have the strong support of large groups. If you want their ear, it > sometimes works well to get their support group concerned with the issue. > Typically agenda-setting requires this or a very focused effort at the key > points in the elite network. > > Sounds as though Rafal has just discovered lobbying. And, generally, the more money spent on lobbying then the greater the success. So small special interest groups have great difficulty in fighting the big money corporations. BillK From pharos at gmail.com Sat May 17 13:54:59 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 14:54:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses Message-ID: Neat summary article here: A few quotes: Civilization seems to be hurtling down two disastrous paths that are contrary to each other and yet connected to each other. The first course is a societal ruination that is so catastrophic that I refer to it as apocalyptic collapse - or to create a term - APOCOLLAPSE. The second course is a steady but accelerating reshaping of the western democracies into tyrannical police-surveillance states. I call this FULL SPECTRUM NEO-FEUDALISM. APOCOLLAPSE There are three meta-systems that individually or in combination could de-stabilize the planet so profoundly that the world that we take for granted could vanish with paralyzing swiftness. I call them the Big Bad "E"s and they stand for Energy, Economics and Ecology. ENERGY Our modern techno-industrial society is so dependent on enormous inputs of fossil fuel products that as Peak Oil intensifies prices will skyrocket and supply chains will break-down. As for the recent rash (a most appropriate noun) of feel good energy stories - they are a callous and malicious charade underwritten by the energy giants to keep the illusion going ... until it just stops going. A good comparison is the believability of the tobacco industry which deceived and lied and distorted until even their most expensive public relations campaigns could no longer disguise the truth. ECONOMICS I would characterize our modern economic system as a perverse mating of absurdity and evil. At least the villainous Robber Barons of the 19th century actually "made things." They may have been ruthless and greedy, but they produced steel and railroads and light bulbs. But our current financial titans have only one real talent. They are masters of deceit - of smoke and mirrors and collusion and corruption. Try heating your home with credit default swaps or try filling your car's gas tank with collateralized debt obligations. ECOLOGY There are two diametrically opposed trends on the environmental landscape. On the one hand the vast majority of climate scientists are continually adjusting their previous predictions because their "worst case scenarios" were not worst case enough. Not only are they altering the severity of the various calamities, but also the speed at which they are occurring. On the opposite hand, the "climate change denial" camp is growing. The fact that the obscenely rich oligarchs have funded thousands of lobbyists in Washington to sway the opinions of Congress is the main factor in this increase. And the fact that these politicians are handed bullet points based on "scientific" studies that these same industrialists bankrolled, is repulsive. What sort of sick sentient being would bequeath his grandchildren a smoldering planet just so that he can move further up the Forbes Richest People list? FULL SPECTRUM NEO-FEUDALSIM Any honest analysis of 21st century American democracy must conclude that it is a sham. Certainly there is still the fa?ade, but it is as phony as a Hollywood movie set. The trappings of a republic are still there, but the actual "power of the people" has vaporized. It has been supplanted by the power of the RICH PEOPLE. If the wealthy campaign contributors want a war in Iraq, it does not matter that 80% of the population is against it. The inescapable trend is towards a society in which a tiny group is extremely rich and powerful and the vast majority is an underclass of modern serfs that run the machines that spew out the profits. It has all of the markings of a science fiction nightmare that is turning into reality. ------------------------ Depressing, huh? So we need an energy revolution *and* a political revolution. Could be tricky........ BillK From spike66 at att.net Sat May 17 14:14:13 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 07:14:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > ...Sounds as though Rafal has just discovered lobbying. >...And, generally, the more money spent on lobbying then the greater the success. So small special interest groups have great difficulty in fighting the big money corporations. >...BillK _______________________________________________ So why fight big money corporations? I can think of a number of strategies that might work better. For instance, become a big money corporation. Alternately, buy stock in a big money corporation interested in fighting for your political views. Or get a ton of money from the other people who share those political views and use that to fight the big money corporation. Or advertise on the internet or various other means to influence consumers to favor those corporations which you think better represent your political views. Or the good old fashioned lobbyists can be hired. It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, vilifying big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing something right that the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. Otherwise they would be the big corporations. Don't rage against the machine; become the machine. Then be a really good one. spike From pharos at gmail.com Sat May 17 15:07:03 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 16:07:03 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 3:14 PM, spike wrote: > It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, vilifying > big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing something right that > the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. Otherwise they would be the > big corporations. Don't rage against the machine; become the machine. Then > be a really good one. > > Hmmm. That seems to be defining 'something right' as collecting big profits and growing 'too big to fail'. Surely *how* they get the money should be factored in? The tobacco companies got big by lying and giving people cancer. (And they are still doing it in the third world). The medical and health industries have given the US the most expensive medical treatments in the world with comparatively poor overall population health. Not paying tax is another good wheeze. And monopolies or duopolies are good money-making schemes as well. Using their money to buy up or extinguish competition is another tactic. You seem to be thinking that big=good. BillK From atymes at gmail.com Sat May 17 15:22:10 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 08:22:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 6:54 AM, BillK wrote: > Depressing, huh? > No, just more (easily seen through if you know what to look for) disasterbationism. For instance, note that in what you quoted, they claim that alternatives to oil are illusions - without citing evidence. The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. Neither do the large wind farms in the hills not too far from here. Granted, oil is currently cheap enough that it's the majority of what we use, but if it does run out, it'll be slow enough that we'll be able to transition. Yes, there will be some pain, mainly by those who wait on getting their act together, but no more collapse-grade than we've already seen. As to economics, note that humanity has far from stopped making things despite the presence of these "financial titans" the article bemoans. Look at any objective measure of worldwide (not just American in specific years or otherwise cherry-picked) manufacturing and productivity stats over the past few decades. (And accept that "this region of the world isn't making as much as it did" is increasingly irrelevant in today's global economy, no matter what one's isolationist urges may suggest.) And so on, and so forth. Generally, any article that's yelling and screaming about how the world is collapsing and there's nothing we can do about it, isn't worth reading. The world has problems, true - but they are being worked on, and there is an indication that they will be fixed before they become irreparable if enough of us help. (Granted, that's an approximation. Some of us are more effective at helping with certain problems than others. And some of us will only "help" in ineffective token ways. But whatever the average aid is, each person increases the total.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat May 17 15:40:25 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 08:40:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 8:07 AM, BillK wrote: > Surely *how* they get the money should be factored in? > He said "something right", not "all things right". For instance: > The tobacco companies got big by lying and giving people cancer. (And > they are still doing it in the third world). But they sell easy-to-get highs, which is desired by many. > The medical and health > industries have given the US the most expensive medical treatments in > the world with comparatively poor overall population health. Comparative to what? Other industrialized countries have copied many treatments from the US; in a sense, we're fronting their R&D expenses. Non-industrialized countries tend to have worse overall health; certainly they collectively have lower average lifespans. > And monopolies or duopolies are > good money-making schemes as well. Using their money to buy up or > extinguish competition is another tactic. > That only works up to a point - and they have to have done well enough to become that monopoly or duopoly in the first place. Notice Microsoft: long a near-monopoly power in most things computing (whatever one may think of their tactics since 2000, they did produce the first good graphical operating system in the '80s); these days, still relevant but the list of markets it dominates (that we still care about) is shrinking. Alternately, look at Boeing & Lockheed: formerly the only solution for all things space and most things military aviation, now losing space to SpaceX among others and losing military aviation to Sirkosky among others. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mrjones2020 at gmail.com Sat May 17 15:51:23 2014 From: mrjones2020 at gmail.com (J.R. Jones) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 11:51:23 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: > It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, vilifying > big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing something right that > the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. Spoken like an entitled, standing on the shoulder of Giants, first world view. Whoever has the highest score wins and sets the bar of acceptability? Cheating, manipulation and murder be damned? Otherwise they would be the > big corporations. Don't rage against the machine; become the machine. Then > be a really good one. What happens when the process of becoming a machine requires that one do away with the parts necessary to do "good". At this point, the rules are set for a fixed game. A giant reboot is necessary, with new rules and fresh scores. > > spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat May 17 15:38:30 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 08:38:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <048b01cf71e6$0e844540$2b8ccfc0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 8:22 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 6:54 AM, BillK wrote: >>?Depressing, huh? >?No, just more (easily seen through if you know what to look for) disasterbationism. For instance, note that in what you quoted, they claim that alternatives to oil are illusions - without citing evidence. The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. ? Adrian Ja. Civilization doesn?t come to an end, but rather only our crazy wasteful way in which we use energy gradually ends. I think we will figure out ways to become waaay more efficient. Think of food production for instance, which is perhaps our largest energy consuming activity. Ponder often how much more efficiently it could be done. Ponder how humanity could rebuild society if we don?t start with the assumption that work is always in the form of a 9 to 5 where scores of proles meet five days a week in an office, by driving from their homes to that office. Imagine alternatives to the energy-intensive office space environmental control systems, enabled by having far fewer proles using those kinds of facilities. Imagine away retail sales; that can all be done online. Imagine away most forms of mass entertainment that require gathering huge crowds: we can broadcast football games and similar forms of sports-related mass insanity with the teams playing in an empty stadium, but we don?t need the stadium. A professional-grade field could be set up anywhere if you don?t need the enormous parking lots and spectator seating. Imagine alternatives to traditional farming, where the machines are far more sophisticated, carrying within their circuitry knowledge of individual edible plants, their diseases, their water and nutrient needs, their harvest schedules. Imagine the industrial technology needed to produce and program these farming machines, with most of the humans in that industry working from home offices. Imagine the mostly empty highways, and the flood of ideas we would get from some actual pressure on us. Right now we are comfortable. Comfortable people don?t accomplish anything. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat May 17 16:57:17 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 17:57:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:22 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > No, just more (easily seen through if you know what to look for) > disasterbationism. > > For instance, note that in what you quoted, they claim that alternatives to > oil are illusions - without citing evidence. He's not trying to persuade you! That's a waste of time. He is trying to expound his worldview. As you know it is almost impossible to argue people into changing their long-held opinions, especially about politics and religion. The best that anyone can expect is to remind people that alternative views do exist. That's why I read stuff outside my comfort zone. I don't just want mutual stroking to keep me happy. There is plenty of evidence on the web and in books to support his view. He is not a lone voice in the wilderness. It is just that, as Spike points out, people are too comfortable at present. People don't want to change until they are forced to. > > And so on, and so forth. Generally, any article that's yelling and > screaming about how the world is collapsing and there's nothing we can do > about it, isn't worth reading. No worries then. Pass me another beer. :) BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat May 17 17:11:43 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 13:11:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory because my car has 306 horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my car needs 228,276 watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about 10 watts per square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar cells, that's not counting the additional air resistance caused by the 151x151 foot square mounted on the car's roof and the "WIDE LOAD" banner I'd have to place on the back.. And I still couldn't get to work at night or on cloudy days. > Neither do the large wind farms in the hills not too far from here. > Today there are no purely economic reasons to build wind farms, there are however tax and public relation reasons for doing so. And if wind farms ever became really common environmentalists would do everything they could to stop them because wind farms: 1) Take up to much environmentally sensitive land. 2) They are too ugly. 3) They are too noisy. 4) They change global wind patterns. 5) They kill little birdies. To environmentalists alternate energy solutions are just fine as long as they remain strictly on paper, just don't try to build anything on a large enough scale to actually accomplish anything. > > Generally, any article that's yelling and screaming about how the world > is collapsing and there's nothing we can do about it, isn't worth reading. > I agree 100%. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat May 17 18:22:48 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 11:22:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 10:11 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. > > But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory > Did I mention solar panels on a car? Cars need higher density fuels than straight solar power, it is true. Once synthetic oil can be made cheaply enough - or electric cars are both similarly-priced as normal cars and have enough range (the Tesla series have enough range for most people, but they're a bit pricey; even with the "but you're not buying gas" factor, that's still shifting costs up front) - then the fuel can be collected and made from home solar, or renewables feeding through the grid. Either of these are possible, but they will take much work to achieve. Disasterbationists would have us give up on this work because it's not already complete. > > Neither do the large wind farms in the hills not too far from here. > > Today there are no purely economic reasons to build wind farms, there are > however tax and public relation reasons for doing so. > All power plants, even coal, have government subsidies of some sort - usually on the fuel, but with wind and solar it's not really possible to subsidize the fuel so they subsidize the plants instead. Then people get confused because other types don't have plant subsidies. > To environmentalists alternate energy solutions are just fine as long as > they remain strictly on paper, just don't try to build anything on a large > enough scale to actually accomplish anything. > Those types of environmentalists - increasingly revealed to be astroturf by various competing energy interests - are starting to lose power. But only starting to. > > Generally, any article that's yelling and screaming about how the world >> is collapsing and there's nothing we can do about it, isn't worth reading. >> > > I agree 100%. > Glad to hear it. :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 17 20:56:58 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 15:56:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals? We are walking around with over 50 chemicals in our bodies that weren't there when we were born. Our rivers, creeks, air, oceans are polluted. They are adding things to our food, our drinking cups, our everything, that hasn't been tested for effects on people. You read every day about some chemical (never mind the stories about drug recalls, generics not up to snuff, lawyers hoping you got sick from testosterone supplements) that some company agreed to take out of their product - or not. How in the world will the geneticists, particularly the medical ones, figure out what he holy hell is going on with our diseases. What effects do these chemicals we are eating, breathing, etc. have on our genes and our health? 50+ chemicals potentially changing us epigenetically. What a mess. bill w On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 10:11 AM, John Clark wrote: > >> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> >> > The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. >> >> But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory >> > > Did I mention solar panels on a car? Cars need higher density fuels than > straight solar power, it is true. Once synthetic oil can be made cheaply > enough - or electric cars are both similarly-priced as normal cars and have > enough range (the Tesla series have enough range for most people, but > they're a bit pricey; even with the "but you're not buying gas" factor, > that's still shifting costs up front) - then the fuel can be collected and > made from home solar, or renewables feeding through the grid. > > Either of these are possible, but they will take much work to achieve. > Disasterbationists would have us give up on this work because it's not > already complete. > > >> > Neither do the large wind farms in the hills not too far from here. >> >> Today there are no purely economic reasons to build wind farms, there are >> however tax and public relation reasons for doing so. >> > > All power plants, even coal, have government subsidies of some sort - > usually on the fuel, but with wind and solar it's not really possible to > subsidize the fuel so they subsidize the plants instead. Then people get > confused because other types don't have plant subsidies. > > >> To environmentalists alternate energy solutions are just fine as long as >> they remain strictly on paper, just don't try to build anything on a large >> enough scale to actually accomplish anything. >> > > Those types of environmentalists - increasingly revealed to be astroturf > by various competing energy interests - are starting to lose power. But > only starting to. > > >> > Generally, any article that's yelling and screaming about how the world >>> is collapsing and there's nothing we can do about it, isn't worth reading. >>> >> >> I agree 100%. >> > > Glad to hear it. :) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Sat May 17 21:13:22 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 22:13:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:56 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals? We are walking around with > over 50 chemicals in our bodies that weren't there when we were born. > > Our rivers, creeks, air, oceans are polluted. They are adding things to our > food, our drinking cups, our everything, that hasn't been tested for effects > on people. You read every day about some chemical (never mind the stories > about drug recalls, generics not up to snuff, lawyers hoping you got sick > from testosterone supplements) that some company agreed to take out of their > product - or not. > > Here in the UK they have now found traces of cocaine in the drinking water. Somehow I seem to have stopped worrying about it. :) Comfortingly they say that the levels found are unlikely to represent a danger to the public. (So far, anyway). BillK From rahmans at me.com Sat May 17 22:24:44 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 00:24:44 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > natasha at natasha.cc , 15/5/2014 12:49 AM: > > > Thanks Anders. (I remember many years ago when you taught me yEd while we were at Paddington Station. J) > > That was fun. And I am still sorry I dragged you across Mayfair and Soho by foot rather than taking the tube. > My preliminary experiments with Tableau Public suggest that it looks good, but mainly for corporate-style data and visualisations - useful, but not necessarily what I want for all applications. But I have just scratched the surface.? > > > Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University Might I suggest, along with whatever software you choose, that you peruse a few books by Edward Tufte. 'The visual display of quantitative information', 'Envisioning Information' and a few others are real eye openers while not being boring reads despite the terribly boring sounding titles. Regards, Omar Rahman From spike66 at att.net Sat May 17 22:45:46 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 15:45:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Saturday, May 17, 2014 10:12 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >>? The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. >?But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory because my car has 306 horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my car needs 228,276 watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about 10 watts per square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar cells, that's not counting the additional air resistance caused by the 151x151 foot square mounted on the car's roof and the "WIDE LOAD" banner I'd have to place on the back.. And I still couldn't get to work at night or on cloudy days. John K Clark Ja, your car can produce 306 peak horsepower, but its average usage is less than a tenth of that typically, and you can cut that in half if you allow half again more time to make the trip. If trips take half again longer than they once did, we start thinking of ways to not go, or to combine trips, saving even more. I have the notion that we will tear around like our asses are on fire so long as it is cheap to do it. Then after it isn?t cheap anymore, we will stop. Then we will have a whole new pile of problems. Now we waste because we can. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat May 17 23:07:55 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 16:07:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <015201cf7224$d6ef7480$84ce5d80$@att.net> ... Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:56 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals? We are walking around > with over 50 chemicals in our bodies that weren't there when we were born... Ja, but one of those is semen, and we have no problem with that one. So we are already down to 49. > Our rivers, creeks, air, oceans are polluted. They are adding things > to our food, our drinking cups, our everything, that hasn't been > tested for effects on people... BillW Ja, BillW, I think the reason I don't really sweat it much is that apparently we aren't walking around with much of that stuff. I live near SF, here for about the last 25 years. Over that time, I have been astonished to notice how much clearer the air has become. I recall how one could seldom see the foothills east of the metropolis from Santa Clara. Now you can usually see them very clearly from Sunnyvale and Palo Alto. Last night I was up on the top of those hills to watch the moonrise and saw Moffett Field as sparkly clear as if I had been km away. I could easily see the SF skyline, all lit up, what a sight. It sure wasn't like that in the late 80s. Perhaps just the more rigorous standards in filtering Diesel soot made most of the difference, and that seems simple enough. Cocaine in the drinking water: get a filter, me lad, that one is easy to fix. If you really want to. {8^D In those concentrations, it wouldn't even give you a decent buzz methinks, and besides I thought it was sniffed or something? I'm no expert on those matters; I learned about it from the lyrics to that song by that guy from a long time ago, what's his name... Frank Sinatra, the song is I Get a Kick Out of You: I get no kick from cocaine I'm sure that if I took even one sniff It would bore me terriff icly too... Ja. People used to sing stuff like that. Or you could just drink soda and coffee. BillW, filter your water me lad, live in a place where they don't usually use fireplaces in homes, eat with reasonable caution, leave the tobacco and drugs alone. Do those simple things and you will enjoy the cleanest and healthiest environment of humans anywhere and anywhen in history. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 17 23:33:43 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 18:33:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: > I have the notion that we will tear around like our asses are on fire so > long as it is . Then after it isn?t cheap anymore, we will stop. Then we > will have a whole new pile of problems. Now we waste because we can. > > > > spike > > > > > ? > > What if a truck was used only when we had to carry something that would not fit into a car? Around here, (central Mississippi) trucks are vanity vehicles that almost never have anything in the back. So, in other words, what if people bought cars that actually did what they needed to do and nothing more? No enormous pickups, no four wheel drive for city folk, no vehicles over 150 HP, and so on. Oh wait! I am thinking of people as rational creatures, aren't I? Duh. How dumb, esp. for a psychologist. Spike is right - we will give up things that pollute, are highly wasteful, etc. only when we are forced to do it. Who said that government forcing choices on consumers was a bad idea? (Spike is wrong about cheap - you ever hear of welfare Cadillacs? Extravagance is far more important than need, especially when men are compensating for small equipment.) bill w? > ? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 robot at ultimax.com Sun May 18 00:03:20 2014 From: robot at ultimax.com (Robert G Kennedy III, PE) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 20:03:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <365eb531dd416175060423c27846bc09@ultimax.com> I take issue with the basic premise. *Every* evolved monkey seeks status, not just the elites. It's hard-wired. This post is also a test to see if [extropy-chat] will stop fighting with my provider & vice versa. Spike has been forwarding my rare posts until now. We'll see. Robert -- Robert G Kennedy III, PE www.ultimax.com From tara at taramayastales.com Sun May 18 01:09:06 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 18:09:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 17, 2014, at 1:56 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals? Sure, I used to worry. Now, I take a pill for that. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun May 18 01:05:40 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 May 2014 18:05:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <365eb531dd416175060423c27846bc09@ultimax.com> References: <365eb531dd416175060423c27846bc09@ultimax.com> Message-ID: <001201cf7235$4a4df590$dee9e0b0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Robert G Kennedy III, PE Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists >...I take issue with the basic premise. *Every* evolved monkey seeks status, not just the elites. It's hard-wired. >...This post is also a test to see if [extropy-chat] will stop fighting with my provider & vice versa. Spike has been forwarding my rare posts until now. We'll see. >...Robert -- Robert G Kennedy III, PE www.ultimax.com _______________________________________________ The fight is over, you and we won. Your server and the Exi-chat server have made peace. Welcome, Robert G. Kennedy III, PE, and may your posts be less rare and more common por favor. spike From rolandodegilead at gmail.com Sun May 18 01:31:34 2014 From: rolandodegilead at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Eugenio_Mart=C3=ADnez?=) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 03:31:34 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <001201cf7235$4a4df590$dee9e0b0$@att.net> References: <365eb531dd416175060423c27846bc09@ultimax.com> <001201cf7235$4a4df590$dee9e0b0$@att.net> Message-ID: > > buy stock in a big money corporation interested in fighting for > your political views This is rich and olygarchy governments. It?s ok, but is what it is. Of course, in these kind of systems, poor people is not going to have a good time: Slavery and lack of human rights. On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 3:05 AM, spike wrote: > >... On Behalf Of Robert G Kennedy III, PE > Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > > >...I take issue with the basic premise. *Every* evolved monkey seeks > status, not just the elites. It's hard-wired. > > >...This post is also a test to see if [extropy-chat] will stop fighting > with my provider & vice versa. Spike has been forwarding my rare posts > until > now. We'll see. > > >...Robert > -- > Robert G Kennedy III, PE > www.ultimax.com > _______________________________________________ > > > > The fight is over, you and we won. Your server and the Exi-chat server > have > made peace. Welcome, Robert G. Kennedy III, PE, and may your posts be less > rare and more common por favor. > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- OLVIDATE.DE Tatachan.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rtomek at ceti.pl Sun May 18 01:25:27 2014 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 03:25:27 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> References: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> Message-ID: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> On Fri, May 09, 2014 at 11:02:41AM -0700, natasha at natasha.cc wrote: [...] > > Can anyone suggest fairly easy to learn and cheap software for stunning data > visualization that is more design wise than Excel looking? I suppose this is not what you are looking for - or maybe? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_(programming_language) http://www.r-project.org/screenshots/screenshots.html Free <==> Cheap Never used it, though. Seems to be well established in certain circles (data analysis, statistics and more). Cons: yes it involves programming (probably more like programmable calculator than Java) Pros: this means it should be possible to bend it to do whatever you want rather than wait for some far away soul to add menu item in next version -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From protokol2020 at gmail.com Sun May 18 06:19:58 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 08:19:58 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: spike: > If trips take half again longer than they once did Time is much more precious than oil. On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 12:45 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Sent:* Saturday, May 17, 2014 10:12 AM > > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] How the world collapses > > > > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > >>? The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. > > >?But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory because my car has > 306 horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my car needs > 228,276 watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about 10 watts > per square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar cells, > that's not counting the additional air resistance caused by the 151x151 > foot square mounted on the car's roof and the "WIDE LOAD" banner I'd have > to place on the back.. And I still couldn't get to work at night or on > cloudy days. John K Clark > > > > > > Ja, your car can produce 306 peak horsepower, but its average usage is > less than a tenth of that typically, and you can cut that in half if you > allow half again more time to make the trip. If trips take half again > longer than they once did, we start thinking of ways to not go, or to > combine trips, saving even more. > > > > I have the notion that we will tear around like our asses are on fire so > long as it is cheap to do it. Then after it isn?t cheap anymore, we will > stop. Then we will have a whole new pile of problems. Now we waste > because we can. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun May 18 12:58:18 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 07:58:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: I can't speak for SF, but I think it will get a lot worse. I read a book on dust and found out that most of what China puts in the air comes east. When they get through putting in umpteen coal power plants they will affect us all. Re our clean living: I will be much surprised if our obesity epidemic isn't related to chemicals in something: air, food, water, etc. Ditto rises in autism and other conditions. I know that sounds sort of paranoid/conspiracy -ish, but consider: in the south Pacific, schizophrenia occurs on the coast towns, but not inland where the natives live lives untouched by modern things. Interesting? One theory is that schizo. is a virus, which would explain that difference, but another is exposure to modern chemicals. bill w On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:19 AM, Tomaz Kristan wrote: > spike: > > > > If trips take half again longer than they once did > > Time is much more precious than oil. > > > On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 12:45 AM, spike wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: >> extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *John Clark >> *Sent:* Saturday, May 17, 2014 10:12 AM >> >> *To:* ExI chat list >> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] How the world collapses >> >> >> >> On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> >> >> >>? The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. >> >> >?But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory because my car has >> 306 horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my car needs >> 228,276 watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about 10 watts >> per square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar cells, >> that's not counting the additional air resistance caused by the 151x151 >> foot square mounted on the car's roof and the "WIDE LOAD" banner I'd have >> to place on the back.. And I still couldn't get to work at night or on >> cloudy days. John K Clark >> >> >> >> >> >> Ja, your car can produce 306 peak horsepower, but its average usage is >> less than a tenth of that typically, and you can cut that in half if you >> allow half again more time to make the trip. If trips take half again >> longer than they once did, we start thinking of ways to not go, or to >> combine trips, saving even more. >> >> >> >> I have the notion that we will tear around like our asses are on fire so >> long as it is cheap to do it. Then after it isn?t cheap anymore, we will >> stop. Then we will have a whole new pile of problems. Now we waste >> because we can. >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > > -- > https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sun May 18 13:13:40 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 06:13:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00d201cf729a$fd927e40$f8b77ac0$@att.net> On Behalf Of Tomaz Kristan Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses spike: >>? If trips take half again longer than they once did >?Time is much more precious than oil. Ja, it is now, when oil is still spewing out of the ground free. My notion is that once the stuff starts getting even a little difficult and expensive to recover, we will reassess what we thought was so critically important. Consider your life, what you are doing that makes time more precious than oil. Are you rushing to invent something that will save humanity from itself? Well good! Oh wait, you aren?t? You are tearing off to your kid?s soccer practice? To some office where you are working on ways to redistribute wealth? To the shopping mall? To a sports event? To your dentist? To a family gathering? To a political rally where both leading candidates are saying the same thing? To anything related in any way to entertainment? My notion is that most of what we now consider more precious than oil can be eliminated and we can still have a good life, while using way less energy, way less. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun May 18 14:18:03 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 10:18:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 , spike wrote: > >> my car has 306 horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my >> car needs 228,276 watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about >> 10 watts per square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar >> cells, that's not counting the additional air resistance caused by the >> 151x151 foot square mounted on the car's roof and the "WIDE LOAD" banner >> I'd have to place on the back.. And I still couldn't get to work at night >> or on cloudy days. >> > > Ja, your car can produce 306 peak horsepower, but its average usage is > less than a tenth of that typically, > So now I accelerate at a snail's pace and still have a 48 foot by 48 foot square of solar cells mounted on top of my car, and I still need that "WIDE LOAD" banner. And I still can't use my car at night or on cloudy days. > and you can cut that in half if you allow half again more time to make > the trip. If trips take half again longer than they once did, we start > thinking of ways to not go, or to combine trips, saving even more. To me that sounds like a big step backward; I thought the idea was to gain more control over time and space not less. On Sun, May 18, 2014 Tomaz Kristan wrote: > Time is much more precious than oil. That my friend is one excellent point! I wish I'd said that. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun May 18 14:31:10 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 07:31:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Sat, May 17, 2014 , spike wrote: > > Ja, your car can produce 306 peak horsepower, but its average usage is less than a tenth of that typically, >?So now I accelerate at a snail's pace? Ja. You give up some of your peak acceleration, resulting in a huge weight reduction of the vehicle. >? and still have a 48 foot by 48 foot square of solar cells mounted on top of my car, and I still need that "WIDE LOAD" banner. And I still can't use my car at night or on cloudy days? How bizarre, Johnny! Think it over: you carry a small IC running at peak efficiency and output always, you have energy storage onboard. Think of it as a Nissan Leaf with about half the batteries and a 5 kw generator running full bore the whole time you are on the road. Granted it isn?t fast off the line, and practical top speeds would be about 100 km/hr, but they would be cheap, reliable, low-cost transportation. Those of us who like our V8s can keep our V8s. Assuming we can afford them. >?To me that sounds like a big step backward; I thought the idea was to gain more control over time and space not less? It?s a nice goal of course. Now explain how we are going to handle the load when a billion more Chinese people and a billion more Indian people want to drive. And the billion more that will be born in the next decade want to eat. On Sun, May 18, 2014 Tomaz Kristan wrote: >>? Time is much more precious than oil. >?That my friend is one excellent point! I wish I'd said that. John K Clark Of course it is, now. Oil is still practically free: it is easy to recover. How hard is it to extrapolate forward all the trends we already see? How long do you expect oil to stay practically free? How will we do when we are having to cook the stuff out of the oil sands of Canada? Will we really need to keep tearing around to the latest hip-hop concert or football game? What are we doing that is really all that important? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun May 18 15:29:17 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 16:29:17 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 3:31 PM, spike wrote: > It's a nice goal of course. Now explain how we are going to handle the load > when a billion more Chinese people and a billion more Indian people want to > drive. And the billion more that will be born in the next decade want to > eat. > > Of course it is, now. Oil is still practically free: it is easy to recover. > How hard is it to extrapolate forward all the trends we already see? How > long do you expect oil to stay practically free? How will we do when we are > having to cook the stuff out of the oil sands of Canada? Will we really > need to keep tearing around to the latest hip-hop concert or football game? > What are we doing that is really all that important? > > And remember that oil is not only used in transportation. Much of our modern civilization depends on products made from oil. Plastics, medicines, fertilizers, cosmetics, synthetic fabrics, lubricants, rubber, TVs, computers, etc. When we eventually get every rooftop covered in solar panels, a lot of that solar power will be used to create oil that we can't do without - no matter how expensive it becomes. Telepresence should reduce the demand for tearing around in V8s. Millennials already don't drive much and instead use cycles and public transport. There is a new - different! - generation getting ready to take over. BillK From spike66 at att.net Sun May 18 15:46:39 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 08:46:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> Message-ID: <015601cf72b0$5c862720$15927560$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 3:31 PM, spike wrote: >>... It's a nice goal of course. Now explain how we are going to handle > the load when a billion more Chinese people and a billion more Indian > people want to drive. And the billion more that will be born in the > next decade want to eat... What are we doing that is really all that important? And remember that oil is not only used in transportation. Much of our modern civilization depends on products made from oil. Plastics, medicines, fertilizers, cosmetics, synthetic fabrics, lubricants, rubber, TVs, computers, etc. When we eventually get every rooftop covered in solar panels, a lot of that solar power will be used to create oil that we can't do without - no matter how expensive it becomes. >...Telepresence should reduce the demand for tearing around in V8s. Millennials already don't drive much and instead use cycles and public transport. There is a new - different! - generation getting ready to take over. BillK _______________________________________________ I see some steps we can take that would be largely symbolic but might raise awareness of the goal. Consider for instance the growing of victory gardens. We wouldn't really dent the food bill: a typical family would be lucky to produce 1% of their calories from a vegetable garden, and even then it assumes a large yard. But it raises awareness of the energy intensiveness of our diets. That was easy. Consider steps such as the late "sequestration." This week the GAO produced a report on the outcome of that program that saved the taxpayer 44 billion dollars. The resulting massive layoff in government was measured at... one job. One. OK now, it would suck to be that one guy. But one job, saves 44 billion dollars. Let's call that guy Joe Btfsplk, have a Joe Btfsplk day, buy him lunch, help him find a new job with that 44 billion that has been pumped back into the economy, and restore sequestration immediately, while celebrating it as a symbol of our wastefulness. That was easy. Influence state governments to reduce registration fees on vehicles. This would make it more practical to own additional conveyances besides the V8 we occasionally need for high speed cross country treks. The fees once covered some of the paperwork costs associated with car ownership. That has become more efficient. So why not cut registration fees in half? If highway maintenance is at issue, make up the difference in fuel taxes. That was easy. The first steps toward overall energy balance are all low hanging fruit, easy relatively painless steps. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun May 18 17:45:55 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 13:45:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 10:31 AM, spike wrote: > Think it over: you carry a small IC running at peak efficiency and > output always, you have energy storage onboard. > Today's batteries are expensive, bulky, heavy and unreliable. True you can invoke improved technology to save the day tomorrow, but remember that most electrical components are astronomically better than they were 100 years ago or even 30, but there is one exception to that happy trend, batteries, they have improved only very slightly. > > it [oil] is easy to recover. And thanks to improving technology it's getting easier. In 2011 the USA exported more gasoline and diesel than it imported for the first time since 1949, and in 2012 the USA saw the largest yearly increase in oil production since oil drilling started in 1859. > > How hard is it to extrapolate forward all the trends we already see? > Try extrapolating this trend, natural gas cost about $13 per million Btu's as recently as 2008, today thanks largely to fracking it's less than $2. More natural gas is being produced right now than at any other time in human history. More by far. > How will we do when we are having to cook the stuff out of the oil sands > of Canada? > I think we will do just fine. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Sun May 18 17:54:32 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 10:54:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <00d201cf729a$fd927e40$f8b77ac0$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <00d201cf729a$fd927e40$f8b77ac0$@att.net> Message-ID: <36E09A12-D39B-4AAF-A74A-C194CB6FD118@taramayastales.com> On May 18, 2014, at 6:13 AM, spike wrote: > My notion is that once the stuff starts getting even a little difficult and expensive to recover, we will reassess what we thought was so critically important. > > Consider your life, what you are doing that makes time more precious than oil. Are you rushing to invent something that will save humanity from itself? Well good! Oh wait, you aren?t? You are tearing off to your kid?s soccer practice? To some office where you are working on ways to redistribute wealth? To the shopping mall? To a sports event? To your dentist? To a family gathering? To a political rally where both leading candidates are saying the same thing? To anything related in any way to entertainment? > > My notion is that most of what we now consider more precious than oil can be eliminated and we can still have a good life, while using way less energy, way less. I'm surprised at you, Spike. Just as no one has the right to tell me, for political reasons, that I have no right to watch my kids play soccer, so I consider it rather obnoxious to tell me that it's a "waste" of energy to do so. Children, work, trade, sports, health, family, entertainment and politics?! (You only left out dating. Let me add it back into that list.) The things you disparage are life itself, not incidental to life. Of course, you may make other choices, but that makes my choices no less important than yours. Freedom is what creates the good life. Freedom from others restricting your actions is one component; freedom to take positive action is another. The first political, the second is technological. If we have less energy, our freedom to do what we want is severely impinged. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun May 18 19:55:02 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 20:55:02 +0100 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 3:31 PM, spike wrote: > Ja. You give up some of your peak acceleration, resulting in a huge weight > reduction of the vehicle. > Re John's giant car rooftop solar panels, there is a crowdfunding proposal to lay solar panels on every road surface in America. So no need for car roof panels. I could believe in parking lots, driveways, playgrounds and sidewalks, but roads????? The problems of traction, wear, dirt and mud and rubber deposit could be difficult to solve. But if it works, it is a brilliant idea. (I bet a friend of Obama gets that government contract!). BillK From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun May 18 20:24:03 2014 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 13:24:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Status was Be nice to leftists Message-ID: On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 5:00 AM, "Robert G Kennedy III, PE" > > I take issue with the basic premise. *Every* evolved monkey seeks > status, not just the elites. It's hard-wired. That's true. It's also true that there is a great reluctance for humans to understand that they are motivated to seek status. Long ago, the middle of the battle with the scientologists, I was much taken with evolutionary psychology and wrote about this. I doubt I was the first to figure it out, but I know of no earlier written sources that expressed the concept self-referentially. (It's wired into primates, I am a primate, ergo.) I think such self-understanding is more acceptable now, but at the time it got me a good deal of flack from one Judge Whyte, in a Federal court. There is, of course, no better example of a person swapping income for status than a Federal Judge. The trial transcript is up. I suppose I could find it if anyone cares. Keith From spike66 at att.net Sun May 18 23:27:14 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 16:27:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <36E09A12-D39B-4AAF-A74A-C194CB6FD118@taramayastales.com> References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <00d201cf729a$fd927e40$f8b77ac0$@att.net> <36E09A12-D39B-4AAF-A74A-C194CB6FD118@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: <007501cf72f0$b40e0950$1c2a1bf0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Tara Maya >>.My notion is that most of what we now consider more precious than oil can be eliminated and we can still have a good life, while using way less energy, way less. >.I'm surprised at you, Spike. >.Just as no one has the right to tell me, for political reasons, that I have no right to watch my kids play soccer, so I consider it rather obnoxious to tell me that it's a "waste" of energy to do so. Indeed not madam. There are no political considerations anywhere in the discussion. The factors controlling these matters will be entirely economic. Really where I was going was not eliminating these matters but recognizing we can take longer to get there, and vastly reduce the cost of getting there. We don't need to tear around the way we do. >.Children, work, trade, sports, health, family, entertainment and politics?! (You only left out dating. Let me add it back into that list.) The things you disparage are life itself, not incidental to life. Sure, do them. Take your time. Accept a conveyance that accelerates at 0.2 G and tops out about 100 kph, and there you have it: a conveyance which carries perhaps 8 liters of Diesel and carries a prole 300 km, city or highway, not much difference. The vehicle I envision will not be as fast as our beloved V8s, but would be waaay cheaper to operate. >.Of course, you may make other choices, but that makes my choices no less important than yours. My vision allows you to not only keep your current choice, it adds a bunch of new ones. The only real downside I can see is that slowpokes might get in your way; that is a legitimate objection. But consider the sport car enthusiast who plunks down a few hundred K for a McLaren. That rig can go over 300 kph. The rest of us proles are always in her way. We can't afford to go that fast. I don't intend to give up my beloved V8. But I can imagine a bunch of self-driving series hybrids always in my way. Then I get to feel like I am a frustrated McLaren driver, except for 4% the cost. Meanwhile, the McLaren driver shoots herself, liberating millions of dollars back into the economy. Almost everyone wins in that scenario. >.Freedom is what creates the good life. Agreed. What I suggest not only does not reduce freedom, it increases it. >. Freedom from others restricting your actions is one component. Good point. On the other hand, it might not do that at all. If low-end cars were slower, perhaps most people would think of alternatives to using them. This would make the roads less crowded. Perhaps the McLaren driver could weave in and out of the sparse remaining traffic. It would be better that she weave thru a few cars going 100 kph than a lot of them all going 120. >.freedom to take positive action is another. The first political, the second is technological. If we have less energy, our freedom to do what we want is severely impinged. Tara Maya Tara you and I agree on all this. My notion is that it isn't politics at work here, but rather birth rates and uncontrolled immigration. The current US government and its attitudes are on their way out (this isn't hard to see); their successors will put in pipelines and drill baby drill, etc. But those are short term. Sooner or later, that game all comes to an end, since those billion new proles are coming, absolutely regardless of what we think of the matter. They are coming anyway, and they want to drive. So. My notion is we need to make room for series hybrid cars, which are pokey and dangerous (they tend to get hit from behind by frustrated McLaren drivers.) But they are very efficient. We can still have a good life, while using way less energy, way less. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun May 18 23:40:29 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 16:40:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: <011701cf7221$bebdc9f0$3c395dd0$@att.net> <012701cf72a5$d12d2200$73876600$@att.net> Message-ID: <008901cf72f2$8db3d9e0$a91b8da0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2014 12:55 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 3:31 PM, spike wrote: >>... Ja. You give up some of your peak acceleration, resulting in a huge > weight reduction of the vehicle. >...Re John's giant car rooftop solar panels, there is a crowdfunding proposal to lay solar panels on every road surface in America. So no need for car roof panels. What am I missing here? There is no need to generate the power right there, either on the conveyance or beside the road. The technology to haul energy around is well-known. Long chain hydrocarbons are great for that purpose. You don't really need all that much battery power on board if you have a mere 10kg of hydrocarbon fuel and perhaps 40 kg of IC-based conversion to DC. Then a 100kg of electrical energy storage is enough and a couple hundred kg of frame and chassis (assuming only one seat and an admittedly leisurely acceleration capability) and we are ready to motor. Right now we don't even have something like that as a market choice. We should. >...(I bet a friend of Obama gets that government contract!)...BillK _______________________________________________ BillK, we will pardon your unawareness of this, being a subject of Her Majesty and far from the scene of the crime, but on the contrary sir. After our recent bitter experience with one of Obama's friends getting a huge contract to build the ObamaCare website and failing most spectacularly, I don't expect any of his friends to be getting any high-visibility contracts any time soon. Spike From spike66 at att.net Sun May 18 23:42:04 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 May 2014 16:42:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Status was Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008a01cf72f2$c673be80$535b3b80$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Keith Henson >...The trial transcript is up. I suppose I could find it if anyone cares. Keith _______________________________________________ Yes very much I would like to see that. spike From spike66 at att.net Mon May 19 07:03:05 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 00:03:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] robot catching stuff out of the air Message-ID: <00f301cf7330$62860b10$27922130$@att.net> This is cool. I didn't realize we were getting this close: http://www.livescience.com/45507-wow-robot-hand-catches-objects-on-the-fly-v ideo.html OK then, if we can get a robot arm to catch stuff, we can get that same arm to throw. You know what comes next: a baseball team. People will pay good money to watch 18 robots play baseball, and furthermore, there is no reason to not allow betting, since you could start out with identical robots and randomly choose the teams. If there is no good way to offer them a payoff to screw up and blow the game, we should be able to bet on them without the usual perils of wagering on sports. Even without the betting, I want to see what comes next. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 19 14:01:22 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 15:01:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [FV] OpenWorm Kickstarter In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <537A0EB2.4000906@aleph.se> -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [FV] OpenWorm Kickstarter Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 12:39:44 +0000 From: Shanahan, Murray P Reply-To: To: foundation-volunteers at googlegroups.com Dear all, For those who support OpenWorm, it's Kickstarter project is 90% funded with 3 hours to go. A good time to make or increase a pledge: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/openworm/openworm-a-digital-organism-in-your-browser/posts/848025 Murray Murray Shanahan Professor of Cognitive Robotics Department of Computing Imperial College London 180 Queen's Gate London SW7 2AZ +44 (0)20 7594 8262 -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foundation-volunteers" (http://neuralprostheses.org) group. To post to this group, send email to foundation-volunteers at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to foundation-volunteers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/foundation-volunteers?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foundation-volunteers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foundation-volunteers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Mon May 19 14:21:20 2014 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 16:21:20 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: [FV] OpenWorm Kickstarter In-Reply-To: <537A0EB2.4000906@aleph.se> References: <537A0EB2.4000906@aleph.se> Message-ID: I just raised my pledge. Please do the same, or consider contributing, to funding this very interesting project dedicated to the mission of this group. 86 minutes to go, only 3,700 $ short of the funding goal of 120,000 $. WE CAN MAKE IT HAPPEN. On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [FV] OpenWorm Kickstarter Date: > Mon, 19 May 2014 12:39:44 +0000 From: Shanahan, Murray P > Reply-To: > To: > foundation-volunteers at googlegroups.com > > > > Dear all, > > For those who support OpenWorm, it's Kickstarter project is 90% funded with 3 hours to go. A good time to make or increase a pledge: > https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/openworm/openworm-a-digital-organism-in-your-browser/posts/848025 > > Murray > > > Murray Shanahan > Professor of Cognitive Robotics > Department of Computing > Imperial College London > 180 Queen's Gate > London SW7 2AZ+44 (0)20 7594 8262 > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "foundation-volunteers" (http://neuralprostheses.org) group. > To post to this group, send email tofoundation-volunteers at googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email tofoundation-volunteers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/foundation-volunteers?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foundation-volunteers" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foundation-volunteers+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 19 22:24:42 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 17:24:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness Message-ID: In Michio Kaku's book, The Future of the Mind, there is a puzzle (page 303) that makes no sense to me. Plutarch and Pliny have written about it, Montaigne, John Locke, George Berkeley, and Aquinas have opined about it and no one is happy with any solution to whether the dog can think/abstract. Here it is: There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them. The dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, without sniffing (!), takes the third. Did he think? IMO: flawed puzzle. A dog simply would not do this. Saying 'but if he did' begs the question. A creature of scent, he would sniff the third trail just as he had the first two. To a dog, smell overrides the other senses. Another flaw seems to be this: how did the dog 'know' his master went down any of the roads? But this is not important. Your opinion? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gsantostasi at gmail.com Mon May 19 22:33:39 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 17:33:39 -0500 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think the idea here is to create a situation where the dog makes a decision based on some form of reasoning, in this case after excluding the first 2 roads the unavoidable conclusion is that the master has followed the 3 roads. This indeed would show some form of high reasoning in the dog. The details are not so important. Neil deGrasse Tyson does a similar experiment in this video, where Chaser the dog finds a stuffed animal that never saw before (Darwin) by excluding all the other possibilities: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-CAhALUBvk On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 5:24 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > In Michio Kaku's book, The Future of the Mind, there is a puzzle (page > 303) that makes no sense to me. Plutarch and Pliny have written about it, > Montaigne, John Locke, George Berkeley, and Aquinas have opined about it > and no one is happy with any solution to whether the dog can > think/abstract. Here it is: > > There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them. The > dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, > without sniffing (!), takes the third. Did he think? > > IMO: flawed puzzle. A dog simply would not do this. Saying 'but if he > did' begs the question. A creature of scent, he would sniff the third > trail just as he had the first two. To a dog, smell overrides the other > senses. Another flaw seems to be this: how did the dog 'know' his master > went down any of the roads? But this is not important. > > Your opinion? bill w > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon May 19 23:03:47 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 16:03:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01da01cf73b6$97b7c900$c7275b00$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them. The dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, without sniffing (!), takes the third. Did he think? Ja. >?IMO: flawed puzzle. A dog simply would not do this? I agree the dog would sniff the third path, even if he knows the master went that way. However, dogs do think and dogs do reason. Granted some dogs are not very good at it, but then humans vary widely in their ability to reason as well. It often seems that some humans are not as good at reasoning as some smart dogs. Cats also reason, to some extent. When they are in the mood. >?Your opinion? bill w My opinion, my good doctor and friend, is that you should spend some quality time with dogs. Failing that, post this question to an online dog enthusiast group. They may offer plenty of fun examples of reasoning in dogs. Do report back with those examples please. A marvelous creatures is the canine domesticus, such good sports. There are plenty of dog lovers in our group. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon May 19 23:30:34 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 16:30:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 19, 2014 3:25 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them. The dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, without sniffing (!), takes the third. Did he think? > > IMO: flawed puzzle. A dog simply would not do this. Agreed. If nothing else, the dog must consider the possibility that, just like the dog would, the master may have gone off into the woods (or whatever the local non-road terrain is). -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon May 19 23:35:16 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 01:35:16 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <382627249-23232@secure.ericade.net> Omar Rahman , 18/5/2014 12:29 AM: Might I suggest, along with whatever software you choose, that you peruse a few books by Edward Tufte. 'The visual display of quantitative information', 'Envisioning Information' and a few others are real eye openers while not being boring reads despite the terribly boring sounding titles. Amen. They are beautiful, incisive works. I have copies both in my office and at home.? However, while Tufte has terrific taste, it is not enough to just read him. Just because one can see that one's creations are no good doesn't mean one can create good designs: it takes a lot of effort and training to actually become able to display information in a good manner. And sometimes Tufte goes off the deep end (those microminimalist bar charts resulting from removing non-data ink are interesting as demonstrations, but hardly useful).? This week's most useful diagram has been a simple scatter plot with one subset of data points in red while the other are mild grey. It is fairly plain to see that they lie in the right half of the cloud, and this in turn has intriguing implications. But making it took an hour of arguing with a colleague in order to figure out what we really were looking for, and a surprising amount of tweaking just to get the axes right.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanzure at gmail.com Mon May 19 23:48:33 2014 From: kanzure at gmail.com (Bryan Bishop) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 18:48:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> References: <000901cf6bb0$dffd2880$9ff77980$@natasha.cc> Message-ID: On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 1:02 PM, wrote: > I identified something missing in approaching to human enhancement > (including HCI/BCI/MCI, DIYbioers, hackers, including grinders). Can you be more specific about what you think is missing? When a transhumanist just builds whatever he needs, what exactly does that miss? - Bryan http://heybryan.org/ 1 512 203 0507 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 20 00:09:30 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 02:09:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <383245802-23121@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 17/5/2014 11:01 PM: Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals?? We are walking around with over 50 chemicals in our bodies that weren't there when we were born. Just 50? You must be living in some Antarctic nature preserve.? But 'chemicals' range from the rather benign artificial sulphur hexafluoride to natural potent carcinogens like aflatoxins. From essential and poisonous selenium to barbiturates produced as drugs or part of our natural biochemistry. The real question must always be if they are harming us appreciably: worrying about them *all* is irrational. When it comes to health, it is worth noticing that the healthspan of people in developed countries (where we likely have the richest mix of molecules) is increasing and far better than in counties where we can expect a more 'natural' environment. Part of this is obviously trade-offs; avoiding parasites and infections might help more than bad effects from pollutants. Part of it is also getting rid of nasties like tobacco smoke, lead or DDT. But I suspect that there are few chemicals around that have effects on our health comparable to the old nasties; we certainly worry about oestrogen-like substances, but their harms have proven rather elusive despite decades of investigation (and we ingest plenty of phyto-oestrogens too). A lot of things may be carcinogenic, but cancer incidence is largely declining.? That doesn't stop people from obsessing about chemicals. But most responses I see are more like attempts of achieving ritual purity (often using traditional methods bolstered with a pinch of pseudoscience) or jumping from fashion to fashion (aspartame! bisphenol-A! manganese! vaccines! benzene in soft drinks! acrylamide in fried food!) rather than aiming for health. My liver enzymes are currently happily chewing up ethanol, modafinil, caffeine and?arsenobetaine?- chemicals that may have some bad effects on me, but also have useful effects (or, in the case of arsenobetaine, just come with good natural seafood). Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 20 00:19:35 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 02:19:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: <385341975-31924@secure.ericade.net> spike , 17/5/2014 4:31 PM: >... On Behalf Of BillK >...And, generally, the more money spent on lobbying then the greater the success. So small special interest groups have great difficulty in fighting the big money corporations. The scaling of success with money is not obviously linear. A lot has to do with what the natural difficulty is: are there stakeholders that loudly and strongly take a position, while the opposition is apathetic? Does the issue naturally mesh with other issues? Is this an entrenched debate, or a new one where enterprising politicians can stake out their claims? So why fight big money corporations? ?I can think of a number of strategies that might work better. ?For instance, become a big money corporation. Alternately, buy stock in a big money corporation interested in fighting for your political views. ?Or get a ton of money from the other people who share those political views and use that to fight the big money corporation. ?Or advertise on the internet or various other means to influence consumers to favor those corporations which you think better represent your political views. ?Or the good old fashioned lobbyists can be hired. If you can get a corporation (or any other organisation) to promote your idea you have a mighty ally. Especially if you can formulate the idea so that it makes business sense to promote it (consider how many of the big US companies now promote gay marriage). This way it actually becomes part of the corporate DNA. Typically the trick is to figure out what corporation or business has parallel needs with you or your idea, and then demonstrate it to them.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 20 00:25:47 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 02:25:47 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> Tomasz Rola , 18/5/2014 3:48 AM: Never used it, though. Seems to be well established in certain circles (data analysis, statistics and more). R is powerful, but likely best if you plan to do statistics and data processing rather than infoviz. There are apparently nice graphics libraries, but the learning curve is steep. Look at?http://d3js.org/ and http://www.jasondavies.com/ for some awesome things that can be done in javascript with the right library.? Hmm,?http://www.processing.org/ is actually great for visualisation, http://www.openprocessing.org/collection/1122 but requires java - which is a bit of the Sick Man of the Internet right now. Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Tue May 20 01:14:43 2014 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 21:14:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 19, 2014 6:25 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > > There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them. The dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, without sniffing (!), takes the third. Did he think? A philosopher creates a thought experiment that goes viral despite several flaws - is he clever? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue May 20 04:19:54 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 00:19:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <49BE466A-8D76-4B22-AC7D-6DA57E6CFA30@taramayastales.com> References: <49BE466A-8D76-4B22-AC7D-6DA57E6CFA30@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 1:59 AM, Tara Maya wrote: > > On May 15, 2014, at 9:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > Turns out that the electoral masses have essentially no impact on > government policy. Only elites control the democratic government. > > > > Except it turns out government policy has essentially no impact on human > evolution. Only the individual choices of the masses. > ### If only. Unfortunately, governments are a huge part of the social landscape and whatever they do, it does have an impact on evolution, over and above our individual choices. For example, we can safely assume that resource transfers from affluent, intelligent and conscientious parents to indigent, dumb and careless parents or their children would in the long term measurably shift relevant allele frequencies. Luckily, the coming robot apocalypse will make this irrelevant soon enough. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue May 20 04:43:48 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 00:43:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: Which of course shows the real problem with identifying with a political side: it is all about a biased self-serving perception to feel good, rather than figuring out how to get policymaking slightly smarter. ### Indeed, this is what Bryan Caplan expounds on in The Myth of the Rational Voter. Political affiliation and voting is primarily expressive, about convincing yourself that you are a good person. Unfortunately, such efforts, while making people feel good have real, bad effects on the world. Partisans end up actually causing more damage than would be expected from a simple balance of good and evil in their souls. So here it goes: The path to enlightenment leads through the darkness in your heart. Accept it, and you won't be a better person. But at least your inner sight will not be clouded. You won't stumble in the fog, clumsily trampling over whatever light is in you. And in this way, you will be a better person. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue May 20 04:49:27 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 00:49:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:14 AM, BillK wrote: > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > > As for input to elites vs. spreading it around, it very much depends on > the > > power basis of the elites. Many of the key groups and people are key > because > > they have the strong support of large groups. If you want their ear, it > > sometimes works well to get their support group concerned with the issue. > > Typically agenda-setting requires this or a very focused effort at the > key > > points in the elite network. > > > > > > Sounds as though Rafal has just discovered lobbying. > ### Well, yeah. There have been discussion on this list about what makes greater sense as a way of popularizing transhumanism, wide outreach or focused attention. Looks like focused attention is the way, and the pros - political lobbyists, pharma reps, were right all along. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Tue May 20 04:54:26 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 00:54:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:07 AM, BillK wrote: The medical and health > > industries have given the US the most expensive medical treatments in > the world with comparatively poor overall population health. ### Government regulation of medical and health industries gave the US the most expensive medical treatments with superb outcomes, lessening but not eliminating the health price Americans pay for sloth and gluttony. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue May 20 05:26:22 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 22:26:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <038e01cf73ec$09d87310$1d895930$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists ### Well, yeah. There have been discussion on this list about what makes greater sense as a way of popularizing transhumanism, wide outreach or focused attention. Looks like focused attention is the way, and the pros - political lobbyists, pharma reps, were right all along?Rafal It feels to me as though Transhumanism has become crazy popular, without much effort or expense on our part. I remember back in the old days, when you could have the local transhumanist meetings in a phone booth (assuming anyone here remembers what those are and what they were for.) Now I see the local (Berkeley) Transhumanist group is on fire, gathering proles like nobody?s business. The Stanford group is active, there are some lads from the San Jose area that look like they will get critical mass soon. Everywhere I hear discussions among normal people about matters that were way out geek-chic cutting edge space-case stuff 20 yrs ago. Now it has become so respectable, a hard-core geek doesn?t know what to do or say. I wouldn?t be surprised if Alcor gets a rush of business in the next few years, an expansion of demand far beyond what it is ready to handle, just because the time is right for the masses to go thru the same line of reasoning you and I did two decades ago. Cool! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue May 20 09:33:08 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 11:33:08 +0200 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 20/5/2014 12:30 AM: In Michio Kaku's book, The Future of the Mind, there is a puzzle (page 303) that makes no sense to me.? Plutarch and Pliny have written about it, Montaigne, John Locke, George Berkeley, and Aquinas have opined about it and no one is happy with any solution to whether the dog can think/abstract.? Here it is: There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them.? The dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, without sniffing (!), takes the third.? Did he think? IMO:? flawed puzzle.? A dog simply would not do this.? Saying 'but if he did' begs the question.? A creature of scent, he would sniff the third trail just as he had the first two.? To a dog, smell overrides the other senses.? Another flaw seems to be this:? how did the dog 'know' his master went down any of the roads?? But this is not important. I think you are missing the point. Your response is a bit like the student saying: "But no cannon can fire a projectile at that speed! And besides, the air resistance would stop it! Hence, professor Newton, your argument that gravity can make an object orbit the Earth is flawed!"? Or perhaps more closely to how engineering students often react to hearing the Trolley Problem in an ethics course: they come up with things like ripping out the lever and jamming the wheels of the trolley rather than making any moral choice. Which would be an awesome response in real life, but misses the point about what the thought experiment is about. Philosophical and physical thought experiments deliberately reduce a situation to a pure (often pretty strange) case in order to make a point about the underlying theory. Not playing by the rules means you are not willing to engage with the posed question. Of course, a popular and valid approach is to try to show that a thought experiment makes an unwarranted *internal* assumption - real dogs, cannons and trolleys do not matter, but the stated properties of them in the experiment might have a subtle flaw (like in the Feynman ratchet experiment). The point of the dog example is to make it clearer what reasoning is, and whether it has anything to do with an internal language, intuitions or deduction. It seems that real dogs are merely interesting examples, while the deep question is whether there is an innate intuition or deduction that if (A or B or C) is true, ((not A) and (not B)) imply C. Even if dogs did behave like in the experiment it might be due to a different mechanism, like running mental models of possible worlds, updating their likelihoods based on accumulated evidence, and acting when the likelihood becomes concentrated enough in one possibility: no deduction needed (at this point a philosopher will complain that my Bayesian Beagle is actually equivalent to his Deductive Doberman, since Bayes rule implicitly contains the above deduction; much barking will ensue).? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Tue May 20 13:04:31 2014 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 09:04:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:33 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > The point of the dog example is to make it clearer what reasoning is, and > whether it has anything to do with an internal language, intuitions or > deduction. It seems that real dogs are merely interesting examples, while > the deep question is whether there is an innate intuition or deduction that > if (A or B or C) is true, ((not A) and (not B)) imply C. Even if dogs did > behave like in the experiment it might be due to a different mechanism, > like running mental models of possible worlds, updating their likelihoods > based on accumulated evidence, and acting when the likelihood becomes > concentrated enough in one possibility: no deduction needed (at this point > a philosopher will complain that my Bayesian Beagle is actually equivalent > to his Deductive Doberman, since Bayes rule implicitly contains the above > deduction; much barking will ensue). > So if Bayesian Beagle and Deductive Doberman behave exactly the same way are they interchangeable with respect to this question? Can they both be replaced by a robot with a program that implements either algorithm? If the robot isn't "thinking" then the dogs aren't thinking either. Oh right, the robot externalized the thinking to the programmer. Where does it end? We can keep moving the intelligence to wherever is convenient if we're willing to contrive some method to convey that intelligence all the way through to a choice of path. thinking about that program, I imagine: if( scent on A ){ follow path A } else if( scent on B ){ follow path B } else follow path C the above program works, but I would never implement something like that. instead: if( scent on A ){ follow path A } else if( scent on B ){ follow path B } else if( scent on C ){ follow path C } else (figure out a new plan) this second program is more robust. The interchangeability of observed behavior in this puzzle reminds me of Searle's Chinese Room. I wonder if they're all just primers for ultimately asking if any of the participants in the conversation are thinking to establish a baseline to the question 'what IS thinking' -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue May 20 14:58:57 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 07:58:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg Subject: Re: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness William Flynn Wallace , 20/5/2014 12:30 AM: In Michio Kaku's book, The Future of the Mind, there is a puzzle (page 303) that makes no sense to me. Plutarch and Pliny have written about it, Montaigne, John Locke, George Berkeley, and Aquinas have opined about it and no one is happy with any solution to whether the dog can think/abstract. Here it is: There are three roads and the dog's master has gone down one of them. The dog sniffs along two of them, finding no scent of his master, and so, without sniffing (!), takes the third. Did he think? ? Here?s an interesting experiment with dogs. First get a dog that really likes you and wants to be with you. Next, find a fenced area with gates at either end. Walk in one gate, leaving the gate open where the dog can see it is open. Walk to the other gate, go thru it without letting the dog follow. Now walk away from the fenced area while calling the dog. I have done this experiment with mixed results. One of my dogs ran back away from me thru the open gate and ran around the fenced area, quickly caught up to me. Another of my dogs had his redeeming qualities, a lovable character, but he was no rocket scientist. He would just stand there barking his head off, hoping I would come back and let him thru the gate. The one dog understood how we got down to where we were, the other didn?t. This is a transhumanist list, but humanity will likely simulate simple brains before we manage to sim complex ones. So transdogism will likely be a useful tool in the transhumanism movement. So, I declare all dog experiments as fair game for posting here. If you see examples of your dog reasoning or failing spectacularly to reason, do post it please. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue May 20 15:24:15 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 08:24:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:33 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > The point of the dog example is to make it clearer what reasoning is, and > whether it has anything to do with an internal language, intuitions or > deduction. > Given the phrasing of the question, I am not sure this is so. It may be to postulate a thing that is not so, to trick people into thinking that kind of thing actually happens, and thereby lead them to false conclusions. (They are open to considering it as part of the question - but it seems believable enough that some might confuse it for having heard that it has happened.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue May 20 16:30:04 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 09:30:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? Message-ID: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> Anders, I read a comment by you the other day which has been rattling around in my head like a marble in an empty coffee can. It was something about Java being the sick man of the internet. Perhaps I misunderstood. Please sir, why is that? Reason why I am asking: my son has been doing the MOOCs on Java, such as the one in Khan Academy. He took it up immediately and is already better at Java than I am (it isn't hard to surpass my modest skills in that area, but still it's good progress for a 7 yr old.) I have been considering getting serious about mastering Java for a specific application I have been working on for some time, a DNA consanguinity study. I want to write the code in a form lots of Ancestry.com-ers can use, so I assumed Java is the way, the truth and the life. Is it? Thanks! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rtomek at ceti.pl Tue May 20 18:19:27 2014 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 20:19:27 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:25:47AM +0200, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Tomasz Rola , 18/5/2014 3:48 AM: > > Never used it, though. Seems to be well established in certain circles > > (data analysis, statistics and more). > > R is powerful, but likely best if you plan to do statistics and data > processing rather than infoviz. There are apparently nice graphics > libraries, but the learning curve is steep. Look > at http://d3js.org/ and http://www.jasondavies.com/ for some awesome > things that can be done in javascript with the right library. > Hmm, http://www.processing.org/ is actually great for visualisation, Visually-wise, they are very nice to look at. But there are some long-term problems I can see with Javascript. Like, I need to have compatible browser, so while I could do some stuff in it _right now_, I don't really want to find myself in the same department where people cry for help because their old sci/tech reports cannot be read (AmiPro for DOS or something even more exotic long long gone) etc. Besides, I myself can only stand one C-like language and its name is C. Learning curve I can negotiate with. There is always some kind of tradeoff. For example. trading time spent on learning now for time spent on rewriting from scratch *and* learning something else, later. The only fancy thing about it is that people AFAICT don't recognise such situations until someone has to pay for what was in small print on that last page. > http://www.openprocessing.org/collection/1122 but requires java - > which is a bit of the Sick Man of the Internet right now. Oh, I could have told you this fifteen years ago, it's just the rest of the world started to pay attention. And I have really followed my own advice, i.e. pulled out of Java world, a bit painfully but without much hesitation. Well, ok, I could have told you this ten years ago. Fifteen years ago I was only sick of Java. JVM (i.e. a virtual machine) is something good, however. At least in some aspects. There really is a need for cross-[operating system/hardware] environment for code execution. And maybe JVM is a poor choice but still worthy. Mono is interesting, too. Chances are, stuff written in Java might be executed in Mono twenty years from now, or twenty years after Java is gone from desktops (unless some DRM stuff forbids it). There are some other choices but they don't belong to this forum. Uhm, yep I know, too long, too offtopic. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From pharos at gmail.com Tue May 20 18:35:11 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 19:35:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:30 PM, spike wrote: > Anders, I read a comment by you the other day which has been rattling around > in my head like a marble in an empty coffee can. It was something about > Java being the sick man of the internet. Perhaps I misunderstood. Please > sir, why is that? > > Many, many, many security problems. Many authorities recommend disabling Java in your browser, unless you really, really need it for certain must-have websites. See: BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 18:35:10 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 13:35:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: I have no idea what you are talking about, but I want to correct one thing: Visualize an xy axis: some measure of learning is on the y and time (or trials etc.) is on the x. So if learning goes slowly, the the curve rises slowly. If learning is fast, then the curve is steep. I know people think of 'steep' as difficult, but with learning curves it is not so. I dunno how this misconception got out there, but it's very difficult to get rid of, like the 'vaccines cause disease' one. Please help get rid of this cliche'. I taught Learning for 35 years and this is driving me crazy! It's worse than the misconception of negative reinforcement as punishment. bill w On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Tomasz Rola wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 02:25:47AM +0200, Anders Sandberg wrote: > > Tomasz Rola , 18/5/2014 3:48 AM: > > > Never used it, though. Seems to be well established in certain circles > > > (data analysis, statistics and more). > > > > R is powerful, but likely best if you plan to do statistics and data > > processing rather than infoviz. There are apparently nice graphics > > libraries, but the learning curve is steep. Look > > at http://d3js.org/ and http://www.jasondavies.com/ for some awesome > > things that can be done in javascript with the right library. > > Hmm, http://www.processing.org/ is actually great for visualisation, > > Visually-wise, they are very nice to look at. But there are some > long-term problems I can see with Javascript. Like, I need to have > compatible browser, so while I could do some stuff in it _right now_, > I don't really want to find myself in the same department where people > cry for help because their old sci/tech reports cannot be read (AmiPro > for DOS or something even more exotic long long gone) etc. > > Besides, I myself can only stand one C-like language and its name is C. > > Learning curve I can negotiate with. There is always some kind of > tradeoff. For example. trading time spent on learning now for time > spent on rewriting from scratch *and* learning something else, > later. The only fancy thing about it is that people AFAICT don't > recognise such situations until someone has to pay for what was in > small print on that last page. > > > http://www.openprocessing.org/collection/1122 but requires java - > > which is a bit of the Sick Man of the Internet right now. > > Oh, I could have told you this fifteen years ago, it's just the rest > of the world started to pay attention. And I have really followed my > own advice, i.e. pulled out of Java world, a bit painfully but without > much hesitation. > > Well, ok, I could have told you this ten years ago. Fifteen years ago > I was only sick of Java. > > JVM (i.e. a virtual machine) is something good, however. At least in > some aspects. There really is a need for cross-[operating > system/hardware] environment for code execution. And maybe JVM is a > poor choice but still worthy. Mono is interesting, too. Chances are, > stuff written in Java might be executed in Mono twenty years from now, > or twenty years after Java is gone from desktops (unless some DRM > stuff forbids it). There are some other choices but they don't belong > to this forum. > > Uhm, yep I know, too long, too offtopic. > > -- > Regards, > Tomasz Rola > > -- > ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** > ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** > ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** > ** ** > ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** > _______________________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Tue May 20 18:50:46 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 19:50:46 +0100 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:58 PM, spike wrote: > This is a transhumanist list, but humanity will likely simulate simple > brains before we manage to sim complex ones. So transdogism will likely be > a useful tool in the transhumanism movement. So, I declare all dog > experiments as fair game for posting here. If you see examples of your dog > reasoning or failing spectacularly to reason, do post it please. > > I have just seen a home video on tv. A few treats were scattered in the middle of a kitchen table. A big dog stood up on his hind legs and reached one paw to the treats and pulled all except one towards him and ate them. He tried several times to reach the remaining treat in the middle of the table, but just missed. So he got down and trotted round to the other side of the table, stood up and stretched out his paw again. He tried several times to reach it, then finally just knocked towards the far side of the table. Then he got down again, trotted round the table again. stood up and snaffled the final treat. Good work! BillK From spike66 at att.net Tue May 20 18:56:08 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 11:56:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> Message-ID: <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] sick man of the internet? On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:30 PM, spike wrote: >>... Anders, I read a comment by you the other day which has been rattling > around in my head like a marble in an empty coffee can. It was > something about Java being the sick man of the internet. Perhaps I > misunderstood. Please sir, why is that? >...Many, many, many security problems. Many authorities recommend disabling Java in your browser, unless you really, really need it for certain must-have websites. See: BillK _______________________________________________ Ja, so what's its replacement? Suppose I have an application that I wrote, or an algorithm that I worked out on Excel for instance. I want it to run on iPads and cell phones and such. What do I do? spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 18:56:40 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 13:56:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <038e01cf73ec$09d87310$1d895930$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <038e01cf73ec$09d87310$1d895930$@att.net> Message-ID: I just got a TENS unit, reconditioned, paid for by Medicare. On the form it said $795. I went to their web site where it was listed new for $169. Will the company take the difference and write it off as a tax loss? Right. A scam and a fraud I've seen many times before. I know some of you fellow libertarians hate government rules and control, but somebody needs to control this sort of thing. bill w On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 12:26 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *Rafal Smigrodzki > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > > > > > > ### Well, yeah. There have been discussion on this list about what makes > greater sense as a way of popularizing transhumanism, wide outreach or > focused attention. Looks like focused attention is the way, and the pros - > political lobbyists, pharma reps, were right all along?Rafal > > > > > > It feels to me as though Transhumanism has become crazy popular, without > much effort or expense on our part. > > > > I remember back in the old days, when you could have the local > transhumanist meetings in a phone booth (assuming anyone here remembers > what those are and what they were for.) Now I see the local (Berkeley) > Transhumanist group is on fire, gathering proles like nobody?s business. > The Stanford group is active, there are some lads from the San Jose area > that look like they will get critical mass soon. > > > > Everywhere I hear discussions among normal people about matters that were > way out geek-chic cutting edge space-case stuff 20 yrs ago. Now it has > become so respectable, a hard-core geek doesn?t know what to do or say. > > > > I wouldn?t be surprised if Alcor gets a rush of business in the next few > years, an expansion of demand far beyond what it is ready to handle, just > because the time is right for the masses to go thru the same line of > reasoning you and I did two decades ago. > > > > Cool! > > > > 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 May 20 19:10:28 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 12:10:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:58 PM, spike wrote: > >...If you see > examples of your dog reasoning or failing spectacularly to reason, do post it please. > > >...I have just seen a home video on tv. A few treats were scattered in the middle of a kitchen table... Then he got down again, trotted round the table again. stood up and snaffled the final treat. Good work! BillK _______________________________________________ Cool, thanks BillK. Here's one that has puzzled me. We are told that dogs don't have a sense of sequence. They can learn a number of tricks but cannot be trained to do them in sequence. At dog shows, every demonstration has a human giving the dog commands, in order, but you never see a dog going out by himself and doing a series of tricks. Conclusion: dogs have no sense of order of events, the animal world's equivalent of Vonnegut's Billy Pilgrim. I will grant most of that, but with moderation. Some dogs apparently have some sense of sequence. Observation: my mother's poodle barks at any dog anywhere under any circumstances, and recognizes other dogs by visual cues alone, such as seeing one out the window of a car. He also recognizes dogs on the TV screen, and of course has to bark and scare them away. This dog knows when a commercial comes on which has a dog in it, before the dog comes onto the screen. He starts barking at the start of the commercial. He knows from just spoken words that there is a dog coming, and must be barked away. Conclusion: this dog has a sense of sequence if he knows what is coming. If we want to do experimentation on some new body medical technique, such as dropping a dog's temperature to 1C, perhaps a way to test it would be to find a dog like this one, time how long he takes to respond to the commercial, do the cooling and rewarming cycle, time him again. spike From spike66 at att.net Tue May 20 19:25:05 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 12:25:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <038e01cf73ec$09d87310$1d895930$@att.net> Message-ID: <065e01cf7461$34f27b70$9ed77250$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:57 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists >?I just got a TENS unit, reconditioned, paid for by Medicare. On the form it said $795. I went to their web site where it was listed new for $169. >?Will the company take the difference and write it off as a tax loss? Right. A scam and a fraud I've seen many times before. I know some of you fellow libertarians hate government rules and control, but somebody needs to control this sort of thing. bill w That isn?t rules and control BillW, that is fraud. We hate government-enabled fraud. This is abusive of the taxpayer. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 20:09:01 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:09:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> Message-ID: Well, Hell! What is sequence but the order in which the trained dogs run an obstacle course? Perhaps the owners are shouting commands? But the dogs aren't stopping at each one to wait for directions. I'll have to bet that 'no dogs can sequence' is very wrong. Dogs are smarter than rats and lab rats can learn very complicated sequences of tasks. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:10 PM, spike wrote: > > >... On Behalf Of BillK > Subject: Re: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:58 PM, spike wrote: > > > >...If you see > > examples of your dog reasoning or failing spectacularly to reason, do > post > it please. > > > > > > >...I have just seen a home video on tv. A few treats were scattered in the > middle of a kitchen table... Then he got down again, trotted round the > table > again. stood up and snaffled the final treat. Good work! BillK > _______________________________________________ > > > Cool, thanks BillK. > > Here's one that has puzzled me. We are told that dogs don't have a sense > of > sequence. They can learn a number of tricks but cannot be trained to do > them in sequence. At dog shows, every demonstration has a human giving the > dog commands, in order, but you never see a dog going out by himself and > doing a series of tricks. Conclusion: dogs have no sense of order of > events, the animal world's equivalent of Vonnegut's Billy Pilgrim. > > I will grant most of that, but with moderation. Some dogs apparently have > some sense of sequence. > > Observation: my mother's poodle barks at any dog anywhere under any > circumstances, and recognizes other dogs by visual cues alone, such as > seeing one out the window of a car. He also recognizes dogs on the TV > screen, and of course has to bark and scare them away. This dog knows when > a commercial comes on which has a dog in it, before the dog comes onto the > screen. He starts barking at the start of the commercial. He knows from > just spoken words that there is a dog coming, and must be barked away. > > Conclusion: this dog has a sense of sequence if he knows what is coming. > > If we want to do experimentation on some new body medical technique, such > as > dropping a dog's temperature to 1C, perhaps a way to test it would be to > find a dog like this one, time how long he takes to respond to the > commercial, do the cooling and rewarming cycle, time him again. > > 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 May 20 20:20:01 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 13:20:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> Message-ID: <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:09 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness >?Well, Hell! What is sequence but the order in which the trained dogs run an obstacle course? Perhaps the owners are shouting commands? Ja, the trainer goes thru and gives both auditory and visual cues. My notion is that dogs can do sequences, but not as effectively as humans. I don?t really know of demonstrations of a dog?s ability to do a sequence of tasks, but I know rats do: they are trained to run mazes. It would be interesting to see a dog vs a rat in learning similar but scaled mazes. >? But the dogs aren't stopping at each one to wait for directions? Part of the criteria for judging is in how seamless the dog transitions from one task to the next. >? I'll have to bet that 'no dogs can sequence' is very wrong? Agreed, as stated is wrong. So how good can dogs get at sequencing? Can you get a dog to do a task every third day, for instance? Or two tasks on alternate days? Or train a dog to hit a lever every hour on a chime, a red lever then two blue levers, in that repeating pattern? >? Dogs are smarter than rats and lab rats can learn very complicated sequences of tasks? Cool, have you examples please? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 20:42:45 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:42:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] neurons Message-ID: In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing page 342): "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not firing. Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue May 20 20:48:01 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 21:48:01 +0100 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 9:20 PM, spike wrote: > Cool, have you examples please? > > Guide dogs for the blind, search and rescue dogs, etc.... BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 20:48:45 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:48:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> Message-ID: Studies are decades old, and I am not a rat psychologist, but I'll try: the rat climbs a rope, goes through the left opening, jumps to the right platform, paws the middle lever, etc. for several more tasks. Key is to start at the end with the last task and work backwards - nothing but positive reinforcement, often secondary so as not to stop the rat, which he would do if you gave him food. I was astounded when I read this study. It does take hours and hours and hours. With a dog, you would establish a sec. reinf. with, say, a simple clicker. Click and give him a small treat. Animal trainers do something similar. So the animal doesn't get a treat every time. As to how far in time a dog can get conditioned - do things the third day - I have no idea. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:20 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn > Wallace > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 1:09 PM > *To:* ExI chat list > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness > > > > >?Well, Hell! What is sequence but the order in which the trained dogs > run an obstacle course? Perhaps the owners are shouting commands? > > > > Ja, the trainer goes thru and gives both auditory and visual cues. My > notion is that dogs can do sequences, but not as effectively as humans. I > don?t really know of demonstrations of a dog?s ability to do a sequence of > tasks, but I know rats do: they are trained to run mazes. It would be > interesting to see a dog vs a rat in learning similar but scaled mazes. > > > > >? But the dogs aren't stopping at each one to wait for directions? > > > > Part of the criteria for judging is in how seamless the dog transitions > from one task to the next. > > > > >? I'll have to bet that 'no dogs can sequence' is very wrong? > > > > Agreed, as stated is wrong. So how good can dogs get at sequencing? Can > you get a dog to do a task every third day, for instance? Or two tasks on > alternate days? Or train a dog to hit a lever every hour on a chime, a red > lever then two blue levers, in that repeating pattern? > > > > >? Dogs are smarter than rats and lab rats can learn very complicated > sequences of tasks? > > > > Cool, have you examples please? > > > > 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 sparge at gmail.com Tue May 20 20:56:48 2014 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 16:56:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTTuiE1_Oe8 Especially interesting part at 11:00. Dog can retrieve any of 1000 toys by name. When asked to retrieve a toy it doesn't know by a name it doesn't know, it picks the one toy it doesn't recognize. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gsantostasi at gmail.com Tue May 20 21:03:43 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 16:03:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when at rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There are times when they are silent. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing page > 342): > > "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be > stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our > DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total > amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store > much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not > fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power > initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. > A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. > Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the > hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. > Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts > possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, > all raised to the Nth power. > > My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to a > neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. > Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is > idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not > firing. > > Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rtomek at ceti.pl Tue May 20 21:44:49 2014 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 23:44:49 +0200 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20140520214449.GB26117@tau1.ceti.pl> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 11:56:08AM -0700, spike wrote: > > >... On Behalf Of BillK > Subject: Re: [ExI] sick man of the internet? > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:30 PM, spike wrote: > >>... Anders, I read a comment by you the other day which has been rattling > > around in my head like a marble in an empty coffee can. It was > > something about Java being the sick man of the internet. Perhaps I > > misunderstood. Please sir, why is that? > > >...Many, many, many security problems. Many authorities recommend disabling > Java in your browser, unless you really, really need it for certain > must-have websites. > See: > BillK > _______________________________________________ > > > Ja, so what's its replacement? Suppose I have an application that I wrote, > or an algorithm that I worked out on Excel for instance. I want it to run > on iPads and cell phones and such. What do I do? Last time I checked, Java was not allowed on iphones. I guess this is still valid assumption. Actually nothing interesting was allowed either. Of course after jailbreak it could (maybe). I choose to not care much, because the whole idea of "has to jailbreak/root" is sick for me. The folks doing Free Pascal Compiler might have a solution for you. They claim they can compile to almost everything in use out there. I am a bit too shy to go back to Pascal but have considered once or twice. They also have portable graphics (i.e. GUI) for many targetted platforms. Apart from Java, this might be the closest to what you want. And Java does not run everywhere, like I wrote. And FPC makes fast binaries (on PC, at least), some folks use it for algo contests. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From rex at nosyntax.net Tue May 20 21:26:08 2014 From: rex at nosyntax.net (rex) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 14:26:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> <061601cf745f$2a096e50$7e1c4af0$@att.net> <06f901cf7468$e1836820$a48a3860$@att.net> Message-ID: <20140520212608.GE17392@nosyntax.net> spike [2014-05-20 13:42]: > William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> >>... Dogs are smarter than rats and lab rats can learn very complicated >> sequences of tasks... > > Cool, have you examples please? Here's a Senegal parrot that does 20 tricks in two minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-cdanh5Xzw http://trainedparrot.com/index.php?bid=35&article=20+Parrot+Tricks+in+2+Minutes+Receives+Over+1%2C000%2C000+Views Here's a New Caledonian crow that, on its own, susses how to bend a wire into a hook to retrieve food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDg0AKfM8EY Another New Caledonian crow that uses short tool to retrieve a longer tool which is used to retrieve the tool that is long enough to retrieve food. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZE4BT8QSgZk -rex -- From rtomek at ceti.pl Tue May 20 21:54:13 2014 From: rtomek at ceti.pl (Tomasz Rola) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 23:54:13 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <20140520215413.GC26117@tau1.ceti.pl> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 01:35:10PM -0500, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I have no idea what you are talking about, but I want to correct one thing: > > Visualize an xy axis: some measure of learning is on the y and time (or > trials etc.) is on the x. > > So if learning goes slowly, the the curve rises slowly. If learning is > fast, then the curve is steep. > > I know people think of 'steep' as difficult, but with learning curves it is > not so. I dunno how this misconception got out there, but it's very That's my case. But I am flexible, I may try to negotiate even with flat learning curve :-). > Please help get rid of this cliche'. I taught Learning for 35 years and > this is driving me crazy! It's worse than the misconception of negative > reinforcement as punishment. Ok, understood and remembered. Thanks. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home ** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_rola at bigfoot.com ** From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 21:58:43 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 16:58:43 -0500 Subject: [ExI] neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when at > rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There are > times when they are silent. > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >> page 342): >> >> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be >> stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our >> DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total >> amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store >> much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not >> fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power >> initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. >> A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. >> Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the >> hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. >> Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts >> possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, >> all raised to the Nth power. >> >> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to a >> neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >> firing. >> >> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:23:10 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:23:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. bill w Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when at > rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There are > times when they are silent. > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >> page 342): >> >> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be >> stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our >> DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total >> amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store >> much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not >> fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power >> initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. >> A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. >> Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the >> hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. >> Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts >> possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, >> all raised to the Nth power. >> >> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to a >> neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >> firing. >> >> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:39:50 2014 From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 15:39:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Economic cyber-warfare Message-ID: China is using cyber espionage to steal up to 400 billion *annually,* from the United States! What does this portend for the future? What can the U.S. and other nations do to properly protect themselves? Will this challenge get better, or only worse? And does the U.S. do the same sort of thing, or is it simply a matter of us not needing to, since we are technologically superior. http://theweek.com/article/index/224521/hacked-how-china-is-stealing-americas-business-secrets John -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gsantostasi at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:46:49 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:46:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens when you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state of sleep. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at > one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster > (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving > inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. > bill w > > > Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to > 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: > >> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when at >> rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There are >> times when they are silent. >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >>> page 342): >>> >>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be >>> stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our >>> DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total >>> amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store >>> much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not >>> fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power >>> initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. >>> A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. >>> Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the >>> hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. >>> Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts >>> possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, >>> all raised to the Nth power. >>> >>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to a >>> neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >>> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >>> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >>> firing. >>> >>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gsantostasi at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:49:50 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:49:50 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Slow wave sleep is when neurons have the slowest and most synchronized firing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-wave_sleep On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens when > you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state of > sleep. > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at >> one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >> bill w >> >> >> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to >> 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when at >>> rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There are >>> times when they are silent. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >>>> page 342): >>>> >>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be >>>> stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our >>>> DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total >>>> amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store >>>> much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not >>>> fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power >>>> initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. >>>> A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. >>>> Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the >>>> hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. >>>> Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts >>>> possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, >>>> all raised to the Nth power. >>>> >>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to >>>> a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >>>> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >>>> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >>>> firing. >>>> >>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:49:36 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:49:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: OK, so they rest. I give up. But do you agree that there are three states of the neuron? On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens when > you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state of > sleep. > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at >> one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >> bill w >> >> >> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to >> 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when at >>> rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There are >>> times when they are silent. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >>>> page 342): >>>> >>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be >>>> stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our >>>> DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total >>>> amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store >>>> much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not >>>> fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power >>>> initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. >>>> A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. >>>> Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the >>>> hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. >>>> Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts >>>> possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, >>>> all raised to the Nth power. >>>> >>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to >>>> a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >>>> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >>>> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >>>> firing. >>>> >>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:54:48 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:54:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Economic cyber-warfare In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: We are bugging/spying on everyone, their email, their phone conversations, as I am sure you have read about recently. Potential enemies, our friends - all of them. And they, us. Also, I am sure that industrial espionage is done by everyone. I don't know what they are trying to accomplish by indicting Chinese officials, who will never be extradited. Who knows what all those spooks do? On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:39 PM, John Grigg wrote: > China is using cyber espionage to steal up to 400 billion *annually,* from > the United States! > > What does this portend for the future? What can the U.S. and other > nations do to properly protect themselves? Will this challenge get better, > or only worse? And does the U.S. do the same sort of thing, or is it > simply a matter of us not needing to, since we are technologically superior. > > > > http://theweek.com/article/index/224521/hacked-how-china-is-stealing-americas-business-secrets > > > John > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 22:56:04 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:56:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I read Wm Dement in the '60s, but thanks anyway. bill w On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:49 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Slow wave sleep is when neurons have the slowest and most synchronized > firing. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-wave_sleep > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: > >> In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens when >> you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state of >> sleep. >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at >>> one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >>> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >>> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >>> bill w >>> >>> >>> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to >>> 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when >>>> at rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There >>>> are times when they are silent. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >>>>> page 342): >>>>> >>>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can >>>>> be stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in >>>>> our DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore >>>>> total amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can >>>>> store much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire >>>>> or not fire*. Hence there are two raised to the >>>>> one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states >>>>> change every few milliseconds. A simple thought may contain one hundred >>>>> generations of neural firings. Hence there are two raised by one hundred >>>>> billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in >>>>> one hundred generations. Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the >>>>> total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the >>>>> one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. >>>>> >>>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to >>>>> a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >>>>> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >>>>> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >>>>> firing. >>>>> >>>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 gsantostasi at gmail.com Tue May 20 23:00:44 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:00:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not sure what point you are trying to make. Kaku was trying to use the neuron bimodal states (firing or not) to calculate the set of all possible combination of states that give rise to thought. It is a simplistic assumption. One could say that what matters is how information is coded and that is not completely understood. It can be a combination of things, firing times, amplitude modulation, two or more signals arriving at the same time or in a precise sequence and so on. Kaku was doing what physicists often do, approximating a cow with a sphere. It is easy in that way to calculate the volume of the cow and it is a roughly good approximation. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > OK, so they rest. I give up. But do you agree that there are three > states of the neuron? > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: > >> In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens when >> you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state of >> sleep. >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at >>> one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >>> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >>> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >>> bill w >>> >>> >>> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to >>> 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when >>>> at rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There >>>> are times when they are silent. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >>>>> page 342): >>>>> >>>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can >>>>> be stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in >>>>> our DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore >>>>> total amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can >>>>> store much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire >>>>> or not fire*. Hence there are two raised to the >>>>> one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states >>>>> change every few milliseconds. A simple thought may contain one hundred >>>>> generations of neural firings. Hence there are two raised by one hundred >>>>> billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in >>>>> one hundred generations. Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the >>>>> total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the >>>>> one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. >>>>> >>>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to >>>>> a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. >>>>> Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is >>>>> idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not >>>>> firing. >>>>> >>>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 gsantostasi at gmail.com Tue May 20 23:02:48 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:02:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Neural coding: Coding schemes[edit ] A sequence, or 'train', of spikes may contain information based on different coding schemes. In motor neurons, for example, the strength at which an innervated muscle is flexed depends solely on the 'firing rate', the average number of spikes per unit time (a 'rate code'). At the other end, a complex 'temporal code ' is based on the precise timing of single spikes. They may be locked to an external stimulus such as in the auditory system or be generated intrinsically by the neural circuitry.[5] Whether neurons use rate coding or temporal coding is a topic of intense debate within the neuroscience community, even though there is no clear definition of what these terms mean. from wiki On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Not sure what point you are trying to make. Kaku was trying to use the > neuron bimodal states (firing or not) to calculate the set of all possible > combination of states that give rise to thought. It is a simplistic > assumption. > > One could say that what matters is how information is coded and that is > not completely understood. It can be a combination of things, firing times, > amplitude modulation, two or more signals arriving at the same time or in a > precise sequence and so on. > > Kaku was doing what physicists often do, approximating a cow with a > sphere. It is easy in that way to calculate the volume of the cow and it is > a roughly good approximation. > > > > > > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> OK, so they rest. I give up. But do you agree that there are three >> states of the neuron? >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens >>> when you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state >>> of sleep. >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires at >>>> one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >>>> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >>>> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >>>> bill w >>>> >>>> >>>> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up to >>>> 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when >>>>> at rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There >>>>> are times when they are silent. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing >>>>>> page 342): >>>>>> >>>>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can >>>>>> be stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in >>>>>> our DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore >>>>>> total amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can >>>>>> store much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either >>>>>> fire or not fire*. Hence there are two raised to the >>>>>> one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states >>>>>> change every few milliseconds. A simple thought may contain one hundred >>>>>> generations of neural firings. Hence there are two raised by one hundred >>>>>> billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in >>>>>> one hundred generations. Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the >>>>>> total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the >>>>>> one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. >>>>>> >>>>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states >>>>>> to a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the >>>>>> same. Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a >>>>>> neuron is idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is >>>>>> not firing. >>>>>> >>>>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 23:21:31 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:21:31 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My point was that Kaku was using 2 - two states of the neuron, to estimate - firing or not, he said. If, in fact, it is 3, then the estimate is far off. billw On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Giovanni Santostasi wrote: > Neural coding: > > Coding schemes[edit > ] > > A sequence, or 'train', of spikes may contain information based on > different coding schemes. In motor neurons, for example, the strength at > which an innervated muscle is flexed depends solely on the 'firing rate', > the average number of spikes per unit time (a 'rate code'). At the other > end, a complex 'temporal code ' > is based on the precise timing of single spikes. They may be locked to an > external stimulus such as in the auditory system or > be generated intrinsically by the neural circuitry.[5] > > Whether neurons use rate coding or temporal coding is a topic of intense > debate within the neuroscience community, even though there is no clear > definition of what these terms mean. > > > > from wiki > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Not sure what point you are trying to make. Kaku was trying to use the >> neuron bimodal states (firing or not) to calculate the set of all possible >> combination of states that give rise to thought. It is a simplistic >> assumption. >> >> One could say that what matters is how information is coded and that is >> not completely understood. It can be a combination of things, firing times, >> amplitude modulation, two or more signals arriving at the same time or in a >> precise sequence and so on. >> >> Kaku was doing what physicists often do, approximating a cow with a >> sphere. It is easy in that way to calculate the volume of the cow and it is >> a roughly good approximation. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> OK, so they rest. I give up. But do you agree that there are three >>> states of the neuron? >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens >>>> when you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state >>>> of sleep. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires >>>>> at one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >>>>> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >>>>> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >>>>> bill w >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up >>>>> to 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>>>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential when >>>>>> at rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. There >>>>>> are times when they are silent. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows >>>>>>> (facing page 342): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can >>>>>>> be stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in >>>>>>> our DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore >>>>>>> total amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can >>>>>>> store much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either >>>>>>> fire or not fire*. Hence there are two raised to the >>>>>>> one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states >>>>>>> change every few milliseconds. A simple thought may contain one hundred >>>>>>> generations of neural firings. Hence there are two raised by one hundred >>>>>>> billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in >>>>>>> one hundred generations. Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the >>>>>>> total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the >>>>>>> one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states >>>>>>> to a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the >>>>>>> same. Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a >>>>>>> neuron is idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is >>>>>>> not firing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> 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 >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gsantostasi at gmail.com Tue May 20 23:33:16 2014 From: gsantostasi at gmail.com (Giovanni Santostasi) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:33:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: neurons In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: In fact, it could be really way off because if information coding is not due to only states on and off but different rates of firing then you have a continuum of possible states no two or three. The brain is a dynamical system. On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:21 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > My point was that Kaku was using 2 - two states of the neuron, to estimate > - firing or not, he said. If, in fact, it is 3, then the estimate is far > off. billw > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:02 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < > gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Neural coding: >> >> Coding schemes[edit >> ] >> >> A sequence, or 'train', of spikes may contain information based on >> different coding schemes. In motor neurons, for example, the strength at >> which an innervated muscle is flexed depends solely on the 'firing rate', >> the average number of spikes per unit time (a 'rate code'). At the other >> end, a complex 'temporal code' >> is based on the precise timing of single spikes. They may be locked to an >> external stimulus such as in the auditory system or >> be generated intrinsically by the neural circuitry.[5] >> >> Whether neurons use rate coding or temporal coding is a topic of intense >> debate within the neuroscience community, even though there is no clear >> definition of what these terms mean. >> >> >> >> from wiki >> >> >> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Not sure what point you are trying to make. Kaku was trying to use the >>> neuron bimodal states (firing or not) to calculate the set of all possible >>> combination of states that give rise to thought. It is a simplistic >>> assumption. >>> >>> One could say that what matters is how information is coded and that is >>> not completely understood. It can be a combination of things, firing times, >>> amplitude modulation, two or more signals arriving at the same time or in a >>> precise sequence and so on. >>> >>> Kaku was doing what physicists often do, approximating a cow with a >>> sphere. It is easy in that way to calculate the volume of the cow and it is >>> a roughly good approximation. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> OK, so they rest. I give up. But do you agree that there are three >>>> states of the neuron? >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> In fact, one per second is resting for neurons. That is what happens >>>>> when you have slow waves oscillations that corresponds to the deepest state >>>>> of sleep. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ?p.s. Still, there are three states: one in which the neuron fires >>>>>> at one per second (resting level - no input), one in which it fires faster >>>>>> (receiving excitatory input), and one in which it fires slower (receiving >>>>>> inhibitory input).? So, firing or not firing is wrong in the context. >>>>>> bill w >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Well, OK, but the slowest they get is about one spike per second (up >>>>>> to 30) without external stimulation. Not exactly resting. bill w >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Giovanni Santostasi < >>>>>> gsantostasi at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> What you are thinking that neurons are at a particular potential >>>>>>> when at rest (about -70 mV). But they are not firing all the time at all. >>>>>>> There are times when they are silent. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >>>>>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows >>>>>>>> (facing page 342): >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that >>>>>>>> can be stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained >>>>>>>> w/in our DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, >>>>>>>> therefore total amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The >>>>>>>> brain can store much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which >>>>>>>> can either fire or not fire*. Hence there are two raised to the >>>>>>>> one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states >>>>>>>> change every few milliseconds. A simple thought may contain one hundred >>>>>>>> generations of neural firings. Hence there are two raised by one hundred >>>>>>>> billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in >>>>>>>> one hundred generations. Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the >>>>>>>> total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the >>>>>>>> one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states >>>>>>>> to a neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the >>>>>>>> same. Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a >>>>>>>> neuron is idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is >>>>>>>> not firing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 20 23:55:46 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:55:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] dogs again Message-ID: Those of you who have dogs or will get dogs will find this book fascinating. I even used it in my Learning class: Don't Shoot the Dog, by Karen Pryor (former dolphin trainer), available at Abe books, which, by the way, is a great source for used books, usually cheaper than Amazon and will have books Amazon doesn't. This book is $3.41 w/ free shipping. None of the methods involve any kind of punishment. All procedures in it could (and should) be used with humans, child and adult). bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed May 21 00:00:52 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:00:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 20, 2014 11:56 AM, "spike" wrote: > Ja, so what's its replacement? Suppose I have an application that I wrote, > or an algorithm that I worked out on Excel for instance. I want it to run > on iPads and cell phones and such. What do I do? Given the other aspects of the use case you outlined, I'd strongly suggest JavaScript, run in a standard Web browser. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed May 21 00:12:20 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 17:12:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dogs again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <094901cf7489$55cfd860$016f8920$@att.net> Those of you who have dogs or will get dogs will find this book fascinating. I even used it in my Learning class: Don't Shoot the Dog, by Karen Pryor (former dolphin trainer)? BillW We have a new question, similar in some ways to how difficult it is to measure intelligence in humans. It depends to a large extent on how you measure it. A friend had a pure-bred Irish Setter, a beautiful dog, and intelligent in his own way, but perfectly useless as a watchdog; worse than useless. He would welcome perfect strangers; wouldn?t care a bit if someone started to haul things away. It never occurred to that dog that humans could possibly be bad guys. He assumed all humans were good, and whatever they were doing was right. He was a gentle beast; OK with cats, or probably even rats; we didn?t know on that one. I had a Doberman who chose all the opposite assumptions; everyone was guilty until proven innocent, and maybe guilty even then. He seldom passed up an opportunity to demonstrate his disdain for strangers. But the Doberman was not a hunter; there was nothing subtle about him. He didn?t sneak around ever. The setter wasn?t stupid; he just liked everybody. The dobe wasn?t stupid, he was just very aggressive. Both were excellent dogs. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 21 00:51:10 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 19:51:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] dogs again In-Reply-To: <094901cf7489$55cfd860$016f8920$@att.net> References: <094901cf7489$55cfd860$016f8920$@att.net> Message-ID: And your point is? If it is that some dogs can easily be trained to do certain things which other dogs find very difficult to learn, then fine - correct. Same with any animal, even us. ??? On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 7:12 PM, spike wrote: > > > Those of you who have dogs or will get dogs will find this book > fascinating. I even used it in my Learning class: > > Don't Shoot the Dog, by Karen Pryor (former dolphin trainer)? BillW > > > > We have a new question, similar in some ways to how difficult it is to > measure intelligence in humans. It depends to a large extent on how you > measure it. A friend had a pure-bred Irish Setter, a beautiful dog, and > intelligent in his own way, but perfectly useless as a watchdog; worse than > useless. He would welcome perfect strangers; wouldn?t care a bit if > someone started to haul things away. It never occurred to that dog that > humans could possibly be bad guys. He assumed all humans were good, and > whatever they were doing was right. He was a gentle beast; OK with cats, > or probably even rats; we didn?t know on that one. > > > > I had a Doberman who chose all the opposite assumptions; everyone was > guilty until proven innocent, and maybe guilty even then. He seldom passed > up an opportunity to demonstrate his disdain for strangers. But the > Doberman was not a hunter; there was nothing subtle about him. He didn?t > sneak around ever. The setter wasn?t stupid; he just liked everybody. The > dobe wasn?t stupid, he was just very aggressive. Both were excellent dogs. > > > > 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 msd001 at gmail.com Wed May 21 01:18:52 2014 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 21:18:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 20, 2014 8:01 PM, "Adrian Tymes" wrote: > > Given the other aspects of the use case you outlined, I'd strongly suggest JavaScript, run in a standard Web browser. I second that recommendation. The browser is acting like the jvm. The limitations of the browser environment are unimportant until you are talking about orders of magnitude of scale in your project. Javascript will be around for many many years... like http and xml - they are now deployed so far and wide on the Internet that they're part of the landscape. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed May 21 01:42:24 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 18:42:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <003901cf7495$ebc74d10$c355e730$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty Subject: Re: [ExI] sick man of the internet? On May 20, 2014 8:01 PM, "Adrian Tymes" wrote: > >>? Given the other aspects of the use case you outlined, I'd strongly suggest JavaScript, run in a standard Web browser. >?I second that recommendation. The browser is acting like the jvm. The limitations of the browser environment are unimportant until you are talking about orders of magnitude of scale in your project. >?Javascript will be around for many many years... like http and xml - they are now deployed so far and wide on the Internet that they're part of the landscape. OK cool thanks. My son viewed the Khan Academy MOOC on JavaScript and two weeks later he is coding like a mad man. I figure if a talented second grader can do this, a rocket scientist aughta be able to figure it out. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed May 21 02:05:27 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 19:05:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 6:18 PM, Mike Dougherty wrote: > The limitations of the browser environment are unimportant until you are > talking about orders of magnitude of scale in your project. > Agreed for the most part, but just so Spike has the full picture, magnitude of scale isn't the only case where browser environment can be a hindrance. In particular there are differences between different browsers, especially MSIE vs. anything else (including different versions of MSIE), though that only matters for certain advanced functions - basic Excel-like spreadsheeting shouldn't have to worry about this much. But then, if you're using MSIE, you have bigger problems. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed May 21 02:51:34 2014 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 20:51:34 -0600 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> Message-ID: My favorite programming language is English. The interpreters vary somewhat in quality, but they can be found at freelancer.com and similar sites. I have worked as a Sherpa for this kind of site. If you need a few pointers... you know my email address. If you want to do it yourself, you might also CONSIDER HTML 5, as it has some good stuff that may do parts of what you want. Flash is definitely on its way out due to this. But you haven't been specific enough about what you want to do to make any kind of specific recommendation. -Kelly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed May 21 02:54:54 2014 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 20:54:54 -0600 Subject: [ExI] dogs again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is one of my favorite books of all time. It is required reading for anyone raising children. My favorite quote from the book is, "Nobody should be allowed to have a baby until they have first been required to train a chicken," -Kelly On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:55 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Those of you who have dogs or will get dogs will find this book > fascinating. I even used it in my Learning class: > > Don't Shoot the Dog, by Karen Pryor (former dolphin trainer), available at > Abe books, which, by the way, is a great source for used books, usually > cheaper than Amazon and will have books Amazon doesn't. This book is $3.41 > w/ free shipping. > > None of the methods involve any kind of punishment. All procedures in it > could (and should) be used with humans, child and adult). bill w > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 21 03:36:47 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 23:36:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> References: <417404774-32720@secure.ericade.net> <051901cf743c$07846290$168d27b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:58 AM, spike wrote: So transdogism will likely be a useful tool in the transhumanism movement. ### Spike, you brought a big smile to my face :) Yes, I want to have my transdog once I upload, probably a German shepherd but with non-shedding fur, for roaming the wide internets together. On the other hand, dachshunds are great as leg warmers in bed, maybe I'll have a Transforming Transdog (I would call him T2 but the connotations are not nice). Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Wed May 21 03:40:22 2014 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 21:40:22 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <065e01cf7461$34f27b70$9ed77250$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <038e01cf73ec$09d87310$1d895930$@att.net> <065e01cf7461$34f27b70$9ed77250$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 1:25 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn > Wallace > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:57 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > > > > >?I just got a TENS unit, reconditioned, paid for by Medicare. On the > form it said $795. I went to their web site where it was listed new for > $169. > > >?Will the company take the difference and write it off as a tax loss? > Right. A scam and a fraud I've seen many times before. I know some of you > fellow libertarians hate government rules and control, but somebody needs > to control this sort of thing. bill w > > > > > > That isn?t rules and control BillW, that is fraud. We hate > government-enabled fraud. This is abusive of the taxpayer. > Sadly, this is as common as swiss banks that help the rich avoid paying taxes. Maybe more so. Individual cheaters getting money out of the government is also a big problem. I was shocked how much money they gave me for doing not so much, at least at one point in my sucking at the teats of the government career. Not that I cheated them, it was just that their rules were so stupid. I'm totally done with that now, and am a recovering socialist attempting to be a Randian (Objectivist) Libertarian insofar as that is possible. -Kelly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rex at nosyntax.net Wed May 21 05:38:47 2014 From: rex at nosyntax.net (rex) Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 22:38:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] dogs again In-Reply-To: <094901cf7489$55cfd860$016f8920$@att.net> References: <094901cf7489$55cfd860$016f8920$@att.net> Message-ID: <20140521053846.GA19402@nosyntax.net> spike [2014-05-20 17:25]: > > We have a new question, similar in some ways to how difficult it is to > measure intelligence in humans. It depends to a large extent on how you > measure it. AFAIK, there's no generally agreed upon definition of intelligence. OTOH, IQ is not difficult to measure and it has the best predictive power known for many outcomes, e.g., educational outcomes, job performance and many social outcomes. > I had a Doberman who chose all the opposite assumptions; everyone was > guilty until proven innocent, and maybe guilty even then. He seldom > passed up an opportunity to demonstrate his disdain for strangers. But > the Doberman was not a hunter; there was nothing subtle about him. He > didn't sneak around ever. The setter wasn't stupid; he just liked > everybody. The dobe wasn't stupid, he was just very aggressive. Both > were excellent dogs. There are differences in the mean trainability of breeds of dogs, just as there are in human breeds (AKA races). I've posted about the amazing abilities of crows and parrots with no response. Here are two more example, one illustrating a wild crow making, and then using, a tool to obtain food, and the other illustrating a wild crow solving a complex series of puzzle that must be completed in order. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGrI_p4fzps https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHtwcaol_rc -rex -- Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals: People don't read documentation voluntarily. From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed May 21 08:34:59 2014 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 01:34:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Really off topic, microwave propulsion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This went off to the arockets list. I really should write up a report for the International Space Development conference last weekend. There was a transhumanist panel that might be a bit of fun for most of you. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Sorry to annoy some of you, but this is one of the few places on the net where I can find people who understand the issues and can help identify problems. The May 2014 issue of the IEEE Spectrum has this: http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/solar/how-japan-plans-to-build-an-orbital-solar-farm The need for high tonnage to GEO has become obvious. I am groping for a way to make that jump real. I mentioned http://theenergycollective.com/keith-henson/362181/dollar-gallon-gasoline some time ago on this mailing list. It's a proposal to use lasers to heat hydrogen hot enough to get a 7.5 km/s exhaust velocity (2700K). It improves the 5% Skylon payload to LEO to 20-25%. Steve Nixon and I designed a 15,000 ton laser propulsion station (most of the mass is the heat radiators). While doing so, we came up with a way to move it from LEO to GEO. It uses electric thrusters and the same microwave link up from earth that powers the lasers. Hard-to-focus microwaves need a huge rectenna, in this case a full km in diameter. There are other problems. The geography of good runway locations is one. Given the available locations, the geometry to the ground power source doesn't work well. The problem is that the ground location needs to be 2600 km to the east of the runway and right on the equator. The only places that are not far out in the ocean are in Southeast Asia. We have been thinking about using microwaves from the ground to power electric thrusters for the LEO to GEO leg. This is as an alternative to using lasers. (Electric thrust just isn't an option for ground to LEO.) In the long run, lasers are much less expensive. This is because the higher exhaust velocity raises the payload fraction for the hard ground to LEO leg by a large factor. Still, as a temporary method, it may be more practical at first than a laser system powered from the ground. It would raise some tens of thousands of tons of payload from LEO to GEO. It would put a sunlight powered propulsion laser in the best location relative to a good runway location. That way we don't try to use the microwave power link to power the LEO to GEO transit *and* the laser propulsion station. It means lifting both 15,000 tons of lasers and 15,000 tons of power satellite to power the laser. Counting ~20% reaction mass and ~2,000 tons of reusable electric tugs, it will take ~45,000 tons of payloads to LEO. That's around 3000 Skylon flights. Or we could build 5-10 power satellites before building the propulsion laser. At 30,000 tons per 5 GW power satellite, it would take 2000 flights each. That would be or 10,000 to 20,000 Skylon flights plus flights for the laser and heat sink. Reaction Engines expects Skylon flights to go under $200/kg at that flight rate. For <$200/kg and a cost multiplier of 1.5 from LEO to GEO, power cost would come in at 3 cents per kWh. That doesn't meet my criteria of 2 cents per kWh, but there are a lot of places in the world where tens of GW at 3 cents per kWh would have a market. The main reason to post here is to identify problems. I know of one, the microwave power beam would sweep over the communication satellites in GEO at ~10 kW/m^2. I don't know how much of a problem this will cause. My biggest concern is what I have overlooked. Any thoughts? Keith http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L5_Society From anders at aleph.se Wed May 21 11:51:45 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 13:51:45 +0200 Subject: [ExI] neurons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <512963824-23545@secure.ericade.net> Kaku seems to be talking about spiking and non-spiking states. Works for his purposes, since he is just making an order of magnitude argument that there is *way* more representational capacity in the brain than in the genome. A factor of ten doesn't change his conclusions much... in fact 4^3e9 is *way* less than 2^100e9=4^50e9 (and then to the Nth ~100 power for longer thoughts) and if there are more neuron states then the difference just becomes larger. The issue of what states there are in the brain and how much information is encoded in spike patterns has been discussed endlessly in computational neuroscience - I slept through many lectures on it back in the late 90s :-) The gist of it is that rate codes are somewhat inefficient since you need to integrate a number of spikes to learn what the value is. Timing codes can be super-efficient *if* you can measure timing accurately and there is no noise... which there is. Distributed representations are likely and solve a lot of problems, but assigning information content to them is complex. Lots of information theory going on, no conclusion that really stuck with me except that the brain seems to use all methods simultaneously.? But note that the change of rate in a rate code is a pretty slow and tricky way of representing something. We do seem to have neurons that turn such changes into signals encoding the direction of change instead, which are presumably easier to handle. Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University William Flynn Wallace , 20/5/2014 10:46 PM: In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing page 342): "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be stored.? The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our DNA.? Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total amount of info is four to the three billionth power.? The brain can store much more - one hundred billion neurons, which can either fire or not fire.? Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds.? A simple thought may contain? one hundred generations of neural firings.? Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations.? Brains are ceaselessly computing.? Therefore the total number of thoughts possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, all raised to the Nth power. My question concerns the underlined clause:? there are three states to a neuron:? increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same.? Kaku says that a neuron fires or not.? This seems to say that a neuron is idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not firing. Am I confused again, or is he wrong?? bill w _______________________________________________ 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 Wed May 21 12:06:31 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:06:31 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Economic cyber-warfare In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <513844285-24921@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 21/5/2014 12:59 AM: We are bugging/spying on? everyone, their email, their phone conversations, as I am sure you have read about recently.? Potential enemies, our friends? - all of them.? And they, us.? Also, I am sure that industrial espionage is done by everyone.? I don't know what they are trying to accomplish by indicting Chinese officials, who will never be extradited.? Who knows what all those spooks do? On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 5:39 PM, John Grigg wrote: China is using cyber espionage to steal up to 400 billion *annually,* from the United States! The issue is rule of law and oversight. Up until Snowden the US claimed to be the good guy and got most of the world to think it was roughly true: sure, everybody spies on everybody, but you are nice to your friends and keep your spies under control. Had the indictment happened back then, it would have looked a bit bad for China - hand in the cookie jar, stern talking to in the WTO, maybe some concessions needed to smooth things over. Now the situation is that the US is no longer seen as any better than China *by the US allies*. In fact, across Europe organisations are now trying to harden their systems against US attacks, possibly abetted by their own governments. And assurances that friends don't snoop on friends have no value after Merkel's cellphone. Even if people believed this was the government position, they no longer think the US is in control of its agencies (consider the CIA-Feinstein shenanigans if you want non-Snowden evidence). In a world where there are no rules for cyberespionage other than getting away with it, and major agencies deliberately try to weaken security for *everybody*, trust is weakened. And that means that friction goes up (everybody has to invest in security and scrutiny; you will not want to deal with unvetted strangers as much), the economy doesn't grow as fast and as globally, as well as increased risks of conflict. Meanwhile the risk of other actors exploiting the nasty stuff increases (the tech differential between the leader of the field and the rouge nations gets smaller, as does the difference between governments and guys in caves). Maintaining cybersecurity is hard as it is; the current situation makes things much worse. And if you add economic incentives to mess it up, we all lose.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From protokol2020 at gmail.com Wed May 21 12:07:30 2014 From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:07:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] neurons In-Reply-To: <512963824-23545@secure.ericade.net> References: <512963824-23545@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: Kaku is wrong and confused once again. The number of possible states is really very big. 2 or 3 to the power of neurons. However, this tells you little or nothing. If you have a hard drive with 1 TB capacity, then the number of possible states is 2 to the power of 8*10^12. Much more even! And also not very useful in what he (Kaku) wants to say. This raising to the power is unjustified and misleading. On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > Kaku seems to be talking about spiking and non-spiking states. Works for > his purposes, since he is just making an order of magnitude argument that > there is *way* more representational capacity in the brain than in the > genome. A factor of ten doesn't change his conclusions much... in fact > 4^3e9 is *way* less than 2^100e9=4^50e9 (and then to the Nth ~100 power for > longer thoughts) and if there are more neuron states then the difference > just becomes larger. > > The issue of what states there are in the brain and how much information > is encoded in spike patterns has been discussed endlessly in computational > neuroscience - I slept through many lectures on it back in the late 90s :-) > The gist of it is that rate codes are somewhat inefficient since you need > to integrate a number of spikes to learn what the value is. Timing codes > can be super-efficient *if* you can measure timing accurately and there is > no noise... which there is. Distributed representations are likely and > solve a lot of problems, but assigning information content to them is > complex. Lots of information theory going on, no conclusion that really > stuck with me except that the brain seems to use all methods > simultaneously. > > But note that the change of rate in a rate code is a pretty slow and > tricky way of representing something. We do seem to have neurons that turn > such changes into signals encoding the direction of change instead, which > are presumably easier to handle. > > > > Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford > University > > > William Flynn Wallace , 20/5/2014 10:46 PM: > > In The Future on the Mind, by Michio Kaku, he says as follows (facing page > 342): > > "Define complex in terms of the total amount of information that can be > stored. The closet rival to the brain might be the info contained w/in our > DNA. Three billion base pairs containing one of four aids, therefore total > amount of info is four to the three billionth power. The brain can store > much more - one hundred billion neurons, *which can either fire or not > fire*. Hence there are two raised to the one-hundred-billionth power > initial states of the brain.... the states change every few milliseconds. > A simple thought may contain one hundred generations of neural firings. > Hence there are two raised by one hundred billion, all raised to the > hundredth power possible thoughts contained in one hundred generations. > Brains are ceaselessly computing. Therefore the total number of thoughts > possible within N generations is two to the one-hundred-billionth power, > all raised to the Nth power. > > My question concerns the underlined clause: there are three states to a > neuron: increasing its rate, decreasing its rate, and staying the same. > Kaku says that a neuron fires or not. This seems to say that a neuron is > idle, waiting for stimuli, whereas I think that no neuron ever is not > firing. > > Am I confused again, or is he wrong? bill w > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- https://protokol2020.wordpress.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed May 21 12:10:07 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 14:10:07 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <514734958-25012@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 20/5/2014 8:39 PM: I know people think of 'steep' as difficult, but with learning curves it is not so.? I dunno how this misconception got out there, but it's very difficult to get rid of, like the 'vaccines cause disease' one. Please help get rid of this cliche'.? I taught Learning for 35 years and this is driving me crazy!? It's worse than the misconception of negative reinforcement as punishment. Amen to that! When I wrote the original post I noted that I was using the term in the standard, wrong way. But I felt it was more important to get the main idea across than try to explain the issue. Maybe I was wrong about that. Saying "difficult learning curve" might be a decent substitution.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com Wed May 21 17:02:08 2014 From: ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 11:02:08 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Test Message-ID: -- Gina Miller www.nanogirl.com www.nanoindustries.com www.millermarketing.co -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed May 21 17:06:47 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:06:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On May 20, 2014 11:20 AM, "Tomasz Rola" wrote: > But there are some > long-term problems I can see with Javascript. Like, I need to have > compatible browser, so while I could do some stuff in it _right now_, > I don't really want to find myself in the same department where people > cry for help because their old sci/tech reports cannot be read (AmiPro > for DOS or something even more exotic long long gone) etc. That does not really seem to be the case, so long as you aren't using latest-generation features (mostly, cut down on the cutting-edge visual effects) and make sure it works in all browsers when you write it. For example: http://www.wingedcat.com/demos/class/hexauto.htm - written in 1997, works just as well in today's browsers. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed May 21 17:27:15 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:27:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On May 20, 2014 11:36 AM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > > I have no idea what you are talking about, but I want to correct one thing: > > Visualize an xy axis: some measure of learning is on the y and time (or trials etc.) is on the x. > > So if learning goes slowly, the the curve rises slowly. If learning is fast, then the curve is steep. The common model flips that: learning or ability to use is on the x axis, while effort or time is on the y. It's one of the few common cases where time is on the y axis. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed May 21 17:28:11 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 10:28:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Test In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Received. On May 21, 2014 10:03 AM, "Gina Miller" wrote: > > > -- > Gina Miller > > www.nanogirl.com > www.nanoindustries.com > www.millermarketing.co > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com Wed May 21 17:38:44 2014 From: ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 11:38:44 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Test In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thanks! On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Received. > On May 21, 2014 10:03 AM, "Gina Miller" > wrote: > >> >> >> -- >> Gina Miller >> >> www.nanogirl.com >> www.nanoindustries.com >> www.millermarketing.co >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- Gina Miller www.nanogirl.com www.nanoindustries.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 21 20:01:56 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 15:01:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: he common model flips that: learning or ability to use is on the x axis, while effort or time is on the y. It's one of the few common cases where time is on the y axis. OK, I googled 'common model' and got nothing. What you say obviously came after I retired. So please give me a link so I can learn it. Thanks! bill w On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 12:27 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On May 20, 2014 11:36 AM, "William Flynn Wallace" > wrote: > > > > I have no idea what you are talking about, but I want to correct one > thing: > > > > Visualize an xy axis: some measure of learning is on the y and time (or > trials etc.) is on the x. > > > > So if learning goes slowly, the the curve rises slowly. If learning is > fast, then the curve is steep. > > The common model flips that: learning or ability to use is on the x axis, > while effort or time is on the y. It's one of the few common cases where > time is on the y axis. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Wed May 21 20:23:28 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:23:28 +0100 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: <003901cf7495$ebc74d10$c355e730$@att.net> References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> <003901cf7495$ebc74d10$c355e730$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 2:42 AM, spike wrote: > OK cool thanks. My son viewed the Khan Academy MOOC on JavaScript and two > weeks later he is coding like a mad man. I figure if a talented second > grader can do this, a rocket scientist aughta be able to figure it out. > > News just in ----- May 21, 2014 Employers want Java skills more than anything else IT job site Dice.com says that by a wide margin, the top search by employers is for Java/J2EE -------- Of course this will probably have changed by the time your son is seeking employment. Computers will be programming themselves by then. ;) BillK From atymes at gmail.com Wed May 21 20:24:40 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 13:24:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On May 21, 2014 1:03 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > OK, I googled 'common model' and got nothing. What you say obviously came after I retired. So please give me a link so I can learn it. Thanks! No link necessary. Just think about ways in which "steep learning curve" would make sense. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed May 21 20:39:48 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:39:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 9:01 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > OK, I googled 'common model' and got nothing. What you say obviously came > after I retired. So please give me a link so I can learn it. Thanks! bill w > Wikipedia, the fount of all knowledge, has a thorough article, including the history of the phrase, here: BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed May 21 20:41:40 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 13:41:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> <003901cf7495$ebc74d10$c355e730$@att.net> Message-ID: <046401cf7535$124a00f0$36de02d0$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] sick man of the internet? On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 2:42 AM, spike wrote: > OK cool thanks. My son viewed the Khan Academy MOOC on JavaScript and > two weeks later he is coding like a mad man. I figure if a talented > second grader can do this, a rocket scientist aughta be able to figure it out... spike News just in ----- May 21, 2014 >...Employers want Java skills more than anything else IT job site Dice.com says that by a wide margin, the top search by employers is for Java/J2EE -------- Cool thanks BillK. I have two kids with me and both are doing Java programming at this moment. So now it is time, past time, for me to view those lectures and get with it. >...Of course this will probably have changed by the time your son is seeking employment. Computers will be programming themselves by then. ;) BillK _______________________________________________ Sure but this assumes his seeking of employment is several years off. Child labor laws do not apply to independent contractors. He's aged 7 now: if he stays on this trajectory, he will be self-sufficient within three to five years. Fun aside: I am astonished at how well these kids can memorize protocols. I always found that tedious and arbitrary, but they seem to see it once and never forget. spike From anders at aleph.se Wed May 21 22:29:52 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 00:29:52 +0200 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <551910121-428@secure.ericade.net> BillK , 21/5/2014 10:27 PM: Employers want Java skills more than anything else IT job site Dice.com says that by a wide margin, the top search by employers is for Java/J2EE -------- Of course this will probably have changed by the time your son is seeking employment. Computers will be programming themselves by then. ?;) Re-reading Vinge's "Fast times at Fairmont High" might give some ideas of the benefit. Java may be the Regna 5 of programming languages, but learning how to learn a language is always useful.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed May 21 23:01:05 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 01:01:05 +0200 Subject: [ExI] puzzle - animal consciousness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <552910813-29469@secure.ericade.net> Mike Dougherty , 20/5/2014 3:09 PM: So if Bayesian Beagle and Deductive Doberman behave exactly the same way are they interchangeable with respect to this question?? Note that externally identical behaviour might not be enough to matter; sometimes we care about whether the internals are the same.? In the case of the BB and the DD I think if they are smart enough they will have to behave similarly. At least the DD will have to be Bayesian because of Cox's theorem, and I think the BB will also have to follow logic (assuming the world does), so they would reach equivalent conclusions despite their different models. There are a lot of systems that are equivalent because they are rich enough. Tonight I came across?Post's Functional Completeness Theorem which is pretty awesome:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_completenesshttp://www.ualberta.ca/~francisp/Phil428/Phil428.11/PostPellMartin.pdfGiven the right, small set of logical connectives, one can build any logical table (or circuit, if you think about digital technology). As the second link shows, some of these sets are pretty odd. If I use a logic based on Fredkin gates and you use a logic of NAND, are we thinking in the same way? We would reach the same conclusions, but some are easier in one logic than the other. I suspect that when resource limited (time, memory) one would see some differences in our reasoning in terms of what could be proven. Maybe the key test of thinking is to see how it behaves under various constraints, not what it could in principle think. Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Thu May 22 01:58:42 2014 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 21:58:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] sick man of the internet? In-Reply-To: References: <057b01cf7448$c1f59c00$45e0d400$@att.net> <061501cf745d$2a7b7bf0$7f7273d0$@att.net> <003901cf7495$ebc74d10$c355e730$@att.net> Message-ID: On May 21, 2014 4:24 PM, "BillK" > > News just in ----- > > May 21, 2014 > Employers want Java skills more than anything else > IT job site Dice.com says that by a wide margin, the top search by > employers is for Java/J2EE > < http://www.infoworld.com/t/java-programming/employers-want-java-skills-more-anything-else-242925 > Given how little understanding HR has of the difference between Java and Javascript, I wonder how much those numbers are skewed. A helpful analogy for a reminder: Java is to Javascript as Ham is to Hamburger. :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mail at harveynewstrom.com Thu May 22 03:17:43 2014 From: mail at harveynewstrom.com (Harvey Newstrom) Date: Wed, 21 May 2014 23:17:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Big Data Visualization In-Reply-To: References: <20140518012527.GE3560@tau1.ceti.pl> <385926755-1504@secure.ericade.net> <20140520181927.GA26117@tau1.ceti.pl> Message-ID: <007501cf756c$65dc7c20$31957460$@harveynewstrom.com> Adrian Tymes wrote on Wednesday, May 21, 2014 1:07 PM, > and make sure it works in all browsers when you write it. There are online services like http://www.browserstack.com that will show what a webpage looks like in different browsers. From dan_ust at yahoo.com Fri May 23 14:21:22 2014 From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan Ust) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 07:21:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Climate scientist proposes extremely cold 2014 winter link to global warming Message-ID: http://phys.org/news/2014-05-climate-scientist-extremely-cold-winter.html Regards, Dan See my Kindle books at: http://www.amazon.com/s?ie=UTF8&field-author=Dan%20Ust&page=1&rh=n%3A133140011%2Cp_27%3ADan%20Ust -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri May 23 15:45:31 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 11:45:31 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" > A leftist is a rightest who's been drafted, a rightest is a leftest who's been mugged. Actually I don't see how all human political ideas can be put into just 2 categories with any consistency; for example, what in the world does opposition to abortion and advocacy of low taxes have in common? Rightest tend to be in favor of the free market and that's good, but they also tend to be in favor of creationism and that's bad. Incidentally I usually fast forward through commercials but not last night when I was watching "The Daily Show" and The Colbert Report on the comedy central channel, there were 2 30 second commercials from the Freedom From Religion Foundation given by Ron Reagan, son of the former president. He calls himself a "unabashed atheist" and at the very end says "I'm not afraid to burn in hell". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNU9PKWdA2A John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri May 23 16:23:10 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 09:23:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 8:46 AM To: rafal at smigrodzki.org; ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists >?Rightest tend to be in favor of the free market and that's good, but they also tend to be in favor of creationism and that's bad. Eh, a lot of that kind of thing is an artifact of our American two-party system, which isn?t really two parties, but rather huge coalitions of unrelated small parties who don?t really like their own fellow travelers. My notion is that everything doesn?t collapse down to right or left. It results in both sides of the political spectrum working to discredit the other by way of pointing out that their coalition includes some distasteful characters. For instance, the left might say ?YOUR side embraces CREATIONISTS!? followed by a retort from the right ?Well, YOUR side embraces radical EPISCOPALIANS!? etc, when the huge majority of both parties quietly reject their distasteful fellow travelers. Both parties may recognize their unwelcome others do tend to vote on the same general side, for completely different reasons, having little or nothing to do with actual politics. I find encouraging the general realignment of US left and right around a matter which definitely does belong in politics: the size and scope of the federal government. We have seen a most unique (in my lifetime) phenomenon where a new party (Tea) comes up wanted more strictly limited federal government, then two established parties both reject it, unite in common cause to defeat the third. I find it astonishing in that if either party were to embrace that third, the two together could rule without significant opposition. Yet both reject it. This tells me that both major parties are more interested in growing federal government as a first priority, even if it means sharing an agenda with the other major party. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNU9PKWdA2A John K Clark Cool ad, thanks John! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri May 23 17:20:49 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 12:20:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> References: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> Message-ID: Re tea party et al: who wants to work with a group that won't compromise on anything? They just waste time trying to kill Obamacare. Right/left just doesn't cut it. Even political compass.org with their excellent test, doesn't either. I am on the left/libertarian, but hate the big debt. Everyone wants lower taxes, but you get what you pay for (well, OK, with big fed, you don't, but still...). Here in MS we don't collect near the taxes we should but only Repubs get elected (on the basis of no new taxes, no raising taxes), with the result that the big feds supply most of our money! And that just isn't fair. I pay zero property taxes, no income taxes. If I want to support education I have to write a check! I am left, but far left, like Ivy school professors and their 'kill the 1st amendment' with their PC speech things, are just nuts. In any case, the left of the Enlightenment is nowhere in sight. I guess politics can kill anything, esp. good ideas. I have been around a lot of black people in my life and I have yet to run into a lazy one. Whites, yes! Most blacks I know hate the idea of welfare and like my yardman with his horrible knees, no running water, no refrig, etc. won't apply for it. It's like giving up to him. Work with them like I have: pick cotton, hoe corn, castrate pigs. You really have to live in the South to understand some of these things that are said about it. Great people here - not too bright, hyperreligious, superstitious, etc. but great people. bill w On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 11:23 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Sent:* Friday, May 23, 2014 8:46 AM > *To:* rafal at smigrodzki.org; ExI chat list > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > > > > >?Rightest tend to be in favor of the free market and that's good, but > they also tend to be in favor of creationism and that's bad. > > Eh, a lot of that kind of thing is an artifact of our American two-party > system, which isn?t really two parties, but rather huge coalitions of > unrelated small parties who don?t really like their own fellow travelers. > > My notion is that everything doesn?t collapse down to right or left. It > results in both sides of the political spectrum working to discredit the > other by way of pointing out that their coalition includes some distasteful > characters. For instance, the left might say ?YOUR side embraces > CREATIONISTS!? followed by a retort from the right ?Well, YOUR side > embraces radical EPISCOPALIANS!? etc, when the huge majority of both > parties quietly reject their distasteful fellow travelers. Both parties > may recognize their unwelcome others do tend to vote on the same general > side, for completely different reasons, having little or nothing to do with > actual politics. > > I find encouraging the general realignment of US left and right around a > matter which definitely does belong in politics: the size and scope of the > federal government. We have seen a most unique (in my lifetime) phenomenon > where a new party (Tea) comes up wanted more strictly limited federal > government, then two established parties both reject it, unite in common > cause to defeat the third. I find it astonishing in that if either party > were to embrace that third, the two together could rule without significant > opposition. Yet both reject it. This tells me that both major parties are > more interested in growing federal government as a first priority, even if > it means sharing an agenda with the other major party. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNU9PKWdA2A John K Clark > > Cool ad, thanks John! > > 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 Fri May 23 18:56:26 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 11:56:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <018401cf76b8$b3c1db40$1b4591c0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?Here in MS we don't collect near the taxes we should but only Repubs get elected (on the basis of no new taxes, no raising taxes) ? bill w BillW, in a democracy, the voters get to define the term ?should.? The solution to your problem above is simple: elect people who promise to raise taxes. If those candidates win, they get to define ?should.? If they lose, they don?t have the right to determine ?should.? That was easy. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri May 23 19:23:52 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 14:23:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <018401cf76b8$b3c1db40$1b4591c0$@att.net> References: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> <018401cf76b8$b3c1db40$1b4591c0$@att.net> Message-ID: Practically speaking, you are, of course, right. Harken back to what I said about the people here. They actually like demagogues (ever hear of Earl Long?). Of course they hate politicians and swear to replace them, but then vote for exactly the same type they did before. Yes, it's a democracy, of sorts, but I don't have to like it. It's irresponsible and immoral (and you'll tell me that's what the politicians they elect are, won't you?). World center of hypocrisy. Why do you think I am working on a book where all the people are geniuses? A fantasy world filled with rational people - Heaven on Earth. bill w On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:56 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > > *>?*Here in MS we don't collect near the taxes we should but only Repubs > get elected (on the basis of no new taxes, no raising taxes) ? bill w > > > > > > BillW, in a democracy, the voters get to define the term ?should.? The > solution to your problem above is simple: elect people who promise to raise > taxes. If those candidates win, they get to define ?should.? If they > lose, they don?t have the right to determine ?should.? That was easy. > > > > 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 pharos at gmail.com Fri May 23 19:36:56 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 20:36:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> <018401cf76b8$b3c1db40$1b4591c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:23 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Practically speaking, you are, of course, right. Harken back to what I said > about the people here. They actually like demagogues (ever hear of Earl > Long?). Of course they hate politicians and swear to replace them, but then > vote for exactly the same type they did before. Yes, it's a democracy, of > sorts, but I don't have to like it. It's irresponsible and immoral (and > you'll tell me that's what the politicians they elect are, won't you?). > World center of hypocrisy. Why do you think I am working on a book where > all the people are geniuses? A fantasy world filled with rational people - > Heaven on Earth. bill w > > If your book is about a world full of rational people, then it is not about humans. It is about an alien race. Best to make sure they don't look like humans - it would confuse your readers. ;) BillK From spike66 at att.net Fri May 23 19:47:22 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 12:47:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> <018401cf76b8$b3c1db40$1b4591c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <021201cf76bf$d1118090$733481b0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Friday, May 23, 2014 12:24 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists Practically speaking, you are, of course, right. Harken back to what I said about the people here. ? Yes, it's a democracy, of sorts, but I don't have to like it? bill w BillW, you are the one who chooses to live in Mississippi, me lad. (Note: all men, regardless of age, are lads. All due respect intended. All women are lasses.) The beauty of the United States lies in the design of our republic. We get all these competing governments, each doing things their own way, creating a laboratory for government. Competition breeds excellence. The people can move into the one they feel is working best. A solution suggests itself. Perhaps a loose coalition of nations could form which have a similar outlook on government; example, USA, Canada, Australia, England, Sweden, Denmark, Germany. Then treat those as scaled up-versions of our states: any citizen of any of those countries can freely immigrate to any other, understanding that the legal system varies somewhat between them. Pension obligations would be transferred from the country of origin and place where the pensions were earned. Everyone in the super-republic would understand that if you come to the USA, you can have guns, some crimes are punishable by death, and the healthcare system is broken. In England, you can?t have guns, the constables are nice, and the healthcare system is broken. In Sweden, the women are beautiful, the food is bland, and the healthcare system is broken, etc. Then we get the federal governments working under market pressures, competition breeds excellence. BillW, if you pine for higher taxes, do come to California. That will cure you, pal. {8-] spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri May 23 21:02:55 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 23:02:55 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <021201cf76bf$d1118090$733481b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <718788812-27841@secure.ericade.net> spike , 23/5/2014 10:04 PM: ?A solution suggests itself.? Perhaps a loose coalition of nations could form which have a similar outlook on government; example, USA, Canada, Australia, England, Sweden, Denmark, Germany.? Then treat those as scaled up-versions of our states: any citizen of any of those countries can freely immigrate to any other, understanding that the legal system varies somewhat between them.? Pension obligations would be transferred from the country of origin and place where the pensions were earned.? ? Everyone in the super-republic would understand that if you come to the USA, you can have guns, some crimes are punishable by death, and the healthcare system is broken.? In England, you can?t have guns, the constables are nice, and the healthcare system is broken.? In Sweden, the women are beautiful, the food is bland, and the healthcare system is broken, etc.? Then we get the federal governments working under market pressures, competition breeds excellence. ? Sounds excellent. Sounds like... the EU.? When the EU works at its best it is just like that: you move to a country that fits you with a minimal hassle. Moving to the UK took me one form at the Swedish revenue service website, and answering a resulting letter from HRM's revenue service politely asking if I live here now. To me, that was the moment I realized that I was an European citizen rather than just a Swedish citizen.? Still, mobility could be a fair bit better: the rate at which US citizens move between states is several times the rate EU citizens change country. Part of it may be language and social barriers, but I think a lot of people still do not realize how mobile they can be. Especially with the very different unemployment rates it would make sense for a lot of people to migrate, but they won't. Then again, views on migrants are also mildly crazy: the UK doesn't want immigration, but integrates people pretty well. Sweden prides itself on not being racist, but is lousy at integration.? (Of course, then there is the stupid and inefficient EU of the Common Agricultural Protocol, bureaucratic research grants and eurozone crises...) Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri May 23 21:08:30 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 23:08:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <719705052-28451@secure.ericade.net> spike , 23/5/2014 6:41 PM: ? >?Rightest tend to be in favor of the free market and that's good, but they also tend to be in favor of creationism and that's bad. Eh, a lot of that kind of thing is an artifact of our American two-party system, which isn?t really two parties, but rather huge coalitions of unrelated small parties who don?t really like their own fellow travelers.? My notion is that everything doesn?t collapse down to right or left. ? It depends on the country. I did some principal component analysis of voting patterns in different countries, and the number of dimensions varies. In the US most voting is explained by just a 1D scale, which we could call "left-right". In Sweden there was 2-3 dimensions, to some degree a mix between left-right and large scale and small scale visions of society. UK also has about 2. In Norway there was 4 (various splits left-right, rural-city, religious-nonreligious etc).? One can create various scales, like "the world's smallest political quiz" that shows social vs economic liberalism. I like Postrels dimension of dynamism vs. stasism: how much do you think the future should be freely explored vs. how much do you think it needs to be controlled (or avoided)? But in many places many dimensions get squeezed together because of the game theory of party politics.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri May 23 23:45:20 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 16:45:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] computers now outperform humans at facial recognition Message-ID: <014c01cf76e1$0fef3d90$2fcdb8b0$@att.net> Cool, check this: http://www.i-programmer.info/news/105-artificial-intelligence/7223-gaussianface-recognizes-faces-better-than-humans.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben at goertzel.org Sat May 24 06:22:13 2014 From: ben at goertzel.org (Ben Goertzel) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 14:22:13 +0800 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rafal, On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - that > it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with status. A > leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably attracted > to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream > journalism. I don't normally read this list but this caught my eye for some reason.. I guess I qualify as a "leftist" if I have to be projected onto the left/right axis. Certainly I'm 100x more leftist than rightist... I hate bureaucracy; I quit academia because I got sick of the bureacracy and the status-seeking BS; and I don't care for mainstream media much either... However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents abandoned any form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the reality of the Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything else. It's about believing the social contract should, normatively, include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some minimal level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's morally wrong for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly inherited, to control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for themselves. Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be gotten from in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... If anyone on the list is interested in some thoughtful writing in the leftist direction I'd suggest -- George Lakoff's various writings on the topic, e.g. Moral Politics -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" (which is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, but is an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics of the last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more supportive of leftist than rightist thinking...) Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your scientific work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human being. But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world without leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would now be far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and science and tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well as total human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also envision other systems of gov't far better than anything current left or right politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... Similarly, going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors roughly the same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which small selfish elites simply owned everything and manipulated the Singularity path for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of dangers and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of uncompassion and unfairness... -- Ben G ;) Ben From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 24 14:40:19 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 09:40:19 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: For me, it's about morality, the larger question. Few books that are called 'seminal' truly are, but this one is: The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). In a sense, he takes morality and does a factor analysis of it, coming up with these categories: Care (uncompassion to Ben), Fairness, Loyalty, Sanctity, and Authority. People on the right use all of these fairly equally, but liberals treat Care and Fairness as major factors and the others as rather minor or even unimportant (or actually bad, such as the libertarians' attitude towards authority). Easily read by any college grad, this book will expand your understanding of morality - guaranteed. bill w On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 1:22 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > Hi Rafal, > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: > > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - > that > > it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with > status. A > > leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably > attracted > > to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream > > journalism. > > I don't normally read this list but this caught my eye for some reason.. > > I guess I qualify as a "leftist" if I have to be projected onto the > left/right axis. Certainly I'm 100x more leftist than rightist... > > I hate bureaucracy; I quit academia because I got sick of the > bureacracy and the status-seeking BS; and I don't care for mainstream > media much either... > > However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of > Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents abandoned any > form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the reality of the > Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) > > To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything > else. It's about believing the social contract should, normatively, > include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some minimal > level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's morally wrong > for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly inherited, to > control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for themselves. > > Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be gotten from > in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to > briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... > > If anyone on the list is interested in some thoughtful writing in the > leftist direction I'd suggest > > -- George Lakoff's various writings on the topic, e.g. Moral Politics > > -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" (which > is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, but is > an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics of the > last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more supportive of > leftist than rightist thinking...) > > Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your scientific > work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human being. > But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world without > leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other > political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would now be > far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and science and > tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well as total > human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also envision > other systems of gov't far better than anything current left or right > politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... Similarly, > going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist > thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors roughly the > same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which small selfish > elites simply owned everything and manipulated the Singularity path > for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of dangers > and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of uncompassion and > unfairness... > > -- Ben G > > > ;) > Ben > _______________________________________________ > 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 clementlawyer at gmail.com Sat May 24 15:05:08 2014 From: clementlawyer at gmail.com (James Clement) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 11:05:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Professor Haidt has made it to this list a number of times in the past. A look at libertarian morality - [image: Print] - [image: Email] Published on 29 June 2013 Written by Connor Wood Hits: 105 [image: Libertarian Porupine]You know your libertarian friend? The one who votes Republican but scoffs at ?family values,? who posts Ron Paul quotes on Facebook and thinks taxes are a form of theft? Well, thanks to some new research, we now know more about him (or her). The results are both unsurprising and shocking. Obviously, libertarians prize personal liberty and freedom above just about everything, but they don?t value the tight, bonded relationships that people throughout history have depended on for survival. This means that libertarianism isn?t just a political stance ? it?s a new way of looking at human social life. University of Southern California psychologist Ravi Iyer teamed up with University of Virginia colleague Jonathan Haidt (now at NYU) and several other colleagues to see how libertarians compared with ordinary liberals and conservatives in a massive online sample. Haidt is well-known for formulatingmoral foundations theory , which claims that human morality can be understood as drawing on five basic instincts: harm avoidance, fairness, respect for authority, ingroup loyalty, and purity. Previous findings published by Haidt and his doctoral student Jesse Graham (who also contributed to this research) had shown that conservatives tended to emphasize all five of these foundations equally, while liberals mostly ignored authority, ingroup loyalty, and purity, while strongly emphasizing harm avoidance and fairness. This pattern of moral profiles, which has been replicated across different cultures and nations, suggests that conservatives actually *feel* moral emotions differently than liberals, and vice-versa. But, of course, not all conservatives and liberals are the same. Libertarians are often lumped in with conservatives in contemporary American politics, but they tend not to share several of the traits of traditional conservatives ? particularly respect for tradition and authority. Iyer and the other researchers run a well-known survey website, YourMorals.org, and they decided to use this online platform to see whether these differences actually showed up in surveys measuring personality type, moral opinions, and similar characteristics. Crunching data from over 150,000 visitors who took online surveys at YourMorals.org between 2007 and 2011, Iyer and the other researchers found that libertarians did, indeed, have a unique personality profile that distinguished them from both conservatives and liberals. As you might expect, libertarians rated themselves as economically conservative, but socially liberal. But perhaps more surprisingly, libertarians showed a moral profile that was distinctly their own: like liberals, they didn?t place much importance on the moral dimensions of authority, ingroup loyalty, or purity. But like conservatives, they didn?t emphasize the ?liberal? dimensions of harm avoidance and fairness, either. This meant that, compared with liberals and conservatives, they actually seemed to feel fewer moral emotions, period. [image: Ravi quote] Or did they? A new, sixth moral dimension, ?liberty,? was tested on a small subset of the site?s total visitors, and it seemed to garner the lion?s share of libertarian interest. Compared with both liberals and conservatives, libertarians more strongly endorsed the moral importance of both economic and lifestyle liberty. The authors interpreted this result to mean that libertarians actually felt a weight of *moral* concern when it came to being left alone to do what they wanted, or to decide how to use their own economic resources. No surprise, right? They?re called ?libertarians,? after all. But remember: this emphasis on personal liberty seemed to come at the expense of other types of moral concern, such as fairness, respect for authority, or concern about harm to others. Libertarian morality not only showed an empirically different profile than that of liberals or conservatives, but it emphasized liberty and individual autonomy to an extraordinary extent. Another interesting finding had to do with personality. The so-called Big Five personality inventory breaks down personality into five distinct tendencies: openness to new experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism. Historically, many researchers have used the Big Five to look at the difference between conservatives and liberals. Generally, the most common finding is that liberals are much more open to new experiences than conservatives, while conservatives tend more toward conscientiousness and, in some studies, agreeableness. (Some researchers also think that conservatives may be less neurotic than liberals, and Iyer's findings mildly support this view.) [image: Libertarians less connected graph]In this study, Iyer and his colleagues found that libertarians again had their own unique personality profile. Like liberals, libertarians were significantly more open to new experiences than conservatives. And along with conservatives, they reported less neurosis than librals. But they were significantly *less* agreeable, conscientious, and extraverted than both conservatives and liberals. This finding stood up to multiple statistical analyses, leaving the authors to conclude that libertarians seemed to have a recognizable personality style: one that was highly open to new experiences and stimulus, emotionally steady, and not quite as motivated by getting along with others. Finally, libertarians seemed to enjoy *thinking* more than either liberals or conservatives. In a test of empathic versus systemizing tendencies, libertarians were the only group that scored higher in systemizing than in empathizing. In this context, empathizing refers to interest in other people, while systemizing refers to fascination with inanimate or abstract objects. Thus, libertarians showed themselves to be highly stimulated, not by other people, but by *things* and *ideas. *(See the graph to the right on libertarians' patterns of social connection.) This finding dovetailed with libertarians? results on the Different Types of Love scale, which showed that libertarians reported feeling less love than liberals or conservatives toward different groups, including friends, romantic partners, and humanity in general. Meanwhile, they also reported higher need for cognition, or motivation to engage in thinking and problem-solving. Iyer?s findings paint a fascinating, if sometimes challenging, portrait of libertarians in today?s complex political landscape. Like liberals, libertarians are hungry for novel experiences and often dismissive of tradition, authority, and concerns about purity or sacredness. They?re also not as conscientious, detail-oriented, or agreeable as conservatives, and they?re much more stimulated by intellectual and abstract challenges (they performed better or tests of analytic thinking, too). In some ways, libertarians almost seem *more* liberal than liberals ? further away from the warm confines of tradition, more on the edge of established cultural boundaries. In the past, human social arrangements were almost always tight, emotionally weighty, and powered by shared ritual, value, and religious tradition. If culture is a laboratory, libertarians are cooking up quite an innovative, and unprecedented, experiment indeed. James On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > For me, it's about morality, the larger question. > > Few books that are called 'seminal' truly are, but this one is: > > The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). In a sense, > he takes morality and does a factor analysis of it, coming up with these > categories: > > Care (uncompassion to Ben), Fairness, Loyalty, Sanctity, and Authority. > > People on the right use all of these fairly equally, but liberals treat > Care and Fairness as major factors and the others as rather minor or even > unimportant (or actually bad, such as the libertarians' attitude towards > authority). > > Easily read by any college grad, this book will expand your understanding > of morality - guaranteed. bill w > > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 1:22 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > >> Hi Rafal, >> >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki >> wrote: >> > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - >> that >> > it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with >> status. A >> > leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably >> attracted >> > to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream >> > journalism. >> >> I don't normally read this list but this caught my eye for some reason.. >> >> I guess I qualify as a "leftist" if I have to be projected onto the >> left/right axis. Certainly I'm 100x more leftist than rightist... >> >> I hate bureaucracy; I quit academia because I got sick of the >> bureacracy and the status-seeking BS; and I don't care for mainstream >> media much either... >> >> However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of >> Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents abandoned any >> form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the reality of the >> Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) >> >> To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything >> else. It's about believing the social contract should, normatively, >> include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some minimal >> level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's morally wrong >> for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly inherited, to >> control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for themselves. >> >> Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be gotten from >> in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to >> briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... >> >> If anyone on the list is interested in some thoughtful writing in the >> leftist direction I'd suggest >> >> -- George Lakoff's various writings on the topic, e.g. Moral Politics >> >> -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" (which >> is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, but is >> an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics of the >> last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more supportive of >> leftist than rightist thinking...) >> >> Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your scientific >> work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human being. >> But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world without >> leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other >> political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would now be >> far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and science and >> tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well as total >> human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also envision >> other systems of gov't far better than anything current left or right >> politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... Similarly, >> going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist >> thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors roughly the >> same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which small selfish >> elites simply owned everything and manipulated the Singularity path >> for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of dangers >> and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of uncompassion and >> unfairness... >> >> -- Ben G >> >> >> ;) >> Ben >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 24 15:25:14 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 10:25:14 -0500 Subject: [ExI] we need socialism Message-ID: Libertarians don't like authority, or at least question it severely if it is some sort of science thing. But look at the needs of society: Somebody has to : take out trash fix roads put out fires catch bad guys etc. So what we do is pool out money through taxes and pay others to do this. OK, so this is kindergarten level, but wait. We have a right to hate communism based on its record in Russia, N Korea, Cuba and others. But wait: all of these are authoritarian-based. Aside from some hippie communes, where has libertarian socialism been practiced? Many of us hated Carl Rogers and his feel-good, unconditional positive regard theory of child raising. But - has it ever been really tried? Probably not, almost certainly not. As soon as a kid left his house he would be treated much differently. So we need socialism, like police departments - its' just a question of how much we will have. This group knows this, and knows that people on the right and people on the left will never ever agree on how much to take from individuals to benefit society. Or maybe 14 trillion dollars of debt is a good stopping point. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Sat May 24 15:47:44 2014 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 08:47:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] we need socialism In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003501cf7767$822a97c0$867fc740$@natasha.cc> William, please be careful about making sweeping statements. Certainly you have your own experiences and views, but generalizations and assumptions about others can backfire. Natasha Vita-More, PhD Professor, University of Advancing Technology Chair, Humanity+ Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies _______________________________________ New Book at Amazon! cover email From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2014 8:25 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] we need socialism Libertarians don't like authority, or at least question it severely if it is some sort of science thing. But look at the needs of society: Somebody has to : take out trash fix roads put out fires catch bad guys etc. So what we do is pool out money through taxes and pay others to do this. OK, so this is kindergarten level, but wait. We have a right to hate communism based on its record in Russia, N Korea, Cuba and others. But wait: all of these are authoritarian-based. Aside from some hippie communes, where has libertarian socialism been practiced? Many of us hated Carl Rogers and his feel-good, unconditional positive regard theory of child raising. But - has it ever been really tried? Probably not, almost certainly not. As soon as a kid left his house he would be treated much differently. So we need socialism, like police departments - its' just a question of how much we will have. This group knows this, and knows that people on the right and people on the left will never ever agree on how much to take from individuals to benefit society. Or maybe 14 trillion dollars of debt is a good stopping point. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10577 bytes Desc: not available URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 24 16:53:34 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 11:53:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This ignores the liberal libertarian. See political compass.org for a relevant test. Bill w Sent from my iPad > On May 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, James Clement wrote: > > Professor Haidt has made it to this list a number of times in the past. > > A look at libertarian morality > > Published on 29 June 2013 Written by Connor Wood Hits: 105 > You know your libertarian friend? The one who votes Republican but scoffs at ?family values,? who posts Ron Paul quotes on Facebook and thinks taxes are a form of theft? Well, thanks to some new research, we now know more about him (or her). The results are both unsurprising and shocking. Obviously, libertarians prize personal liberty and freedom above just about everything, but they don?t value the tight, bonded relationships that people throughout history have depended on for survival. This means that libertarianism isn?t just a political stance ? it?s a new way of looking at human social life. > > University of Southern California psychologist Ravi Iyer teamed up with University of Virginia colleague Jonathan Haidt (now at NYU) and several other colleagues to see how libertarians compared with ordinary liberals and conservatives in a massive online sample. Haidt is well-known for formulatingmoral foundations theory, which claims that human morality can be understood as drawing on five basic instincts: harm avoidance, fairness, respect for authority, ingroup loyalty, and purity. Previous findings published by Haidt and his doctoral student Jesse Graham (who also contributed to this research) had shown that conservatives tended to emphasize all five of these foundations equally, while liberals mostly ignored authority, ingroup loyalty, and purity, while strongly emphasizing harm avoidance and fairness. > > This pattern of moral profiles, which has been replicated across different cultures and nations, suggests that conservatives actually feel moral emotions differently than liberals, and vice-versa. But, of course, not all conservatives and liberals are the same. Libertarians are often lumped in with conservatives in contemporary American politics, but they tend not to share several of the traits of traditional conservatives ? particularly respect for tradition and authority. Iyer and the other researchers run a well-known survey website, YourMorals.org, and they decided to use this online platform to see whether these differences actually showed up in surveys measuring personality type, moral opinions, and similar characteristics. > > Crunching data from over 150,000 visitors who took online surveys at YourMorals.org between 2007 and 2011, Iyer and the other researchers found that libertarians did, indeed, have a unique personality profile that distinguished them from both conservatives and liberals. As you might expect, libertarians rated themselves as economically conservative, but socially liberal. But perhaps more surprisingly, libertarians showed a moral profile that was distinctly their own: like liberals, they didn?t place much importance on the moral dimensions of authority, ingroup loyalty, or purity. But like conservatives, they didn?t emphasize the ?liberal? dimensions of harm avoidance and fairness, either. This meant that, compared with liberals and conservatives, they actually seemed to feel fewer moral emotions, period. > > > > Or did they? A new, sixth moral dimension, ?liberty,? was tested on a small subset of the site?s total visitors, and it seemed to garner the lion?s share of libertarian interest. Compared with both liberals and conservatives, libertarians more strongly endorsed the moral importance of both economic and lifestyle liberty. The authors interpreted this result to mean that libertarians actually felt a weight of moral concern when it came to being left alone to do what they wanted, or to decide how to use their own economic resources. > > No surprise, right? They?re called ?libertarians,? after all. But remember: this emphasis on personal liberty seemed to come at the expense of other types of moral concern, such as fairness, respect for authority, or concern about harm to others. Libertarian morality not only showed an empirically different profile than that of liberals or conservatives, but it emphasized liberty and individual autonomy to an extraordinary extent. > > Another interesting finding had to do with personality. The so-called Big Five personality inventory breaks down personality into five distinct tendencies: openness to new experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism. Historically, many researchers have used the Big Five to look at the difference between conservatives and liberals. Generally, the most common finding is that liberals are much more open to new experiences than conservatives, while conservatives tend more toward conscientiousness and, in some studies, agreeableness. (Some researchers also think that conservatives may be less neurotic than liberals, and Iyer's findings mildly support this view.) > > In this study, Iyer and his colleagues found that libertarians again had their own unique personality profile. Like liberals, libertarians were significantly more open to new experiences than conservatives. And along with conservatives, they reported less neurosis than librals. But they were significantly less agreeable, conscientious, and extraverted than both conservatives and liberals. This finding stood up to multiple statistical analyses, leaving the authors to conclude that libertarians seemed to have a recognizable personality style: one that was highly open to new experiences and stimulus, emotionally steady, and not quite as motivated by getting along with others. > > Finally, libertarians seemed to enjoy thinking more than either liberals or conservatives. In a test of empathic versus systemizing tendencies, libertarians were the only group that scored higher in systemizing than in empathizing. In this context, empathizing refers to interest in other people, while systemizing refers to fascination with inanimate or abstract objects. Thus, libertarians showed themselves to be highly stimulated, not by other people, but by things and ideas. (See the graph to the right on libertarians' patterns of social connection.) This finding dovetailed with libertarians? results on the Different Types of Love scale, which showed that libertarians reported feeling less love than liberals or conservatives toward different groups, including friends, romantic partners, and humanity in general. Meanwhile, they also reported higher need for cognition, or motivation to engage in thinking and problem-solving. > > Iyer?s findings paint a fascinating, if sometimes challenging, portrait of libertarians in today?s complex political landscape. Like liberals, libertarians are hungry for novel experiences and often dismissive of tradition, authority, and concerns about purity or sacredness. They?re also not as conscientious, detail-oriented, or agreeable as conservatives, and they?re much more stimulated by intellectual and abstract challenges (they performed better or tests of analytic thinking, too). In some ways, libertarians almost seem more liberal than liberals ? further away from the warm confines of tradition, more on the edge of established cultural boundaries. In the past, human social arrangements were almost always tight, emotionally weighty, and powered by shared ritual, value, and religious tradition. If culture is a laboratory, libertarians are cooking up quite an innovative, and unprecedented, experiment indeed. > > > James > > >> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> For me, it's about morality, the larger question. >> >> Few books that are called 'seminal' truly are, but this one is: >> >> The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). In a sense, he takes morality and does a factor analysis of it, coming up with these categories: >> >> Care (uncompassion to Ben), Fairness, Loyalty, Sanctity, and Authority. >> >> People on the right use all of these fairly equally, but liberals treat Care and Fairness as major factors and the others as rather minor or even unimportant (or actually bad, such as the libertarians' attitude towards authority). >> >> Easily read by any college grad, this book will expand your understanding of morality - guaranteed. bill w >> >> >>> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 1:22 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: >>> Hi Rafal, >>> >>> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki >>> wrote: >>> > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - that >>> > it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with status. A >>> > leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably attracted >>> > to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream >>> > journalism. >>> >>> I don't normally read this list but this caught my eye for some reason.. >>> >>> I guess I qualify as a "leftist" if I have to be projected onto the >>> left/right axis. Certainly I'm 100x more leftist than rightist... >>> >>> I hate bureaucracy; I quit academia because I got sick of the >>> bureacracy and the status-seeking BS; and I don't care for mainstream >>> media much either... >>> >>> However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of >>> Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents abandoned any >>> form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the reality of the >>> Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) >>> >>> To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything >>> else. It's about believing the social contract should, normatively, >>> include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some minimal >>> level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's morally wrong >>> for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly inherited, to >>> control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for themselves. >>> >>> Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be gotten from >>> in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to >>> briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... >>> >>> If anyone on the list is interested in some thoughtful writing in the >>> leftist direction I'd suggest >>> >>> -- George Lakoff's various writings on the topic, e.g. Moral Politics >>> >>> -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" (which >>> is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, but is >>> an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics of the >>> last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more supportive of >>> leftist than rightist thinking...) >>> >>> Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your scientific >>> work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human being. >>> But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world without >>> leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other >>> political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would now be >>> far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and science and >>> tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well as total >>> human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also envision >>> other systems of gov't far better than anything current left or right >>> politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... Similarly, >>> going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist >>> thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors roughly the >>> same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which small selfish >>> elites simply owned everything and manipulated the Singularity path >>> for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of dangers >>> and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of uncompassion and >>> unfairness... >>> >>> -- Ben G >>> >>> >>> ;) >>> Ben >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From odellhuff2 at gmail.com Sat May 24 15:37:00 2014 From: odellhuff2 at gmail.com (Odell Huff) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 11:37:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] we need socialism In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not only do we not need socialism--especially not to provide basic services that would be much better provided through civil society institutions--support net is a much better argument--but attempts to impose socialism will always hurl the society down the Road the Serfdom--the more the socialism, the faster the trip, as all empirical data show. Please read Hayek's Road to Serfdom, and Use of Knowledge in Society, and the Intellectuals & Socialism, as well as Mises' definitive explanation of how socialism destroys prosperity and freedom with it--when you've refuted their arguments, please repost this email and explain to us how Hayek and Mises got it wrong. On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 11:25 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Libertarians don't like authority, or at least question it severely if it > is some sort of science thing. But look at the needs of society: > > Somebody has to : > > take out trash > fix roads > put out fires > catch bad guys > etc. > > So what we do is pool out money through taxes and pay others to do this. > OK, so this is kindergarten level, but wait. > > We have a right to hate communism based on its record in Russia, N Korea, > Cuba and others. But wait: all of these are authoritarian-based. Aside > from some hippie communes, where has libertarian socialism been practiced? > > Many of us hated Carl Rogers and his feel-good, unconditional positive > regard theory of child raising. But - has it ever been really tried? > Probably not, almost certainly not. As soon as a kid left his house he > would be treated much differently. > > So we need socialism, like police departments - its' just a question of > how much we will have. This group knows this, and knows that people on the > right and people on the left will never ever agree on how much to take from > individuals to benefit society. > > Or maybe 14 trillion dollars of debt is a good stopping point. bill w > > _______________________________________________ > 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 johnkclark at gmail.com Sat May 24 17:29:16 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 13:29:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <00d101cf76a3$4a8fd240$dfaf76c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 1:20 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > You really have to live in the South to understand some of these things > that are said about it. Great people here - not too bright, > hyperreligious, superstitious, etc. but great people. > Or as Mel Brooks said in the movie Blazing Saddles: "You've got to remember that these are just simple farmers. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know... morons." John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com Sat May 24 17:20:59 2014 From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 10:20:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] we need socialism In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1400952059.43497.YahooMailNeo@web160502.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> ?William, The problem with this is that you are conflating politics with idealogy. Arguing the merits of various ideologies is moot when *none* of the governments that claim to espouse an ideal actually even *try* to live up to it. So first make governments accountable to their rhetoric and promises,?then I will entertain the merits of various "isms" with you. Until then, there seems to be only one true form of government in the?world?that?obfuscates itself?behind diverse idealogical prpaganda: oligarchy. And?so long as?the oligarchs think that taxing the rich for?welfare is the most cost effective way to deal with riots and anarchy, then we shall continue to have socialism. When the robot riot cops start popping up, well then its open season on the peasants. But if you must split hairs, the US seems to be evolving into a Soteriarchy. A government that stops at no expense to ensure the real or imagined safety of its citizens from threats be they real or imagined. Terrorism and Global Warming seem to?spring?to mind for possible imagined or at least exagerated threats. And of course you need to be?protected from yourself, the Constitution be damned.? Stuart P.S. Sorry for the top posting but Yahoo leaves me little choice.? On Saturday, May 24, 2014 8:28 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > >Libertarians don't like authority, or at least question it severely if it is some sort of science thing.? But look at the needs of society: > > >Somebody has to : > > >take out trash > >fix roads > >put out fires > >catch bad guys > >etc. > > >So what we do is pool out money through taxes and pay others to do this.? OK, so this is kindergarten level, but wait. > > >We have a right to hate communism based on its record in Russia, N Korea, Cuba and others.? But wait:? all of these are authoritarian-based.? Aside from some hippie communes, where has libertarian socialism been practiced? > > >Many of us hated Carl Rogers and his feel-good, unconditional positive regard theory of child raising.? But - has it ever been really tried?? Probably not, almost certainly not.? As soon as a kid left his house he would be treated much differently. > > >So we need socialism, like police departments - its' just a question of how much we will have.? This group knows this, and knows that people on the right and people on the left will never ever agree on how much to take from individuals to benefit society. > > >Or maybe 14 trillion dollars of debt is a good stopping point.? bill w > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >extropy-chat Info Page > > > extropy-chat Info Page >extropy-chat -- ExI chat list ? About extropy-chat The longest running transhumanist email list in the world. >View on lists.extropy.org Preview by Yahoo > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat May 24 17:55:41 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 13:55:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > I guess I qualify as a "leftist" I don't know what I am. It's good that rightist tend to be more in favor of the free market (with the important exception of farm subsidies) but their first response to any foreign crises tends to be to bomb somebody. > To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything else. Compassion is a unambiguous good but fairness not so much, unlike the other virtues too much equality is not a good thing. However I will admit that on a personal level I like many leftists even when I disagree with them, and when some rightest agree with me I sometimes feel it's time for me to reexamine my position. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Sat May 24 23:31:04 2014 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 16:31:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <53812BB8.50703@mac.com> On 05/24/2014 09:53 AM, William Wallace wrote: > This ignores the liberal libertarian. See political compass.org > for a relevant test. Bill w > The article is typical wordy nonsense. I am a libertarian because I care deeply for people and human relationships - voluntary human relationships. Deep caring about people requires not initiating force against them. Appreciation of the apparent fact that humans survive and thrive as creatures by using their general intelligences to reach their own conclusions about what is best for them seems to me to require making maximal room for people to make their own decisions and succeed or fail on that basis. An appreciation for information requirements of decision making lead to believing that more localized decision made by those with more "skin the the game" will tend to be better than more centralized decisions of necessity made by those with less detailed local information and less interest in outcomes relevant to any of those actually locally involved. The so-called moral foundation theory of the article is a joke. It simply asserts without philosophical basis that derived things like "respect for authority" are actually primary. It includes things without definition such as "fairness". - samantha > Sent from my iPad > > On May 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, James Clement > wrote: > >> Professor Haidt has made it to this list a number of times in the past. >> >> >> A look at libertarian morality >> >> * Print >> >> >> * Email >> >> >> Published on 29 June 2013 >> Written by Connor Wood >> Hits: 105 >> >> Libertarian PorupineYou know your libertarian friend? The one who >> votes Republican but scoffs at "family values," who posts Ron Paul >> quotes on Facebook and thinks taxes are a form of theft? Well, thanks >> to some new research, we now know more about him (or her). The >> results are both unsurprising and shocking. Obviously, libertarians >> prize personal liberty and freedom above just about everything, but >> they don't value the tight, bonded relationships that people >> throughout history have depended on for survival. This means that >> libertarianism isn't just a political stance -- it's a new way of >> looking at human social life. >> >> University of Southern California psychologist Ravi Iyer teamed up >> with University of Virginia colleague Jonathan Haidt (now at NYU) and >> several other colleagues to see how libertarians compared with >> ordinary liberals and conservatives in a massive online >> sample. Haidt is well-known for formulatingmoral foundations theory >> , which claims that human morality >> can be understood as drawing on five basic instincts: harm avoidance, >> fairness, respect for authority, ingroup loyalty, and purity. >> Previous findings published by Haidt and his doctoral student Jesse >> Graham (who also contributed to this research) had shown >> that conservatives tended to emphasize all five of these >> foundations equally, >> while liberals mostly ignored authority, ingroup loyalty, and purity, >> while strongly emphasizing harm avoidance and fairness. >> >> This pattern of moral profiles, which has been replicated across >> different cultures and nations, suggests that conservatives >> actually /feel/ moral emotions differently than liberals, and >> vice-versa. But, of course, not all conservatives and liberals are >> the same. Libertarians are often lumped in with conservatives in >> contemporary American politics, but they tend not to share several of >> the traits of traditional conservatives -- particularly respect for >> tradition and authority. Iyer and the other researchers run a >> well-known survey website, YourMorals.org, >> and they decided to use this >> online platform to see whether these differences actually showed up >> in surveys measuring personality type, moral opinions, and similar >> characteristics. >> >> Crunching data from over 150,000 visitors who took online surveys at >> YourMorals.org between 2007 and 2011, Iyer >> and the other researchers found that libertarians >> did, >> indeed, have a unique personality profile that distinguished them >> from both conservatives and liberals. As you might expect, >> libertarians rated themselves as economically conservative, but >> socially liberal. But perhaps more surprisingly, libertarians showed >> a moral profile that was distinctly their own: like liberals, they >> didn't place much importance on the moral dimensions of authority, >> ingroup loyalty, or purity. But like conservatives, they didn't >> emphasize the "liberal" dimensions of harm avoidance and fairness, >> either. This meant that, compared with liberals and conservatives, >> they actually seemed to feel fewer moral emotions, period. >> >> Ravi quote >> >> Or did they? A new, sixth moral dimension, "liberty," was tested on a >> small subset of the site's total visitors, and it seemed to garner >> the lion's share of libertarian interest. Compared with both liberals >> and conservatives, libertarians more strongly endorsed the moral >> importance of both economic and lifestyle liberty. The authors >> interpreted this result to mean that libertarians actually felt a >> weight of /moral/ concern when it came to being left alone to do what >> they wanted, or to decide how to use their own economic resources. >> >> No surprise, right? They're called "libertarians," after all. But >> remember: this emphasis on personal liberty seemed to come at the >> expense of other types of moral concern, such as fairness, respect >> for authority, or concern about harm to others. Libertarian morality >> not only showed an empirically different profile than that of >> liberals or conservatives, but it emphasized liberty and individual >> autonomy to an extraordinary extent. >> >> Another interesting finding had to do with personality. The >> so-called Big Five personality inventory >> breaks >> down personality into five distinct tendencies: openness to new >> experience, agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and >> neuroticism. Historically, many researchers have used the Big Five to >> look at the difference between conservatives and liberals. Generally, >> the most common finding is that liberals are much more open to new >> experiences >> than >> conservatives, while conservatives tend more toward conscientiousness >> and, in some studies, agreeableness. (Some researchers also think >> that conservatives may be less neurotic than liberals, and Iyer's >> findings mildly support this view.) >> >> Libertarians less connected graphIn this study, Iyer and his >> colleagues found that libertarians again had their own unique >> personality profile. Like liberals, libertarians were significantly >> more open to new experiences than conservatives. And along with >> conservatives, they reported less neurosis than librals. But they >> were significantly /less/ agreeable, conscientious, and extraverted >> than both conservatives and liberals. This finding stood up to >> multiple statistical analyses, leaving the authors to conclude that >> libertarians seemed to have a recognizable personality style: one >> that was highly open to new experiences and stimulus, emotionally >> steady, and not quite as motivated by getting along with others. >> >> Finally, libertarians seemed to enjoy /thinking/ more than either >> liberals or conservatives. In a test of empathic versus systemizing >> tendencies, libertarians were the only group that scored higher in >> systemizing than in empathizing. In this context, empathizing refers >> to interest in other people, while systemizing refers to fascination >> with inanimate or abstract objects. Thus, libertarians showed >> themselves to be highly stimulated, not by other people, but >> by /things/ and /ideas. /(See the graph to the right on libertarians' >> patterns of social connection.) This finding dovetailed with >> libertarians' results on the Different Types of Love scale, which >> showed that libertarians reported feeling less love than liberals or >> conservatives toward different groups, including friends, romantic >> partners, and humanity in general. Meanwhile, they also reported >> higher need for cognition, or motivation to engage in thinking and >> problem-solving. >> >> Iyer's findings paint a fascinating, if sometimes challenging, >> portrait of libertarians in today's complex political landscape. Like >> liberals, libertarians are hungry for novel experiences and often >> dismissive of tradition, authority, and concerns about purity or >> sacredness. They're also not as conscientious, detail-oriented, or >> agreeable as conservatives, and they're much more stimulated by >> intellectual and abstract challenges (they performed better or tests >> of analytic thinking, too). In some ways, libertarians almost >> seem /more/ liberal than liberals -- further away from the warm >> confines of tradition, more on the edge of established cultural >> boundaries. In the past, human social arrangements were almost always >> tight, emotionally weighty, and powered by shared ritual, value, and >> religious tradition. If culture is a laboratory, libertarians are >> cooking up quite an innovative, and unprecedented, experiment indeed. >> >> >> James >> >> >> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace >> > wrote: >> >> For me, it's about morality, the larger question. >> >> Few books that are called 'seminal' truly are, but this one is: >> >> The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). In >> a sense, he takes morality and does a factor analysis of it, >> coming up with these categories: >> >> Care (uncompassion to Ben), Fairness, Loyalty, Sanctity, and >> Authority. >> >> People on the right use all of these fairly equally, but liberals >> treat Care and Fairness as major factors and the others as rather >> minor or even unimportant (or actually bad, such as the >> libertarians' attitude towards authority). >> >> Easily read by any college grad, this book will expand your >> understanding of morality - guaranteed. bill w >> >> >> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 1:22 AM, Ben Goertzel > > wrote: >> >> Hi Rafal, >> >> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki >> > > wrote: >> > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of >> "leftism" - that >> > it is a current manifestation of the age-old human >> obsession with status. A >> > leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, >> predictably attracted >> > to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and >> mainstream >> > journalism. >> >> I don't normally read this list but this caught my eye for >> some reason.. >> >> I guess I qualify as a "leftist" if I have to be projected >> onto the >> left/right axis. Certainly I'm 100x more leftist than >> rightist... >> >> I hate bureaucracy; I quit academia because I got sick of the >> bureacracy and the status-seeking BS; and I don't care for >> mainstream >> media much either... >> >> However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of >> Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents >> abandoned any >> form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the >> reality of the >> Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) >> >> To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything >> else. It's about believing the social contract should, >> normatively, >> include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some >> minimal >> level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's >> morally wrong >> for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly >> inherited, to >> control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for >> themselves. >> >> Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be >> gotten from >> in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to >> briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... >> >> If anyone on the list is interested in some thoughtful >> writing in the >> leftist direction I'd suggest >> >> -- George Lakoff's various writings on the topic, e.g. Moral >> Politics >> >> -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" >> (which >> is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, >> but is >> an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics >> of the >> last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more >> supportive of >> leftist than rightist thinking...) >> >> Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your >> scientific >> work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human >> being. >> But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world >> without >> leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other >> political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would >> now be >> far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and >> science and >> tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well >> as total >> human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also >> envision >> other systems of gov't far better than anything current left >> or right >> politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... >> Similarly, >> going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist >> thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors >> roughly the >> same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which >> small selfish >> elites simply owned everything and manipulated the >> Singularity path >> for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of >> dangers >> and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of >> uncompassion and >> unfairness... >> >> -- Ben G >> >> >> ;) >> Ben >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Sat May 24 23:48:36 2014 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 16:48:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] we need socialism In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <53812FD4.9020204@mac.com> On 05/24/2014 08:25 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Libertarians don't like authority, or at least question it severely if > it is some sort of science thing. But look at the needs of society: What a cheap characterization. Libertarians believe in voluntarism. That is they do not agree that any good is achieved by some humans initiating force against other humans to make them act contrary to their own best judgment. Or to put it a different way. Libertarians believe in self ownership. Which means that you have the right to do whatever you think best in all situations as long as you do not abrogate the right of others to do the same and do not harm them. We have no problem with authority as such unless you are using it as a euphemism granting the authority the right to initiate force. > > Somebody has to : > > take out trash > fix roads > put out fires > catch bad guys > etc. Libertarians do all of these things and more. So what is this canard implying that we do not? > > So what we do is pool out money through taxes and pay others to do > this. OK, so this is kindergarten level, but wait. Libertarians have no problem with voluntary contracts with people to provide all these services and more. The keywords are 'voluntary' and 'contract'. We do have a problem with claims that only government can perform many of these services. We find them quite spurious generally and unbelievable. It also leads to monopoly by government fiat in an area of endeavor and those to less innovation and worse products for worse prices. And we have a problem with people with a "government" label taking money from us by force to do whatever they think is best regardless of what we think. Most of the "services" provided with this money are actually total disservices such as the War on [some] Drugs and locking up nearly 1% of the adult population mainly on charges that are not legitimately "crimes" or any business of government or anyone else at all. > > We have a right to hate communism based on its record in Russia, N > Korea, Cuba and others. But wait: all of these are > authoritarian-based. Aside from some hippie communes, where has > libertarian socialism been practiced? Relatively high freedom was rampant in the US in the 19th century and early 20th century and has been steadily eroded to where we approach everything not explicitly permitted by government regulators being de facto forbidden. > So we need socialism, like police departments - its' just a question > of how much we will have. This group knows this, and knows that > people on the right and people on the left will never ever agree on > how much to take from individuals to benefit society. There is nothing about providing protection against criminals that requires the task be performed by government at all, much less that the country be socialistic. You have heard of minarchy, haven't you? Society is not some separate super-being a la the theories of marxists and nazis with individuals only the tiny insignificant cells in some super-being. Societies are sociological organizations that continue with some modification across individual member life times. The individual contributes to the increased viability of that society to the extent the individual produces more value than they consume over their lifetime. The value surplus increases the wealth available to all members of that society be it in art, knowledge, technology, or whatever form. What is value? It is whatever is valued by members of the society - that which they seek to acquire and retain or appreciate enough to exchange value for it. Free markets where all member are free to value what they value and exchange what they produce of value to others for those values are completely voluntary and thus maximize value production and flow - that is they make for a richer and better society. - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robot at ultimax.com Sun May 25 03:44:27 2014 From: robot at ultimax.com (Robert G Kennedy III, PE) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 23:44:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <32611bbffb5b50997ea064cdf9786ae9@ultimax.com> This gave me a nice laugh. Thanks. No other content, really. RGK3 PS. Well, OK, one more thing. Doing what I do for a day job (green energy) and for an avocation (geoengineering, Spike will tell you) I get it from both the left and the right. They're both annoying. > Compassion is a unambiguous good but fairness not so much, unlike > the > other virtues too much equality is not a good thing. However I will > admit > that on a personal level I like many leftists even when I disagree > with . ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > them, and when some rightest agree with me I sometimes feel it's time > for . ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^ > me to reexamine my position. . ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > John K Clark -- Robert G Kennedy III, PE www.ultimax.com From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 24 23:34:57 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 18:34:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <53812BB8.50703@mac.com> References: <53812BB8.50703@mac.com> Message-ID: Well, I am sorry for that, Samantha, but I was only interested in sharing info about the test. Most tests are just for conservative- liberal and not for authoritarian-libertarian. I don't even remember that article you refer to and probably would agree with you about its deficiencies. bill w On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 6:31 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > On 05/24/2014 09:53 AM, William Wallace wrote: > > This ignores the liberal libertarian. See political compass.org for a > relevant test. Bill w > > > The article is typical wordy nonsense. I am a libertarian because I > care deeply for people and human relationships - voluntary human > relationships. Deep caring about people requires not initiating force > against them. Appreciation of the apparent fact that humans survive and > thrive as creatures by using their general intelligences to reach their own > conclusions about what is best for them seems to me to require making > maximal room for people to make their own decisions and succeed or fail on > that basis. An appreciation for information requirements of decision > making lead to believing that more localized decision made by those with > more "skin the the game" will tend to be better than more centralized > decisions of necessity made by those with less detailed local information > and less interest in outcomes relevant to any of those actually locally > involved. > > The so-called moral foundation theory of the article is a joke. It simply > asserts without philosophical basis that derived things like "respect for > authority" are actually primary. It includes things without definition > such as "fairness". > > - samantha > > Sent from my iPad > > On May 24, 2014, at 10:05 AM, James Clement > wrote: > > Professor Haidt has made it to this list a number of times in the past. > > A look at libertarian morality > > - [image: Print] > - [image: Email] > > Published on 29 June 2013 Written by Connor Wood Hits: 105 > > > [image: Libertarian Porupine]You know your libertarian friend? The one > who votes Republican but scoffs at ?family values,? who posts Ron Paul > quotes on Facebook and thinks taxes are a form of theft? Well, thanks to > some new research, we now know more about him (or her). The results are > both unsurprising and shocking. Obviously, libertarians prize personal > liberty and freedom above just about everything, but they don?t value the > tight, bonded relationships that people throughout history have depended on > for survival. This means that libertarianism isn?t just a political stance > ? it?s a new way of looking at human social life. > > University of Southern California psychologist Ravi Iyer teamed up with > University of Virginia colleague Jonathan Haidt (now at NYU) and several > other colleagues to see how libertarians compared with ordinary liberals > and conservatives in a massive online sample. Haidt is well-known for > formulatingmoral foundations theory , > which claims that human morality can be understood as drawing on five basic > instincts: harm avoidance, fairness, respect for authority, ingroup > loyalty, and purity. Previous findings published by Haidt and his > doctoral student Jesse Graham (who also contributed to this research) had > shown that conservatives tended to emphasize all five of these foundations > equally, while liberals mostly ignored authority, ingroup loyalty, and > purity, while strongly emphasizing harm avoidance and fairness. > > This pattern of moral profiles, which has been replicated across different > cultures and nations, suggests that conservatives actually *feel* moral > emotions differently than liberals, and vice-versa. But, of course, not all > conservatives and liberals are the same. Libertarians are often lumped in > with conservatives in contemporary American politics, but they tend not to > share several of the traits of traditional conservatives ? particularly > respect for tradition and authority. Iyer and the other researchers run a > well-known survey website, YourMorals.org, and they > decided to use this online platform to see whether these differences > actually showed up in surveys measuring personality type, moral opinions, > and similar characteristics. > > Crunching data from over 150,000 visitors who took online surveys at > YourMorals.org between 2007 and 2011, Iyer and the other researchers found > that libertarians did, > indeed, have a unique personality profile that distinguished them from both > conservatives and liberals. As you might expect, libertarians rated > themselves as economically conservative, but socially liberal. But perhaps > more surprisingly, libertarians showed a moral profile that was distinctly > their own: like liberals, they didn?t place much importance on the moral > dimensions of authority, ingroup loyalty, or purity. But like > conservatives, they didn?t emphasize the ?liberal? dimensions of harm > avoidance and fairness, either. This meant that, compared with liberals and > conservatives, they actually seemed to feel fewer moral emotions, period. > > [image: Ravi quote] > > Or did they? A new, sixth moral dimension, ?liberty,? was tested on a > small subset of the site?s total visitors, and it seemed to garner the > lion?s share of libertarian interest. Compared with both liberals and > conservatives, libertarians more strongly endorsed the moral importance of > both economic and lifestyle liberty. The authors interpreted this result to > mean that libertarians actually felt a weight of *moral* concern when it > came to being left alone to do what they wanted, or to decide how to use > their own economic resources. > > No surprise, right? They?re called ?libertarians,? after all. But > remember: this emphasis on personal liberty seemed to come at the expense > of other types of moral concern, such as fairness, respect for authority, > or concern about harm to others. Libertarian morality not only showed an > empirically different profile than that of liberals or conservatives, but > it emphasized liberty and individual autonomy to an extraordinary extent. > > Another interesting finding had to do with personality. The so-called Big > Five personality inventory breaks > down personality into five distinct tendencies: openness to new experience, > agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism. > Historically, many researchers have used the Big Five to look at the > difference between conservatives and liberals. Generally, the most common > finding is that liberals are much more open to new experiences than > conservatives, while conservatives tend more toward conscientiousness and, > in some studies, agreeableness. (Some researchers also think that > conservatives may be less neurotic than liberals, and Iyer's findings > mildly support this view.) > > [image: Libertarians less connected graph]In this study, Iyer and his > colleagues found that libertarians again had their own unique personality > profile. Like liberals, libertarians were significantly more open to new > experiences than conservatives. And along with conservatives, they reported > less neurosis than librals. But they were significantly *less* agreeable, > conscientious, and extraverted than both conservatives and liberals. This > finding stood up to multiple statistical analyses, leaving the authors to > conclude that libertarians seemed to have a recognizable personality style: > one that was highly open to new experiences and stimulus, emotionally > steady, and not quite as motivated by getting along with others. > > Finally, libertarians seemed to enjoy *thinking* more than either > liberals or conservatives. In a test of empathic versus systemizing > tendencies, libertarians were the only group that scored higher in > systemizing than in empathizing. In this context, empathizing refers to > interest in other people, while systemizing refers to fascination with > inanimate or abstract objects. Thus, libertarians showed themselves to be > highly stimulated, not by other people, but by *things* and *ideas. *(See > the graph to the right on libertarians' patterns of social > connection.) This finding dovetailed with libertarians? results on the > Different Types of Love scale, which showed that libertarians reported > feeling less love than liberals or conservatives toward different groups, > including friends, romantic partners, and humanity in general. Meanwhile, > they also reported higher need for cognition, or motivation to engage in > thinking and problem-solving. > > Iyer?s findings paint a fascinating, if sometimes challenging, portrait of > libertarians in today?s complex political landscape. Like liberals, > libertarians are hungry for novel experiences and often dismissive of > tradition, authority, and concerns about purity or sacredness. They?re also > not as conscientious, detail-oriented, or agreeable as conservatives, and > they?re much more stimulated by intellectual and abstract challenges (they > performed better or tests of analytic thinking, too). In some ways, > libertarians almost seem *more* liberal than liberals ? further away from > the warm confines of tradition, more on the edge of established cultural > boundaries. In the past, human social arrangements were almost always > tight, emotionally weighty, and powered by shared ritual, value, and > religious tradition. If culture is a laboratory, libertarians are cooking > up quite an innovative, and unprecedented, experiment indeed. > > James > > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> For me, it's about morality, the larger question. >> >> Few books that are called 'seminal' truly are, but this one is: >> >> The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). In a >> sense, he takes morality and does a factor analysis of it, coming up with >> these categories: >> >> Care (uncompassion to Ben), Fairness, Loyalty, Sanctity, and Authority. >> >> People on the right use all of these fairly equally, but liberals treat >> Care and Fairness as major factors and the others as rather minor or even >> unimportant (or actually bad, such as the libertarians' attitude towards >> authority). >> >> Easily read by any college grad, this book will expand your >> understanding of morality - guaranteed. bill w >> >> >> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 1:22 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: >> >>> Hi Rafal, >>> >>> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 12:48 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki >>> wrote: >>> > Some time ago I posted here about what my understanding of "leftism" - >>> that >>> > it is a current manifestation of the age-old human obsession with >>> status. A >>> > leftist is a status-obsessed (i.e. envious) hypocrite, predictably >>> attracted >>> > to the hierarchies of government bureaucracy, academia and mainstream >>> > journalism. >>> >>> I don't normally read this list but this caught my eye for some reason.. >>> >>> I guess I qualify as a "leftist" if I have to be projected onto the >>> left/right axis. Certainly I'm 100x more leftist than rightist... >>> >>> I hate bureaucracy; I quit academia because I got sick of the >>> bureacracy and the status-seeking BS; and I don't care for mainstream >>> media much either... >>> >>> However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of >>> Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents abandoned any >>> form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the reality of the >>> Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) >>> >>> To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything >>> else. It's about believing the social contract should, normatively, >>> include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some minimal >>> level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's morally wrong >>> for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly inherited, to >>> control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for themselves. >>> >>> Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be gotten from >>> in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to >>> briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... >>> >>> If anyone on the list is interested in some thoughtful writing in the >>> leftist direction I'd suggest >>> >>> -- George Lakoff's various writings on the topic, e.g. Moral Politics >>> >>> -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" (which >>> is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, but is >>> an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics of the >>> last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more supportive of >>> leftist than rightist thinking...) >>> >>> Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your scientific >>> work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human being. >>> But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world without >>> leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other >>> political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would now be >>> far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and science and >>> tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well as total >>> human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also envision >>> other systems of gov't far better than anything current left or right >>> politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... Similarly, >>> going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist >>> thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors roughly the >>> same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which small selfish >>> elites simply owned everything and manipulated the Singularity path >>> for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of dangers >>> and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of uncompassion and >>> unfairness... >>> >>> -- Ben G >>> >>> >>> ;) >>> Ben >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing listextropy-chat at lists.extropy.orghttp://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 spike66 at att.net Sun May 25 15:40:34 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 08:40:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] chemo-preservation and fund raising Message-ID: <04ae01cf782f$abd988b0$038c9a10$@att.net> Greetings Extropians, I have a post in the moderators box from a non-subscriber which has puzzled me, so I will open it for discussion and an invitation for advise your humble servant the list moderator. Short version: an aged mother was a cryonics enthusiast but had not funding for it. She perished in December, so the survivors talked the funeral home into chemo-preserving the brain, whatever that means. Formaldehyde? The poster (a friend the son of the deceased) is passing the hat to collect funding to have the brain cryo-preserved. Question please: do we want that kind of material being posted to ExI? Note: there is nothing inherently offensive or against our posting guidelines. It is entirely a matter of taste and what kind of content we choose to have on ExI-chat. When I say we, I don't mean the royal "we" as in "me" but rather I mean all of us, you included. Assuming you are of noble birth of course. I have a suggestion if we decide to allow those posts: in order to decrease the risk of scams, we should set up an escrow account controlled by the cryo-preservation organization but not by the family of the deceased. Then if they fail to raise sufficient funds, the money goes back to the donors, or into a pool for such cases if the donors are willing (sort of a macabre version of the worthy-student fund, but rather than giving the worthy a college scholarship, you hurl their remains into a vat of liquid nitrogen.) Reasoning: if they get a couple thousand bucks and decide it is a no-go, I don't see having the family of the deceased collect that cash. What do we do now, coach? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun May 25 16:17:59 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 17:17:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] chemo-preservation and fund raising In-Reply-To: <04ae01cf782f$abd988b0$038c9a10$@att.net> References: <04ae01cf782f$abd988b0$038c9a10$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 4:40 PM, spike wrote: > Short version: an aged mother was a cryonics enthusiast but had not funding > for it. She perished in December, so the survivors talked the funeral home > into chemo-preserving the brain, whatever that means. Formaldehyde? The > poster (a friend the son of the deceased) is passing the hat to collect > funding to have the brain cryo-preserved. > > Question please: do we want that kind of material being posted to ExI? > > I see no problem with a single post asking for charitable donations with a link for further info if required. A fund-raising campaign with a stream of posts would become tiresome though. But there are thousands upon thousands of good causes needing donations, so it may be safer to make a general rule to not allow charitable requests to Exi-chat (but permit special case exceptions). I don't think Exi should get involved in administrating the collection of funds. If people want to donate to any good cause then it is up to them to do due diligence before parting with their money. In this particular case I would like a cryonics expert to investigate the chemical preservation first. The preserved brain may be so badly damaged that cryo preservation would be pointless anyway. BillK From ilia.stambler at gmail.com Sun May 25 16:30:50 2014 From: ilia.stambler at gmail.com (Ilia Stambler) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 17:30:50 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Revival of the German Transhumanist Society Message-ID: Dear friends, Please join the revitalized German Transhumanist Society ? Detrans! This will become an important platform to support longevity research and general technological innovation in Germany and on the European level. Register here (in German and English). Thanks to the organizer Miriam Ji Sun! http://eudetrans.wordpress.com/mitgliedschaftmembership/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun May 25 16:32:09 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 09:32:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] chemo-preservation and fund raising In-Reply-To: References: <04ae01cf782f$abd988b0$038c9a10$@att.net> Message-ID: <04f801cf7836$e05cf7f0$a116e7d0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Sunday, May 25, 2014 9:18 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] chemo-preservation and fund raising On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 4:40 PM, spike wrote: > Short version: an aged mother was a cryonics enthusiast but had not > funding for it... > > Question please: do we want that kind of material being posted to ExI? > > >...I see no problem with a single post asking for charitable donations with a link for further info if required. A fund-raising campaign with a stream of posts would become tiresome though. ... >...In this particular case I would like a cryonics expert to investigate the chemical preservation first. The preserved brain may be so badly damaged that cryo preservation would be pointless anyway...BillK _______________________________________________ Thanks BillK, these are close to my own thoughts on that matter. ExI is probably not a good place to put these kinds of efforts, but there are specialized cryonics groups I might recommend we refer them. We don't want to attract that class of posts I wouldn't think. Perhaps most of us here have a grandparent or two they would like to cryo-preserve, but I don't see passing the hat on ExI-chat. If chemo-preservation worked that would be great; far cheaper than cryonics. The procedure would be a lot more common I would think if there was any reason to believe it has promise. Granted it might be a little disconcerting to relatives and visitors. I suppose it might fit in, depending on one's notions on d?cor and eclectic taste, but even my stillborn sense of aesthetics suggests to the contrary. Rather than an urn of ashes on the mantle, there would be a jar of formaldehyde with grandpa's brain. spike From pizerdavid at rocketmail.com Sun May 25 02:30:06 2014 From: pizerdavid at rocketmail.com (David Pizer) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 19:30:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ExI] Heroic Attempt to save a life Message-ID: <1400985006.17504.YahooMailNeo@web161805.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> To Cryonicists, Immortalists,?Humanists,?Transhumanists, and other people?of good will?everywhere. ? Here is an update on the very unusual and desperate? effort to try to save Betty Pugliese by cryopreserving her brain.? It doesn't get?any more creative for those?who are limited in money and?need to try to save a loved one.?? I think you will agree that the efforts described below are truly heroic on the part of her loved ones, who have got her this far and bought her some time, while we try to raise money to finish the job.? ?For those who have already contributed something - thank you.? For those who are thinking about helping Betty,? thank you too.?? For those who can't help with a donation at present, perhaps you can pass this message on to people on your address page, and the sites you communicate on -?and that might generate some donations. ?Betty?was living with her son, Ron,?on a retirement income,? she was elderly, in poor health and?did not have money.??Betty, and her son Ron,?had?wanted to find a way to save enough money for a cryopreservation,?But with little income, medical?expenses and rising cryonics prices the two had insufficient funds for even the least expensive cryopreservation options.??Betty deanimated December 6, 2013 at her son's home in Las Vegas, NV where he and the hospice took care of her. Ron was struggling to keep her alive and the hospice was anticipating her death.? In a desperate attempt to buy some time for his mother, Ron had her brain chemopreserved.?? I have talked with experts in cryonics and chemopreservation may do a good job for a couple of years.? But it cannot preserve as well as cryopreservation over time.? To be sure she has a chance at revival someday, we need to raise money to convert her chemopreservation to cryopreservation. ? Ron?s mother deanimated suddenly in December. There was no time or funding to arrange anything beyond?a temporary chemical preservation that ?the local mortuary could do. The body was embalmed, with the usual formalin as the main fixative, and with emphasis on the brain, then?her brain was removed by a pathologist and stored in formalin fixative.? The Venturists are trying to raise?money?so that cryogenic storage at a public facility for Betty's brain, her mind, ?will become possible. This procedure could be preceded by cryoprotectant perfusion by slow diffusion, as has happened for some other brain-only cases. Overall, it would cost $15,000 to convert her suspension to?cryopreservation. Betty's son, Ron, has informed the Venturists that he will come up with $3,000 on his own towards this goal, so the Venturists will need to raise only $12,000 more.? We are asking your help in raising funding for the cryopreservation of this fine woman and good mother. ? If you care to contribute please send ?your donation to: Society for Venturism, 11255 S. Highway 69, Mayer, AZ 86333.???? Or else you may donate by PayPal through the Venturists? website: http://venturist.info/donate.html ? Thank you, ? David Pizer, President For:? The Venturists -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun May 25 22:18:25 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 23:18:25 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Heroic Attempt to save a life In-Reply-To: <1400985006.17504.YahooMailNeo@web161805.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1400985006.17504.YahooMailNeo@web161805.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 3:30 AM, David Pizer wrote: > Ron's mother deanimated suddenly in December. There was no time or funding > to arrange anything beyond a temporary chemical preservation that the local > mortuary could do. The body was embalmed, with the usual formalin as the > main fixative, and with emphasis on the brain, then her brain was removed by > a pathologist and stored in formalin fixative. > > The Venturists are trying to raise money so that cryogenic storage at a > public facility for Betty's brain, her mind, will become possible. This > procedure could be preceded by cryoprotectant perfusion by slow diffusion, > as has happened for some other brain-only cases. Overall, it would cost > $15,000 to convert her suspension to cryopreservation. > > I appreciate that this is a tragic situation for those involved. But to discuss the technical aspects, I am a bit surprised that storage in formalin is considered adequate for a few years. If this is correct, then it means that the current emergency standby procedures for transfusion as soon as possible after death are unnecessary. Or,at least, just a preferable (though expensive) option. Any comments from cryonics experts? BillK From rahmans at me.com Mon May 26 01:51:50 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 03:51:50 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear All, The main problem I have with most Libertarians is that they ignore that, at a very fundamental level, we are social animals. We seek to group and cooperate even before we, as infants, acquire language. We simply haven't evolved to operate alone. Alone we are weak apes with patchy fur and no language; in short, prey for the first infection or large predator that we encounter. So, why do I say 'socialism' is inevitable? First let me say that by socialism I mean mutually interdependent groups. I do not mean the socialism of communist Russia, or the socialism of the national socialism of 1930s/1940s German, i.e. Nazism. Those were obviously and monstrously flawed systems. Some people take as an a priori that any kind of 'socialism' leads directly to Soviet Communism or Nazism. Those two systems, however, are best described by their fascism and intolerance. Let's take a journey of 4 steps: 1. Our cells, eukaryotes, are descended from simpler cells which accepted symbiotic bacteria. 2. We have a larger number of bacterial cells in our bodies than cells with our DNA. 3. We are born dependant on the good will of our parents, society, and the legacy left to us from those who have gone before. (Dependant even on the bacteria, or perhaps especially the bacteria.) Well, what's next? 4a. (Externally) As we connect to ever larger social groups through social media, such as mail lists like this one, we are experiencing increasing rewards from this interaction. Also we are increasingly interdependent on international trade to meet our needs. By needs I'm not thinking about food/t-shirts/housing, which are all things we can provide ourselves if we have some land and the strength to work it. I'm thinking about our health needs, or other scientific, or technological needs. These have ONLY been achieved through the 'scientific community'. 4b. (Internally) I think that as our minds expand (via technology which is currently present only in Sci-fi or waaaaay out on the horizon) our thought processes will begin to fork and we will begin to 'truly multitask' (The definition of 'truly multitasking' will become very important.) and our individual thought processes, if faced with a problem of sufficient complexity, might acquire the resources necessary to pass a Turing test. We might be willingly inducing Multiple Personality Disorder and reintegrating personalities more or less continually. A 'singular' person without this ability might seem as incongruous as a forlorn weak ape with patchy fur. The future individual will resemble in some ways today's community. 4c. (Environmentally) Some people say we are in the Anthropocene, a geological era where humanity's effect is the defining characteristic. Some people say climate change is the result of human action. 'Some people say' is not a strong argument to make. So what I say is that we should be in the Anthropocene, and that climate change should be the result of human action. By that I don't mean that we should let laissez-faire capitalism rule us, not at all. But we should take control of and responsibility for our environment. Mother nature will just as happily give us an asteroid or an ice age as a sunny day at the beach. It is up to us to steward our environment precisely because we can, and we should do it in a way that ensures our survival, and that way will ultimately be informed by forming a sufficiently broad definition of 'our'. While 4b is really just conjecture, I do feel quite certain that 'humanity' will develop some added layer of 'internal' complexity which I think supports what I see as part of an evolutionary trend to 'socialism'. However, 4a and 4c seem to me to be relatively uncontroversial, perhaps even trivial notions for many here. These latter two are enough for me to conclude that both socialism and environmentalism are inevitable. I think they are inevitable even if we launched all the nukes and tried to sterilise the planet because I'm betting that life would start again and would head in the same direction. My vision of socialism is based on an ever more inclusive social network which manages the environment. A private organisation is conceptually unable to do this as its motivations are not the same as the larger group's. The environment is something real and measurable, as opposed to money which has no value other than what we give it. The body of scientific knowledge is something testable, and a shared legacy of humanity. Capitalism worries about solving the 'free rider problem' constantly while in fact capitalism itself is the ultimate selfish meme. By this I mean that capitalism takes, for example, a forest and transforms it into a smoking wasteland and exports the wood to another place so that it shortly ends up in a landfill where the biomass is polluted with toxic chemicals. This is described as efficient and profitable and many numbers are added to somebody's column. The fact of the matter, however, is that we have a degraded environment in the real world. Capitalism itself is the free rider, constantly taking real things and giving entries in account books in return. Libertarians, basically by definition, worry about being forced to do things, especially by governments. While the communists declared that 'property is theft' it might be better said in the Libertarian context that 'property is a declaration to keep something by force'. Any Libertarian economy would have to have some sort of property from which to produce all the basic resources. Hence force is implied in any Libertarian system thus rendering it inconsistent. The myth of the 'self made man' and the 'open frontier' are the core lies of capitalism and libertarianism respectively. No one makes a fortune without an army of workers, or a patent developed on top of the body of scientific knowledge. No one alive today is standing on a piece of land that someone thousands of years ago someone didn't say 'this is my place'. Even some post singularity entity eating some asteroids would owe a debt to the scientific community and whoever instantiated it on its first hardware. Socialism, would be well advised to accept both the practicality of money as a means of exchange and property as a basic human need but these both must be subordinate to the development of the group and the protection/stewardship of the environment. Best regards, Omar Rahman P.S. I have tried to write without reference to any 'experts' or 'authorities', and have only referred to political parties to specifically disassociate myself from them. I would like a dialogue which continues in the same vein. I would be especially interested to be informed about any factual or logical errors I may have made. From tara at taramayastales.com Mon May 26 02:53:42 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 19:53:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <135FDB47-1266-4F24-8723-ADB65BB39567@taramayastales.com> On May 25, 2014, at 6:51 PM, Omar Rahman wrote: > > 4a. (Externally) As we connect to ever larger social groups through social media, such as mail lists like this one, we are experiencing increasing rewards from this interaction. Also we are increasingly interdependent on international trade to meet our needs. By needs I'm not thinking about food/t-shirts/housing, which are all things we can provide ourselves if we have some land and the strength to work it. I'm thinking about our health needs, or other scientific, or technological needs. These have ONLY been achieved through the 'scientific community'. > > My vision of socialism is based on an ever more inclusive social network which manages the environment. A private organisation is conceptually unable to do this as its motivations are not the same as the larger group's. The environment is something real and measurable, as opposed to money which has no value other than what we give it. The body of scientific knowledge is something testable, and a shared legacy of humanity. > > Capitalism worries about solving the 'free rider problem' constantly while in fact capitalism itself is the ultimate selfish meme. By this I mean that capitalism takes, for example, a forest and transforms it into a smoking wasteland and exports the wood to another place so that it shortly ends up in a landfill where the biomass is polluted with toxic chemicals. This is described as efficient and profitable and many numbers are added to somebody's column. The fact of the matter, however, is that we have a degraded environment in the real world. Capitalism itself is the free rider, constantly taking real things and giving entries in account books in return. I agree with your premise, that the current need of our species it to adapt to larger social groups. And at one point, like you, I would have thought socialism was the obvious way to do this. Or some form of expanding our sense of family/tribe to a larger circle like species/planet. However, after being in the humanitarian field for a while, and becoming depressed by the constant failure of well-meaning people -- and the surprising success of indifferent or even hostile people -- to raising the poor from poverty to wealth, I reached the (reluctant at first) con conclusion that I was absolutely wrong. Capitalism, not socialism, is the secret to helping the poor, and also probably the secret to advancing as a species to a truly peaceful world society. There are many examples. India, for instance, has done more for the poor with ten years of capitalism than with fifty of socialism. Small bank loans to the poor housewives have done more to shift wealth than huge donations to the governments of Third World governments. After I studied the libertarian thinkers, I realized that no matter how compassionate you are, no matter if you love a stranger on the other side of the world as your own brother, you cannot know enough about his needs and desires and capacities to help him better than he can help himself. That is why those of us trying to help the poor failed. We thought were were better than he was; we thought we knew better than he did. That hubris is the downfall of ANY form of socialism, no matter how kind and pacifist. YOU DON'T KNOW BETTER THAN THE POOR HOW TO HELP THEM. Just stop thinking you do. Please. Money is not a selfish meme. It is a marker of communication that allows millions of brains to solve problems at a local level far better than your brain or my brain or any technocrat's brain could solve, even if we were the smartest people in the world. Or the smartest computers in the world. Money is also a form of QUMA. QUANTIZED UNITS OF MUTUAL ALTRUISM. Money is a FANTASTIC evolutionary invention, unprecedented in the history of life. It allows individuals who don't know each other to engage in mutually beneficial trade, across borders, even across time. NO OTHER SPECIES CAN DO THAT. Bats and ravens and wolves can share share meals, but not with strangers, and not over time. Money is amazing. But we don't appreciate it for the same reason we fear snakes but not guns, even though guns kill more humans than snakes. It hasn't been around long enough. The main reason so many humans hate and misunderstand capitalism, and rail so much against it, is that our brains have not yet evolved to understand how beneficial it truly is to our species. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads From ben at goertzel.org Mon May 26 09:11:44 2014 From: ben at goertzel.org (Ben Goertzel) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 17:11:44 +0800 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: > It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, vilifying > big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing something right that > the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. Otherwise they would be the > big corporations. Don't rage against the machine; become the machine. Then > be a really good one. > > spike Well, sure, and by the same token, surely Mao Zedong and his cronies were doing something right, that the people they were oppressing were doing wrong !! "Don't rage against the Communist dictators; become a Communist dictator. Then be a really good one." As we all know, might makes right -- right? ;-) ben g From rahmans at me.com Mon May 26 13:10:42 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 15:10:42 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4380F8D7-A10A-4B9E-9A98-DC676454EDC4@me.com> > From: Tara Maya > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable > Message-ID: <135FDB47-1266-4F24-8723-ADB65BB39567 at taramayastales.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > On May 25, 2014, at 6:51 PM, Omar Rahman wrote: > >> >> 4a. (Externally) As we connect to ever larger social groups through social media, such as mail lists like this one, we are experiencing increasing rewards from this interaction. Also we are increasingly interdependent on international trade to meet our needs. By needs I'm not thinking about food/t-shirts/housing, which are all things we can provide ourselves if we have some land and the strength to work it. I'm thinking about our health needs, or other scientific, or technological needs. These have ONLY been achieved through the 'scientific community'. > >> >> My vision of socialism is based on an ever more inclusive social network which manages the environment. A private organisation is conceptually unable to do this as its motivations are not the same as the larger group's. The environment is something real and measurable, as opposed to money which has no value other than what we give it. The body of scientific knowledge is something testable, and a shared legacy of humanity. >> >> Capitalism worries about solving the 'free rider problem' constantly while in fact capitalism itself is the ultimate selfish meme. By this I mean that capitalism takes, for example, a forest and transforms it into a smoking wasteland and exports the wood to another place so that it shortly ends up in a landfill where the biomass is polluted with toxic chemicals. This is described as efficient and profitable and many numbers are added to somebody's column. The fact of the matter, however, is that we have a degraded environment in the real world. Capitalism itself is the free rider, constantly taking real things and giving entries in account books in return. > > I agree with your premise, that the current need of our species it to adapt to larger social groups. And at one point, like you, I would have thought socialism was the obvious way to do this. Or some form of expanding our sense of family/tribe to a larger circle like species/planet. > > However, after being in the humanitarian field for a while, and becoming depressed by the constant failure of well-meaning people -- and the surprising success of indifferent or even hostile people -- to raising the poor from poverty to wealth, I reached the (reluctant at first) con conclusion that I was absolutely wrong. Capitalism, not socialism, is the secret to helping the poor, and also probably the secret to advancing as a species to a truly peaceful world society. > Please tell the families living with the aftermath of the Bhopal disaster that their lives are better because of capitalism. Capitalism is the secret of putting more numbers in more ledgers, sometimes this spreads it all around, but generally it serves to concentrate it. Why? Precisely because of the capitalist's cherished principle of supply and demand. Those with excess cash are almost never in a situation of extreme demand thus eventually they will encounter an opportunity and have the resources to take advantage of it. Conversely the poor are almost always in a situation of 'demand' and must give over their resources to survive, and when they have an opportunity they almost never have the resources to take advantage of it. 'The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.' Some companies also achieve monopolies and place themselves in a situation of controlling supply to continuing demand. Transhumanists should be wary of the recent GSK / Novartis merger talks as I don't think any of us would like to be in the position of eternal serfdom for our supply of whatever potential longevity/cancer/Alzheimer's medicines become available. > There are many examples. India, for instance, has done more for the poor with ten years of capitalism than with fifty of socialism. Small bank loans to the poor housewives have done more to shift wealth than huge donations to the governments of Third World governments. I seem to have missed India's socialist or communist period. Is this the same India that has been fighting Maoist insurgents off and on for the past 50 or so years? > > After I studied the libertarian thinkers, I realized that no matter how compassionate you are, no matter if you love a stranger on the other side of the world as your own brother, you cannot know enough about his needs and desires and capacities to help him better than he can help himself. That is why those of us trying to help the poor failed. We thought were were better than he was; we thought we knew better than he did. That hubris is the downfall of ANY form of socialism, no matter how kind and pacifist. > > YOU DON'T KNOW BETTER THAN THE POOR HOW TO HELP THEM. > > Just stop thinking you do. Please. Never said I know better than 'the poor'. It seems that you did think that; glad to see you've seen the error of that. That hubris, however, is not a general quality of socialism, and in fact seems antithetical to socialism. Also, while I do believe socialism needs to be 'kind' I absolutely don't think it needs to be pacifist. In fact I think 'the state' needs to arm itself appropriately to meet whatever threatens it. > > Money is not a selfish meme. I didn't say money is a selfish meme, I said that capitalism is. 'Capitalism in morally bankrupt.' would be the slogan I guess. > It is a marker of communication that allows millions of brains to solve problems at a local level far better than your brain or my brain or any technocrat's brain could solve, even if we were the smartest people in the world. Or the smartest computers in the world. > > Money is also a form of QUMA. QUANTIZED UNITS OF MUTUAL ALTRUISM. Money can indeed serve this function. It can also be used as a tool to destroy. Much as I dislike the new Russian imperialism/adventurism, did their civilisation really lose 10% (or whatever the precise amount) of its value in the past few months? Money suffers from a severe disconnect with reality; why else are oranges worth X in Nairobi and Y in Los Angeles? (please spare me the 'supply and demand' explanation, it's about exchange rates and neocolonial capitalism) > Money is a FANTASTIC evolutionary invention, unprecedented in the history of life. It allows individuals who don't know each other to engage in mutually beneficial trade, across borders, even across time. NO OTHER SPECIES CAN DO THAT. Bats and ravens and wolves can share share meals, but not with strangers, and not over time. Money is amazing. But we don't appreciate it for the same reason we fear snakes but not guns, even though guns kill more humans than snakes. It hasn't been around long enough. > > The main reason so many humans hate and misunderstand capitalism, and rail so much against it, is that our brains have not yet evolved to understand how beneficial it truly is to our species. > It is true that I don't think that capitalism is a good guiding principle, but if you notice at the end of my mail I state that I think that money is a very useful invention. As I outlined above there are problems with money, but I believe that these are problems that can be solved by making money subordinate to socialism. > > Tara Maya > Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads > Best regards, Omar Rahman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ben at goertzel.org Mon May 26 13:45:27 2014 From: ben at goertzel.org (Ben Goertzel) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 21:45:27 +0800 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: I mean ... the equation of might with right does have a certain simplicity to it ... but not, I think, a desirable kind ... Occam's Razor should be balanced against explanatory accuracy ;-p ... On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Ben Goertzel wrote: >> It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, vilifying >> big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing something right that >> the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. Otherwise they would be the >> big corporations. Don't rage against the machine; become the machine. Then >> be a really good one. >> >> spike > > Well, sure, and by the same token, surely Mao Zedong and his cronies > were doing something > right, that the people they were oppressing were doing wrong !! > > "Don't rage against the Communist dictators; become a Communist dictator. Then > be a really good one." > > As we all know, might makes right -- right? > > ;-) > ben g -- Ben Goertzel, PhD http://goertzel.org "In an insane world, the sane man must appear to be insane". -- Capt. James T. Kirk "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery / None but ourselves can free our minds" -- Robert Nesta Marley From spike66 at att.net Mon May 26 14:47:57 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 07:47:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: <135FDB47-1266-4F24-8723-ADB65BB39567@taramayastales.com> References: <135FDB47-1266-4F24-8723-ADB65BB39567@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: <00c301cf78f1$7c8a17b0$759e4710$@att.net> >...bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Tara Maya >...However, after being in the humanitarian field for a while, and becoming depressed by the constant failure of well-meaning people -- and the surprising success of indifferent or even hostile people -- to raising the poor from poverty to wealth, I reached the (reluctant at first) con conclusion that I was absolutely wrong. Capitalism, not socialism, is the secret to helping the poor, and also probably the secret to advancing as a species to a truly peaceful world society... EXCELLENT me lass. Well said. How much evidence do we need? We have seen experiment after experiment all over the globe in places such as Korea, Germany, Hong Cong, where capitalism and communism existed side by side. The results were always the same, in every case. They started out with the same kind of people, with similar climates and resources. The capitalist side did better: the people were wealthier and healthier, the environment was cleaner, they ended up better connected to the rest of the world. More economic freedom results in better states. Capitalism is the way. Embrace it warts and all. >...YOU DON'T KNOW BETTER THAN THE POOR HOW TO HELP THEM... Ja. We seem to want to not only help them, but impose our values on the poor. They don't want our values. ... >...Money is also a form of QUMA. QUANTIZED UNITS OF MUTUAL ALTRUISM... Ja! The more money I have the more altruistic I feel. >... Money is a FANTASTIC evolutionary invention... So true, so well spoken. >... Money is amazing... The more of it I have, the more amazing it becomes. >...But we don't appreciate it... I feel it is my duty to spread awareness of how wonderful is this thing we call "money." It brings salvation to the masses, it's really good stuff. We should come up with a better name for it, to help people accept this substance which saves our souls. How about... Wealth. I agree Tara. >... for the same reason we fear snakes but not guns, even though guns kill more humans than snakes... Snakes don't kill people: their fangs do. Or in some cases their muscles which crush the life out of beasts. In both cases, the snake is blameless. >...The main reason so many humans hate and misunderstand capitalism, and rail so much against it, is that our brains have not yet evolved to understand how beneficial it truly is to our species... Tara Maya Those same humans would love capitalism if they had more money. Lack of money is the root of all evil. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 26 12:55:37 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 07:55:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: <135FDB47-1266-4F24-8723-ADB65BB39567@taramayastales.com> References: <135FDB47-1266-4F24-8723-ADB65BB39567@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: Why can't it be both socialism and capitalism? We have both now. They are not mutually exclusive. This liberal doesn't hate business. That's just crazy. I do think some restraint is in order and so most people. bill w On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Tara Maya wrote: > > > On May 25, 2014, at 6:51 PM, Omar Rahman wrote: > > > > > 4a. (Externally) As we connect to ever larger social groups through > social media, such as mail lists like this one, we are experiencing > increasing rewards from this interaction. Also we are increasingly > interdependent on international trade to meet our needs. By needs I'm not > thinking about food/t-shirts/housing, which are all things we can provide > ourselves if we have some land and the strength to work it. I'm thinking > about our health needs, or other scientific, or technological needs. These > have ONLY been achieved through the 'scientific community'. > > > > > My vision of socialism is based on an ever more inclusive social > network which manages the environment. A private organisation is > conceptually unable to do this as its motivations are not the same as the > larger group's. The environment is something real and measurable, as > opposed to money which has no value other than what we give it. The body of > scientific knowledge is something testable, and a shared legacy of humanity. > > > > Capitalism worries about solving the 'free rider problem' > constantly while in fact capitalism itself is the ultimate selfish meme. By > this I mean that capitalism takes, for example, a forest and transforms it > into a smoking wasteland and exports the wood to another place so that it > shortly ends up in a landfill where the biomass is polluted with toxic > chemicals. This is described as efficient and profitable and many numbers > are added to somebody's column. The fact of the matter, however, is that we > have a degraded environment in the real world. Capitalism itself is the > free rider, constantly taking real things and giving entries in account > books in return. > > I agree with your premise, that the current need of our species it to > adapt to larger social groups. And at one point, like you, I would have > thought socialism was the obvious way to do this. Or some form of expanding > our sense of family/tribe to a larger circle like species/planet. > > However, after being in the humanitarian field for a while, and becoming > depressed by the constant failure of well-meaning people -- and the > surprising success of indifferent or even hostile people -- to raising the > poor from poverty to wealth, I reached the (reluctant at first) con > conclusion that I was absolutely wrong. Capitalism, not socialism, is the > secret to helping the poor, and also probably the secret to advancing as a > species to a truly peaceful world society. > > There are many examples. India, for instance, has done more for the poor > with ten years of capitalism than with fifty of socialism. Small bank loans > to the poor housewives have done more to shift wealth than huge donations > to the governments of Third World governments. > > After I studied the libertarian thinkers, I realized that no matter how > compassionate you are, no matter if you love a stranger on the other side > of the world as your own brother, you cannot know enough about his needs > and desires and capacities to help him better than he can help himself. > That is why those of us trying to help the poor failed. We thought were > were better than he was; we thought we knew better than he did. That hubris > is the downfall of ANY form of socialism, no matter how kind and pacifist. > > YOU DON'T KNOW BETTER THAN THE POOR HOW TO HELP THEM. > > Just stop thinking you do. Please. > > Money is not a selfish meme. It is a marker of communication that allows > millions of brains to solve problems at a local level far better than your > brain or my brain or any technocrat's brain could solve, even if we were > the smartest people in the world. Or the smartest computers in the world. > > Money is also a form of QUMA. QUANTIZED UNITS OF MUTUAL ALTRUISM. Money > is a FANTASTIC evolutionary invention, unprecedented in the history of > life. It allows individuals who don't know each other to engage in mutually > beneficial trade, across borders, even across time. NO OTHER SPECIES CAN DO > THAT. Bats and ravens and wolves can share share meals, but not with > strangers, and not over time. Money is amazing. But we don't appreciate it > for the same reason we fear snakes but not guns, even though guns kill more > humans than snakes. It hasn't been around long enough. > > The main reason so many humans hate and misunderstand capitalism, and rail > so much against it, is that our brains have not yet evolved to understand > how beneficial it truly is to our species. > > > Tara Maya > Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 Mon May 26 15:06:39 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 08:06:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: <00c401cf78f4$1944b400$4bce1c00$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Ben Goertzel Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists >>... It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, > vilifying big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing > something right that the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. > Otherwise they would be the big corporations. Don't rage against the > machine; become the machine. Then be a really good one. > > spike >...Well, sure, and by the same token, surely Mao Zedong and his cronies were doing something right, that the people they were oppressing were doing wrong !!... Ben, the fact that Mao ever became a dictator was the fault of their system. The Chinese would never have suffered the horrors of the 20th century had they the right to own guns. When the Japanese invaded during the war and killed allll those unarmed people, imagine what would have happened had there been a rifle behind every blade of grass. Mao's murderous experiment demonstrated that we should jump at every opportunity to reduce the authority of every elected office. Power corrupts. Reduce the power, reduce corruption. Don't be China, be Hong Kong. Be Taiwan. Be South Korea. Capitalism is the way. >..."Don't rage against the Communist dictators; become a Communist dictator. Then be a really good one." Don't rage against Communist dictators; become a Communist dictator. Then become capitalist. Then there will be no more dictators. China demonstrated this. Vietnam demonstrated this. >...As we all know, might makes right -- right? ;-) ben g On the contrary Ben, right makes might. spike _______________________________________________ From tara at taramayastales.com Mon May 26 20:48:25 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 13:48:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: <4380F8D7-A10A-4B9E-9A98-DC676454EDC4@me.com> References: <4380F8D7-A10A-4B9E-9A98-DC676454EDC4@me.com> Message-ID: <38FA18F2-8B8F-4CCB-9DAF-7C5904B32A58@taramayastales.com> > I seem to have missed India's socialist or communist period. Is this the same India that has been fighting Maoist insurgents off and on for the past 50 or so years? If you missed it, then you have not done even a cursory study of Indian history since independence. (As for your odd insinuation that opposing Maoists means you can't be socialist or even communist, I submit to you the USSR, which also opposed Maoists while communist. Dogmatists can always fall out amongst themselves.) Gandhi wanted India to reject modern economics in ANY form. He wanted India to remain an agrarian society of villages. As much respect as I have for his pacifism, which I believe saved India from dictatorship, it is very good for his country that even his closest friends dismissed that absurd idea. Nehru and many others believed, like progressive Europeans (and indeed Americans) of the same period, in government-led development. By remaining a democracy, a feat unrepeated in almost any other newly independent post-colonial nation, India avoided the terrible, terrible fate of, say, China, where the state-monopoly of the economy resulted in the death of thirty to seventy million people. That alone is a huge thing, and very much to India's credit. At the same time, I dare say, that is what makes India such a damning example to socialism. They were a shining example of post-colonialism done right, done by leaders (at least the first generation) who were honorable and peaceful (yet not craven) and truly wanted to bring wealth to their people. They really did, and they really thought that protectionism, state-led industry, laws hemming in big business, discouraging foreign investment, and so on, would bring India in the First World within a generation. And it didn't. Their policies retarded India, and kept her a Third World nation for another three generations. The Bhopal disaster, by the way, occurred before the real experimentation with loosening those controls began. India had a huge number of laws restricting business and 49% of Bhopal itself was essentially government-run. All of that wasn't enough to stop the corrupt individuals in that business from cutting corners. Indeed, how could it? The government was corrupted by being in bed with the business. The thing I don't understand about those who process to suspect and hate the rich cat CEOs is why, why, why would you ALSO want to give them the power to hide behind the state. That is exactly what you do when you give business to be run by the government. You simply give the kinds of sociopaths who do seek power to have TWO ways to trick and rob people, one as a business leader and one as a government official. If you really distrust business, my god, make those f%#king wankers stand or fall on their own, not clothed in tax payer's money and behind the facade of impenetrable government bureaucracies. Getting back to Gandhi, he said, correctly, I think, that poverty is the greatest violence. It claims more lives than gas leaks or oil spills, or even the atrocities of the Communist governments. That is what is so tragic about his abysmal economic sense. I agree with the personality test that indicated that many of the most companionate people in the world also tend to be socialists or welfare liberals, because they mistake compassion for good economics. But being compassionate doesn't mean you actually know how to create wealth. Unfortunately, people who tend to be good at business often also tend to be selfish jerkwads, sometimes even criminally selfish; and so we think that because those individuals are jerks, the system of free enterprise is fit only for jerks to exploit the innocent. The amazing thing about capitalism is that it's the other way around. It's the only system where good people regularly exploit evil people; where the poor regularly exploit the rich. A good example of the later is technology. New technology starts out as clumsy, poorly designed, and extremely expensive. But stupid rich people will buy any gadget just to show off how rich they are. They pay the R&D costs of all that technology, until it becomes so cheap and so well-designed that even the poorest person can have a cell phone, television, automobile?. Imagine if you went to two people and you said to one, "I'm going to make you pay $1000 for a very bad piece of technology so that I can afford to tinker with it some more and sell a much better version to that other guy for $10." That would hardly seem fair. But the rich fall for it, and the poor benefit from it. In government run economies and most traditional economies, it's the other way around. We would make much faster medical advances if we had less laws about it. One of the worst things you could ever do for the poor and sick of the world is tell a company that if it developed a cure for cancer, it must immediately make that cure cheap and available to all. The cure will never come. Almost as bad is to tell them, "You can only offer a cure when you're 100% sure it will work." The cure will be sloooow to come. But tell them, "Sure, try out any bizarre new thing and charge whatever you like," the desperate sick rich people will pay for all sorts of crazy cures, most of which won't work. They will both pay for it and take all the risk. And ten years down the line, that cheap, available cure will arrive and cancer will go the way of small pox. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads On May 26, 2014, at 6:10 AM, Omar Rahman wrote: > > Please tell the families living with the aftermath of the Bhopal disaster that their lives are better because of capitalism. Capitalism is the secret of putting more numbers in more ledgers, sometimes this spreads it all around, but generally it serves to concentrate it. Why? Precisely because of the capitalist's cherished principle of supply and demand. Those with excess cash are almost never in a situation of extreme demand thus eventually they will encounter an opportunity and have the resources to take advantage of it. Conversely the poor are almost always in a situation of 'demand' and must give over their resources to survive, and when they have an opportunity they almost never have the resources to take advantage of it. 'The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.' Some companies also achieve monopolies and place themselves in a situation of controlling supply to continuing demand. Transhumanists should be wary of the recent GSK / Novartis merger talks as I don't think any of us would like to be in the position of eternal serfdom for our supply of whatever potential longevity/cancer/Alzheimer's medicines become available. > > >> There are many examples. India, for instance, has done more for the poor with ten years of capitalism than with fifty of socialism. Small bank loans to the poor housewives have done more to shift wealth than huge donations to the governments of Third World governments. > > I seem to have missed India's socialist or communist period. Is this the same India that has been fighting Maoist insurgents off and on for the past 50 or so years? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Mon May 26 20:52:18 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 13:52:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> How any sane person could compare the crimes of Mao Zedong to the "crimes" of manufacturing the goods and services of the modern world is a level intellectual dishonesty and/or muddle-headedness that is simply beyond my comprehension. It is to say that to take away food from the mouths of thirty million famine victims is equivalent to feeding thirty million people hamburgers. I cannot comprehend the mental gymnastics used to equate starvation and bounty. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads On May 26, 2014, at 2:11 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: >> It surprises me sometimes when I hear people, especially the poor, vilifying >> big corporations. Clearly those companies are doing something right that >> the impoverished complainers are doing wrong. Otherwise they would be the >> big corporations. Don't rage against the machine; become the machine. Then >> be a really good one. >> >> spike > > Well, sure, and by the same token, surely Mao Zedong and his cronies > were doing something > right, that the people they were oppressing were doing wrong !! > > "Don't rage against the Communist dictators; become a Communist dictator. Then > be a really good one." > > As we all know, might makes right -- right? > > ;-) > ben g > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From pharos at gmail.com Mon May 26 21:08:21 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 22:08:21 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tara Maya wrote: > How any sane person could compare the crimes of Mao Zedong to the "crimes" of > manufacturing the goods and services of the modern world is a level intellectual > dishonesty and/or muddle-headedness that is simply beyond my comprehension. And they say the same about you. That's because politics and religion is emotionally driven. Non-rational. You cannot argue anyone out of their basic beliefs. Argument, even contrary evidence, just reinforces their determination to hold on to their beliefs. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 26 21:43:26 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 16:43:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 4:08 PM, BillK wrote: > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:52 PM, Tara Maya wrote: > > How any sane person could compare the crimes of Mao Zedong to the > "crimes" of > > manufacturing the goods and services of the modern world is a level > intellectual > > dishonesty and/or muddle-headedness that is simply beyond my > comprehension. > > And they say the same about you. > > That's because politics and religion is emotionally driven. Non-rational. > You cannot argue anyone out of their basic beliefs. Argument, even > contrary evidence, just reinforces their determination to hold on to > their beliefs. > > BillK > ?Au contraire - there is an entire and enormous field of psychology devoted to attitude change and creation. In economic psychology there is marketing. Thousands of studies - change and creation occur constantly. One tip: do not present an argument far different from the people whose attitudes you are trying to change. Just try to move them a little way or you will get the stubbornness indicated by billk. But sometimes huge changes, like from religious to atheist or the reverse happen?. Just a little thing like whether the pro argument is first or after the con argument matters. Dozens of variables matter aside from the strength of a person' belief. bill w > _______________________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Mon May 26 21:56:56 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 22:56:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 10:43 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Au contraire - there is an entire and enormous field of psychology devoted > to attitude change and creation. In economic psychology there is marketing. > Thousands of studies - change and creation occur constantly. One tip: do > not present an argument far different from the people whose attitudes you > are trying to change. Just try to move them a little way or you will get > the stubbornness indicated by billk. But sometimes huge changes, like from > religious to atheist or the reverse happen. Just a little thing like > whether the pro argument is first or after the con argument matters. Dozens > of variables matter aside from the strength of a person' belief. bill w > Well, yes, but...... I wasn't referring to opinion manipulation, adverts, etc. I was referring to confirmation bias. Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations). ---------- BillK From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon May 26 22:35:52 2014 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 15:35:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Solving big problems Message-ID: People on this list know I have worked for years to get the cost of electricity from power satellites down to where it could displace fossil fuels. The peak investment to get started has fallen over the years. The original estimate was ~$300 B. It fell to $140 B in 2012 and to $60 B last year. In the last week, it fell to ~$30 B. That does not include the Skylon development. The UK and ESA are doing Skylon for independent reasons. The current schedule for Skylon is for it to fly in 2021. At reasonable flight rates (for power satellites) the cost falls around $100/kg. That's to LEO. There is at least a 2.5 multiplier for chemical rockets to get cargo to GEO. Unfortunately, we can't build power satellites in LEO and use electric thrusters to fly them to GEO. It takes 6 months and the cross section for running into space junk reduces the chances to near zero that one will arrive at GEO intact. Sunlight does not have enough energy per square meter for a rapid transit. Raising the output of the sun ten fold wouldn't be a good idea even if we had an idea of how to do it. (Talk about global warming!) But we can beam microwaves from ground to space at an intensity of ~10 kW/m^2. It would take a 1 km rectenna on a rather large vehicle, around 21,500 tons, for a 15,000 ton payload. The rectenna and thrusters would mass around 2000 tons, the reaction mass around 4500 tons. We stack 1001 Skylon payloads 91 to a layer and 11 layers high. This presents a small enough cross section that space junk is not likely to destroy it. Humans can ride this vehicle. There is plenty of shielding even though it spends a month in the Van Alan belt. The scale is not large, only ~20 GW/year. That doesn't come close to enough to get humanity off fossil fuels. But the business makes a _lot_ of money and can grow over a decade to a couple of TW/year. That would end the use of fossil fuels and solve the climate concerns to whatever extent the build up of CO2 is affecting it. Keith From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon May 26 22:51:33 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 17:51:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 4:56 PM, BillK wrote: > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 10:43 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Au contraire - there is an entire and enormous field of psychology > devoted > > to attitude change and creation. In economic psychology there is > marketing. > > Thousands of studies - change and creation occur constantly. One tip: do > > not present an argument far different from the people whose attitudes you > > are trying to change. Just try to move them a little way or you will get > > the stubbornness indicated by billk. But sometimes huge changes, like > from > > religious to atheist or the reverse happen. Just a little thing like > > whether the pro argument is first or after the con argument matters. > Dozens > > of variables matter aside from the strength of a person' belief. bill w > > > > Well, yes, but...... > I wasn't referring to opinion manipulation, adverts, etc. > > I was referring to confirmation bias. > > Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is > the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their > beliefs or hypotheses. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged > issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. > > People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their > existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been > invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes > more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same > evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the > evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect > (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and > illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association > between two events or situations). > ---------- > BillK > ?All of which is correct, except that there are exceptions to the primacy effect you mention. My dissertation showed that in certain circumstances ( I used prosecution and defense arguments in a tort trial and counterbalanced them) the more recent arguments are stronger, and it is not a memory effect. The biggest problem that I see is the selective attention to information - a product of the confirmatory bias? ?among other things. It's a sort of xenophobia:? do not go to other churches, much less other religions, don't read evidence of climate change if you are a denier, etc. We get in our little cliques and only favor those like us - ingroup-outgroup effect, perhaps the most powerful effect there is. Thinking outside the box is pretty rare. Only contrarians like me find it easy. wfw > _______________________________________________ > 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 hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon May 26 23:40:47 2014 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 16:40:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Social organization (was leftist, etc) Message-ID: There have been important advances in knowledge since the early days of this list. Unfortunately most of the recent arguments don't reflect knowledge post 1990. Evolutionary psychology by Wright, Ridley, Buss, Gat and others had a lot of influence. They make a case that evolution shaped human psychology during the long period when we were hunter gatherers. I have taken off from this to explain the origin of war as a sensible approach to a resource (food) crisis. (Sensible from the viewpoint of stone age genes.) More recently I have been particularly impressed by the work of Gregory Clark. His book _Farewell to Alms_ is excellent. If you want to read the Cliff notes version, try here: http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf Genetically Capitalist? The Malthusian Era, Institutions and the Formation of Modern Preferences. Sure, evolution shaped human psychology during the stone age. But Clark makes a case that for 20 generations before 1800 there was strong selection for the traits we see in the wealthy. Clark based his research on historical probate records. The same intensity of selection over the same number of generations produced profound psychological changes in foxes. There is good reason to think this happened in some human groups as well. How does this related to my previous post? To a considerable extent our wealth is due to low cost energy. As we run out and the cost rises, humans will experience a resource crisis. The evolved human reaction to crisis is war or conflict such as that in Syria. I don't want to see that, so I work on ways to improve wealth per capita that should lead us away from wars. Keith PS. There is a fascinating article in a recent Science. It looks into the cultural and psychological differences for Chinese who came from areas of China that grew one or the other. Rice requires much more cooperative labor than wheat. The psychological differences are easy to measure in the current day population from different areas in China. I suspect (and have suggested to the article's author) that the effects may be measurable in their genes. From rahmans at me.com Tue May 27 00:42:40 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 02:42:40 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > > Date: Mon, 26 May 2014 13:48:25 -0700 > From: Tara Maya > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable > Message-ID: <38FA18F2-8B8F-4CCB-9DAF-7C5904B32A58 at taramayastales.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" > > >> I seem to have missed India's socialist or communist period. Is this the same India that has been fighting Maoist insurgents off and on for the past 50 or so years? > > If you missed it, then you have not done even a cursory study of Indian history since independence. What was the name of this political entity? The ISSR, the Indian Soviet Socialist Republic? Sorry, you're just plain wrong about India being a communist or socialist country. Private property, banks, democracy, etc. these are hardly the hallmarks of a communist or extremely socialist country. Perhaps you are aware of the history of India prior to independence? That's when the East India Company used private armies and and British troops to establish monopolies in things like making salt and weaving fabric. Perhaps you might remember that, among the many brave things he did, Gandhi made his own salt and wove his own fabric. This was illegal as a result of laws forced through by the British and the East India Company. Imagine for a moment how powerful a monopoly that is. Without salt you cannot live. We earn a salary, called that because Roman legionnaires were paid in salt. Salt is important. The East India Company had another hot product, opium. Ever heard of the Opium Wars? Another fine example of the depths capitalism can lead us to. Post independence India was a largely preindustrial country generally controlled by feudal families. Transitioning from all the preexisting monopolies to a more open market in some sort of free for all wouldn't have been well advised after the chaos of independence and partition. Millions (more) would have died. > > (As for your odd insinuation that opposing Maoists means you can't be socialist or even communist, I submit to you the USSR, which also opposed Maoists while communist. Dogmatists can always fall out amongst themselves.) > Perhaps the presence of a largely feudal ruling class in post independence India would convince you that it isn't a socialist country? The most I could give you is that India has some some socialist policies, but that could be said about almost any government. I'm not sure what else I can say, I really don't think almost anyone would consider India a primarily socialist country. > Gandhi wanted India to reject modern economics in ANY form. He wanted India to remain an agrarian society of villages. As much respect as I have for his pacifism, which I believe saved India from dictatorship, It is interesting to note that Gandhi was murdered by Hindu Nationalists and that a very 'pro-business' Hindu Nationalist has just been elected. > it is very good for his country that even his closest friends dismissed that absurd idea. Nehru and many others believed, like progressive Europeans (and indeed Americans) of the same period, in government-led development. > > By remaining a democracy, a feat unrepeated in almost any other newly independent post-colonial nation, India avoided the terrible, terrible fate of, say, China, where the state-monopoly of the economy resulted in the death of thirty to seventy million people. That alone is a huge thing, and very much to India's credit. > > At the same time, I dare say, that is what makes India such a damning example to socialism. They were a shining example of post-colonialism done right, done by leaders (at least the first generation) who were honorable and peaceful (yet not craven) and truly wanted to bring wealth to their people. They really did, and they really thought that protectionism, state-led industry, laws hemming in big business, discouraging foreign investment, and so on, would bring India in the First World within a generation. And it didn't. Their policies retarded India, and kept her a Third World nation for another three generations. > And are now yielding fruit as India emerges as an economic powerhouse. India's current development is not due to just the last few, or even ten, years. Please remember that pre-colonial India was the result of a capitalist wonderland. 'Foreign investment', companies that were in control, and enforced their monopolies with armies were precisely the reasons that India wanted independence. They had been fighting for it since the 1850s and the 'Indian Mutiny'. > The Bhopal disaster, by the way, occurred before the real experimentation with loosening those controls began. India had a huge number of laws restricting business and 49% of Bhopal itself was essentially government-run. All of that wasn't enough to stop the corrupt individuals in that business from cutting corners. Indeed, how could it? The government was corrupted by being in bed with the business. If, as you state and I agree, that government was corrupted by being in bed with business, it seems quite obvious that 'business' is a corrupting influence. > The thing I don't understand about those who process to suspect and hate the rich cat CEOs is why, why, why would you ALSO want to give them the power to hide behind the state. That is exactly what you do when you give business to be run by the government. You simply give the kinds of sociopaths who do seek power to have TWO ways to trick and rob people, one as a business leader and one as a government official. If you really distrust business, my god, make those f%#king wankers stand or fall on their own, not clothed in tax payer's money and behind the facade of impenetrable g! > overnment bureaucracies. > > Getting back to Gandhi, he said, correctly, I think, that poverty is the greatest violence. It claims more lives than gas leaks or oil spills, or even the atrocities of the Communist governments. That is what is so tragic about his abysmal economic sense. I agree with the personality test that indicated that many of the most companionate people in the world also tend to be socialists or welfare liberals, because they mistake compassion for good economics. But being compassionate doesn't mean you actually know how to create wealth. Unfortunately, people who tend to be good at business often also tend to be selfish jerkwads, sometimes even criminally selfish; and so we think that because those individuals are jerks, the system of free enterprise is fit only for jerks to exploit the innocent. > > The amazing thing about capitalism is that it's the other way around. It's the only system where good people regularly exploit evil people; where the poor regularly exploit the rich. I will pause here just to marvel at what you have written. > A good example of the later is technology. New technology starts out as clumsy, poorly designed, and extremely expensive. But stupid rich people will buy any gadget just to show off how rich they are. They pay the R&D costs of all that technology, until it becomes so cheap and so well-designed that even the poorest person can have a cell phone, television, automobile?. Imagine if you went to two people and you said to one, "I'm going to make you pay $1000 for a very bad piece of technology so that I can afford to tinker with it some more and sell a much better version to that other guy for $10." That would hardly seem fair. But the rich fall for it, and the poor benefit from it. In government run economies and most traditional economies, it's the other way around. > There have been early adopters of technology for a very long time. Usually the military of states based on every type of political system. > We would make much faster medical advances if we had less laws about it. One of the worst things you could ever do for the poor and sick of the world is tell a company that if it developed a cure for cancer, it must immediately make that cure cheap and available to all. The cure will never come. Almost as bad is to tell them, "You can only offer a cure when you're 100% sure it will work." The cure will be sloooow to come. But tell them, "Sure, try out any bizarre new thing and charge whatever you like," the desperate sick rich people will pay for all sorts of crazy cures, most of which won't work. They will both pay for it and take all the risk. And ten years down the line, that cheap, available cure will arrive and cancer will go the way of small pox. > There are more laws about medical advances expressly at the behest of the big pharmaceutical companies so as to create a barrier to entry for small competitors. Also, why would a company ever lower the price of a patented cure for cancer? Companies can face lawsuits for not maximizing profits. This is turning into a digression about India which however points out very clearly the defects of unfettered capitalism. Libertarians seem worried about governments, but there are many examples of capitalist companies which murder aboriginal people to get their land. Read a little about the East India Company before asserting that capitalism has the answers. The point you make about business corrupting government finds a fine example in the events leading up to and following the annexation of Hawaii. It reads like a horror story from the Libertarian perspective I think. Regards, Omar Rahman From sondre-list at bjellas.com Tue May 27 07:33:05 2014 From: sondre-list at bjellas.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Sondre_Bjell=C3=A5s?=) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:33:05 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <383245802-23121@secure.ericade.net> References: <383245802-23121@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: As Anders mentions, there are way more than 50 and for us living up here in Norway, we have the issue with a lot of chemicals and pollution coming up north with the sea and wind. Norwegians are some of the most polluted humans in the planet ;-) ... Driven by many things, including consumerism and wealth. Few days ago it was reported on fruits in Sweden, 9 out of 10 had traces of chemicals and many of the kind that ain't to good for you. The issues today with food, is that they all contains less than the maximum limit of European regulations, but they contains a cocktail of chemicals which obviously we don't know much on the effects of yet. There is though, no means for anyone to avoid these chemicals and it's simply a fact we have to live with for at least some thousands of years still. My suggestion: Grow your own food =) - Sondre On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:09 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > William Flynn Wallace , 17/5/2014 11:01 PM: > > Why aren't you guys worried about chemicals? We are walking around with > over 50 chemicals in our bodies that weren't there when we were born. > > > Just 50? You must be living in some Antarctic nature preserve. > > But 'chemicals' range from the rather benign artificial sulphur > hexafluoride to natural potent carcinogens like aflatoxins. From essential > and poisonous selenium to barbiturates produced as drugs or part of our > natural biochemistry. The real question must always be if they are harming > us appreciably: worrying about them *all* is irrational. > > When it comes to health, it is worth noticing that the healthspan of > people in developed countries (where we likely have the richest mix of > molecules) is increasing and far better than in counties where we can > expect a more 'natural' environment. Part of this is obviously trade-offs; > avoiding parasites and infections might help more than bad effects from > pollutants. Part of it is also getting rid of nasties like tobacco smoke, > lead or DDT. But I suspect that there are few chemicals around that have > effects on our health comparable to the old nasties; we certainly worry > about oestrogen-like substances, but their harms have proven rather elusive > despite decades of investigation (and we ingest plenty of phyto-oestrogens > too). A lot of things may be carcinogenic, but cancer incidence is largely > declining. > > That doesn't stop people from obsessing about chemicals. But most > responses I see are more like attempts of achieving ritual purity (often > using traditional methods bolstered with a pinch of pseudoscience) or > jumping from fashion to fashion (aspartame! bisphenol-A! manganese! > vaccines! benzene in soft drinks! acrylamide in fried food!) rather than > aiming for health. > > My liver enzymes are currently happily chewing up ethanol, modafinil, > caffeine and arsenobetaine - chemicals that may have some bad effects on > me, but also have useful effects (or, in the case of arsenobetaine, just > come with good natural seafood). > > Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford > University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- Sondre Bjell?s http://www.sondreb.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sondre-list at bjellas.com Tue May 27 07:41:24 2014 From: sondre-list at bjellas.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Sondre_Bjell=C3=A5s?=) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:41:24 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Only 306 HP? And that is only at optimal RPM, which you rarely hit I'm sure ;-) Better off with a Tesla Model S, which is faster and utilizes it's 400+ HP much better. There is only one reason why EVs are mostly popular in Norway: Car manufacturers don't want to destroy their own markets by introducing long-range EVs. That's why Tesla have done it and nobody else. I'm the happy owner of a Nissan Leaf, couldn't be more happy! Side note: In Norway, Nissan Leaf and Tesla Model S have for the last year been the most widely sold car model of all kinds of cards. Even beating VW Golf which traditionally have been the most selling car. In April this year, Tesla was the second most sold car-manufacturer in Norway, second only to Volkswagen. And they only sell one car model, VW have loads. ~50% of Nissan's sold cars are the Leaf, and they are the 4th biggest manufactures, BMW is #3 which recently started selling their i3 EV. (13th most sold car in April). - Sondre On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 7:11 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > > The solar panels on my roof don't seem very illusory. > > But solar panels on the roof of my car are illusory because my car has 306 > horsepower, one horsepower is equal to 746 watts so my car needs 228,276 > watts. On a bright day at noon solar cells produce about 10 watts per > square foot, so my car would need 22,827 square feet of solar cells, that's > not counting the additional air resistance caused by the 151x151 foot > square mounted on the car's roof and the "WIDE LOAD" banner I'd have to > place on the back.. And I still couldn't get to work at night or on cloudy > days. > > > > Neither do the large wind farms in the hills not too far from here. >> > > Today there are no purely economic reasons to build wind farms, there are > however tax and public relation reasons for doing so. And if wind farms > ever became really common environmentalists would do everything they could > to stop them because wind farms: > 1) Take up to much environmentally sensitive land. > 2) They are too ugly. > 3) They are too noisy. > 4) They change global wind patterns. > 5) They kill little birdies. > > To environmentalists alternate energy solutions are just fine as long as > they remain strictly on paper, just don't try to build anything on a large > enough scale to actually accomplish anything. > > >> > Generally, any article that's yelling and screaming about how the world >> is collapsing and there's nothing we can do about it, isn't worth reading. >> > > I agree 100%. > > John K Clark > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- Sondre Bjell?s http://www.sondreb.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rolandodegilead at gmail.com Tue May 27 09:33:23 2014 From: rolandodegilead at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Eugenio_Mart=C3=ADnez?=) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 11:33:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: > > The Chinese would never have suffered the horrors of the 20th century had > they the right to own guns. When the Japanese invaded during the war and > killed allll those unarmed people, imagine what would have happened had > there been a rifle behind every blade of grass. > USA is a country with a absurd number of violent crimes. Years and years and years of civilians having guns at homes, years and years and years of civilians being killed. Spanish civil war showed what happened with armed population during a armed conflict: They joined the army that they were in favour... and killed and raped and made a lot of revenges and lootering in every small town and every ungoverned city. I don?t know if it is a question of age or education, but even the rightest democrat parties in Europe (Like European Popular Party) are against weapons owned by civilians and it is seen as something barbaric that americans do. In Europe only the nazis parties and maybe a rare couple more are pro-weapons. How any sane person could compare the crimes of Mao Zedong to the "crimes" > of manufacturing the goods and services of the modern world is a level > intellectual dishonesty and/or muddle-headedness that is simply beyond my > comprehension. > Capitalism is the way? 16.7 million children living in food insecure households and US having the second highest relative child poverty rates in the developed world (2011 data. From wikipedia.) Yes. Is the way for rich people. And for a ecologically unsustainable way of life. You could think about Coca Cola or Nestle, two of the biggest and most succesful capitalist companies. In your country they are ok. They create a lot of jobs and helps a lot of people. In other countries, therefore, that companies uses slaves, destroy irreversibily a lot of natural places etc. Same with Zara (from my country). It is leftist being against slavery? Wow. Humanism for me. You are intelligent people. You know perfectly that capitalism, as well as comunism, works very well in theory, but in a wicked way in the practice. You know that even if you are in the top of capitalist-chain On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:51 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 4:56 PM, BillK wrote: > >> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 10:43 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >> > Au contraire - there is an entire and enormous field of psychology >> devoted >> > to attitude change and creation. In economic psychology there is >> marketing. >> > Thousands of studies - change and creation occur constantly. One tip: >> do >> > not present an argument far different from the people whose attitudes >> you >> > are trying to change. Just try to move them a little way or you will >> get >> > the stubbornness indicated by billk. But sometimes huge changes, like >> from >> > religious to atheist or the reverse happen. Just a little thing like >> > whether the pro argument is first or after the con argument matters. >> Dozens >> > of variables matter aside from the strength of a person' belief. bill w >> > >> >> Well, yes, but...... >> I wasn't referring to opinion manipulation, adverts, etc. >> >> I was referring to confirmation bias. >> >> Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is >> the tendency of people to favor information that confirms their >> beliefs or hypotheses. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged >> issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. >> >> People also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their >> existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been >> invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes >> more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same >> evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the >> evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect >> (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and >> illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association >> between two events or situations). >> ---------- >> BillK >> > > ?All of which is correct, except that there are exceptions to the primacy > effect you mention. My dissertation showed that in certain circumstances ( > I used prosecution and defense arguments in a tort trial and > counterbalanced them) the more recent arguments are stronger, and it is not > a memory effect. > > The biggest problem that I see is the selective attention to information - > a product of the confirmatory bias? > > ?among other things. It's a sort of xenophobia:? do not go to other > churches, much less other religions, don't read evidence of climate change > if you are a denier, etc. We get in our little cliques and only favor > those like us - ingroup-outgroup effect, perhaps the most powerful effect > there is. > > Thinking outside the box is pretty rare. Only contrarians like me find it > easy. > > wfw > >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- OLVIDATE.DE Tatachan.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue May 27 13:58:58 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:58:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Sondre Bjell?s wrote: > I'm the happy owner of a Nissan Leaf, couldn't be more happy! > That's nice but in the end your all electric Nissan Leaf is probably getting its energy from fossil fuel just like my car, or maybe from nuclear. Due to things like regenerative braking your car might be a little more efficient than mine but not enough to change global warming. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue May 27 14:37:40 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 07:37:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 27, 2014 6:59 AM, "John Clark" wrote: > That's nice but in the end your all electric Nissan Leaf is probably getting its energy from fossil fuel just like my car, or maybe from nuclear. Due to things like regenerative braking your car might be a little more efficient than mine but not enough to change global warming. An EV has the option to be fueled from photovoltaics or wind. Even nuclear, with its issues, is better than coal or gasoline. (If you list said issues, list coal's and compare. Nothing is entirely problem-free.) Also, the pollution can be contained at the generating plant instead of spewed all over town. Even if it isn't, that's still just one or a few sites instead of everywhere the car goes. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Tue May 27 16:12:56 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:12:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 26, 2014, at 5:42 PM, Omar Rahman wrote: > What was the name of this political entity? The ISSR, the Indian Soviet Socialist Republic? Sorry, you're just plain wrong about India being a communist or socialist country. Private property, banks, democracy, etc. these are hardly the hallmarks of a communist or extremely socialist country. My grandmother, a socialist, never confused socialism and communism. Communism is socialism by force. To her, socialism was compatible with democracy--what we would today call the welfare state. She believed that the last capitalist vestiges would fade away, but mustn't be crushed, so that for a while, capitalist and socialist institutions, or government-run and individual-run businesses would exist side by side. It was in this sense that I described India as socialist economy. I think it's a hugely important difference, and we shouldn't concede to the Communists the monopoly of the word "socialism", nor let the extreme Right Wing insult socialists who believe in democracy by conflating the two either. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads From tara at taramayastales.com Tue May 27 16:42:18 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 09:42:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00A8AB11-926D-4CCA-A541-1869B36CF4B5@taramayastales.com> On May 26, 2014, at 5:42 PM, Omar Rahman wrote: >> >> The amazing thing about capitalism is that it's the other way around. It's the only system where good people regularly exploit evil people; where the poor regularly exploit the rich. > > I will pause here just to marvel at what you have written. I wish you would, instead of merely scoffing. Things often have the opposite effect of what we think. We shouldn't assume we know how things will turn out until we have tested our assumptions. Another example, completely different, is that many feminists assume that widespread access to porn increases the incidence of rape. The feminist argument is perfectly logical; porn degrades women, and often glories rape directly, so it seems it would encourage more acts of rape. But the evidence doesn't support their theory. It seems to be the opposite. Societies with easy access to porn have lower incidents of rape. This is something we should continue to investigate and see it there's really a cause and effect, but no feminist (and I am one) has the right to say that just because a person says, "Let's allow porn," that person is saying, "Let's allow rape." We all want to stop rape, I hope. The answer about how to do so must not be assumed from the start. You and I have the same goal. A more just, equitable society with the poor becoming wealthy and the current rich not monopolizing everything. It might seem obvious that capitalism leads to exploitation of the poor, but the evidence suggests otherwise. You ought to consider the possibility before you simply laugh it off. There was an interesting archeological dig, using DNA analysis of bones, into a Canadian Native American tribe over a thousand years of history. To many of us, the society would have seemed idyllic. There were some wealthier families, who owned lodges and some poorer families, who only worked in them (I'm not sure if it would be fair to say they were slaves or not) but the difference in material wealth wasn't that great by our present standards. (All were relatively hand-to-mouth by modern standards, in other words). What stunned the researchers was that they found that the SAME families maintained their wealth over that period. A few families were essentially nobility and they never gave it up. There was practically no social mobility at all. For a thousand years. Most traditional societies were like that. And social mobility, when it came, often came in a bloodbath. In modern Amercian society, in contrast, it's well established that it's "three generations to rags or riches." The poor don't slay the rich and move into their houses, and I hope you're not suggesting they should. The poor get an education and outperform the rich. Speaking personally, I know that as an America, I am now in the elite of the global economy, but of my 8 ancestors who came here (all from different countries from all parts of the globe), 7 were either the "proletariate" (as they used to say) or essentially serfs in their own lands. Only one came from the "nobility" -- and he arrived with nothing and was dirt poor and discriminated against in this country when he arrived. It took one generation to move into the middle class for all 8. This is hardly a unique story. I claim no special genetic inheritance. It's the common story, the benefit of free enterprise. You cannot take any person in America today and know from his bank account how wealthy or poor his great-grandson will be. In fact, you wouldn't be able to tell from the bank account of a twenty year old what his bank account would look like at 40. (To make a prediction, you'd have to know other things, like his education and IQ and whether his parents were married, etc.) What a contrast to a thousand years of frozen class hierarchy. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue May 27 17:02:44 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 12:02:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: <00A8AB11-926D-4CCA-A541-1869B36CF4B5@taramayastales.com> References: <00A8AB11-926D-4CCA-A541-1869B36CF4B5@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: many feminists assume that widespread access to porn increases the incidence of rape. The feminist argument is perfectly logical; porn degrades women, and often glories rape directly, so it seems it would encourage more acts of rape. But the evidence doesn't support their theory. It seems to be the opposite. Societies with easy access to porn have lower incidents of rape. This is something we should continue to investigate and see it there's really a cause and effect, but no feminist (and I am one) has the right to say that just because a person says, "Let's allow porn," that person is saying, "Let's allow rape." We all want to stop rape, I hope. The answer about how to do so must not be assumed from the start. ?Many years ago an 'experiment' occurred in Denmark: pornography became legal. Soon hundreds of porn shops etc. opened. Rape statistics went down and down. After several years shops began to close and most of the customers were from out of the country. Porn became ho-hum, just like it is now for most of us. In 'The Light of Other Days" by Arthur C. Clark and Stephen Baxter, public sexual intercourse becomes common. And ho-hum. People can get used to nearly anything. Well, most people. I too am a feminist, maybe the only male one my college ever had. wfw? > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 johnkclark at gmail.com Tue May 27 17:53:57 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 13:53:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > An EV has the option to be fueled from photovoltaics or wind. > Governments have spent billions of dollars to subsidize the photovoltaic and wind industries, but how many electric cars are actually fueled by them? I imagine you could count them on the fingers of one hand. > Even nuclear, with its issues, is better than coal or gasoline. > Probably. > Nothing is entirely problem-free. > True. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue May 27 18:25:33 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 11:25:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On May 27, 2014 10:55 AM, "John Clark" wrote: > Governments have spent billions of dollars to subsidize the photovoltaic and wind industries, but how many electric cars are actually fueled by them? I imagine you could count them on the fingers of one hand. Define "fueled by". Even if you constrain it to just cars with their own solar panels directly on the car, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cars_(with_homologation) gives more specific examples on homebrews alone. Add in mass produced electric cars that plug in to stations either solely powered by PV, or grid tied where there is a nearby PV installation also grid tied (the typical residential case) and it reaches thousands easily - as in, "1,000 <= X < 1,000,000". This is not a complete solution yet, but not all technologies are adopted as fast as the Internet was. Consider that good EVs and good PV have only come on the market recently, while there are over-50-year-old cars still on the roads. (Keeping those clean without simply confiscating them has been an ongoing struggle for decades. Just ask the regulators.) Give it time - or come up with some other line of reasoning than, "it did not instantly solve everything therefore it must be worthless." -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjatkins at mac.com Tue May 27 19:08:01 2014 From: sjatkins at mac.com (Samantha Atkins) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 19:08:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4b6c31e0-bbe1-4b0d-95d2-fadc4cf1bf51@me.com> On May 27, 2014, at 09:12 AM, Tara Maya wrote: On May 26, 2014, at 5:42 PM, Omar Rahman wrote: ? ? ? ?> What was the name of this political entity? The ISSR, the Indian Soviet Socialist Republic? Sorry, you're just plain wrong about India being a communist or socialist country. Private property, banks, democracy, etc. these are hardly the hallmarks of a communist or extremely socialist country. My grandmother, a socialist, never confused socialism and communism. Communism is socialism by force. To her, socialism was compatible with democracy--what we would today call the welfare state. She believed that the last capitalist vestiges would fade away, but mustn't be crushed, so that for a while, capitalist and socialist institutions, or government-run and individual-run businesses would exist side by side. It was in this sense that I described India as socialist economy. ? You grandmother was wrong. ?Socialism requires state control of many aspects of the economy. ?State control entails initiation of force. ?There is no lack of force in socialism. ?That the people may have a vote really changes nothing in respect to force on in respect to government control of "the means of production" and much of the economy. ? ?It is true that socialism doesn't preach inevitable conflict. ? But there is no real difference re use of force by government.? I think it's a hugely important difference, and we shouldn't concede to the Communists the monopoly of the word "socialism", nor let the extreme Right Wing insult socialists who believe in democracy by conflating the two either. ? Insult? ?What do you think "extreme Right Wing" is if not an insult? ? I believe that all systems that involve the initiation of force are ethically bankrupt. ? History shows that [relatively] free markets have raised the living standards of the people to unprecedented heights over and over again. ? History shows that centralized control and government run enterprises are not as good and not competitive with private enterprise. ?Nor is this surprising.? Am I "extreme Right Wing" because I do not believe my person or what I produce is the property of the State to be done with as it wishes? - samantha -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue May 27 22:17:14 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 15:17:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> Message-ID: <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Eugenio Mart?nez Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists >>?The Chinese would never have suffered the horrors of the 20th century had they the right to own guns? >?Years and years and years of civilians having guns at homes, years and years and years of civilians being killed? All those combined would scarcely scratch the surface of the numbers of Chinese the Japanese slew without any effective opposition. >? Spanish civil war showed what happened with armed population during a armed conflict: They joined the army that they were in favour... and killed and raped and made a lot of revenges and lootering in every small town and every ungoverned city? So don?t be Spain. Be America. >? In Europe only the nazis parties and maybe a rare couple more are pro-weapons? That is a puzzling attitude, considering Herr Hitler?s first job was to disarm the German people. As soon as he did, there were no checks to his power grabs, none. Once only the Nazis were armed, whoever controlled the military controlled everything. >?Capitalism is the way? 16.7 million children living in food insecure households and US having the second highest relative child poverty rates in the developed world (2011 data. From wikipedia.)? Ja. We don?t have real capitalism in the USA. >?Yes. Is the way for rich people? Capitalism makes you rich people. >?And for a ecologically unsustainable way of life? On the contrary sir, capitalism is the path to an economically sustainable way of life. With capitalism we get the technology to clean our environment, as we have demonstrated in the past couple decades. Capitalism creates the wealth so that the consumer class can focus its attention on secondary needs such as ecological sustainability. People don?t worry about global warming in North Korea. >?You could think about Coca Cola or Nestle, two of the biggest and most succesful capitalist companies. In your country they are ok. They create a lot of jobs and helps a lot of people. In other countries, therefore, that companies uses slaves, destroy irreversibily a lot of natural places etc. Same with Zara (from my country). It is leftist being against slavery? Wow. Humanism for me? I had an interesting experience just yesterday. I was in Costco and they were selling baskets handmade in Africa. We don?t have much stuff made in Africa here. Why is that? Plenty of low cost labor, seems like a manufacturers paradise. I looked at their literature which was being distributed at the shelves with the African baskets. They went on and on about their fair trade agreements and how they make sure no one is working for 40 cents an hour. OK then, but when I studied into it I learn that if an American distributor is buying stuff at a fair trade prices, it doesn?t stop the Africans from subcontracting to other Africans and paying them 40 cents an hour. If Costco is caught doing this, Costco stands to lose. So, we seldom see African manufactured goods. If we bought stuff from them manufactured at American minimum wage, the Africans would murder each other for those jobs. So we seldom buy anything from Africa other than raw materials and the occasional phishing scam. I see no end to that. Does your view of Humanism offer a suggestion? >?You are intelligent people. You know perfectly that capitalism, as well as comunism, works very well in theory, but in a wicked way in the practice? That isn?t the fault of the system, it is the fault of the wicked. Don?t buy from those companies. Capitalism is the way. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue May 27 23:10:32 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 16:10:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <03ab01cf7a00$dcd048a0$9670d9e0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Tuesday, May 27, 2014 6:59 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] How the world collapses On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 3:41 AM, Sondre Bjell?s wrote: >>? I'm the happy owner of a Nissan Leaf, couldn't be more happy! >?That's nice but in the end your all electric Nissan Leaf is probably getting its energy from fossil fuel just like my car, or maybe from nuclear. Due to things like regenerative braking your car might be a little more efficient than mine but not enough to change global warming. John K Clark Ja there is that, but all-electric cars can help enable intermittent power sources. A friend with a leaf was most annoyed with me I fear, for my referring to his ride as an emissions-elsewhere vehicle. But we can easily see how a huge fleet of all-electrics and plug-in hybrids will help with power generation load levelling, so we can use more effectively our ground-based solar and wind power. Leaf buyers, you are still helping, even if not in exactly the way it is being advertised. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 28 00:04:19 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 20:04:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <03ab01cf7a00$dcd048a0$9670d9e0$@att.net> References: <03ab01cf7a00$dcd048a0$9670d9e0$@att.net> Message-ID: ? When it comes to health, it is worth noticing that the health of people in developed countries (where we likely have the richest mix of molecules) is increasing and far better than in counties where we can expect a more 'natural' environment (Anders) That is doomed to fall, given the horrendous epidemic in obesity, which is increasing in every country that is eating a Western diet. High blood pressure and diabetes accompany obesity as well. Just a thought: is this the first time in history that poor people are fat? Mississippi has to be one of the fattest places in the world. Blacks and whites - not just fat, obese and superobese. According to late figures more than 1/3 of Mississippians are obese. I have to doubt that laziness and pork ribs are the whole answer.? ? Helminthic therapy and a more natural distribution of gut bacteria may be some answers, but I still suspect chemicals.? ?I do raise a lot of my food, but notice that poor people don't even when they have the space. Now that is just lazy. wfw? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 28 00:09:03 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 20:09:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> Message-ID: We don?t have real capitalism in the USA. spike Where and when has it ever been practiced the way the theory says? If it never has, then how to we know that things will be better if it is? That is to say, where is our living model? wfw? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Wed May 28 02:42:50 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 19:42:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Socialism and Environmentalism are inevitable In-Reply-To: <4b6c31e0-bbe1-4b0d-95d2-fadc4cf1bf51@me.com> References: <4b6c31e0-bbe1-4b0d-95d2-fadc4cf1bf51@me.com> Message-ID: On May 27, 2014, at 12:08 PM, Samantha Atkins wrote: > > > You grandmother was wrong. Socialism requires state control of many aspects of the economy. State control entails initiation of force. There is no lack of force in socialism. That the people may have a vote really changes nothing in respect to force on in respect to government control of "the means of production" and much of the economy. It is true that socialism doesn't preach inevitable conflict. But there is no real difference re use of force by government. >> I stand by my assertion that there's a huge difference between Nehru and Stalin. And between a system of re-distribution practiced in a democracy and practiced in a dictatorship. I believe we erase that distinction to our peril. That said, I chose India as my example exactly because the best of socialist intentions, even as "nonviolent" as they tried to be, didn't dent poverty. (In striking comparison to a freer system, which has recently brought millions of Indians into the middle class in a short time.) The reason is probably for the one you identify. At the end of the day, you are still taking away people's free choice. You're replacing individual sovereignty with the caprice of strangers, which leads to miscommunication and waste at best and corruption and criminality at worst. The more freedom individuals have, economically as well as democratically, the better. No government is better able to tell you your best interest than you are. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tara at taramayastales.com Wed May 28 02:53:37 2014 From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya) Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 19:53:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Social organization (was leftist, etc) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51D7A65E-674A-42F3-97C2-CB144366FE72@taramayastales.com> Thank you for this link, it's fascinating. Tara Maya Blog | Twitter | Facebook | Amazon | Goodreads On May 26, 2014, at 4:40 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > More recently I have been particularly impressed by the work of > Gregory Clark. His book _Farewell to Alms_ is excellent. If you want > to read the Cliff notes version, try here: > http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf > > Genetically Capitalist? The Malthusian Era, Institutions and the > Formation of Modern Preferences. From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 28 05:34:18 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 01:34:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 2:22 AM, Ben Goertzel wrote: > However, I come from many generations of leftists, even plenty of > Marxists among my grandparents etc. (though my parents abandoned any > form of strict Marxism in the late 70s on observing the reality of the > Soviet Union, they remain fairly leftist...) > ### Ben, you are not one of the elite leftists I referred to in my two posts (the original one went into more details, if you are interested you can find it in the archives). You may be however a cultural leftist, somebody raised in an atmosphere filled with leftist idiom who did not become a part of the political structure of leftism. Leftism is the major non-theistic (godless) civic religion in America. Just like in any organized religion, there is a split between the faithful and the clergy, and the more dominant the church, the more drastic the split. Those interested in clawing their way up end up in clergy, those who have other interests (like AI research), don't. ----------- > > To me leftism is about compassion and fairness more than anything > else. It's about believing the social contract should, normatively, > include a responsibility for society to provide everyone some minimal > level of help and opportunity. It's about feeling it's morally wrong > for a small elite, with power and wealth that is mainly inherited, to > control nearly everything and take most of the goodies for themselves. > ### An accurate portrayal of beautiful beliefs.... --------- > > Anyway I have a low estimate of the ultimate value to be gotten from > in-depth discussion of politics on this list. I just wanted to > briefly speak out against your caricature of leftist politics... > ### .... but the Pelosis, the Obamas, the Hoffas and other hierarchs are cut from a different cloth, and my words are no caricature. ------------------- > > -- Piketty's recent master work "Capital in the 21st Century" (which > is flawed in ignoring exponential technological acceleration, but is > an excellent, thoroughly data-driven summary of the economics of the > last few hundred years. Turns out the data is way more supportive of > leftist than rightist thinking...) > ### They want to do the same thing they always did when money is tight. At least this time they promise not send anybody to the Gulag or the gas chamber. I guess this is progress. --------------------- > > Rafal, it goes w/o saying I have great respect for your scientific > work and your general stature as a creative, proactive human being. > But I can't agree w/ your view on leftism. IMO in a world without > leftist activiism throughout the 20th century, but with other > political factors roughly the same, the Western nations would now be > far more extremely owned by small egocentric elites, and science and > tech progress would be much less than they have been, as well as total > human happiness being much lower. (Of course, I can also envision > other systems of gov't far better than anything current left or right > politicos imagine. But that's a different story.) .... Similarly, > going forward toward Singularity, if we subtracted leftist > thinking/attitudes and left other sociopolitical factors roughly the > same, we'd end up with a pre-Singularity period in which small selfish > elites simply owned everything and manipulated the Singularity path > for their own personal good. This would lead to all sorts of dangers > and problems beyond the intrinsic moral aspects of uncompassion and > unfairness... > ### We could spend a long time trying to vivisect this body politic, probably to little benefit. But, let me just tell you that from my far-outsider's perch, a Che T-shirt does not look cool at all. It's too splattered. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 28 05:38:17 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 01:38:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). > ### I loved this book, not just because I work just a mile away from Professor Haidt. But there is one failing - it does not account for the much higher levels of hypocrisy among leftists. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 28 05:50:30 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 01:50:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Social organization (was leftist, etc) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 7:40 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > > > More recently I have been particularly impressed by the work of > Gregory Clark. His book _Farewell to Alms_ is excellent. If you want > to read the Cliff notes version, try here: > http://www.econ.ucdavis.edu/faculty/gclark/papers/Capitalism%20Genes.pdf > > Genetically Capitalist? The Malthusian Era, Institutions and the > Formation of Modern Preferences. > ### "The Son Also Rises" is pretty cool, too. So, anybody else finished reading "A Troublesome Inheritance"? I liked it, even if none of the material was really new to me. Not surprisingly, it got the author fired and Watsoned. At least that's all they do to blasphemers nowadays, no more auto-da-fe. I guess it's progress. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 28 06:46:02 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 02:46:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Why socialism and environmentalism (and a lot more) will be impossible Message-ID: It's interesting to speculate on the evolutionary paths that our successors later this century will take as they churn in the computational substrate. Yet, I feel that the truth of the future is largely inaccessible to us, hidden behind many layers of interactions between computational features of the world that will be formed by minds rapidly evolving away from humanity. Just think - if zero knowledge proofs can be used to implement efficient minds, the future might belong to reciprocally opaque entities, like poker players but even more so. But then, maybe completely reciprocally transparent minds might have an advantage by being able to justifiably trust each other and thus collaborate better. But then, a transparent mind might be more susceptible to viral attacks, so maybe you need opacity but maybe you could do with firewalls, whitelists, and remote restore in case of infection. But maybe all you need is an opaque manager core and single-use minds copied from a library and erased after they do their job.... One could go on fantasizing about the shape of minds to come for a long time but none of us, not even AI researchers, have enough knowledge to make any but the most trivial predictions. However, since the design space of minds in general is much larger than the tiny area explored by evolution in the making of humans, I am reasonably sure the minds spawned by evolution in the computational substrate, under much different pressures, will be just too weird to have such human proclivities that produce our -isms. And there is nothing anybody can do about it. Technology does what technology wants. I think I have been lately becoming a techno-fatalist, although not in a sad or depressed manner. The future will be very cool, with or without beings recognizably human. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rolandodegilead at gmail.com Wed May 28 09:25:35 2014 From: rolandodegilead at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Eugenio_Mart=C3=ADnez?=) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 11:25:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> Message-ID: > > >>?The Chinese would never have suffered the horrors of the 20th century > had they the right to own guns? > > > > >?Years and years and years of civilians having guns at homes, years and > years and years of civilians being killed? > > > All those combined would scarcely scratch the surface of the numbers of > Chinese the Japanese slew without any effective opposition. Yeah. In war times things are different. Today we are in peace times. Well.. with 30.000 persons dying for weapons every year in USA, it?s only semipeace. >?Capitalism is the way? 16.7 million children living in food insecure > households and US having the second highest relative child poverty rates in > the developed world (2011 data. From wikipedia.)? > > > > Ja. We don?t have real capitalism in the USA. > Of course. But then, they don?t have real communism in Cuba, or Korea, or URSS. So.. Capitalism, in theory, is great, but not possible in real life. >?Yes. Is the way for rich people? > > > Capitalism makes you rich people. > I agree with good things about capitalism. It?s a good thing and a good step, because it makes humanity wealthy*. But there is a moment (and we are reaching that moment) when it is unsustainable, because it makes the rich people more rich and the poor people poorer. In my country we have a 50% of young unemployment. In yours, 16.7 millions of poor children. Again, the problem of real capitalism is the same that the problem of real anarchism. I can have a weapon, I can defend myself. But my neighbour, richer than me, have more weapons and an army. And nobody can defend me from him. So he can do whatever he want. On the contrary sir, capitalism is the path to an economically sustainable > way of life. With capitalism we get the technology to clean our environment And, if nobody forces to the industry to stop pollution, we get bopals, exxon?s, Prestiges, etc. > I had an interesting experience just yesterday. I was in Costco and they > were selling baskets handmade in Africa. We don?t have much stuff made in > Africa here. Why is that? Plenty of low cost labor, seems like a > manufacturers paradise. I looked at their literature which was being > distributed at the shelves with the African baskets. They went on and on > about their fair trade agreements and how they make sure no one is working > for 40 cents an hour. OK then, but when I studied into it I learn that if > an American distributor is buying stuff at a fair trade prices, it doesn?t > stop the Africans from subcontracting to other Africans and paying them 40 > cents an hour. If Costco is caught doing this, Costco stands to lose. So, > we seldom see African manufactured goods. If we bought stuff from them > manufactured at American minimum wage, the Africans would murder each other > for those jobs. So we seldom buy anything from Africa other than raw > materials and the occasional phishing scam. I see no end to that. Does > your view of Humanism offer a suggestion? > > > That isn?t the fault of the system, it is the fault of the wicked. Don?t > buy from those companies. Capitalism is the way. > I don?t know in USA. Europe is flooded with Made In China products. My humanist solution is never buy anything from China. I can?t fight for them, because I am little. But I can stop finance them. Anyway, this is just semirelated to my complaints about capitalism. The second line is more related: The wicked people who destroy nature places or kill people who is in strike in Sudamerica (I am thinking now in Coca Cola) are the ones to blame because of the wicked acts, not capitalism. But capitalism is unable to control them, so they do whatever they want. >From Europe, right winged american politicians, with their creationism, their death penalties, their negacionism about climate change, etc are seen as monkeys with a box full of bombs. *Well... we all know that about the 75% of the money doesn?t exist... don?t we? On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:17 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org [mailto: > extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *Eugenio Mart?nez > > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > > > > >>?The Chinese would never have suffered the horrors of the 20th century > had they the right to own guns? > > > > >?Years and years and years of civilians having guns at homes, years and > years and years of civilians being killed? > > > > All those combined would scarcely scratch the surface of the numbers of > Chinese the Japanese slew without any effective opposition. > > > > >? Spanish civil war showed what happened with armed population during a > armed conflict: They joined the army that they were in favour... and killed > and raped and made a lot of revenges and lootering in every small town and > every ungoverned city? > > > > So don?t be Spain. Be America. > > > > >? In Europe only the nazis parties and maybe a rare couple more are > pro-weapons? > > That is a puzzling attitude, considering Herr Hitler?s first job was to > disarm the German people. As soon as he did, there were no checks to his > power grabs, none. Once only the Nazis were armed, whoever controlled the > military controlled everything. > > >?Capitalism is the way? 16.7 million children living in food insecure > households and US having the second highest relative child poverty rates in > the developed world (2011 data. From wikipedia.)? > > > > Ja. We don?t have real capitalism in the USA. > > >?Yes. Is the way for rich people? > > > > Capitalism makes you rich people. > > > > >?And for a ecologically unsustainable way of life? > > > > On the contrary sir, capitalism is the path to an economically sustainable > way of life. With capitalism we get the technology to clean our > environment, as we have demonstrated in the past couple decades. > Capitalism creates the wealth so that the consumer class can focus its > attention on secondary needs such as ecological sustainability. People > don?t worry about global warming in North Korea. > > > >?You could think about Coca Cola or Nestle, two of the biggest and most > succesful capitalist companies. In your country they are ok. They create a > lot of jobs and helps a lot of people. In other countries, therefore, that > companies uses slaves, destroy irreversibily a lot of natural places etc. > Same with Zara (from my country). It is leftist being against slavery? Wow. > Humanism for me? > > > > I had an interesting experience just yesterday. I was in Costco and they > were selling baskets handmade in Africa. We don?t have much stuff made in > Africa here. Why is that? Plenty of low cost labor, seems like a > manufacturers paradise. I looked at their literature which was being > distributed at the shelves with the African baskets. They went on and on > about their fair trade agreements and how they make sure no one is working > for 40 cents an hour. OK then, but when I studied into it I learn that if > an American distributor is buying stuff at a fair trade prices, it doesn?t > stop the Africans from subcontracting to other Africans and paying them 40 > cents an hour. If Costco is caught doing this, Costco stands to lose. So, > we seldom see African manufactured goods. If we bought stuff from them > manufactured at American minimum wage, the Africans would murder each other > for those jobs. So we seldom buy anything from Africa other than raw > materials and the occasional phishing scam. I see no end to that. Does > your view of Humanism offer a suggestion? > > > > >?You are intelligent people. You know perfectly that capitalism, as well > as comunism, works very well in theory, but in a wicked way in the practice > ? > > > > That isn?t the fault of the system, it is the fault of the wicked. Don?t > buy from those companies. Capitalism is the way. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- OLVIDATE.DE Tatachan.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 28 12:14:39 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 08:14:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> Message-ID: I loved this book, not just because I work just a mile away from Professor Haidt. But there is one failing - it does not account for the much higher levels of hypocrisy among leftists. Rafal ?OH? Maybe because he did not have any data showing this. Do you? wfw? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed May 28 13:55:57 2014 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 09:55:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 5:25 AM, Eugenio Mart?nez wrote: > >> > I don?t know in USA. Europe is flooded with Made In China products. My > humanist solution is never buy anything from China. I can?t fight for them, > because I am little. But I can stop finance them. > ### For a humanist you seem to be quite scornful of honest humans working their way up from earning 250$ per year in 1980, to $10,000 per year now (see China GDP history on Wikipedia). Do you despise the Chinese because of their success? ------------------ > > From Europe, right winged american politicians, with their creationism, > their death penalties, their negacionism about climate change, etc are seen > as monkeys with a box full of bombs. > ### Indeed, you are quite scornful of a lot humans. Rafal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed May 28 14:26:16 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 10:26:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 6:17 PM, spike wrote: > > > > I had an interesting experience just yesterday. I was in Costco and > they were selling baskets handmade in Africa. We don?t have much stuff > made in Africa here. Why is that? > One reason is the enormous amount of corruption and political instability in Africa, no company wants to make a investment if you must constantly make payments to numerous and competing gangs of thugs to keep them from burning down your factory, or if they worry the government is going to nationalize it, or if a civil war is likely to break out right in front of it. > Plenty of low cost labor, seems like a manufacturers paradise. [...] > They went on and on about their fair trade agreements and how they make > sure no one is working for 40 cents an hour. > And that is the other reason. The only advantage Africa has over other places is plenty of very low cost labor, but liberal "humanitarians" insist on taking that one advantage away from Africa. So even though millions would be absolutely delighted to receive the princely wage of 40 cents an hour the leftest have stepped in to "help" them and made sure that can never happen. So now Africans no longer get 40 cents an hour, thanks to the intervention of upper middle class western whites and their liberal ideas Africans now receive exactly ZERO cents an hour. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed May 28 14:20:45 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 07:20:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <064201cf7a80$04d5d980$0e818c80$@att.net> On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: >>?The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). >?### I loved this book, not just because I work just a mile away from Professor Haidt. But there is one failing - it does not account for the much higher levels of hypocrisy among leftists?Rafal I considered it a most insightful work. There was something I saw in there I consider a major flaw: Professor Haidt used the term fairness without fully explaining that the right and the left each have their own definition of the term. Each considers the other?s definition of fairness as unfairness. The right considers it fair if everyone has equal opportunity. The left considers it fair if everyone has equal outcomes. Which are you? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed May 28 14:53:46 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 07:53:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> Message-ID: <068601cf7a84$a1380ab0$e3a82010$@att.net> >? Behalf Of Eugenio Mart?nez Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists All those combined would scarcely scratch the surface of the numbers of Chinese the Japanese slew without any effective opposition. >?Yeah. In war times things are different. Today we are in peace times? Eugenio, if we weren?t heavily armed, we would be in war times. Weakness is provocation. >?Well.. with 30.000 persons dying for weapons every year in USA, it?s only semipeace? Note where all those people are dying for weapons: it?s primarily in places where guns are illegal. Weakness is provocation. >?Of course. But then, they don?t have real communism in Cuba, or Korea, or URSS. So.. Capitalism, in theory, is great, but not possible in real life? We should strive for it however. Here?s an interesting thought experiment: allow a communist state, full-oh hard line theoretical communism. Take one of the US states, make it communist (ja right, California. No, I mean complete Marxist state communism.) People can come and go, just as it has always been, and of course the federal government still wants its cut regardless of what your state government does to your paycheck; you don?t need to live there. So open borders, anyone can come and go, one communist state. What happens? Why? Question please: why do you suppose every time a Marxist state forms anywhere, it needs to build walls around itself, not just to keep freeloading outsiders out but to keep the productive prisoners in? Communism converts its own citizens to slaves. If you want to argue that capitalism exports its slavery elsewhere, the solution seems clear enough to me in our modern times. We now have the control system technology to have most slave labor done by robots. Problem solved. Capitalism makes you rich people. I agree with good things about capitalism. It?s a good thing and a good step, because it makes humanity wealthy*. But there is a moment (and we are reaching that moment) when it is unsustainable, because it makes the rich people more rich and the poor people poorer? There we disagree. Capitalism makes the poor richer too. Overpopulation makes the poor poorer. But communism doesn?t solve that either. >?In my country we have a 50% of young unemployment? European governments have made the hiring of young people a bad bet. High unemployment results. Solution: dismantle the legal system that makes the hiring of the young a good bet. Problem solved. Of course they will be lousy low-paying jobs, perhaps a lot like the ones you and I held our misspent youth, but what was the result of that? We got our asses in gear and arranged at all costs to get valuable skills. >? In yours, 16.7 millions of poor children? Ja, overbreeding rather than capitalism is to blame for that. >?Again, the problem of real capitalism is the same that the problem of real anarchism. I can have a weapon, I can defend myself. But my neighbour, richer than me, have more weapons and an army. And nobody can defend me from him. So he can do whatever he want? With adequate weapons, your neighbor will not attack. Form a business together, makes something valuable, become rich. Teach your children to do likewise. All get rich together. On the contrary sir, capitalism is the path to an economically sustainable way of life. With capitalism we get the technology to clean our environment >?And, if nobody forces to the industry to stop pollution, we get bopals, exxon?s, Prestiges, etc? If people have money, they do force industry to stop pollution. Every manufacturing process and every manufactured product has means of creating that product safely and cleanly. Capitalism has markets which pressure manufacturers to do so. Communist systems don?t do that. >?I don?t know in USA. Europe is flooded with Made In China products? Pretty much everything in the USA is manufactured in China, but I see that coming to an end soon. Everything was once made in Japan, but their stuff became too expensive. Example: motorcycles. In the 1970s, American made motorcycles were rare as hens teeth. Japan Inc manufacturing became expensive, Harley Davidson revived. Capitalism worked. >? My humanist solution is never buy anything from China. I can?t fight for them, because I am little. But I can stop finance them? That?s the right answer. Well done. Of course, it takes away jobs from the poor in China, but hey, their manufacturing is going to become very expensive soon. We borrow so much money from China, our dollar is going to crash hard some time in the next few years. No one knows when. >?Anyway, this is just semirelated to my complaints about capitalism. The second line is more related: The wicked people who destroy nature places or kill people who is in strike in Sudamerica (I am thinking now in Coca Cola) are the ones to blame because of the wicked acts, not capitalism. But capitalism is unable to control them, so they do whatever they want? Socialism and communism don?t control that either. But you can get fair-trade cola; that?s easy enough. I find it encouraging that technology allows us to get a fair assessment of the negative impacts in manufacturing the items we buy, now more than ever. If you want to be a responsible consumer, I applaud that. Don?t look to government to do it for you; governments are corrupt, all of them. Reduce their scope and authority, that?s how you reduce corruption. >?From Europe, right winged american politicians, with their creationism, their death penalties, their negacionism about climate change, etc are seen as monkeys with a box full of bombs? Ja, and I see a gradual shift to redefine capitalism as right wing. It isn?t the same thing. You can be left or libertarian and still be a dedicated capitalist. >?*Well... we all know that about the 75% of the money doesn?t exist... don?t we? Only 75%? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 28 15:30:47 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 11:30:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <064201cf7a80$04d5d980$0e818c80$@att.net> References: <064201cf7a80$04d5d980$0e818c80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 10:20 AM, spike wrote: > > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 10:40 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >>?The Righteous Mind, by Jonathan Haidt (social psychologist). > > > > >?### I loved this book, not just because I work just a mile away from > Professor Haidt. > > > > But there is one failing - it does not account for the much higher levels > of hypocrisy among leftists?Rafal > > > > > > I considered it a most insightful work. There was something I saw in > there I consider a major flaw: Professor Haidt used the term fairness > without fully explaining that the right and the left each have their own > definition of the term. Each considers the other?s definition of fairness > as unfairness. The right considers it fair if everyone has equal > opportunity. The left considers it fair if everyone has equal outcomes. > Which are you? > > > > spike > > ?I strongly dispute the comment about the left. Maybe it characterizes the extreme left, but certainly not us moderate ones. In fact, I never heard of anyone who thinks everyone should make the same money, or get the same outcome in any way. We are most definitely not against competition and winning.? ?And I am still waiting for Ra?fal's data about the higher hypocrisy among leftists. > _______________________________________________ > 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 pharos at gmail.com Wed May 28 16:08:49 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 17:08:49 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <064201cf7a80$04d5d980$0e818c80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:30 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I strongly dispute the comment about the left. Maybe it characterizes the > extreme left, but certainly not us moderate ones. In fact, I never heard of > anyone who thinks everyone should make the same money, or get the same > outcome in any way. We are most definitely not against competition and > winning. > > Now there's a good question! Which breed of politicians lies most? ;) Do we count big lies more than small lies? (e.g. Iraq war justification v supporting war on drugs while using drugs). Do we count the lies that affect the most people? Do we count the lies that have the worst consequences? Do we count passing laws (then exempting politicians). How about 'Power corrupts' all politics? BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 28 16:19:37 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 12:19:37 -0400 Subject: [ExI] true debate Message-ID: In traditional debate, as taught in schools, though maybe not so much anymore, debaters would gain no points from the judges and few from the audience if they presented only one side of the argument. The tradition is to present your side and refute the other, thus acknowledging that there is another side. Yet what we have today in the media is mostly one-sided. In social psych, we know that one-sided arguments convince very few, and only those who are mostly unaware of the other side. And maybe you have noticed that emotions tend to run high in public media, Congress, etc. It is said that the Republicans don't just dislike Obama and his policies, they hate him and them. Compromise involves the two-sided arguments and our congressmen repudiate them, likening them to giving in and being untrue to one's principles. Perhaps they just don't want to confuse their constituents, whom they regard as uninformed and unintelligent. One of my posts was stopped because Spike thought that it would cause flame wars (on socialism). He also told me that socialists were not well liked. What has liking or even respect got to do with a political position? Or people who hold it? Once emotions get high rationality goes out the window, people get defensive and strike back. (In any case, I am moderately left wing and libertarian - no socialist here). Unless I miss my best guess, the people in this group are of high intelligence and education, who would be highly insulted if presented with a one-sided argument, as if they were unaware of both sides. And likely equally insulted if yelled at and called names. (Is extreme right wing an insult? Samantha thought so.). Negative emotions have no role in debate. Unsupported opinions are equally out of bounds to the intellectual elite. Show me the data, right? The posts on the chat group are far better than seen in the media, and yet some of the problems mentioned above are present. I'd like to see true debates, acknowledging the points of the other side and refuting them. If you are socialist, then how is your system going to make money? What about the free rider problem? How do you explain the failures of countries that went whole hog on it? If you are capitalist, how do you treat those who cannot contribute much - widow and orphans, the disabled, the aged? We must avoid Social Darwinism on one side and autocratic socialism on the other. I don't know if anyone will agree with me but I predict I'll find out! wfw -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed May 28 16:21:17 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 12:21:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <064201cf7a80$04d5d980$0e818c80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 12:08 PM, BillK wrote: > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 4:30 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > I strongly dispute the comment about the left. Maybe it characterizes > the > > extreme left, but certainly not us moderate ones. In fact, I never > heard of > > anyone who thinks everyone should make the same money, or get the same > > outcome in any way. We are most definitely not against competition and > > winning. > > > > > > Now there's a good question! Which breed of politicians lies most? ;) > > Do we count big lies more than small lies? > (e.g. Iraq war justification v supporting war on drugs while using drugs). > Do we count the lies that affect the most people? > Do we count the lies that have the worst consequences? > Do we count passing laws (then exempting politicians). > > How about 'Power corrupts' all politics? > > BillK > ?How about : you can tell a politician is lying if his lips move. wfw? > _______________________________________________ > 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 rahmans at me.com Wed May 28 16:27:51 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 18:27:51 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Why socialism and environmentalism (and a lot more) will be impossible In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 02:46:02 -0400 > From: Rafal Smigrodzki > To: ExI chat list > Subject: [ExI] Why socialism and environmentalism (and a lot more) > will be impossible > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > It's interesting to speculate on the evolutionary paths that our successors > later this century will take as they churn in the computational substrate. > Yet, I feel that the truth of the future is largely inaccessible to us, > hidden behind many layers of interactions between computational features of > the world that will be formed by minds rapidly evolving away from humanity. Rafal, I agree with much of what you say. And if these future minds exist many layers deep in some sort of virtual world I also agree that it is basically impossible to predict what they will be like. In such circumstances they will indeed evolve rapidly away from humanity. There are some who make the argument that we already exist in a simulated environment. Theoretical physicists and cosmologists have yet to present a testable consensus view that I as a non-physicist can comprehend fully or at least comfortably adopt into my worldview. Why am I going on about multiple realities or nested layers of reality in simulations? Because, as far as we know, we have one reality and a speed limit of 'c'. The result of this that we will be sharing the same environment. > > Just think - if zero knowledge proofs can be used to implement efficient > minds, the future might belong to reciprocally opaque entities, like poker > players but even more so. But then, maybe completely reciprocally > transparent minds might have an advantage by being able to justifiably > trust each other and thus collaborate better. But then, a transparent mind > might be more susceptible to viral attacks, so maybe you need opacity but > maybe you could do with firewalls, whitelists, and remote restore in case > of infection. But maybe all you need is an opaque manager core and > single-use minds copied from a library and erased after they do their > job.... > You have speculated along the same lines as many have done. I speculated in a similar manner in my recent post. Process termination will become a thorny issue if the processes develop personalities, worldviews, ethics, etc. The recent thread 'death follows European contact' inspired me to think a bit more about what our 'first contact' with AIs will be like. > One could go on fantasizing about the shape of minds to come for a long > time but none of us, not even AI researchers, have enough knowledge to make > any but the most trivial predictions. However, since the design space of > minds in general is much larger than the tiny area explored by evolution in > the making of humans, I am reasonably sure the minds spawned by evolution > in the computational substrate, under much different pressures, will be > just too weird to have such human proclivities that produce our -isms. > You're right about some, maybe even many, of our -isms. These entities almost certainly won't have a sex in our sense of the word and will reproduce in something probably resembling an engineering design process. So sexism would be gone for them. Hooray, if you eliminate the sexes we can finally eliminate sexism, or at least 'for them'. How about the environment? Unless this universe collapses there will always be an environment. Environmentalism can't go away. How about socialism? Unless there is only one entity, yourself, that you are aware of there will always be some sort of society. Socialism can't go away. I am trying to speak of a socialism which is connected to the environment because the environment is a REAL and measurable thing. I am speaking against capitalism because it is a UNREAL and measurable thing. Money is a very useful tool for facilitating exchanges and nothing more. Money is a trust symbol. Capitalism is the accumulation of trust symbols for the sake of accumulating trust symbols. Once someone accumulates too many trust symbols there are not enough trust symbols to go around and the system collapses. I think basic human psychology drives the crash cycle in capitalism. If we manage to move into a post-scarcity economy with entities that have long transaction histories we should be able to move away from the 'prisoner's dilemma' and 'there's a sucker born every minute' capitalist scenario we are in. > And there is nothing anybody can do about it. Technology does what > technology wants. I think I have been lately becoming a techno-fatalist, > although not in a sad or depressed manner. The future will be very cool, > with or without beings recognizably human. > > Rafal You, as a researcher Rafal, are creating the technology. You can create many things and I'm sure you can probably imagine enough research projects to fill up a 'normal' human lifetime. There is nothing inevitable about any particular technology. I agree the future will be very cool, especially if we can recognise more things as being 'human'. Best regards, Omar Rahman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed May 28 20:38:53 2014 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 21:38:53 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <068601cf7a84$a1380ab0$e3a82010$@att.net> References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> <068601cf7a84$a1380ab0$e3a82010$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 3:53 PM, spike wrote: > There we disagree. Capitalism makes the poor richer too. > > There was a big conference in London yesterday. Quote: The Conference on Inclusive Capitalism co-hosted by the City of London Corporation and EL Rothschild investment firm, brought together the people who control a third of the world's liquid assets - the most powerful financial and business elites - to discuss the need for a more socially responsible form of capitalism that benefits everyone, not just a wealthy minority. ------------ (You would think that the wealthiest people in the world would know whether capitalism needs reforming). Quote: Leading financiers referred to statistics on rising global inequalities and the role of banks and corporations in marginalising the majority while accelerating systemic financial risk - vindicating the need for change. --------------- The takeaway message, though, is that the rich are becoming worried that they have gone too far and are on the verge of killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. Quote: Central to the proceedings was an undercurrent of elite fear that the increasing disenfranchisement of the vast majority of the planetary population under decades of capitalist business-as-usual could well be its own undoing. ------------ The rich seem to have a different view of capitalism........ BillK From rolandodegilead at gmail.com Wed May 28 23:23:53 2014 From: rolandodegilead at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Eugenio_Mart=C3=ADnez?=) Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 01:23:53 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> <068601cf7a84$a1380ab0$e3a82010$@att.net> Message-ID: > > ### For a humanist you seem to be quite scornful of honest humans working > their way up from earning 250$ per year in 1980, to $10,000 per year now > (see China GDP history on Wikipedia). > So, if I eat two chickens and you don?t eat anything, we both have had a chicken. Eugenio, if we weren?t heavily armed, we would be in war times. Weakness > is provocation. > What? Your government is heavily armed. You have maybe a couple of weapons. Your neighbours have nothing. In Europe, nobody has weapons, still we are less violents. Weakness is provocation as long as short skirts are provocations for rape. I mean: If we both met, as I can see in your photo, I am way younger and bigger than you. If it happens that you don?t have your weapons with you, are you provoking me? As far as I think, you are just next to me. Question please: why do you suppose every time a Marxist state forms > anywhere, it needs to build walls around itself, not just to keep > freeloading outsiders out but to keep the productive prisoners in? > Communism converts its own citizens to slaves. > In Allende?s years, truck drivers from Chile were payed by the US government just for do nothing. They payed more that the salary that they had if they had worked. That is just an example between one thousand: Capitalism is stronger and win the wars. But the war doesn?t determine who is right. (just who is left) > If you want to argue that capitalism exports its slavery elsewhere, the > solution seems clear enough to me in our modern times. We now have the > control system technology to have most slave labor done by robots. Problem > solved. It would be solved if it were economically worthwhile. With adequate weapons, your neighbor will not attack. Form a business > together, makes something valuable, become rich. Teach your children to do > likewise. All get rich together. > So, if we are not going to attack ourselves, what are the weapons for? Couldn?t we form a business and make something valuable without weapons? I think you are very ingenious: If your neighbour want to kill you he can throw you a simple knife or hit you with a simple bat. Or burn your house while you are sleeping. Having a weapon is provoking. If you walk in dangerous neighbourhoods of Sudamerica, you can be robbed. If you show your weapon, you are going to be shooted, because the robber doesn?t want to risk his life. ______________________________________ There were here elections in Europe. And there were a lot of ultraright and ultrawing parties that made their way to the European parlament. We are going to see 4 interesting years. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed May 28 23:51:41 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 16:51:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: <156442028-10515@secure.ericade.net> <03e901cf71da$480b8f00$d822ad00$@att.net> <3E37D473-EB85-4ADE-A867-ABC6255F14D0@taramayastales.com> <038901cf79f9$6a834880$3f89d980$@att.net> <068601cf7a84$a1380ab0$e3a82010$@att.net> Message-ID: <011b01cf7acf$c64f79f0$52ee6dd0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Eugenio Mart?nez >>?Eugenio, if we weren?t heavily armed, we would be in war times. Weakness is provocation. >?What? Your government is heavily armed. You have maybe a couple of weapons. Your neighbours have nothing. In Europe, nobody has weapons, still we are less violents. Weakness is provocation as long as short skirts are provocations for rape. I mean: If we both met, as I can see in your photo, I am way younger and bigger than you. If it happens that you don?t have your weapons with you, are you provoking me? As far as I think, you are just next to me? Hmm, I don?t know what you are proposing here. Weakness is provocation. Being possibly armed is often equivalent to being armed; both are sufficient to discourage attack. >?In Allende?s years, truck drivers from Chile were payed by the US government just for do nothing. They payed more that the salary that they had if they had worked. That is just an example between one thousand: Capitalism is stronger and win the wars. But the war doesn?t determine who is right. (just who is left)? Still not clear what you are arguing. Capitalism encourages competition. Competition breeds excellence. Excellence generates wealth. Wealth promotes capitalism. Upward spiral. Excellent. >>? We now have the control system technology to have most slave labor done by robots. Problem solved. >?It would be solved if it were economically worthwhile? It gets more worthwhile with each price increase for labor. >>?With adequate weapons, your neighbor will not attack. Form a business together, makes something valuable, become rich. Teach your children to do likewise. All get rich together. >?So, if we are not going to attack ourselves, what are the weapons for? Deterrence, me lad. Weapons of war are actually weapons of peace. Note we have never used all those nuclear missiles. No one has. But they kept the commies from going ape in the 1950s. >? Couldn?t we form a business and make something valuable without weapons? Sure. Form away. The weapons infrastructure is in place, now we are ready to do business. >? I think you are very ingenious? You are too kind, sir, thank you. >?If your neighbour want to kill you he can throw you a simple knife or hit you with a simple bat? It isn?t my neighbor I want to deter. Those are all good guys. I want to deter the bad guys. >? If you walk in dangerous neighbourhoods of Sudamerica, you can be robbed? Simple solution: don?t go into those neighborhoods. >?If you show your weapon, you are going to be shooted, because the robber doesn?t want to risk his life? Ja, my point exactly. We have places in America where guns are illegal, such as Chicago. The gun death risk there is thru the roof. Solution: don?t go there. Go where guns are legal. Robbers don?t like to risk their lives; they go where it is safer for them, places where there are few guns. So go where there are many guns; it?s safer for you there. Bumper sticker: Where guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns. ______________________________________ >?There were here elections in Europe. And there were a lot of ultraright and ultrawing parties that made their way to the European parlament. We are going to see 4 interesting years? Ja I agree it will be interesting. We should see constant experimentation in government. Try different solutions. The American Left is always urging diversity; well OK, let?s have some diversity. If diversity of thought is good here, it must be good in Europe too; Europe and American are not so different. Congratulations on the parliamentary victories Eugenio. We wish your nation and your continent the best. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rahmans at me.com Fri May 30 07:34:11 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 09:34:11 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <477C504D-C6CE-4CCC-8249-B28B32925908@me.com> > Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 16:51:41 -0700 > From: "spike" > To: "'ExI chat list'" > Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > Still not clear what you are arguing. > > Capitalism encourages competition. Competition breeds excellence. Excellence generates wealth. Wealth promotes capitalism. > > Upward spiral. Excellent. > Only, when capitalism is well controlled this can happen. Otherwise we get: Capitalism forms monopolies to maximise profits. Monopolies breed incompetence. Incompetence must protect themselves through the application of force. Force promotes oligarchies. Downward spiral. Uh oh! I can see the positive potential in well regulated capitalism, can you see this negative potential in unregulated capitalism? Money is just a tool, not the end in itself. A lot of 'western' thought is influenced by Calvinist/protestant thought which basically states that financial or worldly success is a tangible sign of 'God's blessing'. As a generally scientifically minded group we should acknowledge this influence and ask ourselves questions from first principles. Such as: Does money have any moral value in itself? No. Seems obvious, but if you disagree could you please answer the question: "How does money contain moral value?" Does the use of money have any moral value? Yes, because money is a trust symbol. Trust can be upheld or betrayed. Trust can help you work together on problems too big for one person, or it's systemic betrayal can lead whole societies to collapse. Money is only a tool. >> ?If you show your weapon, you are going to be shooted, because the robber doesn?t want to risk his life? > > Ja, my point exactly. We have places in America where guns are illegal, such as Chicago. The gun death risk there is thru the roof. Solution: don?t go there. Go where guns are legal. Robbers don?t like to risk their lives; they go where it is safer for them, places where there are few guns. So go where there are many guns; it?s safer for you there. Bumper sticker: Where guns are outlawed, only outlaws have guns. Spike, to pretend that violence in Chicago is linked positively with stricter gun registration is ludicrous. Ever heard of a guy named Al Capone? That was significantly before Chicago's attempts to control gun ownership. Also, at no point were all guns completely illegal in Chicago. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois ) For the record I am a 2nd amendment supporter as stated in the constitution. This is not an unfettered right as many supreme court decisions have made clear. The framers intention was to provide the population with the legal framework to form militias capable of resisting the state if a tyranny should form. Capitalism is fully able to form a tyranny, please refer to the history of the East India Company for one (but not the only) example. Best regards, Omar Rahman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri May 30 16:49:08 2014 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 09:49:08 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: <477C504D-C6CE-4CCC-8249-B28B32925908@me.com> References: <477C504D-C6CE-4CCC-8249-B28B32925908@me.com> Message-ID: <041b01cf7c27$1465ac10$3d310430$@att.net> >. On Behalf Of Omar Rahman . >.I can see the positive potential in well regulated capitalism, can you see this negative potential in unregulated capitalism? Ja. The real problem is that the term regulation assumes government intervention, and all governments are for sale. Humans have never invented a form of government that was anything other than Plutocracies in various disguises, completely without exception. Marx theorized a hypothetical alternative. Humanity experimented with his notions at enormous cost in human suffering. We should go ahead and rip away the masks; recognize that all governments everywhere run on gold, at every level everywhere and everywhen. It's the most universal truth of human behavior. All efforts to defeat that observation have merely reinforced it. >. A lot of 'western' thought is influenced by Calvinist/protestant thought which basically states that financial or worldly success is a tangible sign of 'God's blessing'. Hmmm, Calvinism. From my own view, religions are equivalent in that they are superstitions. They seem to have vastly differing impacts on the societies which embrace them. For instance, animism is dominant in places like Haiti, I forget what they call that religion that is popular in places like Sudan, Afghanistan, Middle East in general, Buddhism in Japan, Catholicism in most of South America, a loose-fitting form of Calvinism has shaped North American and Europe in general, definitely the USA. Of those, assuming you don't embrace the superstition but must live in a society shaped by those religions, which do you choose? I would choose to live among Calvin's mind-children. The Mormons make good neighbors, as do the Episcopalians, the Presbyterians, the Methodists, etc. They tend to have small well-fed and well educated families, they keep their yards clean and their houses neat, they keep their children home at night. Buddhists would be OK too, ending at mostly the same place from a different path. If societies are shaped by their superstitions, which do you choose? >.Does money have any moral value in itself?... Calvin's legacy is to have societies that value having money in the hands of good guys rather than in the hands of bad guys. >.Spike, to pretend that violence in Chicago is linked positively with stricter gun registration is ludicrous. Ever heard of a guy named Al Capone? That was significantly before Chicago's attempts to control gun ownership. Also, at no point were all guns completely illegal in Chicago. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois ) Al Capone is an example of what happens when governments are corrupt. The city government of Chicago and even the state of Illinois has been corrupt since the days of Al Capone. Of the last seven Illinois governors, four have served time for corruption. Capone was in bed with the politicians. He is a perfect example of bad guys with money and bad guys with political power. >.For the record I am a 2nd amendment supporter as stated in the constitution. Me too. More guns equals less gun crime. Bad guys get shot. >. This is not an unfettered right as many supreme court decisions have made clear. The framers intention was to provide the population with the legal framework to form militias capable of resisting the state if a tyranny should form. Capitalism is fully able to form a tyranny, please refer to the history of the East India Company for one (but not the only) example. Best regards, Omar Rahman Agreed with part of it. The big difference is companies cannot force you to buy its products. The federal government can. It is doing it now, with the "affordable" heath care act. It is compelling its citizens to buy a product under threat of penalty from the IRS. We had a case where 2000 pages of legislation passed into law with very little senate debate against the unanimous will of one of the political parties, then enforcement of the will of the other major party was put in the hands of the national tax collection agency, which has few or no constitutional limits on its power. This enforcement power was immediately shown to be corrupt: an IRS chief suppressed a political party, then testified before congress that she had done nothing illegal, then took the fifth amendment right to not incriminate herself. Those two positions are contradictory; it was given in testimony before congress under oath, lying under oath is a felony, so the USA now has a pre-conviction felon who was in charge of enforcing the will of one of the two major political parties against the will of the other. How do you suppose this is going to end? Conclusion: better to have corporations with the power of wealth; if they are evil, you buy from their competitors. If their competitors are evil, you give up cola for coffee. Capitalism is the way. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri May 30 17:08:50 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 13:08:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] new names Message-ID: NEW HAVEN (The Borowitz Report )?After a report from the Yale Center on Climate Change Communication showed that the term ?climate change? elicits relatively little concern from the American public, leading scientists are recommending replacing it with a new term: ?You will be burnt to a crisp and die.? Other terms under consideration by the scientists include ?your cities will be ravaged by tsunamis and floods? and ?earth will be a fiery hellhole incapable of supporting human life.? Scientists were generally supportive of the suggestions, with many favoring the term ?your future will involve rowing a boat down a river of rotting corpses.? ?Any of these terms would do a better job conveying the urgency of the problem,? Tracy Klugian, a spokesperson for the newly renamed Yale Center for Oh My God Wake Up You Assholes, said. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri May 30 23:00:35 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 01:00:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1330773550-21189@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 28/5/2014 2:09 AM: ?When it comes to health, it is worth noticing that the health of people in developed countries (where we likely have the richest mix of molecules) is increasing and far better than in counties where we can expect a more 'natural' environment (Anders) That is doomed to fall, given the horrendous epidemic in obesity, which is increasing in every country that is eating a Western diet.? Maybe... obesity and the accompanying metabolic syndrome are pretty bad for health. But the impact doesn't seem to have showed up in life expectancy yet:https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=sp_dyn_le00_in&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:USA:MEX:JPN:NOR&ifdim=region&tstart=549327600000&tend=1338332400000&hl=en&dl=en&ind=falseHere I plotted two high obesity countries - US and Mexico - and two low obesity countries - Japan and Norway. While obesity might be part of the explanation of why US and Mexico are below Norway and Japan, the level of obesity has been growing exponentially during this period, yet life expectancy is still going up linearly:http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/www/external/health/feature/forty/images/obesity_large.jpgLooking at the impact of obesity on life expectancy in US states shows that it does reduce it by a few yearshttp://www.cuug.ab.ca/~branderr/usamed/avg_life_vs_obesity.png- but it might be that the trend towards stronger life expectancy is bigger than this decrement.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri May 30 23:05:15 2014 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 01:05:15 +0200 Subject: [ExI] new names In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <1331569093-8910@secure.ericade.net> William Flynn Wallace , 30/5/2014 7:13 PM: NEW HAVEN (The Borowitz Report)?After a report from the Yale Center on Climate Change Communication showed that the term ?climate change? elicits relatively little concern from the American public, leading scientists are recommending replacing it with a new term: ?You will be burnt to a crisp and die.? This would have been amusing, except I actually encounter people who get terribly upset when I mention climate change is unlikely to be an existential risk. Just check out some of the reactions in the comments: https://theconversation.com/the-five-biggest-threats-to-human-existence-27053 The problem is that they have invested so much in getting their sluggish neighbors to take the problem seriously that they get very touchy about anybody even mentioning there is a bit of hyperbole there. A bit like how the nuclear disarmament movement argued that nuclear wars were guaranteed to kill all of mankind - they believed they had a powerful rhetorical weapon, but the claim merely triggered fatalism.? Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kellycoinguy at gmail.com Sat May 31 04:41:17 2014 From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 22:41:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] Kinect Ripple Message-ID: One step closer to the holodeck. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0K4iZdMjLw -Kelly -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat May 31 05:33:47 2014 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 22:33:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Kinect Ripple In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Not really. If anything, floor-based menus are a step back from existing augmented reality interfaces IMO. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 9:41 PM, Kelly Anderson wrote: > One step closer to the holodeck. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0K4iZdMjLw > > -Kelly > > _______________________________________________ > 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 foozler83 at gmail.com Sat May 31 13:28:19 2014 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 09:28:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: <1330773550-21189@secure.ericade.net> References: <1330773550-21189@secure.ericade.net> Message-ID: Well, it is going to take awhile for these people to die, eh? At least it will slow the rate of increase in mortality age. As for chemicals, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, as we know. wfw On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 7:00 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > William Flynn Wallace , 28/5/2014 2:09 AM: > > ?When it comes to health, it is worth noticing that the health of people > in developed countries (where we likely have the richest mix of molecules) > is increasing and far better than in counties where we can expect a more > 'natural' environment (Anders) > > That is doomed to fall, given the horrendous epidemic in obesity, which is > increasing in every country that is eating a Western diet. > > > Maybe... obesity and the accompanying metabolic syndrome are pretty bad > for health. But the impact doesn't seem to have showed up in life > expectancy yet: > > https://www.google.co.uk/publicdata/explore?ds=d5bncppjof8f9_&ctype=l&strail=false&bcs=d&nselm=h&met_y=sp_dyn_le00_in&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=region&idim=country:USA:MEX:JPN:NOR&ifdim=region&tstart=549327600000&tend=1338332400000&hl=en&dl=en&ind=false > Here I plotted two high obesity countries - US and Mexico - and two low > obesity countries - Japan and Norway. While obesity might be part of the > explanation of why US and Mexico are below Norway and Japan, the level of > obesity has been growing exponentially during this period, yet life > expectancy is still going up linearly: > > http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/www/external/health/feature/forty/images/obesity_large.jpg > Looking at the impact of obesity on life expectancy in US states shows > that it does reduce it by a few years > http://www.cuug.ab.ca/~branderr/usamed/avg_life_vs_obesity.png > - but it might be that the trend towards stronger life expectancy is > bigger than this decrement. > > > > Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford > University > > _______________________________________________ > 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 johnkclark at gmail.com Sat May 31 16:52:57 2014 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 12:52:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] How the world collapses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: >> Governments have spent billions of dollars to subsidize the photovoltaic >> and wind industries, but how many electric cars are actually fueled by >> them? I imagine you could count them on the fingers of one hand. > > >> > > Define "fueled by". > Define "define". John K Clark > Even if you constrain it to just cars with their own solar panels directly > on the car, > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_solar_cars_(with_homologation) gives > more specific examples on homebrews alone. > > Add in mass produced electric cars that plug in to stations either solely > powered by PV, or grid tied where there is a nearby PV installation also > grid tied (the typical residential case) and it reaches thousands easily - > as in, "1,000 <= X < 1,000,000". > > This is not a complete solution yet, but not all technologies are adopted > as fast as the Internet was. Consider that good EVs and good PV have only > come on the market recently, while there are over-50-year-old cars still on > the roads. (Keeping those clean without simply confiscating them has been > an ongoing struggle for decades. Just ask the regulators.) Give it time - > or come up with some other line of reasoning than, "it did not instantly > solve everything therefore it must be worthless." > > _______________________________________________ > 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 rahmans at me.com Sat May 31 20:40:10 2014 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 22:40:10 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Be nice to leftists In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <24C5B37E-822A-47B7-8CA7-AC6F1D8C47EA@me.com> > Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 09:49:08 -0700 > From: "tokenpike" > To: "'ExI chat list'" > Subject: Re: [ExI] Be nice to leftists > Message-ID: <041b01cf7c27$1465ac10$3d310430$@att.net> > >> . On Behalf Of Omar Rahman > >> .I can see the positive potential in well regulated capitalism, can you see > this negative potential in unregulated capitalism? > > > > Ja. The real problem is that the term regulation assumes government > intervention, and all governments are for sale. Humans have never invented > a form of government that was anything other than Plutocracies in various > disguises, completely without exception. Marx theorized a hypothetical > alternative. Humanity experimented with his notions at enormous cost in > human suffering. We should go ahead and rip away the masks; recognize that > all governments everywhere run on gold, at every level everywhere and > everywhen. It's the most universal truth of human behavior. All efforts to > defeat that observation have merely reinforced it. > "All governments run on gold, at every level everywhere and everywhen." - Spike That is quotable in my opinion because it is so very very broad and almost certainly true. By gold I take it you mean money, and by money I take it you mean trust tokens. Governments run on trust. When that trust is broken (i.e. corruption) government has problems. We currently live in a democratic society where we give large numbers of trust tokens, votes, to other people so that they are delegated to act in government on our behalf. Lobbyists are currently giving lots of 'dollar' trust tokens to our delegates to betray us. Others are giving lots of 'dollar' trust tokens to taint the public discourse with attack ads, misinformation and fear. These people are reducing the level of public trust in a way that impoverishes society's integrity so as to add more 'dollar' trust tokens into their account books. We should be mad at this betrayal of our trust. We need to clean up the system so that it functions better. Failure to do so will eventually result in a collapse. > >> . A lot of 'western' thought is influenced by Calvinist/protestant thought > which basically states that financial or worldly success is a tangible sign > of 'God's blessing'. > > > > Hmmm, Calvinism. From my own view, religions are equivalent in that they > are superstitions. Yes. > Of those, assuming you don't embrace the superstition but must live in a > society shaped by those religions, which do you choose? I would choose to > live among Calvin's mind-children. We are influenced by or at the very least have been exposed to Calvinist thought. I only want us to recognise this for what it is....and then reject it. I'll spare you long quote from Wikipedia but: Calvinism ---> Puritanism ---> Salem Witch Trials Something similar could be done for almost any religion. The Quakers and Sufis might not have any blood on their hands. > The Mormons make good neighbors, as do > the Episcopalians, the Presbyterians, the Methodists, etc. They tend to > have small well-fed and well educated families, they keep their yards clean > and their houses neat, they keep their children home at night. You mean western people in western countries are living western lifestyles, yes? There is a global trend towards small well fed and educated families. Yard hygiene via NIMBY policies is being increased for some and worsened for others. Home-at-nightedness is still seems highly variable. > Buddhists would be OK too, ending at mostly the same place from a different path. Except if they are from 'Bodu Bala Sena'. > If societies are shaped by their superstitions, which do you choose? We never had a choice; we were born into the societies we were born into and went through the educations we went through. The only choice we have now is to find the superstitions embedded in our thought processes and root them out. > >> .Does money have any moral value in itself?... > > > Calvin's legacy is to have societies that value having money in the hands of > good guys rather than in the hands of bad guys. > Calvin's legacy is very mixed, and that the 'good' are predestined by God. > >> .Spike, to pretend that violence in Chicago is linked positively with > stricter gun registration is ludicrous. Ever heard of a guy named Al Capone? > That was significantly before Chicago's attempts to control gun ownership. > Also, at no point were all guns completely illegal in Chicago. ( > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_Illinois ) > > > > Al Capone is an example of what happens when governments are corrupt. The > city government of Chicago and even the state of Illinois has been corrupt > since the days of Al Capone. Of the last seven Illinois governors, four > have served time for corruption. Capone was in bed with the politicians. > He is a perfect example of bad guys with money and bad guys with political > power. > > >> .For the record I am a 2nd amendment supporter as stated in the > constitution. > > Me too. More guns equals less gun crime. Bad guys get shot. > Nope. Lots of evidence to the contrary. For example, by your hypothesis Detroit should be paradise as there are 'more guns than people'. > >> . This is not an unfettered right as many supreme court decisions have made > clear. The framers intention was to provide the population with the legal > framework to form militias capable of resisting the state if a tyranny > should form. Capitalism is fully able to form a tyranny, please refer to the > history of the East India Company for one (but not the only) example. Best > regards, Omar Rahman > > > > Agreed with part of it. The big difference is companies cannot force you to > buy its products. Companies can force you to buy their product if they form a monopoly on some staple good. They are motivated to this by the doctrine of maximising profits. I'm not speaking theoretically here. The British East India Company is a really good example of this. Also read a little about the Opium Wars; those are the wars Britain fought to ensure its traders a monopoly in the Opium Trade in China. The drug trade that China was trying to eliminate. Yes folks, before there was a war on drugs, the was a war FOR drugs. > > Conclusion: better to have corporations with the power of wealth; if they > are evil, you buy from their competitors. If their competitors are evil, > you give up cola for coffee. > > And if there is an 'evil' monopoly on (salt)/(longevity drugs)/(air in the space station) or whatever else? There are lots of chemical compounds that are technically salts, but I'd prefer to stick to good old NaCl if you don't mind. Please google 'salt monopoly', there are numerous examples and none of them make capitalism look appealing. > > Capitalism is the way. > To where? Capitalism is a system for maximising 'profits' as measured by trust tokens such as the Canadian, American, or Zimbabwean dollars. Capitalism hasn't cared if it was trading in slaves, drugs, weapons for a nation's enemies (i.e. Iran-Contra), etc. etc. etc. You need something else to guide a society. Social-environmentalism would have as its core the value of protecting our shared physical environment and providing a social environment which enables members to to prosper. These are real measurable things. Much of the world is already in a post-scarcity economy; my evidence for this is the spreading pandemic of obesity. Much of economic theory has 'scarcity' imbedded in it so that while most of the time we talk about the 'winners' in an economy there is the built in idea that there MUST be losers. Why? Because if someone doesn't lose then there won't be enough to go around. If you start to look at the manipulation of social programs from my sort of perspective it seems that these policies are enacted to create losers. Scarcity will happen by itself whenever nature exceeds our ability to plan for the future, there's no need to create an underclass. Environmentalism is the way, because it is real and measurable. Best regards, Omar Rahman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: