From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 00:05:28 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:05:28 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Not to cause a panic...
References: <1412121261.34876.YahooMailNeo@web161603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <0F41A875-F30E-45EB-AA1E-32A7D413A189@gmail.com>

Seems to be one confirmed case of Ebola in Dallas. I also read an estimate (in Science News, I believe) that the number of cases will likely top a million in afraid either by next year.

Regards, 

Dan


From johnkclark at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 00:38:10 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 20:38:10 -0400
Subject: [ExI] wordplay for a tuesday morning
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEa1u1Eusdx24vHn_gi3GCJgAsEP1Nfe6Jfz1XimkU-1Xw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ba01cfdcb1$493e1040$dbba30c0$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEbfe9aiRTgD_R0hUHcNS80PXZ=Wzai_sdJZFNAu4p3LAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2W7R1=wnPo5HaO2zOT+2q134udJrYF8V88EuaFBbgBnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <C3D8B4DC-C609-433E-965B-938E31B67DF6@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbxU20mbR8RxY+UC8sAwasp6kWS6S=k5T3a5zCHeP+DaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <24EA40C1-11D2-4C3D-9CF5-F7AB6E8AE96F@taramayastales.com>
 <CAO+xQEa1u1Eusdx24vHn_gi3GCJgAsEP1Nfe6Jfz1XimkU-1Xw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv0CD1mJBYpcbgZhwjg9F1VOBNtYU+6bsBt_aMuZgDariQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 6:29 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>


?> But some of them are just wrong!  Take 'back and forth'.  Clearly one
> cannot go back without first going forth.  So either use 'to and fro' or
> change the former to 'forth and back'.
>

What about "near miss"  if they nearly missed but not quite shouldn't that
mean they hit? And why is it always "not a panacea", isn't anything a
panacea?

 John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140930/92e3d6c6/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 00:57:06 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 10:57:06 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <F1EB0630-9916-4D89-8056-056A69398150@gmail.com>
References: <1410560744.2227.YahooMailNeo@web161601.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAOmnAOyakuWSQAk75Pn9-c5XoMhkJguTr1NjxT_PAR6gV3ks6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQGAnEf2Gn_s+aj0Eg=+v3bGUHFwHSgnp=TRR0P9m5aQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F68ADC7-B556-4A29-B1D9-815758A995E6@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQ0baupN93foS+T9hsS+X4HjcKK_5vGkAHDvHnwnvxOrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <92A9EAE3-1E2E-42E1-88C9-2661FA91DA82@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZORdAtcX1njsttFB=TeXktbtNQE7fYndKsbNTG+ADc4CWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOSPr=i4uD16Pru0c4_RieuEfOpfSz7OemNxKDXY5Q1oVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F69B172C-6564-41BB-B0E6-72CB70AD2CD5@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQ2vWpBHFQG12xbbTRpSXy3NbGON74tAcP5C7xcQVBBxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOmnAOyxcE=1qx=4yLeeqAybTHvawaPLk0sp7eKkWYrgGh7O8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOSgiaPMM30UDMU6tD14ORjZzvK8hYSNS+N1RUirXM5JaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411676302.219.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CABgRZOR84DWXhr+++t=CC-i_bfa=meYiXxA-qRUEpad4pm+dJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQzCVKPhKb=ds-ZHuBjYOo=sXahEAytBtO=DAtkAT3H0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411690860.1023.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CABgRZOTn-h_5uKCN3E=r+VyxYdDjqMtO_2-nFo9BSD4JXbQfpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411769280.43806.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <1411775089.88488.YahooMailNeo@web161603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAH=2ypVv+OfLxbhdov70KN64PPUgrZpMRwcpskKF4WEtXx_UDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411786298.53129.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAH=2ypUddkbNZRZuXj2KrpNaWOnhRKV5XrcbiFfTzj_7Ds9TjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXum3zB8WXQoYn8jC8Q=tPWavPNnp3qrVUZHe2Gd=fxfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DC0D0FBA-6BBA-4979-AE46-A229A249D7ED@gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWk6UajMQpQGrNr8jqyf5V3CUAezWjwx6Ouh6auityDsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1EB0630-9916-4D89-8056-056A69398150@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypUf=cn2oTaNmN8cZEXdOPGyDbeG0za1NVXeiH6pNJnU6w@mail.gmail.com>

On 1 October 2014 09:37, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 2:53 PM, Stathis Papaioannou
> <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The problem is that it is impossible to meaningfully
>
> distinguish between a copy that is really you and a
>
> copy that only has the delusional belief that it is
>
> really you.
>
>
> This is not necessarily the case, though, in possible worlds as real. The
> you in another possible world is distinguishable from you in this world
> because that you is in another possible world and not this one. Whether
> there's some sense that you're both part of the same overall you is the
> point of contention, but other possible worlds "you" are not deluded copies
> of you nor you of them. And they'd also have slightly (in some cases
> infinitesimally slightly) different relations to their worlds. The you that
> ends, say, being the prime minister of France or of not believing in other
> possible worlds wouldn't confuse himself with the you I'm discussing this
> with, would he?

The other copies are not the you, now, in this world, but your past
self is not the you, now in this world either. The copy of you that
wakes up from cryonic sleep in a minority of worlds bears the same
relationship to you, now as you, now bear to your past self.

> Suppose you are informed that you have a disease that
>
> causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at night so
>
> that the person who wakes up in the morning is a
>
> completely different Dan Ust who shares your memories.
>
> This has been happening every day of your life, but you
>
> have only just found out about it. Would this information
>
> worry you or make any difference to how you live your life?
>
>
> The issue though is not whether you can cook up cases where worrying would
> seem to offer no consolation -- and I think many people would worry every
> single night though would merely get used to it just as they'd get used to
> being blinded or having their face disfigured, but that's not an argument
> for blinding or disfiguring people, is it? -- is not the same as proving the
> you who happens to live in another universe is really picking up where you
> left off or that your extinction here should be of no concern to you. All of
> this is merely postulating ways to get around a very real concern.

If you're blind or disfigured that is a real deficit and makes a real
difference. If you die every night in your sleep and a different
person wakes up in your bed with your memories every morning that is
indistinguishable from ordinary life. In fact, it is arguable that
that is what actually happens.

> Also, these are epistemic issues that don't really clear up what is the
> case. You might not know (or now know, considering that the problem might be
> tackled in the future) how to resolve these issues, but lacking a resolution
> doesn't erase the problem. Nor does merely adopting a resolution that seems
> uber-optimistic: no one really dies or needs to worry.
>
> This also doesn't really resolve the issue of whether strong AI is possible.
> I doubt it, but one conceive of it being the case that they are necessarily
> ruled out (in our world, or, if you please, in all possible worlds). Thus,
> fantasizing it might be different elsewhere doesn't gaurantee just how it's
> different -- regardless of our ability to know.

No, it doesn't have a direct bearing on the possibility of strong AI.

> (Finally, the usual treatment of modality is really to figure out just what
> is possible -- whether one accepts possible worlds are real -- and what's
> entailed by this. Roderick Long, in a similar discussion, clarified the
> different relations between the possible in various domains and believes
> some of the problem here is how some confuse metaphysical entailment with
> epistemic entailment, physical entailment, and so forth. I think it's worth
> considering.)
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
> Preview my latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," at:
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 00:57:56 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:57:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] wordplay for a tuesday morning
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv0CD1mJBYpcbgZhwjg9F1VOBNtYU+6bsBt_aMuZgDariQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ba01cfdcb1$493e1040$dbba30c0$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEbfe9aiRTgD_R0hUHcNS80PXZ=Wzai_sdJZFNAu4p3LAg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2W7R1=wnPo5HaO2zOT+2q134udJrYF8V88EuaFBbgBnQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <C3D8B4DC-C609-433E-965B-938E31B67DF6@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbxU20mbR8RxY+UC8sAwasp6kWS6S=k5T3a5zCHeP+DaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <24EA40C1-11D2-4C3D-9CF5-F7AB6E8AE96F@taramayastales.com>
 <CAO+xQEa1u1Eusdx24vHn_gi3GCJgAsEP1Nfe6Jfz1XimkU-1Xw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv0CD1mJBYpcbgZhwjg9F1VOBNtYU+6bsBt_aMuZgDariQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1643F899-D28F-4221-A97C-4FEDF536F0E4@gmail.com>

> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 5:38 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> What about "near miss"  if they nearly missed but
> not quite shouldn't that mean they hit? And why
> is it always "not a panacea", isn't anything a panacea?

Regarding "near miss," I find nothing wrong with that. I think it's confusing "nearly" with "near" to believe otherwise. A near miss, after all, is not a hit and is not a far miss. It's something that nearly hit, but didn't. Anyhow, that's how I parse it.

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," is now available at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140930/90e49c46/attachment.html>

From ohadasor at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 00:58:33 2014
From: ohadasor at gmail.com (Ohad Asor)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 03:58:33 +0300
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 2:28 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Combinatorial explosion. When you discover spatial coherence and the
> existence of objects a lot of things like video become learnable that
> otherwise would need exponentially large training sets. So the real issue
> is how to get the hierarchies and structures from the data; I assume you
> know about the work in the Josh Tannenbaum empire?
>
> Apparently the video game playing reinforcement agent of Deep Mind somehow
> figured out object constancy for the aliens in the first wave of Space
> Invaders and could learn to play well, but got confused by the second wave
> since the aliens looked different - it didn't generalize the first aliens,
> and had to re-learn the game completely for that stage.
>



Contemporary learning algorithms are even O(1) wrt number of variables. An
example that jumps to my mind is PEGASOS SVM. It is a shallow learner,
though. I don't recall an example for deep learning right now, but even I
have developed some deep learning neural networks, some even fully
connected, with training time of O(n) per iteration wrt number of
connections, and optimization convergence rate of O(n^-2) wrt number of
iterations. Of course, all learnable wrt PAC Learning theory. Yann Le'Cunn,
which I mentioned earlier, also demonstrated extraordinary results with
deep neural networks.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/39829b48/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 00:50:27 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:50:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] drones and ants. was: RE: Input for article on "The
	Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
In-Reply-To: <021f01cfdd05$7f5733b0$7e059b10$@att.net>
References: <021f01cfdd05$7f5733b0$7e059b10$@att.net>
Message-ID: <03f701cfdd11$b27fdba0$177f92e0$@att.net>

 

 

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

 

 

Ooops apologies, my cut and paste failed.  Below is the correct link:

 

 

 

 

 

Had I heard this described, I would be sure it was a hoax.  I have been observing ants all my life and I have never seen anything like it.  I have seen ants surround a dead bug and work together to move it, but never by forming a daisy chains.  This defies everything I thought I knew about how an ant brain works?  spike

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzjA-b2vnjA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20140930/821b0487/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Wed Oct  1 06:43:24 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 08:43:24 +0200
Subject: [ExI] wordplay for a tuesday morning
In-Reply-To: <D61575D5-8845-4626-9DDD-A816473FCF02@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3396111729-22867@secure.ericade.net>

Dan?<danust2012 at gmail.com>?, 1/10/2014 1:48 AM:I think there's the rhythm of the language involved. "Black and white," for example, just sounds right as opposed to "white and black." Ditto for "black and blue" versus "blue and black," though there's violation of temporal, logical, or other order as in "head over heels" (doesn't violate but why is that strange?) or "have your cake and eat it" (which I read started as "eat your cake and have it").
Some of these rhythms are surprisingly complicated, yet people learn them implicitly:http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/the_good_word/2014/08/the_study_of_adjective_order_and_gsssacpm.html
I have been reading?Brewer's Dictionary of Phrase, and it is very fun to learn where some of these idioms come from. I never knew that gamuts had anything to do with musical notation.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/0be48d9b/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 08:59:00 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 09:59:00 +0100
Subject: [ExI] drones and ants. was: RE: Input for article on "The
 Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
In-Reply-To: <03f701cfdd11$b27fdba0$177f92e0$@att.net>
References: <021f01cfdd05$7f5733b0$7e059b10$@att.net>
 <03f701cfdd11$b27fdba0$177f92e0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armhscNwJycUEHXOp3JLNese9Bgw2koYWw0VFewF-=BTvkA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:50 AM, spike wrote:
> Ooops apologies, my cut and paste failed.  Below is the correct link:
>
> Had I heard this described, I would be sure it was a hoax.  I have been
> observing ants all my life and I have never seen anything like it.  I have
> seen ants surround a dead bug and work together to move it, but never by
> forming a daisy chains.  This defies everything I thought I knew about how
> an ant brain works...  spike
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzjA-b2vnjA
>


This viral video seems to be newly noticed behaviour that has got the
entomologists quite excited.
See:
<http://www.myrmecos.net/2014/08/29/did-liveleak-just-leak-an-unknown-ant-behavior/>
The comments there are also relevant.

BillK


From giulio at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 09:54:16 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:54:16 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Input for article on "The Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
In-Reply-To: <3370787082-22867@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAKTCJyfx3R6XyjmATRn9Nx4GcU7Nmj-JFTiBKRXKanc7GHx+GQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370787082-22867@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJycqRx1HjczqZR3JpVLX53nkOCEdmTS5LjWQrBB_V123gQ@mail.gmail.com>

So besides Hal, Julian Assange, Nick Szabo and Wei Dai used to discuss
cryptocurrencies on the list. The last two have been rumored to be
Satoshi Nakamoto and John Nash (I don't really believe that).

Other notable participants in the early- and mid-90s related
discussions on the list?

Can anyone remember key related discussions? Just send rough pointers
from memory, I will scan the archives.

re "The Extropy archives will indeed be a goldmine for future historians."

Yes, definitely. I think a lot of ideas that will have a huge impact
of the world originated here, or at least found an early greenhouse
here. Bitcoin, which seems well on its way to have a huge impact, is
but one of the first (again, not in the sense that it originated here
but in the early greenhouse sense), and that's what I wish to show.
Other Extropian ideas will have a huge impact when their time comes.

Max, any memories or thoughts to share?

G.

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> I don't remember much of the discussions, but they were often pretty
> extensive. Both anarchocapitalist ideas and how to implement PPL using smart
> contracts (old issues of Extropy might have a few illuminating articles),
> technical discussions about protocols and of course hardware worries about
> rod logic computers cracking codes. I think the key insight was that crypto
> could act as a primitive for building awesome things.
>
> I certainly learned a fair bit about crypto from it, ending up getting
> Schneiers' Applied Cryptography. Some ideas from those discussions show up
> in my early RPG writing like http://www.aleph.se/Nada/InfoWar/economics.html
>
>
> 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
>


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 09:56:05 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 10:56:05 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
Message-ID: <CAL_armjvA=NoodDMnPNtzLcxq0Vzsrkiay5nTDG47=zdfJ2+bQ@mail.gmail.com>

Next Big Future points to a new study about how a nearby Galactic
Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) can be a threat to life.

<http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.2506>
Quote:
Using recent determinations of the rate of GRBs, their luminosity
function and properties of their host galaxies, we estimate the
probability that a life-threatening (lethal) GRB would take place.
We find that the probability of a lethal GRB is much larger in the
inner Milky Way (95% within a radius of 4 kpc from the galactic
center), making it inhospitable to life. Only at the outskirts of the
Milky Way, at more than 10 kpc from the galactic center, this
probability drops below 50%.
--------------

One more factor pointing to life being rare and occurring far enough
apart that contact with other aliens will be unusual.


BillK


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 11:42:48 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 12:42:48 +0100
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
Message-ID: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sunday, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill making California the first
state to require "affirmative, conscious and voluntary agreement to
engage in sexual activity" on college campuses and adopt requirements
for colleges to follow when investigating sexual assault reports.

<http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/09/29/good2go-smartphone-app-gauges-partners-informed-consent-before-having-sex/>

Good2Go, made by San Diego County-based Sandton Technologies, LLC,
says that when a person proposes to have sex with another, he or she
can hand their phone over to the potential partner who can use the app
to assess their mutual interest.

The user is prompted to choose "No, Thanks," "Yes, but ... we need to
talk," or "I'm Good2Go."
------------


Looks like everything has to be done by smartphone these days.
In olden times there was just pillows with 'Yes' on one side and 'No'
on the other.

After marriage and kids of course, the pillows were changed to 'No
chance' and 'Oh, allright then'.


BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 14:18:11 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 07:18:11 -0700
Subject: [ExI] drones and ants. was: RE: Input for article on "The
	Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armhscNwJycUEHXOp3JLNese9Bgw2koYWw0VFewF-=BTvkA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <021f01cfdd05$7f5733b0$7e059b10$@att.net>
 <03f701cfdd11$b27fdba0$177f92e0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armhscNwJycUEHXOp3JLNese9Bgw2koYWw0VFewF-=BTvkA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <009a01cfdd82$88d0b560$9a722020$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] drones and ants. was: RE: Input for article on "The
Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:50 AM, spike wrote:
> Ooops apologies, my cut and paste failed.  Below is the correct link:
>
> ...  This defies everything I thought I knew about how an ant brain
works...  spike

>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzjA-b2vnjA

>


This viral video seems to be newly noticed behaviour that has got the
entomologists quite excited.

<http://www.myrmecos.net/2014/08/29/did-liveleak-just-leak-an-unknown-ant-be
havior/>

The comments there are also relevant.

BillK
_______________________________________________


It is blowing my mind BillK.  I have been looking for any hints that the
video is fake, but it looks real to me.  I have half a mind to try to get
some of those ants, breed them up and see if we can replicate the behavior.
It is very exciting to discover a previously unknown talent in old friend.

spike



From foozler83 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 14:42:30 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 09:42:30 -0500
Subject: [ExI] wordplay for a tuesday morning
In-Reply-To: <3396111729-22867@secure.ericade.net>
References: <D61575D5-8845-4626-9DDD-A816473FCF02@gmail.com>
 <3396111729-22867@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEaUZR4QPuzY2oxKh1==0q18MpG=YTNSh1R9mLW1Hp4LPQ@mail.gmail.com>

?Regarding "near miss," I find nothing wrong with that. I think it's
confusing "nearly" with "near" to believe otherwise. A near miss, after
all, is not a hit and is not a far miss. It's something that nearly hit,
but didn't. Anyhow, that's how I parse it.

Regards,

Dan

I say a near miss is easier to cuddle with than a far miss.  bill w?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/414e2f75/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 14:54:29 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 09:54:29 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>

?? Suppose you are informed that
you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
live your life?

Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will
awake tomorrow but it will not be me.  It means that I will die today.
bill w

?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/88a4046a/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 14:59:45 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 07:59:45 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00f601cfdd88$5740d0b0$05c27210$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace
Sent: Wednesday, October 01, 2014 7:54 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?

 

?? Suppose you are informed that
you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
live your life?

Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will awake tomorrow but it will not be me.  It means that I will die today.  bill w

 

Related question:

 

There was a Star Trek prequel series, which I heard about but never viewed.  I heard it was pretty good.  Anyone see that?

 

The transporter was new-ish technology and several of the crew were reluctant to use it.

 

I can imagine a good script would be a couple of crew members arguing that when you disappear on one end, you die.  Then a different but similar being materializes on the other end.  So that machine murders a crewmember every time you beam up.

 

spike  


?

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/9b1ecb45/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 18:45:44 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 11:45:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>

> <
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2014/09/29/good2go-smartphone-app-gauges-partners-informed-consent-before-having-sex/
>
>
> Good2Go, made by San Diego County-based Sandton Technologies, LLC,
> says that when a person proposes to have sex with another, he or she
> can hand their phone over to the potential partner who can use the app
> to assess their mutual interest.
>
> The user is prompted to choose "No, Thanks," "Yes, but ... we need to
> talk," or "I'm Good2Go."

Of course, horny guys can just press the last option on behalf of the lady,
so there is an electronic record when she later says she said no and never
heard of the app let alone tapped to indicate consent.  Evidence that can
be so easily forged is fairly worthless.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/4d29669c/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 19:08:29 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 20:08:29 +0100
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armgwFj88zKcrPmi79ot9_dzmM3=Cn8=fjBD4BsDq=-2E0g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> Of course, horny guys can just press the last option on behalf of the lady,
> so there is an electronic record when she later says she said no and never
> heard of the app let alone tapped to indicate consent.  Evidence that can be
> so easily forged is fairly worthless.
>
>

Agreed. The app also says that 'Yes' can be changed to 'No' later, if
the action becomes too violent or objectionable. But there will be no
record of that change. And the initial record of 'Yes' could be used
to excuse any later behaviour.

I think that really the app is only a gimmick to get randy student
hunks to give real consideration to her right of refusal.

BillK


From msd001 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 21:01:12 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 17:01:12 -0400
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armgwFj88zKcrPmi79ot9_dzmM3=Cn8=fjBD4BsDq=-2E0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgwFj88zKcrPmi79ot9_dzmM3=Cn8=fjBD4BsDq=-2E0g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdb+0vF8MmeQp_h-knyPq0R8jqRyg4V5ioS7vFSE0b5CXgQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 3:08 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> Agreed. The app also says that 'Yes' can be changed to 'No' later, if
> the action becomes too violent or objectionable. But there will be no
> record of that change. And the initial record of 'Yes' could be used
> to excuse any later behaviour.
>
> I think that really the app is only a gimmick to get randy student
> hunks to give real consideration to her right of refusal.

This has similar problems (and solutions?) as spike's voting machine
(I know the voting machine is not spike's per se, but that that rant
was due to resurface soon anway, eh?)

I had been considering an app like this for a while.  In my version
both people have profiles in the app... with settings for the kind of
'stuff' they're willing to authorize.  That generates a 2d barcode
that the other person can snap with their phone, after both parties
have exchanged these token approvals (one to generate the 2d barcode,
one to snap the OK) and the apps can identify the common (or UNcommon)
boundaries of consent.

I'd offer the service of a follow-up... to express buyers remorse,
possibly adjust the default consent settings, and manage reputation
(for both parties)

The service is about being a 'trusted' third-party.  The 2-factor
authentication could also include uploading photos of the place (and
person) for the sake of further tracking the transaction.

I wonder if sousveillance is sufficient threat value to constrain
unwanted behavior on both sides of the transaction.

Also, what is the critical mass of acceptance/usage of this service to
have any real impact on the population in question?


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 21:45:20 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 14:45:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <1412198994.95022.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1410560744.2227.YahooMailNeo@web161601.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAOmnAOyakuWSQAk75Pn9-c5XoMhkJguTr1NjxT_PAR6gV3ks6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQGAnEf2Gn_s+aj0Eg=+v3bGUHFwHSgnp=TRR0P9m5aQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F68ADC7-B556-4A29-B1D9-815758A995E6@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQ0baupN93foS+T9hsS+X4HjcKK_5vGkAHDvHnwnvxOrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <92A9EAE3-1E2E-42E1-88C9-2661FA91DA82@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZORdAtcX1njsttFB=TeXktbtNQE7fYndKsbNTG+ADc4CWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOSPr=i4uD16Pru0c4_RieuEfOpfSz7OemNxKDXY5Q1oVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F69B172C-6564-41BB-B0E6-72CB70AD2CD5@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQ2vWpBHFQG12xbbTRpSXy3NbGON74tAcP5C7xcQVBBxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOmnAOyxcE=1qx=4yLeeqAybTHvawaPLk0sp7eKkWYrgGh7O8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOSgiaPMM30UDMU6tD14ORjZzvK8hYSNS+N1RUirXM5JaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411676302.219.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CABgRZOR84DWXhr+++t=CC-i_bfa=meYiXxA-qRUEpad4pm+dJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQzCVKPhKb=ds-ZHuBjYOo=sXahEAytBtO=DAtkAT3H0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411690860.1023.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CABgRZOTn-h_5uKCN3E=r+VyxYdDjqMtO_2-nFo9BSD4JXbQfpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411769280.43806.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <1411775089.88488.YahooMailNeo@web161603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAH=2ypVv+OfLxbhdov70KN64PPUgrZpMRwcpskKF4WEtXx_UDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411786298.53129.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAH=2ypUddkbNZRZuXj2KrpNaWOnhRKV5XrcbiFfTzj_7Ds9TjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXum3zB8WXQoYn8jC8Q=tPWavPNnp3qrVUZHe2Gd=fxfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DC0D0FBA-6BBA-4979-AE46-A229A249D7ED@gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWk6UajMQpQGrNr8jqyf5V3CUAezWjwx6Ouh6auityDsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1EB0630-9916-4D89-8056-056A69398150@gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypUf=cn2oTaNmN8cZEXdOPGyDbeG0za1NVXeiH6pNJnU6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1412198994.95022.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <7C391CA2-ECF0-4382-8BD6-5ECCDF5EFE6F@gmail.com>

> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 5:57 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
> The other copies are not the you, now, in this world, but
> your past self is not the you, now in this world either.
> The copy of you that wakes up from cryonic sleep in a
> minority of worlds bears the same relationship to you,
> now as you, now bear to your past self.

This relies on a certain view of persistence, which in itself is not uncontreversial. I'm sure you've heard of endurance, exdurance, and perdurance (or whatever other theory might be cooked up here) with regard to persistence. It's unclear to me which is the correct view to take here. And, again, I don't postulating one view is correct simply to make the solution you want is the way to go here. (The same goes for personal identity beyond temporal issues. The idea that self is an illusion is not settled and not without serious (in my mind) problems.) 

> If you're blind or disfigured that is a real deficit and makes a real
> difference. If you die every night in your sleep and a different
> person wakes up in your bed with your memories every morning that is indistinguishable from ordinary life. In fact, it is arguable that that is what actually happens.

It's true that the deficit is one you know about via memory: you recall that previous you didn't have said deficit and now you have it. (I was going to quip: But what if you really were already blind or disfigured and it's just your memory (and all other testimony) of not being so that's wrong here?) But my point is knowing you die every night is something that the new you would get used to -- or maybe not, but what could you do about it?

But this doesn't clear up the matter of whether this is actually is the case or whether it clears up anything about possible worlds or a multiverse. That you couldn't tell any difference from the inside or out in the case of dying every night doesn't mean that this applies to supposed yous in other possible worlds or other universes. You're still trading on the idea that those other yous are somehow you rather than instances of you in another universe or possible world. And internally or externally, in many of these cases, they'd be distinguishable. The you that is here now exchanging emails with me is distinguishable from the you that's in another possible world who's never exchanged emails with me, for instance.

You could argue there are possible worlds or universes so close that you couldn't tell. Maybe, but it still doesn't answer whether they're the same you. Also, there are ones that are not so close where they are distinguishable, outside and in. Again, the problem is whether and how the yous (said in strong Cockney accent;) in different possible worlds or different universes are part of an overall you -- presuming either of these exist. That's not clear here. All of this seems like postulating a just so story on possible worlds or a multiverse to get the optimistic answer you want. (And we're not even getting into all the other possible worlds or universes where you life is far worse or nonexistent. Why just focus on the ones where you exist in a better state?)

>> Also, these are epistemic issues that don't really clear up what
>> is the case. You might not know (or now know, considering that
>> the problem might be tackled in the future) how to resolve these
>> issues, but lacking a resolution doesn't erase the problem. Nor
>> does merely adopting a resolution that seems
>> uber-optimistic: no one really dies or needs to worry.
>> 
>> This also doesn't really resolve the issue of whether strong AI
>> is possible. I doubt it, but one conceive of it being the case
>> that they are necessarily ruled out (in our world, or, if
>> you please, in all possible worlds). Thus, fantasizing it
>> might be different elsewhere doesn't guarantee just how it's
>> different -- regardless of our ability to know.
> 
> No, it doesn't have a direct bearing on the possibility of
> strong AI.

At least in the actual world, we're in agreement on that. :)

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
 (It doesn't deal with strong AI or possible worlds, AFAIK.:)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/5eabf7c1/attachment.html>

From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Wed Oct  1 21:55:48 2014
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:55:48 -0600
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armgwFj88zKcrPmi79ot9_dzmM3=Cn8=fjBD4BsDq=-2E0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgwFj88zKcrPmi79ot9_dzmM3=Cn8=fjBD4BsDq=-2E0g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK7-onujLrb9pt=g9FwuxLSLjB9jBcvQsZamU_L7yHpTqts-jg@mail.gmail.com>

yea, all that can easily be solved with new Bitcoin 2.0 block chain
technology.  I bet if you googled for that, one already exists, proving
that someone, indeed, say yes, irrefutably so.


On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:08 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 7:45 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
> > Of course, horny guys can just press the last option on behalf of the
> lady,
> > so there is an electronic record when she later says she said no and
> never
> > heard of the app let alone tapped to indicate consent.  Evidence that
> can be
> > so easily forged is fairly worthless.
> >
> >
>
> Agreed. The app also says that 'Yes' can be changed to 'No' later, if
> the action becomes too violent or objectionable. But there will be no
> record of that change. And the initial record of 'Yes' could be used
> to excuse any later behaviour.
>
> I think that really the app is only a gimmick to get randy student
> hunks to give real consideration to her right of refusal.
>
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/170c9edb/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Wed Oct  1 21:59:33 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 23:59:33 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjvA=NoodDMnPNtzLcxq0Vzsrkiay5nTDG47=zdfJ2+bQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3451377714-16666@secure.ericade.net>

BillK?<pharos at gmail.com>?, 1/10/2014 12:01 PM:
<http://arxiv.org/abs/1409.2506>?
Quote:?
Using recent determinations of the rate of GRBs, their luminosity?
function and properties of their host galaxies, we estimate the?
probability that a life-threatening (lethal) GRB would take place.?
We find that the probability of a lethal GRB is much larger in the?
inner Milky Way (95% within a radius of 4 kpc from the galactic?
center), making it inhospitable to life. Only at the outskirts of the?
Milky Way, at more than 10 kpc from the galactic center, this?
probability drops below 50%.?
--------------?

One more factor pointing to life being rare and occurring far enough?
apart that contact with other aliens will be unusual.?
I am sceptical of their conclusion. While a GRB no doubt can cause mass extinctions they do not remove biospheres: a few cm of water or rock protects against the radiation in their paper.?
The GRB rate is also low enough that it cannot cause effective synchronization of advanced life a la the Annis/Cirkovic scenario.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/0928825d/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 22:21:26 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 23:21:26 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3451377714-16666@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAL_armjvA=NoodDMnPNtzLcxq0Vzsrkiay5nTDG47=zdfJ2+bQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3451377714-16666@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armh25bUHu-R8gUujkGAZAYAkiUsT2Swc0h2UoKePMBwV+g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> I am sceptical of their conclusion. While a GRB no doubt can cause mass
> extinctions they do not remove biospheres: a few cm of water or rock
> protects against the radiation in their paper.
>
> The GRB rate is also low enough that it cannot cause effective
> synchronization of advanced life a la the Annis/Cirkovic scenario.
>


The full paper is available as a pdf file here:
<http://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.2506v1>

I am not a GRB expert, but their paper seems to be thorough. They
consider the different types and strengths of GRBs and the frequency
of each type, They say that the main damage is caused by the
destruction of the ozone layer. Even if the GRB only destroyed higher
lifeforms, that would be sufficient to leave only bacteria on nearby
planets.

BillK


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 22:21:54 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:21:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Input for article on "The Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB5ZHNsKmgYtnE6=6r+Nv-Y=wjA2rJdG9fr0pMDbCogJgA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 3:20 PM,  Bryan Bishop <kanzure at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Aleksei Riikonen <aleksei at iki.fi> wrote:
>
>> Well here's some fun speculation for you, on how bitcoin was born,
>> with some extropians featuring prominently in the plot:
>>
>> http://fuk.io/who-is-satoshi-nakamoto-the-truth/
>
> You can go even further back, to the USENET conspiracy theories about Nick
> Szabo, Hal Finney, Perry Metzger, Wei Dai, John Gilmore, etc:
> http://borg.uu3.net/ldetweil/medusa/medusa.html

Ah!  Those were the days!  Hal, of course, is in suspension.  I have
had recent contact in person with Tim May.  John Gilmore by email and
Perry over chat.  Eric Hughes was tele present at Hugh Daniel's wake a
bit over a year ago.

Keith


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 22:14:36 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:14:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00ef01cfddc5$17352b50$459f81f0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
...

>>...Good2Go...The user is prompted to choose "No, Thanks," "Yes, but ... we
need to talk," or "I'm Good2Go."
------------

>...In olden times there was just pillows with 'Yes' on one side and 'No' on
the other.  BillK
_______________________________________________


Well I'll be damned.  I never knew there was a Yes on the other side of the
pillow.

spike



From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct  1 22:38:02 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:38:02 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CAK7-onujLrb9pt=g9FwuxLSLjB9jBcvQsZamU_L7yHpTqts-jg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgwFj88zKcrPmi79ot9_dzmM3=Cn8=fjBD4BsDq=-2E0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAK7-onujLrb9pt=g9FwuxLSLjB9jBcvQsZamU_L7yHpTqts-jg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNR5w7pRqMv6BwLW4O9KPg9Cak_me1ytd9Ms8qAwSSiO4w@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 1, 2014 2:56 PM, "Brent Allsop" <brent.allsop at canonizer.com> wrote:
> yea, all that can easily be solved with new Bitcoin 2.0 block chain
technology.  I bet if you googled for that, one already exists, proving
that someone, indeed, say yes, irrefutably so.

I think it is a safe bet that far less than 0.1% of their users will have a
block chain that they would use with this app, or in general be willing to
spare the time for any UI that could get a second party's non-pre-loaded
(which is the vast majority of useful situations) authentication into the
app during approval for the act.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/7685b0c4/attachment.html>

From tara at taramayastales.com  Wed Oct  1 22:56:26 2014
From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:56:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNQAcL1=jtOOWZ_y3hrXFS0Qk6s3QTpOdLjFxVh2yOdq_g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <50E14EFE-F3CC-400A-ABAA-B7F85DA69B9F@taramayastales.com>

This is solved by the fact that each response on the young lady's phone includes the automatic option:  Fwd: Dad.

Tara Maya
Blog  |  Twitter  |  Facebook  |  Amazon  |  Goodreads



On Oct 1, 2014, at 11:45 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

> > Good2Go, made by San Diego County-based Sandton Technologies, LLC,
> > says that when a person proposes to have sex with another, he or she
> > can hand their phone over to the potential partner who can use the app
> > to assess their mutual interest.
> >
> > The user is prompted to choose "No, Thanks," "Yes, but ... we need to
> > talk," or "I'm Good2Go."
> 
> Of course, horny guys can just press the last option on behalf of the lady, so there is an electronic record when she later says she said no and never heard of the app let alone tapped to indicate consent.  Evidence that can be so easily forged is fairly worthless.
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/da89e970/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 22:43:43 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:43:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] baseball for the first time and voting machines again,
	was:  RE:  META: Humour: Sex?
Message-ID: <012601cfddc9$2830de50$78929af0$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of Mike Dougherty
...

>...This has similar problems (and solutions?) as spike's voting machine (I
know the voting machine is not spike's per se, but that that rant was due to
resurface soon anway, eh?)

HAH!  Thank you a hundred times Mike for opening this discussion, and do
keep in mind that it was our old pal Mike Dougherty who started it this
time.  Yes Mike, that rant is due to resurface soon, but not in this post,
for this post isn't about voting machines.  Rather, it is a parallel
principle.

For the benefit of Europeans, the great American pastime is baseball.  In
recent years, a big deal has been made about steroid use in professional
baseball players.  We have professional baseball players in big legal
trouble for secret steroid use and subsequent false testimony in that
regard, bringing up the weird possibility of a rich guy going to prison for
using advanced technology to play a game.

OK then, in the game of baseball, a Feller hurls a ball, and another feller
attempts to hit it if it passes over the plate within a theoretical square
region known as the strike zone.  A third presumed-neutral feller stands
behind the plate and decides, like a judge, if the ball is inside or outside
that strike zone.  Consequence: the feller behind the plate has arbitrary
power to decide in favor of whichever team he wants, the feller batting or
the Feller hurling the ball.

Here's the reason I wrote all that: for perhaps half a CENTURY now, we have
had the technology to install a machine to make that call, half a CENTURY!
With lasers, it would not be at all difficult to make and install such a
machine, and it would be a lot cheaper than the alternative, for the feller
known as the umpire is a professional, so he must be paid with each game,
particularly the high-stakes professional ball games.  All along, we have
had the technology to make those calls, or failing that, in measuring how
accurate is this umpire feller.  Yet...

Yet, as is the case with voting machines, that tech is being conspicuously
not used.

Why?

With the great American pastime, they are intentionally keeping the decision
on who wins every ballgame in the hands of a feller who is presumed neutral.
They don't even try to measure this neutrality.

With recent advances in high speed video photography, we could even take the
judgment factor out of deciding when a feller slides into a base.  They
could have video-analysis, realtime.  But they don't do it.

Why?

I don't follow sports, but to an outside observer, it looks to me like the
sports world is intentionally keeping the outcome of the game in the hands
of these presumed neutral judges, the umpires.

Sports fans and otherwise, what do you make of this?  Can you see why this
question is parallel in principle to non-auditable voting machines?

spike




From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 22:46:00 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:46:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Input for article on "The Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB5ZHNsKmgYtnE6=6r+Nv-Y=wjA2rJdG9fr0pMDbCogJgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB5ZHNsKmgYtnE6=6r+Nv-Y=wjA2rJdG9fr0pMDbCogJgA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <012701cfddc9$79ddd5a0$6d9980e0$@att.net>



>...  Eric Hughes was tele present at Hugh Daniel's wake a bit over a year
ago.  Keith
_______________________________________________


If a cryonaut's friends get together for a remembrance party, shouldn't it
be called a thaw?

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 22:47:33 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 15:47:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Humour: Sex? There's an app for that!
In-Reply-To: <00ef01cfddc5$17352b50$459f81f0$@att.net>
References: <CAL_armh8WLF1hfG45fzSeZi-ofRf7kRmvjbk18tLC033ps0GSw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ef01cfddc5$17352b50$459f81f0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <012801cfddc9$b13550a0$139ff1e0$@att.net>



>>...In olden times there was just pillows with 'Yes' on one side and 'No'
on
the other.  BillK
_______________________________________________


>...Well I'll be damned.  I never knew there was a Yes on the other side of
the pillow.

spike

_______________________________________________


Just as well.  Having never heard the term "Yes" in that context, I would
likely have misinterpreted it anyway, as "Yes you may go away and stop
bothering me now."

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct  1 23:11:39 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 16:11:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] baseball for the first time and voting machines again,
	was:  RE:  META: Humour: Sex?
In-Reply-To: <012601cfddc9$2830de50$78929af0$@att.net>
References: <012601cfddc9$2830de50$78929af0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <015901cfddcd$0ee7cc20$2cb76460$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of spike

>>...This has similar problems (and solutions?) as spike's voting machine...
Mike

>...this post isn't about voting machines...spike


_______________________________________________

...But this one is getting closer.

Is anyone here besides me following the current unrest in Hong Kong?  As I
understand it, the problem is that Hong Kong is to have free elections,
however, Beijing must sign off on the candidates before they can go on the
ballot.  Hong Kong protestors argue that this resembles a free election but
is not a free election.

As long as we have no way to externally verify the calls of a home-plate
umpire, we don't know who won that game.  It resembles a fair game, but we
are being asked to assume the umpire is neutral.

Do I even need to make the next comment, with regard to non-auditable voting
machines?

spike 



From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 00:03:24 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 19:03:24 -0500
Subject: [ExI] baseball for the first time and voting machines again,
 was: RE: META: Humour: Sex?
In-Reply-To: <015901cfddcd$0ee7cc20$2cb76460$@att.net>
References: <012601cfddc9$2830de50$78929af0$@att.net>
 <015901cfddcd$0ee7cc20$2cb76460$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZr-ka8DAkNa8OBO_60iYoWTab1o3YjD-h0_sfbEOv7XA@mail.gmail.com>

Sports fans and otherwise, what do you make of this?  Can you see why this
question is parallel in principle to non-auditable voting machines?

spike

I don't know about the voting machine thing, but to me, the baseball thing
is about tradition.  Instant replays capable of overturning umpires
decisions are now available despite strong opposition.  Conservative tennis
fans don't want line calls overturned by replay videos.    Baseball hasn't
replaced wooden bats with metal ones, and so on.  Tradition, tradition,
tradition (like Fiddler on the Roof).

bill w (far less of a fan than I used to be;  traditionally a player stayed
with a team forever, essentially being owned; then free agency came along
and now it's hired guns going to one team, then another, and another, and
it's hard for fans to get used to this.  All of a sudden your favorite team
player is on the other side and now gets hate mail from his former fans for
being a traitor!)

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:11 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On
> Behalf
> Of spike
>
> >>...This has similar problems (and solutions?) as spike's voting
> machine...
> Mike
>
> >...this post isn't about voting machines...spike
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> ...But this one is getting closer.
>
> Is anyone here besides me following the current unrest in Hong Kong?  As I
> understand it, the problem is that Hong Kong is to have free elections,
> however, Beijing must sign off on the candidates before they can go on the
> ballot.  Hong Kong protestors argue that this resembles a free election but
> is not a free election.
>
> As long as we have no way to externally verify the calls of a home-plate
> umpire, we don't know who won that game.  It resembles a fair game, but we
> are being asked to assume the umpire is neutral.
>
> Do I even need to make the next comment, with regard to non-auditable
> voting
> machines?
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141001/4a5e4fbd/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 02:48:42 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 12:48:42 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thursday, October 2, 2014, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> ?? Suppose you are informed that
> you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
> night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
> different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
> every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
> Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
> live your life?
>
> Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will
> awake tomorrow but it will not be me.  It means that I will die today.
> bill w
>
>
Then I'm sorry to upset you but this is more or less what actually happens
in ordinary life. The matter in your body is replaced over time such that
over a period of months very little of the original matter remains.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/d446d13e/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Thu Oct  2 09:06:56 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:06:56 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armh25bUHu-R8gUujkGAZAYAkiUsT2Swc0h2UoKePMBwV+g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>

Yes, I have read the paper and still remain unconvinced. Destroy the ozone layer and the land biosphere is in trouble. But do you really think that will wipe out fish all the way to the bottom of the Marianas trench? Their conclusion is not compatible with other papers on GRB damage I have read.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University


BillK <pharos at gmail.com> , 2/10/2014 12:25 AM:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote: 
> I am sceptical of their conclusion. While a GRB no doubt can cause mass 
> extinctions they do not remove biospheres: a few cm of water or rock 
> protects against the radiation in their paper. 
> 
> The GRB rate is also low enough that it cannot cause effective 
> synchronization of advanced life a la the Annis/Cirkovic scenario. 
> 
 
 
The full paper is available as a pdf file here: 
<http://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.2506v1> 
 
I am not a GRB expert, but their paper seems to be thorough. They 
consider the different types and strengths of GRBs and the frequency 
of each type, They say that the main damage is caused by the 
destruction of the ozone layer. Even if the GRB only destroyed higher 
lifeforms, that would be sufficient to leave only bacteria on nearby 
planets. 
 
BillK 
_______________________________________________ 
extropy-chat mailing list 
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org 
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/f815a986/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 09:54:04 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 10:54:04 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAL_armh25bUHu-R8gUujkGAZAYAkiUsT2Swc0h2UoKePMBwV+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjR__k7o49dqSD=SziWy4qZkARVWegsmZjDUx+-n4+2Ug@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> Yes, I have read the paper and still remain unconvinced. Destroy the ozone
> layer and the land biosphere is in trouble. But do you really think that
> will wipe out fish all the way to the bottom of the Marianas trench? Their
> conclusion is not compatible with other papers on GRB damage I have read.
>
>

I think the authors of the paper would agree with you. I don't see
them claiming total life extinction from a GRB. Though if food chains
are destroyed, the extinction could be very extensive.

What they are saying is that nearer the galaxy centre there are more
frequent GRBs such that intelligent life will never have time to
arise. A GRB is a knock-back of billions of years in life evolution.

Other papers have suggested that some early extinctions on Earth might
have been due to GRBs.

I think their paper is reducing the area of the galaxy where
intelligent life might get the time to develop. i.e. SETI shouldn't
look near galactic centre for intelligent life.

BillK


From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 09:57:04 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:57:04 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAL_armh25bUHu-R8gUujkGAZAYAkiUsT2Swc0h2UoKePMBwV+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFQqK3-0GPvpM+XGopPrfX5FAFuDd=dEp6qOvvgSA1o5oQ@mail.gmail.com>

I think that those, who are arguing for a relative low impact of GRBs may
be biased toward championing the common life in the Universe.

Even if a fish in Mariana trench actually survives, there is not enough
time to repopulate the planet, before the central star is either too hot or
too cold.

All the metals we see around are signs of possible GRBs in the past.

Had been no metals around us, GRBs would be rare.

And life also.

You can't live with GRBs and you can't live with them. Almost can't.

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Yes, I have read the paper and still remain unconvinced. Destroy the ozone
> layer and the land biosphere is in trouble. But do you really think that
> will wipe out fish all the way to the bottom of the Marianas trench? Their
> conclusion is not compatible with other papers on GRB damage I have read.
>
>
> Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford
> University
>
>
> BillK <pharos at gmail.com> , 2/10/2014 12:25 AM:
>
> On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:59 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> > I am sceptical of their conclusion. While a GRB no doubt can cause mass
> > extinctions they do not remove biospheres: a few cm of water or rock
> > protects against the radiation in their paper.
> >
> > The GRB rate is also low enough that it cannot cause effective
> > synchronization of advanced life a la the Annis/Cirkovic scenario.
> >
>
>
> The full paper is available as a pdf file here:
> <http://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.2506v1>
>
> I am not a GRB expert, but their paper seems to be thorough. They
> consider the different types and strengths of GRBs and the frequency
> of each type, They say that the main damage is caused by the
> destruction of the ozone layer. Even if the GRB only destroyed higher
> lifeforms, that would be sufficient to leave only bacteria on nearby
> planets.
>
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/262ebb1b/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct  2 12:28:58 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 05:28:58 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAL_armh25bUHu-R8gUujkGAZAYAkiUsT2Swc0h2UoKePMBwV+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <008501cfde3c$714d5050$53e7f0f0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg
Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2014 2:07 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts

 

Yes, I have read the paper and still remain unconvinced. Destroy the ozone layer and the land biosphere is in trouble. But do you really think that will wipe out fish all the way to the bottom of the Marianas trench? Their conclusion is not compatible with other papers on GRB damage I have read. 


Anders Sandberg/



A little bit of water will stop gamma rays, and of course rocks will too.  Even if a nearby GRB managed to destroy the ozone layer and slay all the life on land, much if not most of the biodiversity of the planet would still be with us.  Depending on how you define the term ?us.?  spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/a7fbc1a4/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 14:57:24 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 10:57:24 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <03426BAE-4F5C-4C36-BE2C-BC166CCA5D84@gmail.com>
References: <1411775089.88488.YahooMailNeo@web161603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <C9F3BD64-5AFA-45EF-A3A4-F080BD0384DF@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2aZctnpibNDPPhnfJ1FHz14Aj_AjOM+=DbQN9Y78siQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <9E611077-5924-4D90-ACA8-FD1D5C2FDD6B@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2Z4zoPPx-JOuFqZoPFFEO+uhHQajZ3Yn9H_E+iAjLHiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1412108106.65746.YahooMailNeo@web161602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <03426BAE-4F5C-4C36-BE2C-BC166CCA5D84@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

> The problem is not with the definition though. Just as atomism was the
> thesis that all things are made of atoms, physicalism means all things are
> made ultimately of physical stuff.
>

No physicist thinks atoms are the ultimate foundation of matter, just the
foundation for the elements. I do think that matter is one of 2 pillars
that forms the foundation of all nouns (the other being information) but
not everything is a noun; I don't think John K Clark is a noun but a
adjective, the way matter atoms behave when they are organized in a
johnkclarkian way.


> > Even your offer of "Bosons and Fermions" seems to be a variety of
> physicalism and would depend on what was meant by those terms.
>

Bosons have integer spin, Fermions have half integer spin, that would seem
to me about as clear and unambiguous as definitions get.

>> I love philosophy but philosophers no longer do philosophy, scientists
>> and mathematicians do.
>>
>
> > I think people in general, scientists and mathematicians too (of the
> latter I think I can speak with some expertise because that's where my
> degree is), often do poor philosophy, just as most non-experts in any field
> do poorly in that field.
>

What major discovery in the field of philosophy have philosophers made in
the last 300 years? I can't think of one, but Darwin made a HUGE
philosophical discovery as did Watson and Crick. Cantor found that some
infinities are larger than others and Godel found that if a system of
thought  is self consistent then there are true statements it can never
know, and Turing proved that you can't predict what a machine will do next
even if it is 100% deterministic. Einstein found that time and space could
not be separated and that mass told spacetime how to bend and spacetime
told mass how to move. Heisenberg found that not only is the future
indeterminate but to some degree the past is too. And astronomers found
that the universe is expanding, and accelerating, and is 13.8 billion years
old. So what have philosophers got to stack up against these gargantuan
philosophical discoveries made by non-philosophers?  Searle and his
imbecilic Chinese Room.

>> I think the ancient Greeks got more credit than they deserved for coming
>> up with atomism, after all substances are either infinitely divisible or
>> they aren't, Democritus said they aren't and Aristotle said they are. One
>> said things were continuous and one said things were not, one of them had
>> to be right although neither had a scrap of experimental evidence to
>> support his guess.
>>
>
> > They relied on observation and argument.
>

Observation? Aristotle was a OK biologist but in my opinion he was the
worst physicist who ever lived.  As Bertrand Russell said:

"Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was
twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by
examining his wives' mouths."

And Aristotle was supposed to be a master of logic but when he applied it
to physics the result was a complete muddle. Aristotle's physical theories
could have been easily refuted even in his own day;  take his theory that
heavy things fall faster than lighter ones, even if he was too lazy to
perform the experiment he should have been able to figure out from pure
logic alone that it can't be right because it leads to self contradiction.
If you take a heavy rock and tie it to a slightly lighter rock with some
string that has some slack in it and drop them then both rocks would fall
slower than the big rock alone because the slower moving lighter rock would
bog it down, but the tied together object would fall faster than the heavy
rock because the new object is heavier than the heavy rock alone.

> the strong AI hypothesis most proponents of AI hold seems to imply
> physicalism -- in the sense that what human intelligence relies on is how
> brains physically work -- what goes on in them in terms of electrical and
> chemical reactions and not on some notion of, say, that there's a mental
> realm separate from all physical moorings
>

We know with certainty, or at least as much certainty as we know anything
in science, that human intelligence relies on electrical and chemical
reactions. How do we know this? The same way we know that any 2 things in
science are related; change X and we observe that Y always changes and
change Y and we observe that X always changes.

>  there's also a multiple realizability thesis tucked in with this. This
> is just that intelligence supervenes on processes that can happen in a
> substrate other than a physical brain.
>

And we've already seen objects that work by electronics rather than
chemistry that show unmistakable signs of intelligence, and they're getting
smarter at a exponential rate.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/2f6cddab/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 16:20:09 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:20:09 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1411775089.88488.YahooMailNeo@web161603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <C9F3BD64-5AFA-45EF-A3A4-F080BD0384DF@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2aZctnpibNDPPhnfJ1FHz14Aj_AjOM+=DbQN9Y78siQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <9E611077-5924-4D90-ACA8-FD1D5C2FDD6B@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2Z4zoPPx-JOuFqZoPFFEO+uhHQajZ3Yn9H_E+iAjLHiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1412108106.65746.YahooMailNeo@web161602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <03426BAE-4F5C-4C36-BE2C-BC166CCA5D84@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZ-wPGqD86OOqwfMtkFM_2gbLewDA20tJ3z9nHt8n3WhQ@mail.gmail.com>

? I love philosophy but philosophers no longer do philosophy, scientists
and mathematicians do.


Let me point out that nowadays moral philosophy is being done?
? mainly by social psychologists like Haidt and Kahneman.  There is a
tremendous gulf between the soft 'science' of clinical psych and the much
harder science to be found among experimental psychologists.  (Still not in
a class with physics and chemistry, but still.....)

bill w?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/6254a615/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Thu Oct  2 16:34:16 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 18:34:16 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjR__k7o49dqSD=SziWy4qZkARVWegsmZjDUx+-n4+2Ug@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3517202933-24689@secure.ericade.net>

The problem with the GRB explanation is that it is too noisy. GRBs produce mass extinction within a few kilo-parsec, but they are really directional - if you are outside the beam the exposure is way lower.?If GRBs were spherical in effect, then they could cover volume well, but most jet models fall off as theta^-2 or worse - nearly all energy is along the jet, within a few degrees. And the jet is typically pointed out of the galactic plane.?So when you try to model this, in order to ensure that every inner system get whacked with a mass extinction say ever 100 million years you?need a very high rate of GRBs in order to make it work. That is tough to balance with observed rates, which are on the order of one every million years. Even if you have a lot of GRBs, there are going to be unaffected systems fairly nearby too: the chance of some stars being lucky over several galactic rotations is pretty high. So the overall probability distribution of GRB impact ends up with a huge variance - it won't work as an effective Fermi paradox answer.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/82a2f28e/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Thu Oct  2 16:38:47 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 18:38:47 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>

John Clark?<johnkclark at gmail.com>?, 2/10/2014 5:03 PM:So what have philosophers got to stack up against these gargantuan philosophical discoveries made by non-philosophers?
As soon as I say something you will say it is not philosophy. Formal logic, decision theory, foundations of mathematics... you will quickly say that wasn't philosophy or that the people involved were not doing it as philosophers.
It is a bit like robotics and AI: as soon as it starts working, it gets called automation.

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/2045e158/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 17:05:13 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 18:05:13 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3517202933-24689@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAL_armjR__k7o49dqSD=SziWy4qZkARVWegsmZjDUx+-n4+2Ug@mail.gmail.com>
 <3517202933-24689@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armj-jR4+4JrsyvMyWeX7Qy9yZSGDuJLz82qyS+2-dzqNFA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> The problem with the GRB explanation is that it is too noisy. GRBs produce
> mass extinction within a few kilo-parsec, but they are really directional -
> if you are outside the beam the exposure is way lower. If GRBs were
> spherical in effect, then they could cover volume well, but most jet models
> fall off as theta^-2 or worse - nearly all energy is along the jet, within a
> few degrees. And the jet is typically pointed out of the galactic plane. So
> when you try to model this, in order to ensure that every inner system get
> whacked with a mass extinction say ever 100 million years you need a very
> high rate of GRBs in order to make it work. That is tough to balance with
> observed rates, which are on the order of one every million years. Even if
> you have a lot of GRBs, there are going to be unaffected systems fairly
> nearby too: the chance of some stars being lucky over several galactic
> rotations is pretty high. So the overall probability distribution of GRB
> impact ends up with a huge variance - it won't work as an effective Fermi
> paradox answer.
>


No argument there! But I don't think there is *one* Fermi paradox
answer. It's a big dangerous universe out there. I see many many ways
that intelligent life can be stopped. It is like weaving a safe path
through a maze of possible failure modes. GRBs are just one more
hurdle to be lucky enough to avoid.

BillK


From bbenzai at yahoo.com  Thu Oct  2 17:15:58 2014
From: bbenzai at yahoo.com (Ben)
Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2014 18:15:58 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.189.1412204399.28991.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.189.1412204399.28991.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <542D884E.8020404@yahoo.com>

William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:

 >>?? Suppose you are informed that
 >>you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
 >>night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
 >>different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
 >>every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
 >>Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
 >>live your life?
 >
 >Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will
 >awake tomorrow but it will not be me.  It means that I will die today.


I think it means that we need to look very carefully at what we mean by 
'death'.  Let's say that instead of once a day, we all 'die' ten million 
trillion trillion times every second, and are replaced by "someone else 
with..", etc.  How can that possibly make any difference to you?  What 
does that actually mean for the concept of 'you'?

The point of the argument is to show that /it doesn't matter/.  In fact, 
I think there's a bit of a trick in the statement "a completely 
different Dan Ust who shares your memories".  That's a bit like saying 
"a completely different tune that shares all the same notes, in the same 
order, with the same timing".  What we're talking about with uploading 
or copying or whatever, is equivalent to the same tune being played on a 
different instrument.  Calling it a different tune is clearly incorrect.

Ben Zaiboc


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 17:49:54 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 10:49:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armj-jR4+4JrsyvMyWeX7Qy9yZSGDuJLz82qyS+2-dzqNFA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armjR__k7o49dqSD=SziWy4qZkARVWegsmZjDUx+-n4+2Ug@mail.gmail.com>
 <3517202933-24689@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAL_armj-jR4+4JrsyvMyWeX7Qy9yZSGDuJLz82qyS+2-dzqNFA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7E867489-8AED-4CAD-A9DD-D0D1C29176F4@gmail.com>

In a way, the "rare earth" crowd are arguing for a multi-factor approach, no? 

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2

> On Oct 2, 2014, at 10:05 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
>> The problem with the GRB explanation is that it is too noisy. GRBs produce
>> mass extinction within a few kilo-parsec, but they are really directional -
>> if you are outside the beam the exposure is way lower. If GRBs were
>> spherical in effect, then they could cover volume well, but most jet models
>> fall off as theta^-2 or worse - nearly all energy is along the jet, within a
>> few degrees. And the jet is typically pointed out of the galactic plane. So
>> when you try to model this, in order to ensure that every inner system get
>> whacked with a mass extinction say ever 100 million years you need a very
>> high rate of GRBs in order to make it work. That is tough to balance with
>> observed rates, which are on the order of one every million years. Even if
>> you have a lot of GRBs, there are going to be unaffected systems fairly
>> nearby too: the chance of some stars being lucky over several galactic
>> rotations is pretty high. So the overall probability distribution of GRB
>> impact ends up with a huge variance - it won't work as an effective Fermi
>> paradox answer.
> 
> 
> No argument there! But I don't think there is *one* Fermi paradox
> answer. It's a big dangerous universe out there. I see many many ways
> that intelligent life can be stopped. It is like weaving a safe path
> through a maze of possible failure modes. GRBs are just one more
> hurdle to be lucky enough to avoid.
> 
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/9a3e3477/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 17:56:09 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 13:56:09 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> So what have philosophers got to stack up against these gargantuan
>> philosophical discoveries made by non-philosophers?
>>
>
> > As soon as I say something you will say it is not philosophy. Formal
> logic, decision theory, foundations of mathematics... you will quickly say
> that wasn't philosophy
>

No I think those disciplines can and have contributed to philosophy, but it
wasn't done by philosophers. By philosophers I mean those who are ignorant
of modern developments in science and mathematics because they think it
unimportant in philosophy and engage in ancestor worship for the ancient
Greeks, Leibniz and a few 19th century philosophers. Mortimer J. Adler
would be a good example of this sort of person, a very famous philosopher
who nevertheless discovered absolutely nothing new in philosophy.

A few years ago I was kicked off a mailing list about Objectivism because I
dared to suggest that in addition to the birth of Ayn Rand there might have
been other things that happened in the last century, liked Quantum
Mechanics and the work of Einstein and Godel and Turing, that might have
some relevance to philosophy,


> > It is a bit like robotics and AI: as soon as it starts working, it gets
> called automation.
>

Some truth in that. In philosophy you try to find the correct questions to
ask, after that it's passed over to science where they try to find the
answers, but to do either you can't ignore what's happened in the last few
centuries.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/ebd66be5/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 18:16:06 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:16:06 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv19GT2oNAczyOyUqvjtvnCyC0cu=pYTM8NWcXWT3iD8Jw@mail.gmail.com>

> ?? Suppose you are informed that
>> you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
>> night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
>> different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
>> every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
>> Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
>> live your life?
>>
>> Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will
>> awake tomorrow but it will not be me.
>>
>
Explain how things would be different if it had been you.

 > It means that I will die today.
>

It would also mean that for the first time in history one human being, Dan
Ust, has good evidence that nobody can tell if they're dead or alive, so
being dead is a matter of absolutely no importance.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/9adfa215/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct  2 18:47:12 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 11:47:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <027a01cfde71$4835f480$d8a1dd80$@att.net>

 

 

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


>?A few years ago I was kicked off a mailing list about Objectivism because I dared to suggest that in addition to the birth of Ayn Rand there might have been other things that happened in the last century?  John K Clark

 

Haaaaaa! 

 

John I failed in my attempt to shout HERETIC because I was laughing too hard.  {8^D

 

spike





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/e4e9ab08/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 19:02:48 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 12:02:48 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>

> On Thursday, October 2, 2014 9:38 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> , 2/10/2014 5:03 PM:
>> So what have philosophers got to stack up against
>> these gargantuan philosophical discoveries made by
>> non-philosophers?

That's a true Scotsman argument, no? If there's progress or discoveries, it's not philosophy; if it doesn't then it is.

> As soon as I say something you will say it is not
> philosophy. Formal logic, decision theory, foundations
> of mathematics... you will quickly say that wasn't
> philosophy or that the people involved were not

> doing it as philosophers.

Yah. Cognitive science could be added to the list.

> It is a bit like robotics and AI: as soon as it starts
> working, it gets called automation.

True, though I believe "intelligence" has been ill-defined or even undefined from the start.

Regards, 

Dan 
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at: 
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2 
(I assure John, it's not intentionally philosophical.:)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/788a2716/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 19:05:07 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 12:05:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv19GT2oNAczyOyUqvjtvnCyC0cu=pYTM8NWcXWT3iD8Jw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv19GT2oNAczyOyUqvjtvnCyC0cu=pYTM8NWcXWT3iD8Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6B22A57C-E5A6-423A-AD77-E201FE322F19@gmail.com>

FWIW, you're replaying to Bill's comments not mine at the end there. ;)

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2

> On Oct 2, 2014, at 11:16 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>> ?? Suppose you are informed that
>>> you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
>>> night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
>>> different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
>>> every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
>>> Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
>>> live your life?
>>> 
>>> Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will awake tomorrow but it will not be me. 
> 
> Explain how things would be different if it had been you.
> 
>>  > It means that I will die today.
> 
> It would also mean that for the first time in history one human being, Dan Ust, has good evidence that nobody can tell if they're dead or alive, so being dead is a matter of absolutely no importance.  
> 
>   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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/0d30a94f/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 19:20:59 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:20:59 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <6B22A57C-E5A6-423A-AD77-E201FE322F19@gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv19GT2oNAczyOyUqvjtvnCyC0cu=pYTM8NWcXWT3iD8Jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6B22A57C-E5A6-423A-AD77-E201FE322F19@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEY=BrxbUXHCd7p=UUmKSoDJJR7aaubbbnSGKRLfKFxO5Q@mail.gmail.com>

?nobody can tell if they're dead or alive, so being dead is a matter of
absolutely no importance.


If being dead means that I can still enjoy ice cream, sex, chili and all
the rest then I don't care if I'm dead, though I have to say your
definition of dead is unique.  Hmm, it is said that you live but a short
time but are dead forever, so  if I am dead then I will enjoy it forever.

Just how far into your cheek is your tongue, anyway?  bill w?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/c60c9bd9/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 19:33:36 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:33:36 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>

?True, though I believe "intelligence" has been ill-defined or even
undefined from the start.

Regards,

Dan


Intelligence is a concept that has been criticized since psychologists
started working on it.  At one point we were reduced to saying that
intelligence was what an intelligence test tests.  Completely operational.?
?  Then the test creation started and many different definitions of
intelligence?
? were used to create new tests, including those that considered
intelligence a multifactorial thing.

The problem was that the new tests correlated so highly with the old tests
that no one could say that something new had been measured.  So we still
use the old tests over and over, restandardizing.  Whatever it is, it is
the most important concept in psychology.  More things correlate with it
than with any other thing that we have measured.  Even creativity
correlates with it, just a bit - like there is a level of IQ below which
little creativity is to be found.

Which brings us to the most thorny concept of all:  creativity.  Define
that, if you will.  No one else can.  If there is an area of philosophy
that has practically no relationship to science it is aesthetics.?


?And for a thought question:  what do you think science has contributed to
genetic epistemology?  bill w?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/2d7f4421/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 19:41:03 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:41:03 -0500
Subject: [ExI] smile
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZtqJ89fcfP_aUF-AsDRy7Y9GCKk95OYox5aBzDTEo=mg@mail.gmail.com>

I see that the link to Dan's new vampire book is to Amazon.

If you have not noticed, there is a 'new' Amazon called Smile.  Check it
out.  When you buy things from Smile charities get 1% and it costs you no
more.    You can pick from a number of charities - mine is St. Jude's
Hospital for Children.

If you sign up for it, when you go to a regular Amazon page it will remind
you to go to the same page on Smile.

Free, helps people - What a deal!

smile.amazon.com

bill w
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/3983c859/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Thu Oct  2 20:35:42 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 22:35:42 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3532805576-926@secure.ericade.net>

John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> , 2/10/2014 8:04 PM:
On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> So what have philosophers got to stack up against these gargantuan philosophical discoveries made by non-philosophers?

> As soon as I say something you will say it is not philosophy. Formal logic, decision theory, foundations of mathematics... you will quickly say that wasn't philosophy

No I think those disciplines can and have contributed to philosophy, but it wasn't done by philosophers. By philosophers I mean those who are ignorant of modern developments in science and mathematics because they think it unimportant in philosophy and engage in ancestor worship for the ancient Greeks, Leibniz and a few 19th century philosophers. 
Guess why I will not even try to argue with you?
(Although I wonder what you would call us who work at FHI.)

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/55b6ebfe/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 21:12:08 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 14:12:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB7fdD6ktM7vDKfa0Qr+OqEYi=4w7LgKKLRGgep1kZpKVA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:21 PM,   Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> The problem with the GRB explanation
snip

- it won't work as an effective Fermi paradox answer.?

I agree with Anders and add that GRB are *short,* a few seconds at the
most.  So ~half of the planet surface is shielded by the whole
planet's mass.  Even if a burst fried everything on one side, the
other side would be untouched and life would rapidly spread back into
the damaged half.

Asteroid impacts are a much bigger problem.

BTW, the earth got hit with one around 774 or 775.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/774%E2%80%93775_carbon-14_spike

Keith


From connor_flexman at brown.edu  Thu Oct  2 14:49:20 2014
From: connor_flexman at brown.edu (Flexman, Connor)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 10:49:20 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>

Given the quantum mechanical fact that no particles are distinguishable
from other particles (there is no actual way to talk about this electron
and that electron, as in
http://lesswrong.com/lw/pl/no_individual_particles/           and
http://lesswrong.com/lw/ph/can_you_prove_two_particles_are_identical/), it
matters not at all that your atoms are slowly replaced over months. If you
lose a hand, you're still YOU. The only meaningful way to talk about who is
YOU is to talk about brain states. If you get your hand back but get a
lobotomy, you're no longer you. Then the thought experiment should be more
like, "If you die each night and are replaced with a new copy of your body,
but with all the memories AND brain connections AND current state AND
hormone and neurotransmitter balances, then would that make any difference
in how you live your life?" To which I would say no, because my mind is
entirely intact, and that's me.
Connor

On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 10:48 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Thursday, October 2, 2014, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> ?? Suppose you are informed that
>> you have a disease that causes you to die whenever you fall asleep at
>> night so that the person who wakes up in the morning is a completely
>> different Dan Ust who shares your memories. This has been happening
>> every day of your life, but you have only just found out about it.
>> Would this information worry you or make any difference to how you
>> live your life?
>>
>> Absolutely YES.   It means that someone with my body and memories will
>> awake tomorrow but it will not be me.  It means that I will die today.
>> bill w
>>
>>
> Then I'm sorry to upset you but this is more or less what actually happens
> in ordinary life. The matter in your body is replaced over time such that
> over a period of months very little of the original matter remains.
>
>
> --
> Stathis Papaioannou
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>


-- 
Tsuyoku naritai
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/948d30d4/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 22:33:48 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 17:33:48 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>

? "If you die each night and are replaced with a new copy of your body, but
with all the memories AND brain connections AND current state AND hormone
and neurotransmitter balances, then would that make any difference in how
you live your life?" To which I would say no, because my mind is entirely
intact, and that's me.
Connor

Why isn't it someone else with your memories etc.?  Didn't you die?  bill w
?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/09b53bf8/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  2 23:51:42 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 16:51:42 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB7fdD6ktM7vDKfa0Qr+OqEYi=4w7LgKKLRGgep1kZpKVA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB7fdD6ktM7vDKfa0Qr+OqEYi=4w7LgKKLRGgep1kZpKVA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <8BADB815-13C4-4F55-96ED-159759DA4679@gmail.com>

> On Thursday, October 2, 2014 2:12 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I agree with Anders and add that GRB are *short,*
> a few seconds at the most.  So ~half of the planet
> surface is shielded by the whole planet's mass.

> Even if a burst fried everything on one side, the

> other side would be untouched and life would
> rapidly spread back intothe damaged half.

Depends on how fast the planet is spinning, but, yah. Still, that can be a pretty big disruption and how "rapidly" land can be repopulated and the path to technological civilization retrode is a big unknown. If Earth is typical, one can imagine a GRB now knocking out humans, probably making most land vertebrates extinct, and collapse of ocean ecosystems might threaten marine mammals too... How long would it take to get something like humans -- in terms of intelligence, civilization, and technology? If Earth's typical and the path and tempo of evolution is roughly the same maybe in the 0.1 Gyear range or longer, no?

> Asteroid impacts are a much bigger problem


Well, one can adjust any threat to make it bigger than another. The really big life destroying impactors are likely to be rare the longer a planetary system is around because the bigger ones get absorbed early on. But estimating the rate of large impacts across the galaxy or across the known universe, to my untutored intellect, seems to be harder than estimating the number of GRBs. Not that this problem is insoluble, but I'm wondering if anyone has a good handle on whether Earth is typical here. (If it is, then it might move a step closer -- still needing assumptions that the path (no radical shortcuts from microbes to technology) and rate (no breakneck innovations early on) of evolution toward technological civilization is roughly the same as Earth's and there are no big surprises.)

Or maybe I'm wrong. Has anyone come up with good fairly precise estimates on large impactors over solar system life times other than ours? (Even ours seems to hold surprises. And the early exo-planet discoveries revolutionized thinking about solar system development. I'm not up to speed on all of this, but I feel it should give one pause.;)

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/3c4dd48f/attachment.html>

From possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 02:58:03 2014
From: possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com (John Grigg)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 19:58:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Happy Petrov Day!
In-Reply-To: <2988222180-25366@secure.ericade.net>
References: <2988222180-25366@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAGSKFy297Q=zJyit7oUSKcikwn=8g_nkUjLoBZ6TNcvc84OXqQ@mail.gmail.com>

And so this brave and sensible Russian chose not to let the world get blown
up, and yet no one here responded to your post?  SHAME!!!!!!  SHAME!!!!!!!
SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We are enjoying our very non-apocalyptic world because of him....


John  :  )



On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 6:22 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Almost a gigasecond ago, 31 years to the day, Stanislav Petrov choose to
> disregard warnings of an imminent nuclear attack, correctly guessing they
> were a computer error. By doing that he likely saved the world as we know
> it. Let's celebrate those who stand up to reduce existential risk!
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_Petrov
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Soviet_nuclear_false_alarm_incident
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24280831
>
>
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/54330c6b/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 03:21:46 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 20:21:46 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Happy Petrov Day!
In-Reply-To: <CAGSKFy297Q=zJyit7oUSKcikwn=8g_nkUjLoBZ6TNcvc84OXqQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <2988222180-25366@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAGSKFy297Q=zJyit7oUSKcikwn=8g_nkUjLoBZ6TNcvc84OXqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <76CE87D9-ECB7-4B6F-9FD4-B10F16E7D1E1@gmail.com>

For the record, I passed Anders post along and even tweeted it. Maybe others spread it around too. (I know you're only joking.;)

Regards,

Dan

> On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:58 PM, John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> And so this brave and sensible Russian chose not to let the world get blown up, and yet no one here responded to your post?  SHAME!!!!!!  SHAME!!!!!!!  SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!  
> 
> We are enjoying our very non-apocalyptic world because of him....
> 
> John  :  )
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/522404de/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 04:38:33 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:38:33 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEY=BrxbUXHCd7p=UUmKSoDJJR7aaubbbnSGKRLfKFxO5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv19GT2oNAczyOyUqvjtvnCyC0cu=pYTM8NWcXWT3iD8Jw@mail.gmail.com>
 <6B22A57C-E5A6-423A-AD77-E201FE322F19@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY=BrxbUXHCd7p=UUmKSoDJJR7aaubbbnSGKRLfKFxO5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2t+vyS_UQtCrkOR4O2NSRsyX4DxzPShx7uZE2jF4fVGg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 3:20 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> If being dead means that I can still enjoy ice cream, sex, chili and all
> the rest then I don't care if I'm dead
>

Well of course you can still enjoy all those things because absolutely
nothing has changed except for the atoms that make up your body and science
can detect absolutely no difference between one hydrogen atom and another,
and you recycle them every few months anyway. You are quite literally last
years mashed potatoes.

> Just how far into your cheek is your tongue, anyway?
>

I'm dead serious!

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/41430c76/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 04:46:54 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 00:46:54 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

>> So what have philosophers got to stack up against these gargantuan
>> philosophical discoveries made by non-philosophers?
>>
>
> >As soon as I say something you will say it is not philosophy. Formal
> logic, decision theory, foundations of mathematics... you will quickly say
> that wasn't philosophy
>

No I think those disciplines can and have contributed to philosophy, but it
wasn't done by philosophers. By philosophers I mean those who are ignorant
of modern developments in science and mathematics because they think it
unimportant in philosophy and engage in ancestor worship for the ancient
Greeks, Leibniz and a few 19th century philosophers. Mortimer J. Adler
would be a good example of this sort of person, a very famous philosopher
who nevertheless discovered absolutely nothing new in philosophy.

A few years ago I was kicked off a mailing list about Objectivism because I
dared to suggest that in addition to the birth of Ayn Rand there might have
been other things that happened in the last century, liked Quantum
Mechanics and the work of Einstein and Godel and Turing, that might have
some relevance to philosophy,

 > It is a bit like robotics and AI: as soon as it starts working, it gets
> called automation.
>


Some truth in that. In philosophy you try to find the correct questions to
ask, after that it's passed over to science where they try to find the
answers, but to do either you can't ignore what's happened in the last few
centuries.

John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/cfd5d8c8/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Fri Oct  3 05:40:10 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 07:40:10 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Happy Petrov Day!
In-Reply-To: <CAGSKFy297Q=zJyit7oUSKcikwn=8g_nkUjLoBZ6TNcvc84OXqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3565318714-21703@secure.ericade.net>

John Grigg <possiblepaths2050 at gmail.com> , 3/10/2014 5:05 AM:
And so this brave and sensible Russian chose not to let the world get blown up, and yet no one here responded to your post?? SHAME!!!!!!? SHAME!!!!!!!? SHAME ON ALL OF YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!! ?
We are enjoying our very non-apocalyptic world because of him....
Thank you!
And just to remind those overcome with shame that 27/10 is?Arkhipov Day! Another chance to celebrate a sensible Russian!



Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/980519b7/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 05:41:10 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:41:10 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>

On 3 October 2014 08:33, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
> "If you die each night and are replaced with a new copy of your body, but
> with all the memories AND brain connections AND current state AND hormone
> and neurotransmitter balances, then would that make any difference in how
> you live your life?" To which I would say no, because my mind is entirely
> intact, and that's me.
> Connor
>
> Why isn't it someone else with your memories etc.?  Didn't you die?  bill w

Why isn't it someone else with your memories etc. when you apparently
survive from one day to the next, given that the matter in your body
changes? After a few months, your body has been almost completely
replaced.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 05:54:49 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2014 22:54:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers/was Re: Strong AI Hypothesis:
	logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>

>> On Thursday, October 2, 2014 9:46 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
>> As soon as I say something you will say it is not philosophy.
>> Formal logic, decision theory, foundations of mathematics...
>> you will quickly say that wasn't philosophy
> 
> No I think those disciplines can and have contributed to
> philosophy, but it wasn't done by philosophers. By philosophers
> I mean those who are ignorant of modern developments in science
> and mathematics because they think it unimportant in philosophy
> and engage in ancestor worship for the ancient Greeks, Leibniz
> and a few 19th century philosophers. Mortimer J. Adler would be
> a good example of this sort of person, a very famous philosopher
> who nevertheless discovered absolutely nothing new in philosophy.

Don't you feel you're cherry-picking here. Adler is hardly considered a great or even influential philosopher. He was a popularizer of certain traditions. This is like arguing that all scientists are mystical airheads and then parading out Fritjof Capra as an example. What about folks like John Searle, Saul Kripke, W. V. O. Quine, Bertrand Russell, and Frege? They've certainly done more and are more respected by professional philosophers than Adler.

And most professional discussions of philosophy I'm aware of today do indeed bring in modern developments in science and math. There's a whole branch of philosophy of science devoted to discussing quantum field theory (Michael Redhead), spacetime theory (Lawrence Sklar, John Earman), etc. (I can drop more names like Marc Lange. Maybe I'm missing something, but I've never seen Adler cited in any of these discussions. No incense have been lit either to the shades of long dead philosophers -- even when their ideas are considered...:)

As for ancestor worship, there's a difference between history of philosophy and philosophy per se. The latter might dig into previous thinkers, especially the so called giants (Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Kant, etc.) because they were influential and presented some fairly good arguments or ideas that later work has to grapple with. That doesn't mean ancestor worship.

In fact, a hobby horse of mine is attacks on Aristotle -- as if he's responsible for every wrong turn taken. Actually, during his lifetime and after, members of his circle were questioning his ideas. Theophrastus, his immediate successor and heir, was no stranger to calling Aristotle's views into question. The same is true of later Aristoteleans and most modern ones too. Yes, there are the worshiper types, but there are those types in every field, such as folks who quote Einstein or Carl Sagan as if they were near gods, never to be doubted.

Let me continue on this for a moment. Much of the popular view of philosophy tends to be that things ossified after Aristotle until Descartes came along. This overlooks not only all the work done between these two, but paints a dim view of no progress for about 1800 years, when, in truth, critical work was being done even before Aristotle's corpse was closed. (In fact, his Lyceum is thought to have been more like a research institute where thinkers on a vast array of topics reacted to each others' findings rather than a religious order where pupils sat at the foot of the master ready to receive Truth.) I don't to deny revolutionary changes, but much of the Renaissance and later Enlightenment, were building on earlier work and it was some proponents (of these later movements) who championed the view that they were clean breaks. (In a similar way, Newton was deeply influenced by both Aristoteleanism and the Cartesian system in his physics. Yes, he definitely overturned much here, but he also made sure not to mention who his real influences were, especially in the case of Descartes. And by "influences" I don't mean by being influenced one must follow the influencer, but that the influencer's thought acts as a springboard for further discoveries.)


> A few years ago I was kicked off a mailing list about
> Objectivism because I dared to suggest that in addition to
> the birth of Ayn Rand there might have been other things
> that happened in the last century, liked Quantum Mechanics
> and the work of Einstein and Godel and Turing, that might
> have some relevance to philosophy,

That tells us what though? That some Objectivists are closedminded. I was on a science list where I was kicked out for daring to think there might be ores worth mining on the Moon. I don't think that said anything about science or scientists per se, but just that the guy running that list didn't like anyone contradicting his views on the matter.

And, for the record, having been a long time observer and partipant in the Objectivist movement, it's definitely got more than it's fair share of closed minded individuals. There's also a segment of the movement that's actually interested in modern philosophy and modern science, but they're definitely and sadly in the minority. But what, again, does this tell us? That professional philosophers are to blame for this?

>> It is a bit like robotics and AI: as soon as it starts working,
>> it gets called automation.
> 
> Some truth in that. In philosophy you try to find the
> correct questions to ask, after that it's passed over
> to science where they try to find the answers, but to > do either you can't ignore what's happened in the last
> few centuries.

Who are these professional philosophers who are ignoring "what's happened in the last few centuries"? Don't mention Adler again. Look at the philosophy journals or series like the Oxford's "New Waves" or Routledge's "New Problems in Philosophy." That would the place to start -- not considering some long dead popularizer who, by my reckoning, is about influential on current philosophy as some "boy's first book of rocketry" is on professional engineering. :) Let me reiterate: I think one can learn and do excellent work in philosophy without ever reading Adler.

I'd like to believe all the fields complement and help each other and your view of the role of philosophy to define questions -- broadly, it's not something professional philosophers have a lock on -- and interpret findings should both inform and be informed by the specialized fields, such as the various sciences, history, math, and other disciplines. But I think many professional philosophers today do work on this -- though some are devoted to internal questions that still draw in other fields.

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141002/f279e590/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 06:07:05 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 16:07:05 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <7C391CA2-ECF0-4382-8BD6-5ECCDF5EFE6F@gmail.com>
References: <1410560744.2227.YahooMailNeo@web161601.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAOmnAOyakuWSQAk75Pn9-c5XoMhkJguTr1NjxT_PAR6gV3ks6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQGAnEf2Gn_s+aj0Eg=+v3bGUHFwHSgnp=TRR0P9m5aQw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4F68ADC7-B556-4A29-B1D9-815758A995E6@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQ0baupN93foS+T9hsS+X4HjcKK_5vGkAHDvHnwnvxOrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <92A9EAE3-1E2E-42E1-88C9-2661FA91DA82@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZORdAtcX1njsttFB=TeXktbtNQE7fYndKsbNTG+ADc4CWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOSPr=i4uD16Pru0c4_RieuEfOpfSz7OemNxKDXY5Q1oVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <F69B172C-6564-41BB-B0E6-72CB70AD2CD5@gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQ2vWpBHFQG12xbbTRpSXy3NbGON74tAcP5C7xcQVBBxg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOmnAOyxcE=1qx=4yLeeqAybTHvawaPLk0sp7eKkWYrgGh7O8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOSgiaPMM30UDMU6tD14ORjZzvK8hYSNS+N1RUirXM5JaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411676302.219.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CABgRZOR84DWXhr+++t=CC-i_bfa=meYiXxA-qRUEpad4pm+dJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABgRZOQzCVKPhKb=ds-ZHuBjYOo=sXahEAytBtO=DAtkAT3H0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411690860.1023.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CABgRZOTn-h_5uKCN3E=r+VyxYdDjqMtO_2-nFo9BSD4JXbQfpw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411769280.43806.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <1411775089.88488.YahooMailNeo@web161603.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAH=2ypVv+OfLxbhdov70KN64PPUgrZpMRwcpskKF4WEtXx_UDQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1411786298.53129.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <CAH=2ypUddkbNZRZuXj2KrpNaWOnhRKV5XrcbiFfTzj_7Ds9TjQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXum3zB8WXQoYn8jC8Q=tPWavPNnp3qrVUZHe2Gd=fxfA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DC0D0FBA-6BBA-4979-AE46-A229A249D7ED@gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWk6UajMQpQGrNr8jqyf5V3CUAezWjwx6Ouh6auityDsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1EB0630-9916-4D89-8056-056A69398150@gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypUf=cn2oTaNmN8cZEXdOPGyDbeG0za1NVXeiH6pNJnU6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <1412198994.95022.YahooMailNeo@web161605.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <7C391CA2-ECF0-4382-8BD6-5ECCDF5EFE6F@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypUSwjFugbx2gAiPuSXvaeHNcOZkJ_zZktqdd8Oa9JZTUA@mail.gmail.com>

On 2 October 2014 07:45, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 30, 2014 5:57 PM, Stathis Papaioannou
> <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The other copies are not the you, now, in this world, but
>
> your past self is not the you, now in this world either.
>
> The copy of you that wakes up from cryonic sleep in a
>
> minority of worlds bears the same relationship to you,
>
> now as you, now bear to your past self.
>
>
> This relies on a certain view of persistence, which in itself is not
> uncontreversial. I'm sure you've heard of endurance, exdurance, and
> perdurance (or whatever other theory might be cooked up here) with regard to
> persistence. It's unclear to me which is the correct view to take here. And,
> again, I don't postulating one view is correct simply to make the solution
> you want is the way to go here. (The same goes for personal identity beyond
> temporal issues. The idea that self is an illusion is not settled and not
> without serious (in my mind) problems.)

Whatever the definition of death and personal identity you will be
left with this problem: your body has been replaced over time, yet you
don't worry about it; so if this is death or not really being you,
then this type of death or not really being you is no big deal.

> If you're blind or disfigured that is a real deficit and makes a real
>
> difference. If you die every night in your sleep and a different
>
> person wakes up in your bed with your memories every morning that is
> indistinguishable from ordinary life. In fact, it is arguable that that is
> what actually happens.
>
>
> It's true that the deficit is one you know about via memory: you recall that
> previous you didn't have said deficit and now you have it. (I was going to
> quip: But what if you really were already blind or disfigured and it's just
> your memory (and all other testimony) of not being so that's wrong here?)
> But my point is knowing you die every night is something that the new you
> would get used to -- or maybe not, but what could you do about it?

Well, suppose you could pay half of your income for a treatment that
would prevent it happening. You feel exactly the same in the morning,
but you are reassured by the doctor that you haven't died. Would you
pay for the treatment? What would you say to your friend who saves his
money because he thinks the definition of death this treatment is
meant to prevent is, since neither you nor anyone else notices any
difference, bullshit?

> But this doesn't clear up the matter of whether this is actually is the case
> or whether it clears up anything about possible worlds or a multiverse. That
> you couldn't tell any difference from the inside or out in the case of dying
> every night doesn't mean that this applies to supposed yous in other
> possible worlds or other universes. You're still trading on the idea that
> those other yous are somehow you rather than instances of you in another
> universe or possible world. And internally or externally, in many of these
> cases, they'd be distinguishable. The you that is here now exchanging emails
> with me is distinguishable from the you that's in another possible world
> who's never exchanged emails with me, for instance.

As I have explained before, almost all the matter in my body changes
over time, yet I still feel that that former self was me. So there is
no requirement for strict physical continuity: I am the continuation
of an entity whose memories I continue, and not necessarily an entity
made out of the same matter. If there are 10 identical copies of me in
the universe running in lockstep then I can't say which particular
copy I am the continuation of. As long as at least one copy remains, I
will continue living, just as I continue living despite the fact that
the atoms comprising my body last year have been thoroughly dispersed
in the environment.

> You could argue there are possible worlds or universes so close that you
> couldn't tell. Maybe, but it still doesn't answer whether they're the same
> you. Also, there are ones that are not so close where they are
> distinguishable, outside and in. Again, the problem is whether and how the
> yous (said in strong Cockney accent;) in different possible worlds or
> different universes are part of an overall you -- presuming either of these
> exist. That's not clear here. All of this seems like postulating a just so
> story on possible worlds or a multiverse to get the optimistic answer you
> want. (And we're not even getting into all the other possible worlds or
> universes where you life is far worse or nonexistent. Why just focus on the
> ones where you exist in a better state?)

If they differ from me then the copies are not me. Identical copies
will very quickly differentiate and are then no longer identical.

> Also, these are epistemic issues that don't really clear up what
>
> is the case. You might not know (or now know, considering that
>
> the problem might be tackled in the future) how to resolve these
>
> issues, but lacking a resolution doesn't erase the problem. Nor
>
> does merely adopting a resolution that seems
>
> uber-optimistic: no one really dies or needs to worry.
>
>
> This also doesn't really resolve the issue of whether strong AI
>
> is possible. I doubt it, but one conceive of it being the case
>
> that they are necessarily ruled out (in our world, or, if
>
> you please, in all possible worlds). Thus, fantasizing it
>
> might be different elsewhere doesn't guarantee just how it's
>
> different -- regardless of our ability to know.
>
>
> No, it doesn't have a direct bearing on the possibility of
>
> strong AI.
>
>
> At least in the actual world, we're in agreement on that. :)
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>  My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
>  (It doesn't deal with strong AI or possible worlds, AFAIK.:)
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>



-- 
Stathis Papaioannou


From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 12:55:14 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 07:55:14 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>

?I think what is missing here is the idea of real death.  All body cells
die.  All of them.  Yes, cells are replaced while you are living but there
is a continuity effected by the still living ones.  If all cells are dead
there is no continuity possible.

What y'all seem to be saying is that if you could extract a copy of your
memories, put them into hard drive, then download them into some other body
or robot, then there are two yous?
?.  I say there is only one 'you' and if it is dead then it cannot awaken
somewhere else.  A copy is not the original.

The original premise of all this is, of course, impossible.  bill w?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/88db21dd/attachment.html>

From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 13:04:53 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:04:53 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFQzCb0oPksb2tpA=WrUhUd5EYzNQ92k55F27mYipxRnZQ@mail.gmail.com>

> All body cells die.  All of them

Some cells may survive, one can be an organ donor.

Does this count, as "some cells survived"? Or what?

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:55 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> ?I think what is missing here is the idea of real death.  All body cells
> die.  All of them.  Yes, cells are replaced while you are living but there
> is a continuity effected by the still living ones.  If all cells are dead
> there is no continuity possible.
>
> What y'all seem to be saying is that if you could extract a copy of your
> memories, put them into hard drive, then download them into some other body
> or robot, then there are two yous?
> ?.  I say there is only one 'you' and if it is dead then it cannot awaken
> somewhere else.  A copy is not the original.
>
> The original premise of all this is, of course, impossible.  bill w?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/d659c2c3/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 13:15:50 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 08:15:50 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CALMrAFQzCb0oPksb2tpA=WrUhUd5EYzNQ92k55F27mYipxRnZQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFQzCb0oPksb2tpA=WrUhUd5EYzNQ92k55F27mYipxRnZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEYO=054q5UKkJS0YtZry5NG3eKdwrS4Ymi3k8qH-nO0gw@mail.gmail.com>

??Some cells may survive, one can be an organ donor.

Does this count, as "some cells survived"? Or what?

Some cells survived. "You" didn't.

?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/37409181/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 13:22:01 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 23:22:01 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>

On Friday, October 3, 2014, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> ?I think what is missing here is the idea of real death.  All body cells
> die.  All of them.  Yes, cells are replaced while you are living but there
> is a continuity effected by the still living ones.  If all cells are dead
> there is no continuity possible.
>

In what we normally understand as death, all the cells die and are not
replaced. But if the cells are replaced, that isn't death.


> What y'all seem to be saying is that if you could extract a copy of your
> memories, put them into hard drive, then download them into some other body
> or robot, then there are two yous?
> ?.  I say there is only one 'you' and if it is dead then it cannot awaken
> somewhere else.  A copy is not the original.
>

But you seem to think a copy *is* the original if it is replaced over time.
What basis do you have for making this distinction?


> The original premise of all this is, of course, impossible.  bill w?
>
>

-- 
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/9e99bd73/attachment.html>

From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 13:31:10 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:31:10 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>

Mr. Flynn!

How many cells must die, for me to die?


On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Friday, October 3, 2014, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> ?I think what is missing here is the idea of real death.  All body cells
>> die.  All of them.  Yes, cells are replaced while you are living but there
>> is a continuity effected by the still living ones.  If all cells are dead
>> there is no continuity possible.
>>
>
> In what we normally understand as death, all the cells die and are not
> replaced. But if the cells are replaced, that isn't death.
>
>
>> What y'all seem to be saying is that if you could extract a copy of your
>> memories, put them into hard drive, then download them into some other body
>> or robot, then there are two yous?
>> ?.  I say there is only one 'you' and if it is dead then it cannot awaken
>> somewhere else.  A copy is not the original.
>>
>
> But you seem to think a copy *is* the original if it is replaced over
> time. What basis do you have for making this distinction?
>
>
>> The original premise of all this is, of course, impossible.  bill w?
>>
>>
>
> --
> Stathis Papaioannou
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/b923f35d/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 14:30:46 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 09:30:46 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>

> How many cells must die, for me to die?
>
> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?


?Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is not
the territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some way.
(Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)

It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that idea
has gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.  But
perhaps the deterioration of them and partial replacement? account for many
memory errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts for
most).  bill w
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/e7ae287f/attachment.html>

From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 15:27:52 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:27:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFQRWkhErRnOPdjeeaR=eJ2JUwiqtsNa6hTyH18DuNfA8g@mail.gmail.com>

>
?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?


Really? How deep this forebrain goes? To the half of brain, or what?

Your view is of no use, utterly!.

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
>
>
>> How many cells must die, for me to die?
>>
>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>
>
> ?Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is not
> the territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some way.
> (Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)
>
> It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that idea
> has gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.  But
> perhaps the deterioration of them and partial replacement? account for many
> memory errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts for
> most).  bill w
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/a69c5bff/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 15:32:04 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:32:04 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdb+aoBs3kdtp0emtzthS7Ayr1Xf1-QVbEuvsdhiCB6_Uyw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:30 AM, William Flynn Wallace
<foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is not the
> territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some way.
> (Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)
>
> It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that idea has
> gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.  But perhaps
> the deterioration of them and partial replacement account for many memory
> errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts for most).

So much of these conversations seem to me to be two people on the same
side of the fence arguing about what it's like on the other side...
using language like "from where I am it looks like this" and the other
person says "no, you're wrong... from where I am it looks like this"
and inevitably the answer is both parties are missing the fact that
they're on the same side of the fence.

Objective death vs Subjective death... You as not-me vs You/I as me...

I feel like the various facets of this armchair philosophy might as as
well be discussing which is the right religion.

... or should I just butt-out?


From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 15:32:20 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 10:32:20 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CALMrAFQRWkhErRnOPdjeeaR=eJ2JUwiqtsNa6hTyH18DuNfA8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFQRWkhErRnOPdjeeaR=eJ2JUwiqtsNa6hTyH18DuNfA8g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEarSRiFFjeY3ZHbJg-uWiksQNHJ3HHgsNM=_QF1J_eUDA@mail.gmail.com>

If my views are of no use, Tomaz, why are you asking me questions you can
easily find with a Google search?  bill w

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Tomaz Kristan <protokol2020 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> >
> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>
>
> Really? How deep this forebrain goes? To the half of brain, or what?
>
> Your view is of no use, utterly!.
>
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> How many cells must die, for me to die?
>>>
>>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>>
>>
>> ?Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is not
>> the territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some way.
>> (Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)
>>
>> It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that idea
>> has gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.  But
>> perhaps the deterioration of them and partial replacement? account for many
>> memory errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts for
>> most).  bill w
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/d8e89283/attachment.html>

From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 16:29:38 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 18:29:38 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEarSRiFFjeY3ZHbJg-uWiksQNHJ3HHgsNM=_QF1J_eUDA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFQRWkhErRnOPdjeeaR=eJ2JUwiqtsNa6hTyH18DuNfA8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEarSRiFFjeY3ZHbJg-uWiksQNHJ3HHgsNM=_QF1J_eUDA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFT-Cg=mVjkwBg+20ZYg-synJgCd-UxxUp3GOz8oScb+cg@mail.gmail.com>

Because William, it's quite a common misconception. And it is very wrong at
the same time.

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:32 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> If my views are of no use, Tomaz, why are you asking me questions you can
> easily find with a Google search?  bill w
>
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Tomaz Kristan <protokol2020 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> >
>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>>
>>
>> Really? How deep this forebrain goes? To the half of brain, or what?
>>
>> Your view is of no use, utterly!.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM, William Flynn Wallace <
>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> How many cells must die, for me to die?
>>>>
>>>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>>>
>>>
>>> ?Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is not
>>> the territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some way.
>>> (Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)
>>>
>>> It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that idea
>>> has gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.  But
>>> perhaps the deterioration of them and partial replacement? account for many
>>> memory errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts for
>>> most).  bill w
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/3ecece76/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 17:52:05 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 10:52:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
Message-ID: <A886E39A-B5B8-4E83-8783-2D6CBA3B9E49@gmail.com>

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/10/aging_out_of_ad.html

So I wonder how many treatment programs are no better than homeopathy or doing nothing. (And, yah, a case can be made the last two are equivalent.;)

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/2e7ef355/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 18:17:56 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 11:17:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 11:07 PM,
<extropy-chat-request at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

>> On Thursday, October 2, 2014 2:12 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I agree with Anders and add that GRB are *short,*
>> a few seconds at the most.  So ~half of the planet
>> surface is shielded by the whole planet's mass.
>
>> Even if a burst fried everything on one side, the
>> other side would be untouched and life would
>> rapidly spread back into the damaged half.
>
> Depends on how fast the planet is spinning, but, yah.

Let's put some logic and numbers on this.

Unless the GRB happened right over the equator, then some of the
planet isn't going to be toasted no matter how fast it spins.  If it
came from right over the north or south pole, then half the planet
would be spared.  But consider the right-over-the-equator case.

Given the time for a GRB, to get uniformly toasted, the planet would
need a rotation rate of at least 1 revolution per second.  Using the
earth as an example of a planet with life, it's equatorial rotation
speed is 465.1 m/s at one revolution per day.

It would be close to 670 km/s spinning at 60 RPM.  Low earth orbit is
~8 km/s so this is around 84 times faster.  I.e., physics tells you
that an earth sized planet can't spin anywhere close to fast enough to
get toasted all around by a GRB.

Keith


From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 18:37:32 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 19:37:32 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjeJMAE369QRVFcLib4s7hrXu4Waxzm07=ss75ensMc0Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Keith Henson  wrote:
<snip>
> It would be close to 670 km/s spinning at 60 RPM.  Low earth orbit is
> ~8 km/s so this is around 84 times faster.  I.e., physics tells you
> that an earth sized planet can't spin anywhere close to fast enough to
> get toasted all around by a GRB.
>
>

GRBs vary in duration and strength. The paper tries to take account of
all the types of GRBs.

The problem is not just radiation exposure to part of a planet. You
have to account for secondary effects as well. Serious damage to the
ozone layer and atmosphere damage similar to a nuclear winter would
affect the whole planet.

Evolution could be postponed for millions of years.

BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Fri Oct  3 19:02:09 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:02:09 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjeJMAE369QRVFcLib4s7hrXu4Waxzm07=ss75ensMc0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjeJMAE369QRVFcLib4s7hrXu4Waxzm07=ss75ensMc0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <033b01cfdf3c$893b2420$9bb16c60$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of BillK

>...GRBs vary in duration and strength. ...Evolution could be postponed for
millions of years.

>...BillK
_______________________________________________


Not at all.  Evolution does its best work when things change quickly.   Good
chance we won't like the outcome, depending of course on how we define "we."

spike



From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 19:25:16 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:25:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9ABF5DBF-3CFC-4AE7-BE1A-A1EFB18AE1C6@gmail.com>

On Friday, October 3, 2014 11:17 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Even if a burst fried everything on one side, the
>>> other side would be untouched and life would
>>> rapidly spread back into the damaged half.
> 
>> Depends on how fast the planet is spinning, but, yah.
> 
> Let's put some logic and numbers on this.

Let's not because it was a fucking joke. ;)   

Regards, 

Dan 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/34a0c411/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 19:25:54 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:25:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjeJMAE369QRVFcLib4s7hrXu4Waxzm07=ss75ensMc0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjeJMAE369QRVFcLib4s7hrXu4Waxzm07=ss75ensMc0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <13286910-851F-43C2-9B22-D7CD461471F3@gmail.com>

> On Friday, October 3, 2014 11:37 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> The problem is not just radiation exposure to
> part of a planet. You have to account for
> secondary effects as well. Serious damage to the
> ozone layer and atmosphere damage similar to a
> nuclear winter would affect the whole planet.
> 
> Evolution could be postponed for millions of years.

That would depend on many factors, but my qualitative non-expert view is more than millions, but tens of millions of years to recover, depending on those other factors. Imagine this happened now to Earth. I think it'd be safe to safe, humanity would be wiped out and probably a good chunk of terrestrial life. How long would it be before another intelligent species evolved to carry forth with a technological civilization? If much of terrestrial life is gone, presumably most near contenders -- most of which are near extinction now -- would likely be gone. Maybe some of the primate line would survive, but I don't any small primate would leap up to human level intelligence is a few million years. (This is just my speculation. Hominin brain power did explode in maybe ten million years or so. But the ancestors were larger primates already: bigger base to build on. Just my guess.)

Of course, if the GRB happens earlier in evolution (again, presuming Earth is a good guide to the path and tempo of evolution toward technological civilization), it might not matter as much. For instance, if it happens at the pre-multicellular life stage, it'll still have a big impact, but it's more likely, IMO, unicellular life can recover. (Again, presuming life takes a similar path and a similar speed at getting there, on average, across the universe.)

Regards, 

Dan 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/692fc438/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 19:35:05 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 12:35:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <033b01cfdf3c$893b2420$9bb16c60$@att.net>
References: <CAPiwVB6==YdUU4kM768SfvnoANd_kPTqHbE0ZB=1Vw43OpkR_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjeJMAE369QRVFcLib4s7hrXu4Waxzm07=ss75ensMc0Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <033b01cfdf3c$893b2420$9bb16c60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <67BE20FF-1287-469E-ACEF-6C3FA3910E23@gmail.com>

On Friday, October 3, 2014 12:02 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> ...GRBs vary in duration and strength. ...Evolution could be
>> postponed for millions of years.
> 
>> ...BillK

> Not at all.  Evolution does its best work when things change
> quickly.   Good chance we won't like the outcome, depending of
> course on how we define "we."

I don't think Bill literally no evolution would take place, but if we consider evolution toward technological civilization, all else being equal, it would likely reset the clock. I think it might have more of an impact now than hundreds of millions of years in terms of Earth for the reasons previously stated: evolution reinventing large primate-like intelligence capable of making technology might take a much longer time given that save for humans (and I think if it happened this moment, humans would almost certainly go extinct*), all nearby contenders are almost extinct as it is. A GRB would likely push them over the edge.


Regards,

Dan

* If humans don't go extinct, then, IMO, it's another story. Then it's a matter of how fast humans can recover. If we had viable settlements off Earth, my guess they would survive (humans living sheltered on Mars would be impacted, but my guess is not to the same degree; humans living in space would likely have radiation sheltering -- either getting fried or surviving with class) and that would be a life preserver even for humans on Earth. Why? Off world humans could aid in recovery on Earth -- in the event any were left there. Well, IMHO. ;)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/31113e6e/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 19:43:20 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:43:20 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>

William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:

> the map is not the territory
>

It is if the map contains as much useful information as the territory.

> All body cells die.  All of them.  Yes, cells are replaced while you are
> living but there is a continuity effected by the still living ones.
>

I don't give a hoot in hell about my cells, it's my consciousness that I
want to continue.

> If all cells are dead there is no continuity possible.
>

Consciousness is always continuous except when it stops and never starts up
again, there is a convenient word for that state of affairs, death. Even
when you go to the hospital and undergo anesthesia your consciousness
remains continuous (assuming that you survived the operation), its the
external world that seems to jump ahead discontinuously

> What y'all seem to be saying is that if you could extract a copy of your
> memories, put them into hard drive, then download them into some other body
> or robot, then there are two yous.
>

Yes.

> I say there is only one 'you' and if it is dead then it cannot awaken
> somewhere else.
>

That's the conventional opinion and up to now it has been the correct one
because up to now only one collection of atoms in the entire observable
universe behaves in a Williamflynnwallaceian way, but that is only a
accident of technology and there is no law of physics that ensures that
will always be the case.

 >  A copy is not the original.
>

Exactly what is so original about "the original"? It's certainly not due to
the atoms because atoms are generic and are constantly entering and leaving
your body anyway. Even the original isn't the original because "the
original" doesn't exist and never has.

Earlier you said you would be very upset if you found out that every time
you went to sleep your body was destroyed and replaced by a copy, well lets
take the limit of that and see what happens. Suppose your body was replaced
not once a night since you were born  but every hour, or every minute, or
every second, or every nanosecond, or every Planck Time 10^-43 seconds? So
even as you read this post you are dieing and being reborn 10^43 times
every second, and yet you feel fine and intuitively feel despite all this
destroying and rebuilding SOMETHING has continued and whatever that
something is you want it to continue into tomorrow because you don't want
to die.

> The original premise of all this is, of course, impossible.
>

The  original premise was just that nothing in the laws of physics prevents
molecules from being positioned with nanometer accuracy, and as Drexler and
others have shown that this premise is correct.

> Intelligence is a concept that has been criticized since psychologists
> started working on it.
>

That's true, the idea of Intelligence has been criticized by psychologists
and that's because they aren't very. Of course that doesn't prevent them
from saying at faculty psychology meetings that  Mr. X shouldn't be granted
tenure because he isn't intelligent enough.

> At one point we were reduced to saying that intelligence was what an
> intelligence test tests.
>

I would prefer to say that intelligence is what psychology professors are
looking for in their students.

> Completely operational.
>

You almost make that sound like a bad thing. We learn by examples not by
definitions.

> Which brings us to the most thorny concept of all:  creativity.  Define
> that, if you will.
>

No.

John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/d33e7e86/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 20:10:31 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:10:31 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
In-Reply-To: <A886E39A-B5B8-4E83-8783-2D6CBA3B9E49@gmail.com>
References: <A886E39A-B5B8-4E83-8783-2D6CBA3B9E49@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZpp3rivdL0F84Qy+gbDQ9jQrfBFDR_yKZZU++XuD=Uhw@mail.gmail.com>

> So I wonder how many treatment programs are no better than homeopathy or
> doing nothing. (And, yah, a case can be made the last two are equivalent.;)
>
> Dan
>
>
?Most programs of any kind in clinical psych (which is what it is not
matter what they call it) are mostly placebo.  In fact, many patients get
addicted to the therapy, meaning the attention they get.  In AA, a person
can get addicted to revealing faults, admitting guilt, getting group
support, and so on.  They can get a thrill out of the 'war stories' about
how much they drank and how stupid they were.  Still, this one is the best
one!

In addition to addictions, most mental disorders get better with time, with
or without medication or any other kind of therapy.  This makes it very
hard to evaluate treatment effects.?


?I was a clinical psychologist for two years and exited to experimental.
Science too soft, peers burnt out, no way of knowing if you are doing any
good.?

A case can clearly be made for some disorders and some medications, at
least in the short run.  However, Hans Eysenck did a huge study in the '50s
showing psychiatry to be worthless - no clear data on effectiveness.  I
have not really kept up with the data but I doubt if it has changed a great
deal (except, again, for a few drugs, NOT including antidepressants).  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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/981f6cbf/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 20:13:11 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:13:11 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CALMrAFT-Cg=mVjkwBg+20ZYg-synJgCd-UxxUp3GOz8oScb+cg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFQRWkhErRnOPdjeeaR=eJ2JUwiqtsNa6hTyH18DuNfA8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEarSRiFFjeY3ZHbJg-uWiksQNHJ3HHgsNM=_QF1J_eUDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-Cg=mVjkwBg+20ZYg-synJgCd-UxxUp3GOz8oScb+cg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbTW9Ysmh74UKdum=pF73dcdgMr+c+RDpvjgOZm8Vgtzg@mail.gmail.com>

Tomaz, I am confused as to what misconception (according to you) I am
suffering from.  bill w

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Tomaz Kristan <protokol2020 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Because William, it's quite a common misconception. And it is very wrong
> at the same time.
>
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 5:32 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> If my views are of no use, Tomaz, why are you asking me questions you can
>> easily find with a Google search?  bill w
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 10:27 AM, Tomaz Kristan <protokol2020 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> >
>>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>>>
>>>
>>> Really? How deep this forebrain goes? To the half of brain, or what?
>>>
>>> Your view is of no use, utterly!.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:30 PM, William Flynn Wallace <
>>> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> How many cells must die, for me to die?
>>>>>
>>>>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ?Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is
>>>> not the territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some
>>>> way.  (Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)
>>>>
>>>> It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that
>>>> idea has gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.
>>>> But perhaps the deterioration of them and partial replacement? account for
>>>> many memory errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts
>>>> for most).  bill w
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/e1bda890/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Fri Oct  3 20:13:26 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 13:13:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] give a what?   was:  RE:  Strong AI Hypothesis...
Message-ID: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of John Clark



>?I don't give a hoot in hell about my cells?

 

It?s one of those what if things, John.  What if? we atheists are wrong and there really is a hell, then what if we die, go there because we were flaming atheists, and we find out that hoots there are really rare valuable things.  Then we have an eternity of regret because in our brief meat-world life, we could have had all the hoots we wanted, but gave them away for nothing, never caring for them at all.  That would be a hoot.

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/0f0733ee/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 20:31:38 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 21:31:38 +0100
Subject: [ExI] give a what? was: RE: Strong AI Hypothesis...
In-Reply-To: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>
References: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armgdJsvysN4hsR4SCSt+r6e=g-1w61D94DqNGs0A7qS8iA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 9:13 PM, spike wrote:
> It's one of those what if things, John.  What if... we atheists are wrong and
> there really is a hell, then what if we die, go there because we were
> flaming atheists, and we find out that hoots there are really rare valuable
> things.  Then we have an eternity of regret because in our brief meat-world
> life, we could have had all the hoots we wanted, but gave them away for
> nothing, never caring for them at all.  That would be a hoot.
>
>


Do owls go to heaven or hell?

BillK


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 20:50:09 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 13:50:09 -0700
Subject: [ExI] give a what?
In-Reply-To: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>
References: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CD3A682A-269F-4FA0-9172-1210631A8B74@gmail.com>

On Friday, October 3, 2014 1:13 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> ?On Behalf Of John Clark
>> ?I don't give a hoot in hell about my cells?

> It?s one of those what if things, John.  What if? we atheists
> are wrong and there really is a hell, then what if we die, go
> there because we were flaming atheists, and we find out that
> hoots there are really rare valuable things.  Then we have an
> eternity of regret because in our brief meat-world life, we
> could have had all the hoots we wanted, but gave them away for
> nothing, never caring for them at all.  That would be a hoot.

Ha ha. Okay, my turn to play annoying pedant: Of course, this presumes that, if there is a Hell, atheists necessarily go there. Some Buddhists have a conception of Hell and you don't go there for being an atheist. (And, IIRC, it's not eternal either. It's sort of like a time out for really, really bad karma.) After all, going to Hell might not be caused at all by being an atheist. (It could even be arbitrary.) 

By the way, John raises an interesting issue here that kind of ties in with the diamond/water paradox of economics. Presuming he supervenes on his cells -- there's that physicalist premise again :) -- then he might not give a hoot about any particular one of them, but all of them together might be another matter. This is similar to how one might value one diamond more than a glass of water now, but not all the diamonds in the world over all the water in the world now.

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/5c54cbaf/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 20:56:25 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 06:56:25 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypXD9SZqQoHQQAv__vQ-YrmbR1Zoh+yKW22zT9znWL1SPw@mail.gmail.com>

On Saturday, October 4, 2014, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
>
>
>> How many cells must die, for me to die?
>>
>> ?Whatever number it takes to make up most of your forebrain.?
>
>
> ?Shades of Korzybski and Hayakawa and general semantics:  the map is not
> the territory.  It could be argued that all copies are flawed in some way.
> (Pratchett fans will see a parallel in the dwarf's holy hammer.)
>
> It used to be thought that neurons were never replaced and now that idea
> has gone out the window.  But do all neurons get replaced?  Dunno.  But
> perhaps the deterioration of them and partial replacement? account for many
> memory errors over the years (though confabulation probably accounts for
> most).  bill w
>

All neurons are replaced over time. Synapses are particularly active
metabolically and are replaced faster.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063191


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141004/1e0d4047/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Fri Oct  3 22:19:11 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 17:19:11 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAH=2ypXD9SZqQoHQQAv__vQ-YrmbR1Zoh+yKW22zT9znWL1SPw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXD9SZqQoHQQAv__vQ-YrmbR1Zoh+yKW22zT9znWL1SPw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZCKSPG6dcSZuwMa5-yiPRb_PHLQn=2TP16J1HG_BrhYQ@mail.gmail.com>

> All neurons are replaced over time. Synapses are particularly active
> metabolically and are replaced faster.
>
> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
> <http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063191>
>

?Apparently not:

http://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273%2812%2900341-8?


?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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/28e82384/attachment.html>

From stathisp at gmail.com  Sat Oct  4 00:11:22 2014
From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou)
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 10:11:22 +1000
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEZCKSPG6dcSZuwMa5-yiPRb_PHLQn=2TP16J1HG_BrhYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAuFJFu50+3ocjz0eXwxeJuhyvmakytwitD4+Qv08QM7e9DKRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3370094529-20838@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAAuFJFu8OEy8KLzb6g55gpiVtej=gyeuLtw6DJHyqb5k-17tRA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbhGTV9OgSoS7pkgzdv_Dv0jvFPSK_a7WjYs7Hbqfx1oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXvF9Fhr_MMKu-jr3eQ38zPgCnBs594=4Ag7Rk4zzSHfw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA++aaA8+eApromV9iphcu=zfzMCwV61n7EE37603d_GYGtA_Fw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEatL68jDg201GaX8PRqj-+QkrDni_QNv8UY-LiksOa+QA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypWFz8KJWaNG+_rEWztuKV3f4=w2PKz75-iHyY1fa2Od0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYXn450oo8QZ8x-OMU7OS_7wtWj04yhhfNKprqEfKscFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypULo6HGQ7tWDyFDX7ZoX2pNr5y9B89SD02V2mCvNqfWSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALMrAFT-b5FwjMWvECZUNDs0AsqBE66ZCqqDcunQ0=SaMTGZ6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEaV8k7zdyOmR2UujgVRRq2wVTToc-9iChzbpBw-ibrfCA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH=2ypXD9SZqQoHQQAv__vQ-YrmbR1Zoh+yKW22zT9znWL1SPw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEZCKSPG6dcSZuwMa5-yiPRb_PHLQn=2TP16J1HG_BrhYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAH=2ypXbGZUAyH4R1+GPpFkxOSP8VN7W90oGm0pTD1neJy8N1Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Saturday, October 4, 2014, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> All neurons are replaced over time. Synapses are particularly active
>> metabolically and are replaced faster.
>>
>> http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/
>> <http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0063191>
>>
>
> ?Apparently not:
>
> http://www.cell.com/neuron/abstract/S0896-6273%2812%2900341-8?
>
>

Neurons are not replaced the way skin epithelium is replaced, where the old
cells die and are sloughed off while new cells grow from deeper layers, but
they are replaced in a piecemeal fashion over time. It's like the
difference between knocking down a house and building a new one and
gradually replacing the carpet, the floorboards, the bricks and so on over
time. Some parts of the neuron such as the synapses are very active and
turn over quickly, while other parts such as the nuclear DNA are less
active and turn over slowly.


-- 
Stathis Papaioannou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141004/11b98fa6/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Sat Oct  4 00:49:30 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 20:49:30 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers/was Re: Strong AI Hypothesis:
 logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv0_43dduo815zC_ufOHKJSswLx764Uj4i75fHY_ecEtxw@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > What about folks like John Searle, Saul Kripke, W. V. O. Quine, Bertrand
> Russell, and Frege?
>

I can't say anything about Saul Kripke because I've never heard of him,
unfortunately I have heard of John Searle and his dimwitted Chinese Room;
as for W. V. O. Quine and Bertrand Russell I've read books by them and like
them, but like Frege they were all mathematicians/logicians. And none of
the people on your list came within a light year of the gigantic
contribution to philosophy that Charles Darwin made, and he never had a
philosophy course in his life.  As Daniel Dennett (well OK, I don't hate
ALL philosophers) said:

"If I were to give an award for the single best idea anyone has ever had,
I'd give it to Darwin."

> There's a whole branch of philosophy of science devoted to discussing
> quantum field theory (Michael Redhead), spacetime theory (Lawrence Sklar,
> John Earman)
>

And what important new ideas did they come up with that Einstein, Dirac or
Feynman hadn't discovered a half century before?

> In fact, a hobby horse of mine is attacks on Aristotle
>

Me too, if people must ancestor worship a ancient Greek it should be
Archimedes not Aristotle or Plato.

 > Don't mention Adler again.
>

OK, maybe that was a low blow, most philosophers aren't THAT bad.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/a96561f3/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Sat Oct  4 01:21:43 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 21:21:43 -0400
Subject: [ExI] give a what?
In-Reply-To: <CD3A682A-269F-4FA0-9172-1210631A8B74@gmail.com>
References: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>
 <CD3A682A-269F-4FA0-9172-1210631A8B74@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv0AH9Z14RyTJmpg2bFXmJggqhZ5M1Hxn60X+Dudcm47mQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Of course, this presumes that, if there is a Hell, atheists necessarily
> go there.
>

Not if God were a fan of logic, and if He wasn't it's hard to imagine how
He managed to engineer some rather large construction projects, like the
Universe. Perhaps God hides all evidence of His existence and then sends
everyone that believes he's real anyway to hell for the sin of being
illogical and only atheists go to heaven. Somebody asked Bertrand Russell
what he would say to God after he dies and he found out that God exists
after all, Russell responded:

"Sir, you did not give us enough information"

> By the way, John raises an interesting issue here that kind of ties in
> with the diamond/water paradox of economics. Presuming he supervenes on his
> cells there's that physicalist premise again :) -- then he might not give a
> hoot about any particular one of them, but all of them together might be
> another matter.
>

If I'm uploaded into a computer (and for all I know I may already have
been) then I'm still conscious but have no cells at all, living or dead,
but I feel fine nevertheless.

> This is similar to how one might value one diamond more than a glass of
> water now, but not all the diamonds in the world over all the water in the
> world now.
>

That's no paradox, it's just a matter of value density.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/16257727/attachment.html>

From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu  Fri Oct  3 19:32:45 2014
From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera)
Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:32:45 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
In-Reply-To: <A886E39A-B5B8-4E83-8783-2D6CBA3B9E49@gmail.com>
References: <A886E39A-B5B8-4E83-8783-2D6CBA3B9E49@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <525CBB6E-F14F-4BCB-8D57-E09606B0A24E@alumni.virginia.edu>

As is noted in the comments in that page, I think the referenced study may be using "addiction" in a non-clinical way and may be referring to what used to be called "abuse" prior to DSM-5. My experience treating addiction and my review of the literature supports that addicts are vulnerable to relapse for the rest of their lives even after a period of abstinence. Many do recover and stop using. Despite the commentary on that page, providers are not hopeless about addiction. I think what is happening here is conflating use with abuse with dependence, especially with respect to illegal substances. Anyone with personal experience or with others who use substances knows that just because someone uses cocaine, for example, doesn't make them an addict. I have had way too many patients die from their addictions, and I have many patients who had had exceptional luck and are elderly addicts but are still alive. Addiction is progressive and is often fatal in my experience. Using "addiction" too loosely is a disservice to those who struggle with this issue. 
-Henry

> On Oct 3, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/10/aging_out_of_ad.html
> 
> So I wonder how many treatment programs are no better than homeopathy or doing nothing. (And, yah, a case can be made the last two are equivalent.;)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
>  My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141003/f567e41f/attachment.html>

From test at ssec.wisc.edu  Sat Oct  4 13:23:32 2014
From: test at ssec.wisc.edu (Bill Hibbard)
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 08:23:32 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.207.1412405356.28991.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.207.1412405356.28991.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOC.4.64.1410040818280.13042@sarah.ssec.wisc.edu>

Thank you Henry.

Telling real, abstaining alcoholics that they can
drink again is a great way to ruin their lives and
the lives of their familys.

Bill

> Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2014 15:32:45 -0400
> From: Henry Rivera <hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu>
> To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
> Message-ID: <525CBB6E-F14F-4BCB-8D57-E09606B0A24E at alumni.virginia.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> As is noted in the comments in that page, I think the referenced study may be using "addiction" in a non-clinical way and may be referring to what used to be called "abuse" prior to DSM-5. My experience treating addiction and my review of the literature supports that addicts are vulnerable to relapse for the rest of their lives even after a period of abstinence. Many do recover and stop using. Despite the commentary on that page, providers are not hopeless about addiction. I think what is happening here is conflating use with abuse with dependence, especially with respect to illegal substances. Anyone with personal experience or with others who use substances knows that just because someone uses cocaine, for example, doesn't make them an addict. I have had way too many patients die from their addictions, and I have many patients who had had exceptional luck and are elderly addicts but are still alive. Addiction is progressive and is often fatal in my experience. Using "addic!
> tion" too loosely is a disservice to those who struggle with this issue.
> -Henry
>
>> On Oct 3, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/10/aging_out_of_ad.html
>>
>> So I wonder how many treatment programs are no better than homeopathy or doing nothing. (And, yah, a case can be made the last two are equivalent.;)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Dan
>>  My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2


From foozler83 at gmail.com  Sat Oct  4 15:32:18 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 10:32:18 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
In-Reply-To: <525CBB6E-F14F-4BCB-8D57-E09606B0A24E@alumni.virginia.edu>
References: <A886E39A-B5B8-4E83-8783-2D6CBA3B9E49@gmail.com>
 <525CBB6E-F14F-4BCB-8D57-E09606B0A24E@alumni.virginia.edu>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZSqopmpCh_2tbcwYRZvFf6GbMm_Co-ODhx-j=i0qpq6A@mail.gmail.com>

My personal experience with addiction, use, abuse, or ?>?>?  I hope this
helps someone.

I smoked two packs a day for 25 years and quit cold turkey.  After a week I
never experienced any urgings, but ten years after that I took a big drag
and inhaled and said 'Yep, you'll be back to two packs in a second if you
let yourself.'  Never since.

When I reached the stage of getting up at 6 and pouring a quadruple vodka
with a coffee chaser to kill the burning inside, I quit cold turkey.  Felt
better immediately and had no urgings to go back.  But 8 years later I was
at a gala with free drinks and had three double vodkas in 15 minutes.  So I
said "See, you just can't drink, you can't moderate it."  Have not had so
much as a beer since.  Yes, alcohol has been in the house the whole time.
And yes, I've had plenty of stress that might cause a person to go back to
his abuses.

Now I don't know what you call these abuses, but I did not meet the
definition of an alcoholic although clearly I had a big problem with it.
Maybe I was just a drunk, although I never missed a teaching day - did my
job well.

I think it is pretty silly to call someone a shopping addict or sex
addict.  Not the same at all.

While I am on the subject, let me relate an allergy that manifests in
emotions:  I discovered that bourbon whiskey made me angry and
belligerent.   Other alcohols did not.  I'll bet that many people have this
kind of behavioral allergy, perhaps to bourbon, perhaps to beer or who
knows what.  We all know people who can change rather drastically when
under the influence.  I think of it as an allergy. Maybe if they would just
change their type of alcohol they'd not experience what can be fatal
emotions.

Hope this helps someone.

bill w

On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Henry Rivera <hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu>
wrote:

> As is noted in the comments in that page, I think the referenced study may
> be using "addiction" in a non-clinical way and may be referring to what
> used to be called "abuse" prior to DSM-5. My experience treating addiction
> and my review of the literature supports that addicts are vulnerable to
> relapse for the rest of their lives even after a period of abstinence. Many
> do recover and stop using. Despite the commentary on that page, providers
> are not hopeless about addiction. I think what is happening here is
> conflating use with abuse with dependence, especially with respect to
> illegal substances. Anyone with personal experience or with others who use
> substances knows that just because someone uses cocaine, for example,
> doesn't make them an addict. I have had way too many patients die from
> their addictions, and I have many patients who had had exceptional luck and
> are elderly addicts but are still alive. Addiction is progressive and is
> often fatal in my experience. Using "addiction" too loosely is a disservice
> to those who struggle with this issue.
> -Henry
>
> On Oct 3, 2014, at 1:52 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/10/aging_out_of_ad.html
>
> So I wonder how many treatment programs are no better than homeopathy or
> doing nothing. (And, yah, a case can be made the last two are equivalent.;)
>
> Regards,
>
> Dan
>  My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141004/99be4312/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Sat Oct  4 21:23:37 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2014 14:23:37 -0700
Subject: [ExI] give a what?
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv0AH9Z14RyTJmpg2bFXmJggqhZ5M1Hxn60X+Dudcm47mQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002301cfdf46$7e64e540$7b2eafc0$@att.net>
 <CD3A682A-269F-4FA0-9172-1210631A8B74@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv0AH9Z14RyTJmpg2bFXmJggqhZ5M1Hxn60X+Dudcm47mQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <A70A0CE7-9448-4E3C-898F-BCB746D8B308@gmail.com>

> On Friday, October 3, 2014 6:21 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:50 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Of course, this presumes that, if there is a Hell, atheists
>> necessarily go there.
> 
> Not if God were a fan of logic, and if He wasn't it's hard to
> imagine how He managed to engineer some rather large construction
> projects, like the Universe. Perhaps God hides all evidence of
> His existence and then sends everyone that believes he's real
> anyway to hell for the sin of being illogical and only atheists
> go to heaven. Somebody asked Bertrand Russell what he would say
> to God after he dies and he found out that God exists after all,
> Russell responded:
> 
> "Sir, you did not give us enough information"

Yes, I've heard that before. Did you read the part of my statement when I wrote "this presumes that." What was meant by that?

And you trimmed out the part of my post where I gave an example of religious believers who don't believe atheists must needs end up in Hell:

"Some Buddhists have a conception of Hell and you don't go there for being an atheist."

(Buddhists don't necessarily believe in god or gods, and it's not any divine being that sends one to Buddhist Hell, IIRC.)

>> By the way, John raises an interesting issue here that kind of
>> ties in with the diamond/water paradox of economics. Presuming
>> he supervenes on his cells there's that physicalist premise
>> again :) -- then he might not give a hoot about any particular
>> one of them, but all of them together might be another matter.
> 
> If I'm uploaded into a computer (and for all I know I may already
> have been) then I'm still conscious but have no cells at all,
> living or dead, but I feel fine nevertheless.

Understood, but unless and until that's the case, my guess is you wouldn't want all your cells destroyed, no?

>> This is similar to how one might value one diamond more than a
>> glass of water now, but not all the diamonds in the world over
>> all the water in the world now.
> 
> That's no paradox, it's just a matter of value density.

The paradox was resolved in the late 19th century by the marginalists, but not with the notion of value density, but with marginal utility.

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141004/2c4a40dc/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Sat Oct  4 22:10:42 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 00:10:42 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEZSqopmpCh_2tbcwYRZvFf6GbMm_Co-ODhx-j=i0qpq6A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3711208952-3608@secure.ericade.net>

Addictive behaviour is in many ways a special form of bad habit, reinforced because of the neurochemical effects of the behaviour. One of the main findings in the field has been that context matters a lot: the best way to avoid the behaviour is to change the context - new friends, a new environment that doesn't allow the addict to conveniently continue. Maybe ageing has the same effect: it changes one's context, and this can help kick the compulsive behaviour.


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141005/1e402794/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Sun Oct  5 15:45:32 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 08:45:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Aging out of addiction?
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB5m397nVG3-brUkL-jTqhghNmU1q-ujOi1mK_wh+VUdtA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 5:00 AM,  Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Addictive behaviour is in many ways a special form of bad habit, reinforced because of the neurochemical effects of the behaviour. One of the main findings in the field has been that context matters a lot: the best way to avoid the behaviour is to change the context - new friends, a new environment that doesn't allow the addict to conveniently continue. Maybe ageing has the same effect: it changes one's context, and this can help kick the compulsive behaviour.

True, but people do age out of cocaine, alcohol and opiate use
_sometimes_.  Not everyone, but I have looked at cults as addictive
behavior with rewarding attention as the addictive "substance."  The
kind of rewards all these give to the brain's reward circuits are
similar.  They are substitutes for the reward for behavior (such as
supplying the tribe with meet) that was more important reproductively
in the young than the old.

So there is an evolutionary reason you would expect people to get less
out of reward chemicals be they external ones or internal as the age.
Of course there are people who stay drunk till they die as well as
people who stay in a cult till they are so useless that the cult sets
them and their possessions out on the curb.

Keith



From giulio at gmail.com  Sun Oct  5 16:12:59 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 18:12:59 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Input for article on "The Extropian Roots of Bitcoin"
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJyfx3R6XyjmATRn9Nx4GcU7Nmj-JFTiBKRXKanc7GHx+GQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyfx3R6XyjmATRn9Nx4GcU7Nmj-JFTiBKRXKanc7GHx+GQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJydMDtsGHvrev+WRJThBHJsEatR+ihux9tyzhkHasXUYLQ@mail.gmail.com>

The article is here FYC:
https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/extropian-roots-bitcoin/

G.

On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 10:57 AM, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
> I am writing for a Bitcoin magazine and I want to write an article on
> "The Extropian Roots of Bitcoin." Of course the evident connections
> are Hal Finney and the fact that the original Bitcoin paper was first
> shared on Perry Metzger cryptography mailing list.
>
> I joined this list in 1997 or 98 and I remember some good crypto
> discussions at that time, but I am sure there were even more
> discussions before. Who of the old-timers (and others) wants to share
> memories, facts and opinions?
>
> G.


From johnkclark at gmail.com  Sun Oct  5 16:56:42 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 12:56:42 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAL_armh25bUHu-R8gUujkGAZAYAkiUsT2Swc0h2UoKePMBwV+g@mail.gmail.com>
 <3491526493-24160@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv1B_WVQkPYYWJPJFaKCRxnt7N_bwX04SScwC2hgL9CXDA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 5:06 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Yes, I have read the paper and still remain unconvinced. Destroy the
> ozone layer and the land biosphere is in trouble. But do you really think
> that will wipe out fish all the way to the bottom of the Marianas trench?
>

It wouldn't sterilize the planet but it would cause lots of trouble. During
the last 600 million years the Earth may have been hit by one massive Gamma
Ray Burst and it may have caused the Ordovician?Silurian mass extinction
450 million years ago. At that time the land biosphere hadn't even evolved
yet, nevertheless except for the Permian it was the largest mass extinction
in Earth's history. If you were near the center of the galaxy it seems
reasonable to me that your chances of being hit by a similar GRB would be
at least 10 times larger (maybe 100) as it is on the Earth, and that could
be a big roadblock to the evolution of life complex enough to make radio
telescopes.  In addition you'd be much more likely to be uncomfortably near
to a run of the mill supernova or a belch from the super-massive Black Hole
at the Galaxy's center.

If you're too far from the center (like in the galactic halo) that could be
a problem too, there wouldn't be enough of the heavier elements that life
needs, or even enough to make rocky planets like the Earth, so you'd only
have gas giants such as Jupiter. For this reason some have proposed there
is a Galactic Habitable Zone.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141005/1c4e6aac/attachment.html>

From dan_ust at yahoo.com  Sun Oct  5 20:29:48 2014
From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan Ust)
Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2014 13:29:48 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers/was Re: Strong AI Hypothesis:
	logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv0_43dduo815zC_ufOHKJSswLx764Uj4i75fHY_ecEtxw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv0_43dduo815zC_ufOHKJSswLx764Uj4i75fHY_ecEtxw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CBB61656-39E9-4E68-A749-E1EBEFEF9251@yahoo.com>

> On Friday, October 3, 2014 5:49 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> What about folks like John Searle, Saul Kripke, W. V. O. Quine,
> Bertrand Russell, and Frege?
> 
> I can't say anything about Saul Kripke because I've never heard
> of him,

I'm mentioning people who have made contributions to philosophy as philosophers. That's why I listed these examples.

> unfortunately I have heard of John Searle and his dimwitted
> Chinese Room;

I'm not so sure Searle is dimwitted and his contributions have been to philosophy of language and to philosophy of mind. Aside from his views on AI, he's not a dualist and seems to be a naturalist/physicalist. But let's return to the Chinese Room, regardless of your view of it, don't you agree that it's been influential in the AI field -- even if only, for some, in coming up with rejections for it? It's definitely not, in my view, some idle speculation that's had no impact and no one need bother with examining or dealing with.

If you can admit this, of course, you still have the escape hatch of saying he came up with this thinking about AI -- not, say, pondering the views of Quine or some other philosopher. But that's kind of trivial escape hatch, no? It shows that it's not really about whether one is a professional this or that, but whether one is coming up with ideas and arguments that matter, which no field or person as such has a monopoly on.


> as for W. V. O. Quine and Bertrand Russell I've read
> books by them and like them, but like Frege they were all
> mathematicians/logicians.

Quine, Russell, and Frege all studied philosophy, and their major work was as philosophers. Yes, they all made contributions to logic (and to philosophy of mathematics), including Frege pretty much single-handedly developing modern symbolic logic, which alone should be seen as a major contribution to logic, math, and science. He did this in his work on foundations of thought and mathematics -- in other words, doing philosophy stuff.

We're back to Anders' comment too: when a philosopher makes a major contribution to something, it seems that gets repackaged later as non-philosophy. (Recall, what we call natural science today was once called natural philosophy and has its roots in Ancient Greek philosophy which was eventually systematized by Aristotle and his heirs.)

> And none of the people on your list
> came within a light year of the gigantic contribution to
> philosophy that Charles Darwin made, and he never had a
> philosophy course in his life.  As Daniel Dennett (well
> OK, I don't hate ALL philosophers) said:
> 
> "If I were to give an award for the single best idea anyone has
> ever had, I'd give it to Darwin."

I'm not disagreeing with the value of Darwin's contributions, though it's likely he did have a philosophy course in divinity school. Also, he wasn't really a professional scientist -- not that there were many at that time.

You've turned this into a pissing contest instead of seeing if there's any value in the work or the field itself. If Darwin is going to be the standard, then let's say no one else has done much work in any field since 1859. Yah, there have been some big contributions, but they all pale by comparison, so let's say even the latest work in physics today is really small potatoes. After all, it's not as world-changing as Darwin.

In fact, using Darwin here is not helpful. It's almost like in the field of literature, bringing up Shakespeare as the greatest among Bardolators. Yah, Shakespeare is the tops, but that doesn't mean all other creators must be set aside and shat on.

>> There's a whole branch of philosophy of science devoted to
>> discussing quantum field theory (Michael Redhead), spacetime
>> theory (Lawrence Sklar, John Earman)
> 
> And what important new ideas did they come up with that
> Einstein, Dirac or Feynman hadn't discovered a half century
> before?

The scientists you mention were steeped in philosophy, Einstein especially in the ideas of Ernst Mach. But you're looking at this in terms of philosophers coming up with scientific ideas. In the same fashion, scientists don't tend to come up with great new philosophic ideas. They usually elucidate a philosophical idea with their work.

But if you want to look at a philosophy who seems to have some direct impact on science, think Popper. (And think Mach. Think Aristotle, going back a ways, but he was the first to explicitly work out logic.)

>> In fact, a hobby horse of mine is attacks on Aristotle
> 
> Me too, if people must ancestor worship a ancient Greek
> it should be Archimedes not Aristotle or Plato.

You've misread me here. My hobby horse is against those making uninformed attacks on Aristotle. I see that all too often coming from people who haven't actually studied Aristotle, but are merely rehashing attacks on Aristoteleanism and Scholasticism from centuries ago. (Not defending them in toto, but merely against caricature.) This is little different than Creationists who attack Darwin based on some attack on evolution they cribbed from his 19th and early 20th century doubters (many of whom were not Creationists, but it's a matter of any stick is a good stick if you're beating your enemy with it). Aristotle is the usual whipping boy and it's not ancestor worship to defend him against an unfair charge. (And defending him, just to cut any further abject stupidity, against unfair charges is not saying he was always right or above criticism. The same would apply to anyone or to any other philosophy.)

As for contributions, I don't think one must choose here. This is like looking for a "top ten" list in something. Archimedes was definitely influential in mathematics and engineering. Aristotle developed logic and was really the first to attempt to systematize all the sciences he was interested in (and he seemed to be interested in everything). Plato really brought philosophical speculation to a new level that set the stage for Aristotle and many later thinkers. Some say both these philosophers were key, from a methodological standpoint, in Euclid's development, directly impacting the latter's geometry, probably the most read text in the West for centuries after, of course, the Bible. (And geometrical thinking had a direct impact on Descartes who directly influenced Newton. So, there's a loose line of philosophical succession to ponder.)

If we could run the experiment, it'd be interesting to see how Western thought, including science, would've evolved if we excised Aristotle (or pick someone; see below). Granted, it's quite possible anything he discovered would've been discovered later, but my guess is developments would've been delayed. Of course, other events impinged and who can say?

>> Don't mention Adler again.
> 
> OK, maybe that was a low blow, most philosophers aren't THAT bad.

It's cherry-picking at its worst: choosing one example of someone who's not really influential in his field, hasn't made any major contributions there (sung or unsung) as an example of the best. But this shouldn't be a pissing contest. I believe philosophy and the work of _some_ philosophers has value. Ditto for people in other fields. Does that mean every last person in any field must be a Darwin or the entire endeavor is worthless? If so, then I think most fields must be completely worthless because Darwins are kind of the once or twice a century geniuses (or incredibly lucky and hardworking so that he's fooled many of us:).

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141005/64327f25/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct  6 01:30:32 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 03:30:32 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv1B_WVQkPYYWJPJFaKCRxnt7N_bwX04SScwC2hgL9CXDA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3809673381-2792@secure.ericade.net>

I did some simulations:?http://aleph.se/andart2/space/galactic-duck-and-cover/
If one takes directionality into account the risk does not seem to be as dramatic as in the paper. Or rather, the variance goes way up: stars near the galactic centre are at risk, but there is a fair fraction that are never hit.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/9fd0ce2d/attachment.html>

From iph1954 at msn.com  Mon Oct  6 06:15:13 2014
From: iph1954 at msn.com (Mike Treder)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 06:15:13 +0000
Subject: [ExI] From: Mike Treder
Message-ID: <00CA6438-1AA0-42AE-8AF0-1A5AD1D6374B@pegasuscoachtours.com.au>




Hi Extropy


http://fmclicks.com/week.php?interest=yzkthhuyz3497zxcvm

Mike Treder

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/4a7cd74c/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 08:36:56 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:36:56 +0100
Subject: [ExI] From: Mike Treder
In-Reply-To: <00CA6438-1AA0-42AE-8AF0-1A5AD1D6374B@pegasuscoachtours.com.au>
References: <00CA6438-1AA0-42AE-8AF0-1A5AD1D6374B@pegasuscoachtours.com.au>
Message-ID: <CAL_armhCVQqj5=PySWYJCMpru0JRJxsJ+hotcNNMfqCdYOi0Ew@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Mike Treder wrote:
> Hi Extropy
>
> Mike Treder
>

This links to a diet spam site.
Probably spoofing an old mailing list address pretending to come from
Mike Treder.

BillK


From giulio at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 08:40:23 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 10:40:23 +0200
Subject: [ExI] From: Mike Treder
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armhCVQqj5=PySWYJCMpru0JRJxsJ+hotcNNMfqCdYOi0Ew@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00CA6438-1AA0-42AE-8AF0-1A5AD1D6374B@pegasuscoachtours.com.au>
 <CAL_armhCVQqj5=PySWYJCMpru0JRJxsJ+hotcNNMfqCdYOi0Ew@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyfCo5NzBU6Jp_sm=egbk1G3NGP=fjCG24SfWSXh-aoaFQ@mail.gmail.com>

Yes. BTW does anyone have recent news of Mike?

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 10:36 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 7:15 AM, Mike Treder wrote:
>> Hi Extropy
>>
>> Mike Treder
>>
>
> This links to a diet spam site.
> Probably spoofing an old mailing list address pretending to come from
> Mike Treder.
>
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct  6 09:44:50 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 11:44:50 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <13286910-851F-43C2-9B22-D7CD461471F3@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3838512435-4703@secure.ericade.net>


Dan?<danust2012 at gmail.com>?, 3/10/2014 9:34 PM:
On Friday, October 3, 2014 11:37 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:Evolution could be postponed for millions of years.
That would depend on many factors, but my qualitative non-expert view is more than millions, but tens of millions of years to recover, depending on those other factors.
I looked a bit at this for a paper. The references I found suggested that it took 5-30 million years after the end-Permian extinction for the biosphere to recover. Ecosystems bootstrapped faster, but most were simple and cosmopolitan - essentially weed ecosystems. It looks like the evolutionary radiation into new niches takes at least 5 million years, possibly longer.
Sahney S, Benton MJ. Recovery from the most profound mass extinction of all time. Procedings of the Royal Society B, 2008; 275: 759?765.http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/275/1636/759.full.pdf+html
Douglas H Erwin. The end and the beginning: recoveries from mass extinctions. Trends in Ecology & Evolution. Volume 13, Issue 9, 1 September 1998, Pages 344?349http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169534798014360
Note that this does not put a huge dent in the evolution of intelligence. It took 5 million years from the common ancestors of chimps and humans to us. I think the bigger problem is the Lilliputian issue: survivor species tend to be small, and if it takes a certain body size for intelligence (large animals are metabolically more efficient due to allometric scaling, so they can more easily afford big brains) then there is going to be a delay until they get large enough. But I would not think the probability of intelligence 15 myr after a mass extinction is vastly lower than just before (5 myr of recovery, 5 myr of size scaling, 5 myr of potential intelligence scaling).?



Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/3ac030c1/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 10:22:23 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 11:22:23 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3809673381-2792@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAJPayv1B_WVQkPYYWJPJFaKCRxnt7N_bwX04SScwC2hgL9CXDA@mail.gmail.com>
 <3809673381-2792@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjgQEAYJf2Twi33LugXvgq7QhAwgVeqEdd64nPyKa1yag@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> I did some simulations:
> http://aleph.se/andart2/space/galactic-duck-and-cover/
>
> If one takes directionality into account the risk does not seem to be as
> dramatic as in the paper. Or rather, the variance goes way up: stars near
> the galactic centre are at risk, but there is a fair fraction that are never
> hit.
>

Beam angle is important and there appears to be quite a wide
variation, though mostly seem to be concentrated around 4 degrees.
Some GRBs may even be spherical in dispersion. The wider spread beams
would catch more nearby systems, but the gamma ray density would
dwindle earlier with less effect on farther away stars. So being near
the galaxy centre or in a crowded star region would be a disadvantage.

Another point is that narrower, more concentrated GRB beams can go
right across the galaxy, so they could hit more than one star system.
(As could beams in crowded star regions).

BillK


From fortean1 at mindspring.com  Mon Oct  6 08:01:46 2014
From: fortean1 at mindspring.com (Terry W. Colvin)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 15:01:46 +0700 (GMT+07:00)
Subject: [ExI] FW...... Announcing The International Cryptozoology Museum
	Journal
Message-ID: <4550029.1412582506650.JavaMail.root@mswamui-thinleaf.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

This new journal is free at this time.  Loren Coleman also gives a good
review of cryptozoology publications in America and in Europe the past
few decades.  I wish Loren luck in this new endeavor.

Terry


[forteana] Announcing The International Cryptozoology Museum Journal
Date: Oct 6, 2014 8:13 AM

Announcing The International Cryptozoology Museum Journal

http://www.cryptozoonews.com/icmj/



------------------------------------
Posted by: Loren Coleman <lcoleman at maine.rr.com>
------------------------------------





From foozler83 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 13:58:03 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 08:58:03 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>

 Even when you go to the hospital and undergo anesthesia your consciousness
remains continuous  John Clark

I don't know of anyone who would agree that one remains aware of his
surroundings while under anesthesia, unless there are definitions of
consciousness of which I am unaware.  (Under ether for an appendectomy when
it was 1951 I had wild dreams the whole time.  Since then nothing.)

?I don't give a hoot in hell about my cells, it's my consciousness that I
want to continue.  JC

Now we have the nub, I think. I am a physical monist, so if there are no
cells there is no consciousness.  You sound like a dualist who thinks that
consciousness is not a physical thing.  If so we are arguing at cross
purposes.
Do you think you'd be conscious inside a hard drive?  Conscious of what?
Certainly no senses.  Just your thoughts?

Earlier someone said that if something is not impossible then it's
possible.  Well, I would like to qualify that:  If something is not
impossible according to what we know now, then it could be possible
?, depending on what future science discovers, which might be that it is
impossible.?


?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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/89df9771/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 15:55:00 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 11:55:00 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:58 AM, William Flynn Wallace
<foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Now we have the nub, I think. I am a physical monist, so if there are no
> cells there is no consciousness.  You sound like a dualist who thinks that
> consciousness is not a physical thing.  If so we are arguing at cross
> purposes.
> Do you think you'd be conscious inside a hard drive?  Conscious of what?
> Certainly no senses.  Just your thoughts?

dems fightin words

i'd say more of a duelist than dualist  :)


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 16:36:52 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:36:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <CBB61656-39E9-4E68-A749-E1EBEFEF9251@yahoo.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv0_43dduo815zC_ufOHKJSswLx764Uj4i75fHY_ecEtxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CBB61656-39E9-4E68-A749-E1EBEFEF9251@yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BFD82A43-238C-4DB7-BA74-3CBB6D8D7E44@gmail.com>

>> On Friday, October 3, 2014 5:49 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:54 AM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> What about folks like John Searle, Saul Kripke, W. V. O. Quine,
> Bertrand Russell, and Frege?
> 
> I can't say anything about Saul Kripke because I've never heard
> of him,

I'm mentioning people who have made contributions to philosophy as philosophers. That's why I listed these examples.

> unfortunately I have heard of John Searle and his dimwitted
> Chinese Room;

I'm not so sure Searle is dimwitted and his contributions have been to philosophy of language and to philosophy of mind. Aside from his views on AI, he's not a dualist and seems to be a naturalist/physicalist. But let's return to the Chinese Room, regardless of your view of it, don't you agree that it's been influential in the AI field -- even if only, for some, in coming up with rejections for it? It's definitely not, in my view, some idle speculation that's had no impact and no one need bother with examining or dealing with.

If you can admit this, of course, you still have the escape hatch of saying he came up with this thinking about AI -- not, say, pondering the views of Quine or some other philosopher. But that's kind of trivial escape hatch, no? It shows that it's not really about whether one is a professional this or that, but whether one is coming up with ideas and arguments that matter, which no field or person as such has a monopoly on.


> as for W. V. O. Quine and Bertrand Russell I've read
> books by them and like them, but like Frege they were all
> mathematicians/logicians.

Quine, Russell, and Frege all studied philosophy, and their major work was as philosophers. Yes, they all made contributions to logic (and to philosophy of mathematics), including Frege pretty much single-handedly developing modern symbolic logic, which alone should be seen as a major contribution to logic, math, and science. He did this in his work on foundations of thought and mathematics -- in other words, doing philosophy stuff.

We're back to Anders' comment too: when a philosopher makes a major contribution to something, it seems that gets repackaged later as non-philosophy. (Recall, what we call natural science today was once called natural philosophy and has its roots in Ancient Greek philosophy which was eventually systematized by Aristotle and his heirs.)

> And none of the people on your list
> came within a light year of the gigantic contribution to
> philosophy that Charles Darwin made, and he never had a
> philosophy course in his life.  As Daniel Dennett (well
> OK, I don't hate ALL philosophers) said:
> 
> "If I were to give an award for the single best idea anyone has
> ever had, I'd give it to Darwin."

I'm not disagreeing with the value of Darwin's contributions, though it's likely he did have a philosophy course in divinity school. Also, he wasn't really a professional scientist -- not that there were many at that time.

You've turned this into a pissing contest instead of seeing if there's any value in the work or the field itself. If Darwin is going to be the standard, then let's say no one else has done much work in any field since 1859. Yah, there have been some big contributions, but they all pale by comparison, so let's say even the latest work in physics today is really small potatoes. After all, it's not as world-changing as Darwin.

In fact, using Darwin here is not helpful. It's almost like in the field of literature, bringing up Shakespeare as the greatest among Bardolators. Yah, Shakespeare is the tops, but that doesn't mean all other creators must be set aside and shat on.

>> There's a whole branch of philosophy of science devoted to
>> discussing quantum field theory (Michael Redhead), spacetime
>> theory (Lawrence Sklar, John Earman)
> 
> And what important new ideas did they come up with that
> Einstein, Dirac or Feynman hadn't discovered a half century
> before?

The scientists you mention were steeped in philosophy, Einstein especially in the ideas of Ernst Mach. But you're looking at this in terms of philosophers coming up with scientific ideas. In the same fashion, scientists don't tend to come up with great new philosophic ideas. They usually elucidate a philosophical idea with their work.

But if you want to look at a philosophy who seems to have some direct impact on science, think Popper. (And think Mach. Think Aristotle, going back a ways, but he was the first to explicitly work out logic.)

>> In fact, a hobby horse of mine is attacks on Aristotle
> 
> Me too, if people must ancestor worship a ancient Greek
> it should be Archimedes not Aristotle or Plato.

You've misread me here. My hobby horse is against those making uninformed attacks on Aristotle. I see that all too often coming from people who haven't actually studied Aristotle, but are merely rehashing attacks on Aristoteleanism and Scholasticism from centuries ago. (Not defending them in toto, but merely against caricature.) This is little different than Creationists who attack Darwin based on some attack on evolution they cribbed from his 19th and early 20th century doubters (many of whom were not Creationists, but it's a matter of any stick is a good stick if you're beating your enemy with it). Aristotle is the usual whipping boy and it's not ancestor worship to defend him against an unfair charge. (And defending him, just to cut any further abject stupidity, against unfair charges is not saying he was always right or above criticism. The same would apply to anyone or to any other philosophy.)

As for contributions, I don't think one must choose here. This is like looking for a "top ten" list in something. Archimedes was definitely influential in mathematics and engineering. Aristotle developed logic and was really the first to attempt to systematize all the sciences he was interested in (and he seemed to be interested in everything). Plato really brought philosophical speculation to a new level that set the stage for Aristotle and many later thinkers. Some say both these philosophers were key, from a methodological standpoint, in Euclid's development, directly impacting the latter's geometry, probably the most read text in the West for centuries after, of course, the Bible. (And geometrical thinking had a direct impact on Descartes who directly influenced Newton. So, there's a loose line of philosophical succession to ponder.)

If we could run the experiment, it'd be interesting to see how Western thought, including science, would've evolved if we excised Aristotle (or pick someone; see below). Granted, it's quite possible anything he discovered would've been discovered later, but my guess is developments would've been delayed. Of course, other events impinged and who can say?

>> Don't mention Adler again.
> 
> OK, maybe that was a low blow, most philosophers aren't THAT bad.

It's cherry-picking at its worst: choosing one example of someone who's not really influential in his field, hasn't made any major contributions there (sung or unsung) as an example of the best. But this shouldn't be a pissing contest. I believe philosophy and the work of _some_ philosophers has value. Ditto for people in other fields. Does that mean every last person in any field must be a Darwin or the entire endeavor is worthless? If so, then I think most fields must be completely worthless because Darwins are kind of the once or twice a century geniuses (or incredibly lucky and hardworking so that he's fooled many of us:).

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/bb12046a/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct  6 16:39:29 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:39:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] ex post fucto
Message-ID: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>

 

In the US legal system (and probably all the others that matter) if the
penalty for a crime increases after the crime has been committed, the perp
is penalized under the previous system, when the crime was actually
committed.  This legal concept is known by the Latin phrase ex post facto,
after the fact.

 

What if some technology is invented which causes a crime to be detectable,
long after it is committed, such that the probability of being caught rises
dramatically?

 

Do avoid the temptation to jump to easy cases; murderer or rapist leaves DNA
at the scene, we later track the bastard.  That one is easy because we have
zero point zero sympathy for murderers and rapists.  Too easy, no moral
dilemma.  Catch 'em!

 

But consider a case where a harlot gets pregnant.  There has never been a
penalty because there is no way to know who dunnit where there may be
hundreds of candidates.  But now the harlot's daughter grows up, and can
spend a hundred bucks and figure out who is her father with some
persistence.  The client is fucked after the fact.  The potential for
harmful wordplay is great (and welcomed) but do give this some thought
please.  The harlot's daughter can sue the client for child support long
after the fact, she could blackmail or extort payments, she could claim (in
court) he loved her mother, made her all kinds of promises, broke her heart
and so forth, when the client has exactly no memories of ever having met
this perhaps now-expired woman.  The harlot's daughter isn't carrying the
burden of proof; she is a DNA match.  Is not the client on the hook for
child-support payments?

 

After all this time, it is just now occurring to me that DNA testing may
enable crime or cause enormous disruption.  I think I overlooked that
because I lived such a tragically G-rated life throughout my misspent youth
(dammit.)  

 

Ethics hipsters, do offer me some guidance here, or share your thoughts and
ideas.  

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/331f239e/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 16:53:27 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 11:53:27 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>

>
> i'd say more of a duelist than dualist  :)
>

?Here's the thing for me:  we have 100K enyzmes (most a mystery), scores of
hormones (that we know of) interacting in ways we are just beginning to
understand, all these neurons and glial cells.  In addition, recently it
has been found that gut bacteria may influence or even make
neurotransmitters.  What else are microbes doing to/with us?

So what is going on in our unconscious (we have a very poor idea of what it
is doing), preconscious (ditto), and conscious (ditto except for
introspection which is fundamentally flawed as data, and fMRIs which are
beginning to show some real promise)?  Influx from all the senses, much of
it blocked on a moment to moment basis, from hormones and who knows what
else in our blood that can penetrate the blood brain barrier, and some of
you can think of our brain's functions as something downloadable as zeros
and ones.?

?  Not only that, you think that this collection of digital info can be
conscious without all the input above - reduced to pure thoughts perhaps -
junking our apesuits, as someone said a few months ago.  The idea that you
could put a brain in a jar, much less a hard drive, and feed it all these
data to create a thinking and feeling machines that function like our own
brain, is just way, way beyond my ability to conceive of.  Note that I did
not say it was impossible.

Too much scifi perhaps?

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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/bddd7bcb/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 16:54:24 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 17:54:24 +0100
Subject: [ExI] META: Gmail problem
Message-ID: <CAL_armht=XsN+_4o68xRsVf9tGH2iT2Qhwh3ftXPO75o-0Z8xA@mail.gmail.com>

I thought I should tell everyone that Dan isn't double-posting by choice,

Gmail currently has a problem with any posts from a yahoo.com email
address to the Exi-chat list. Any post with a yahoo.com address gets
put in gmail users Spam folder. Gmail says that this is because it is
being aggressive with spam and is unable to verify any yahoo.com email
address.
Gmail user filters don't help as the spam detection takes precedence.
And having the yahoo user in your gmail Address book doesn't help either.

(As yahoo email is a competitor to gmail, there may be suspicions
about this behaviour). ;)

BillK


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 16:58:12 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 09:58:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] ex post fucto
In-Reply-To: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
References: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
Message-ID: <737ACC8B-9453-4C84-8937-2F7A3B2F53B0@gmail.com>

In your initial example, ex post facto is not about detection as such but whether it's a crime at the time. Murder, e.g., is the crime -- not leaving DNA at the crime scene.

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2

> On Oct 6, 2014, at 9:39 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> 
>  
> In the US legal system (and probably all the others that matter) if the penalty for a crime increases after the crime has been committed, the perp is penalized under the previous system, when the crime was actually committed.  This legal concept is known by the Latin phrase ex post facto, after the fact.
>  
> What if some technology is invented which causes a crime to be detectable, long after it is committed, such that the probability of being caught rises dramatically?
>  
> Do avoid the temptation to jump to easy cases; murderer or rapist leaves DNA at the scene, we later track the bastard.  That one is easy because we have zero point zero sympathy for murderers and rapists.  Too easy, no moral dilemma.  Catch ?em!
>  
> But consider a case where a harlot gets pregnant.  There has never been a penalty because there is no way to know who dunnit where there may be hundreds of candidates.  But now the harlot?s daughter grows up, and can spend a hundred bucks and figure out who is her father with some persistence.  The client is fucked after the fact.  The potential for harmful wordplay is great (and welcomed) but do give this some thought please.  The harlot?s daughter can sue the client for child support long after the fact, she could blackmail or extort payments, she could claim (in court) he loved her mother, made her all kinds of promises, broke her heart and so forth, when the client has exactly no memories of ever having met this perhaps now-expired woman.  The harlot?s daughter isn?t carrying the burden of proof; she is a DNA match.  Is not the client on the hook for child-support payments?
>  
> After all this time, it is just now occurring to me that DNA testing may enable crime or cause enormous disruption.  I think I overlooked that because I lived such a tragically G-rated life throughout my misspent youth (dammit.) 
>  
> Ethics hipsters, do offer me some guidance here, or share your thoughts and ideas. 
>  
> spike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/6620ba39/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 17:00:48 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 12:00:48 -0500
Subject: [ExI] ex post fucto
In-Reply-To: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
References: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbcfACirwykiqTF4CzFnK+XQ_Z9UOuux7RknGHeXu6zKA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:39 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> In the US legal system (and probably all the others that matter) if the
> penalty for a crime increases after the crime has been committed, the perp
> is penalized under the previous system, when the crime was actually
> committed.  This legal concept is known by the Latin phrase ex post facto,
> after the fact.
>
>
>
> What if some technology is invented which causes a crime to be detectable,
> long after it is committed, such that the probability of being caught rises
> dramatically?
>
>
>
> Do avoid the temptation to jump to easy cases; murderer or rapist leaves
> DNA at the scene, we later track the bastard.  That one is easy because we
> have zero point zero sympathy for murderers and rapists.  Too easy, no
> moral dilemma.  Catch ?em!
>
>
>
> But consider a case where a harlot gets pregnant.  There has never been a
> penalty because there is no way to know who dunnit where there may be
> hundreds of candidates.  But now the harlot?s daughter grows up, and can
> spend a hundred bucks and figure out who is her father with some
> persistence.  The client is fucked after the fact.  The potential for
> harmful wordplay is great (and welcomed) but do give this some thought
> please.  The harlot?s daughter can sue the client for child support long
> after the fact, she could blackmail or extort payments, she could claim (in
> court) he loved her mother, made her all kinds of promises, broke her heart
> and so forth, when the client has exactly no memories of ever having met
> this perhaps now-expired woman.  The harlot?s daughter isn?t carrying the
> burden of proof; she is a DNA match.  Is not the client on the hook for
> child-support payments?
>
>
>
> After all this time, it is just now occurring to me that DNA testing may
> enable crime or cause enormous disruption.  I think I overlooked that
> because I lived such a tragically G-rated life throughout my misspent youth
> (dammit.)
>
>
>
> Ethics hipsters, do offer me some guidance here, or share your thoughts
> and ideas.
>
>
>
> spike
>

?If you made it, it's yours and your responsibility.  Will harlots (please
excuse me while I giggle....) now have to have clients sign forms declaring
any babies will not be their responsibility?   Even if so, I'll bet they
would not stand up in court anymore than those signs on gravel trucks
saying not responsible for damage (that's been adjudicated - truckers
lost). That it's a commercial transaction seems irrelevant to me.

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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/ae8e807c/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 17:08:33 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 12:08:33 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <BFD82A43-238C-4DB7-BA74-3CBB6D8D7E44@gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv0_43dduo815zC_ufOHKJSswLx764Uj4i75fHY_ecEtxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CBB61656-39E9-4E68-A749-E1EBEFEF9251@yahoo.com>
 <BFD82A43-238C-4DB7-BA74-3CBB6D8D7E44@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEYq_iV7G=m5wfsZ6M3mkyR_skOhsitDqu0+fz0+=zPB=w@mail.gmail.com>

Me too, if people must ancestor worship a ancient Greek
>
> it should be Archimedes not Aristotle or Plato.
>
>
?Archimedes and Plato are different sorts, as I am sure you know.  Plato
and Socrates for moral phil., Arch. and Arist. for natural.  bill w?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/267557a0/attachment.html>

From steinberg.will at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 19:29:43 2014
From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 14:29:43 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKrqSyHDy-uVVniAC7KOhHdxerOH9h5G_pWYKRt4MOeDCewUgA@mail.gmail.com>

Physicalism seems bereft of any real meaning.  What is physical--something
exists in the universe?  What is exists--existence can only be verified by
observation.  So calling something physical doesn't resolve any problems or
explain anything.

It is like imagining the universe as a bunch of billiard balls knocking
around on a table, and being satisfied with "the universe is made up of a
bunch of billiard balls knocking around on a table" without stopping to
think what they are made of, why they are moving, why there are more than
one.

It's a pretty old argument, but if you want to be as rational as possible
then you should predicate reality on the only thing you can actually
verify, which is your consciousness.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/b314d4d3/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Mon Oct  6 20:44:49 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 13:44:49 -0700
Subject: [ExI] ex post fucto
In-Reply-To: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
References: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNT=my-uFCXuegN3dxT0CXc1ik9nB7ukUbzbEc9nb213Eg@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 6, 2014 9:53 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> In the US legal system (and probably all the others that matter) if the
penalty for a crime increases after the crime has been committed, the perp
is penalized under the previous system, when the crime was actually
committed.  This legal concept is known by the Latin phrase ex post facto,
after the fact.
>
> What if some technology is invented which causes a crime to be
detectable, long after it is committed, such that the probability of being
caught rises dramatically?

The same thing that happens if evidence turns up for non-technological
reasons.  There is a statute of limitations on most crimes, and none on
others, to deal with this type of situation.

The law does not excuse cases just because the probability of being caught
seemed low at the time.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/51a17fc4/attachment.html>

From tara at taramayastales.com  Mon Oct  6 23:38:36 2014
From: tara at taramayastales.com (Tara Maya)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 16:38:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] ex post fucto
In-Reply-To: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
References: <01f801cfe184$1a196bc0$4e4c4340$@att.net>
Message-ID: <A991F6CB-1206-4BAA-B9A2-89A6A5E731C9@taramayastales.com>

I'm not sure this is the best example for what I thought you were trying to ask. Presumably the "crime" is soliciting a prostitute, and the fact that a baby is born is evidence of the crime. But that's quite trivial and irrelevant to issue raised, which is paternal responsibility to a child. Even after any other statute of limitations passed, the child would be his child, because that relationship is permanent. Suppose the guy died, leaving a Will which said only, "Divide my estate equally among my children." The harlot's child could use DNA to prove being one of those children, perhaps to the dismay of his other children. Those other children wouldn't have committed a crime, and might be quite horrified to have evidence of a half-sibling begotten in a brothel. But punishment, nor even disgrace, would not be the issue, only relationship.

In other words, who cares if the mother is a harlot? That's just a red herring. He would be (or, in my opinion, SHOULD BE) required to make child-support payments if he's the father of the child. 


Tara Maya
Blog  |  Twitter  |  Facebook  |  Amazon  |  Goodreads



On Oct 6, 2014, at 9:39 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>  
> In the US legal system (and probably all the others that matter) if the penalty for a crime increases after the crime has been committed, the perp is penalized under the previous system, when the crime was actually committed.  This legal concept is known by the Latin phrase ex post facto, after the fact.
>  
> What if some technology is invented which causes a crime to be detectable, long after it is committed, such that the probability of being caught rises dramatically?
>  
> Do avoid the temptation to jump to easy cases; murderer or rapist leaves DNA at the scene, we later track the bastard.  That one is easy because we have zero point zero sympathy for murderers and rapists.  Too easy, no moral dilemma.  Catch ?em!
>  
> But consider a case where a harlot gets pregnant.  There has never been a penalty because there is no way to know who dunnit where there may be hundreds of candidates.  But now the harlot?s daughter grows up, and can spend a hundred bucks and figure out who is her father with some persistence.  The client is fucked after the fact.  The potential for harmful wordplay is great (and welcomed) but do give this some thought please.  The harlot?s daughter can sue the client for child support long after the fact, she could blackmail or extort payments, she could claim (in court) he loved her mother, made her all kinds of promises, broke her heart and so forth, when the client has exactly no memories of ever having met this perhaps now-expired woman.  The harlot?s daughter isn?t carrying the burden of proof; she is a DNA match.  Is not the client on the hook for child-support payments?
>  
> After all this time, it is just now occurring to me that DNA testing may enable crime or cause enormous disruption.  I think I overlooked that because I lived such a tragically G-rated life throughout my misspent youth (dammit.) 
>  
> Ethics hipsters, do offer me some guidance here, or share your thoughts and ideas. 
>  
> spike
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/9970d2e8/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 02:11:54 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 22:11:54 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <BFD82A43-238C-4DB7-BA74-3CBB6D8D7E44@gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv13gQ_cXB=LMB4jpzVQb1tUw6US=JTfLhp=8mbfALiqGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAJPayv07rETw1x5H3igu699oCdLtf27TXwpxcCeJvkstB0JG1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv1Qu51JXPXhWA2GDhrXC3MFnPdNkoVSdVJKF4ZmoL3Nvw@mail.gmail.com>
 <780B9ADE-6B0B-41DC-A717-6FEBDE60B3B4@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv0_43dduo815zC_ufOHKJSswLx764Uj4i75fHY_ecEtxw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CBB61656-39E9-4E68-A749-E1EBEFEF9251@yahoo.com>
 <BFD82A43-238C-4DB7-BA74-3CBB6D8D7E44@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv0LaF7PQFOhyP5bn7FDjxw-xSYn5CpDfbg7MpJTK8m+7Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:36 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

> he's [Searle] is not a dualist

However I am a duelist, I think that a noun (like the brain) is not the
same as the way a noun behaves (like the mind).

 > the Chinese Room, regardless of your view of it, don't you agree that
> it's been influential in the AI field
>

I agree that the Chinese Room has been influential, but not in a good way.
The Chinese Room thought experiment is not just wrong it is STUPID. I say
this because it has 3 colossal flaws, just one would render it stupid and 3
render it stupidity cubed:

1) It assumes that a small part of a system has all the properties of the
entire system.

2) It assumes that slowing down consciousness would not make things strange
and that strange things can not exist. Yes it's strange that a room can be
conscious but it would also be strange if the grey goo inside your head was
slowed down by a factor of a hundred thousand million billion trillion.

3) This is the stupidest reason of the lot. Searle wants to prove that
mechanical things may behave intelligently but only humans can be
conscious. Searle starts by showing successfully that the Chinese Room does
indeed behave intelligently, but then he concludes that no consciousness
was involved in the operation of that intelligent room. How does he reach
that conclusion? I will tell you. Searle assumes that mechanical things may
behave intelligently but only humans can be conscious and it is perfectly
true that the little man is not aware of whats going on therefore Searle
concludes that consciousness was not involved in that intelligence,
therefore mechanical things may behave intelligently but only humans can be
conscious. By assuming what he wants to prove all Searle has proven is that
he's a idiot.

And now let me tell you about Clark's Chinese Room: You are a professor of
Chinese Literature and are in a room with me and the great Chinese
Philosopher and Poet Laozi. Laozi writes something in his native language
on a paper and hands it to me. I walk 10 feet and give it to you. You read
the paper and are impressed with the wisdom of the message and the beauty
of its language. Now I tell you that I don't know a word of Chinese; can
you find any deep philosophical  implications from that fact? I believe
Clark's Chinese Room is every bit as profound as Searle's Chinese Room. Not
very.

All Searle did was come up with a wildly impractical model (the Chinese
Room) of a very very VERY slow intelligence in which a human being happens
to play a trivial part.

 > Quine, Russell, and Frege all studied philosophy, and their major work
> was as philosophers.
>

Quine was very witty writer and  logician and I'm a fan of logic,  but I
always associate him with Douglas Hofstadter and his book "G?del, Escher,
Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid", the most brilliant book I ever read. In
that book Hofstadter coins a new verb "to quine" which involves the use
/mention distinction.

Bertrand Russell's major work was the mathematical book Principia
Mathematica; he said that besides himself and his coauthor Alfred North
Whitehead only one other person read all 3 of the enormous volumes cover to
cover, and that person was Kurt Godel; but that one reader was enough to
change everything. This isn't a exact quote but he said that as he got
older he got too stupid for mathematics so he switched to philosophy, and
when he got even older and was too stupid for philosophy he switched to
politics.

And as for Ferge...

 > Frege pretty much single-handedly developing modern symbolic logic,
>

I couldn't have said it better myself.

> I'm not disagreeing with the value of Darwin's contributions, though it's
> likely he did have a philosophy course in divinity school.
>

If it was in divinity school it was a anti philosophy course.


> > Also, he wasn't really a professional scientist -- not that there were
> many at that time.
>

The word "scientist" hadn't even been invented, people like Darwin and
Newton were called "Natural Philosophers", a charming term that I wish we
still used. But it's true that Darwin was not a professional in the sense
that he was never payed for his scientific work but he didn't need to be,
Darwin was rich.


>> And what important new ideas did they come up with that Einstein, Dirac
> or Feynman hadn't discovered a half century  before?
>


> > The scientists you mention were steeped in philosophy,
>

As I said I love philosophy, it's philosophers I have a problem with.


> > Einstein especially in the ideas of Ernst Mach.
>

Einstein was a fan of some of Mach's ideas but Mach was not a fan of
Einstein, to the day he died he never accepted relativity, Special or
General, nor even the atomic theory of matter.


> > scientists don't tend to come up with great new philosophic ideas.
>

Scientists (and mathematicians) are the only ones who do come up with great
new philosophic ideas, after they do it takes card carrying philosophers a
century or two to incorporate the discovery into their own work, but by
then of course scientists have moved on. So philosophers fight the last war
and are always 2 or 3 revolutions in thought behind.


> > But if you want to look at a philosophy who seems to have some direct
> impact on science, think Popper.
>

Science impacted Popper but Popper didn't impact science, no scientist
would read Popper and become a better scientist because of it. Popper and
all philosophers of science reminds me of movie critics, they keep telling
movie makers how they're doing it all wrong but couldn't make a movie
themselves if their life depended on it.


> >  My hobby horse is against those making uninformed attacks on Aristotle.
> I see that all too often coming from people who haven't actually studied
> Aristotle,
>

I have't read much Aristotle, few have, unlike Plato he was not a good
writer; as for his ideas, about 5 minutes of study (he doesn't deserve
more) is enough to convince me that Aristotle was the worst physicist who
ever lived.

 John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141006/b7658129/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 13:59:54 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 08:59:54 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAKrqSyHDy-uVVniAC7KOhHdxerOH9h5G_pWYKRt4MOeDCewUgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKrqSyHDy-uVVniAC7KOhHdxerOH9h5G_pWYKRt4MOeDCewUgA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZPfUjMA6X-sz0p=kNEp2FNweGDNpHSkB0H8W3u-tM_wQ@mail.gmail.com>

>
> It's a pretty old argument, but if you want to be as rational as possible
> then you should predicate reality on the only thing you can actually
> verify, which is your consciousness.
>

I am not really sure what this statement means.  If it just means that "I
think therefore I am" (meaning I am aware of my surroundings and can
function in them), then fine.  If it means that our conscious self is the
only thing capable of discovering reality (whatever that is), then we have
trusted a very unreliable source of facts.  Just look at all the cognitive
errors that we are susceptible to.  The superstitions.  Humans, are, in
fact, a highly irrational group of beings.?

?  There are excellent reasons why skepticism was invented.

Can billions of people who all agree on the same thing be wrong?  I just
wish this were laughable.

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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/274537d0/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 17:38:33 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:38:33 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2e7EUcqZVgonBmc4vQyzp+ZhmL+GbyTeiVb_66sTh+BA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 9:58 AM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Now we have the nub, I think. I am a physical monist, so if there are no
> cells there is no consciousness.
>

That would be a perfectly logical conclusion, if human cells were the only
physical thing in the universe.

> You sound like a dualist
>

That's because I am, I believe that nouns and adjectives are not the same
thing.

> who thinks that consciousness is not a physical thing.
>

The way a physical thing behaves is not itself a physical thing. A brain is
a noun, a physical thing that you can touch, but you can no more touch the
intelligence or consciousness in a brain than you can touch the "fast" in a
racing car.

Your particular brain is a physical lump of matter and there is only one of
those, but William Flynn Wallace is the way that lump of matter behaves and
there could be lots of those, if there isn't it's only because technology
isn't yet able to position molecules with nanometer precision that would
allow other lumps of matter to behave in a Williamflynnwallaceian way.

> Do you think you'd be conscious inside a hard drive?
>

If it was just a hard disk the information on it would never change and
mind can not exist without change, but if the hard drive was hooked up to a
large enough microprocessor then certainly it would be conscious, and if it
was the right information on that disk it would be John K Clark. Unless you
believe in crap like the soul no other conclusion can be reached.

> Conscious of what?  Certainly no senses.
>

Your computer has no I/O ports?! How did you see my post? How did you type
your reply?

> Just your thoughts?
>

If you had no I/O ports, that is to say if you were paralyzed from the neck
down and were blind and deaf you'd be conscious of nothing but your
thoughts too.

> Earlier someone said that if something is not impossible then it's
> possible.  Well, I would like to qualify that:  If something is not
> impossible according to what we know now, then it could be possible
> ?, depending on what future science discovers, which might be that it is
> impossible.?
>
>
If we wish to put things into the possible or the impossible pile the only
tool we have to accomplish that task is the knowledge  we know (or think we
know) about how the universe operates; we might make a error but the best
we can do is the best we can do. But you seem to be saying that it must be
impossible because it it were not then things would be odd, not illogical
not paradoxical just odd. Well the Universe works the way it wants to work
and if human beings find it odd that's just too bad.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/1571b27d/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 17:52:39 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:52:39 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv3MGDsH5Xev9O8timDCANb_MCk-i1zDZf=QSsEWCUn6mQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 12:53 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Here's the thing for me:  we have 100K enyzmes (most a mystery), scores
> of hormones
>

I am not impressed. Chemicals like that move by diffusion, so  they could
only transfer information at about .01 Meters a second. Light moves at
300,000,000 Meters a second.

> The idea that you could put a brain in a jar, much less a hard drive, and
> feed it all these data to create a thinking and feeling machines that
> function like our own brain, is just way, way beyond my ability to conceive
> of.
>

Your brain is already in a jar,  it's just that the jar is made of bone and
not glass.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/e0ad21fe/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 18:04:35 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:04:35 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Strong AI Hypothesis: logically flawed
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv3MGDsH5Xev9O8timDCANb_MCk-i1zDZf=QSsEWCUn6mQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <3518539204-19896@secure.ericade.net>
 <937EE929-F8A3-4CDE-A288-F2B1D3704843@gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEY1tgyZ2pimXi2M6Yaj8Vt779D7b8hLy7YS=DRNVaS6+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv2ien4BJYh02ngAd34Hjg4WKhLTyubGoFEwvjq7Ne1bGw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEb7LV+oKYsOBsTDEGpmPcFPxoridJsFDjpka2bcG=XJwA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOJFdbJGUZtg0MeR0wgR4=swBK3FjEuv99RQYYufk602CgmENg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEbi=22ssoEVY87-8H9Kty1j_RAgyoL445EDyEbE7NKhKA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv3MGDsH5Xev9O8timDCANb_MCk-i1zDZf=QSsEWCUn6mQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEYQbQCUHv6N6NBun3kDR4n46Y60MNMF9w7C1999K3zWiw@mail.gmail.com>

> ?John Clark wrote;?
>
> I am not impressed. Chemicals like that move by diffusion, so  they could
> only transfer information at about .01 Meters a second. Light moves at
> 300,000,000 Meters a second.
>

?Chemicals do the job?.  What more do you want?  Faster?  More gigabytes?

A brain is a noun, a physical thing that you can touch, but you can no more
touch the  intelligence or consciousness in a brain than you can touch the
"fast" in a racing car.?


?I don't buy the comparison.  I think of the brain as a verb.  It's
active.  No activity, no self.  Dead.?  And it depends on what you call
'touch'.  We can't put our finger on neurons firing but we can take
pictures of them, see where they go, correlate that with behaviors.

?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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/93b0db1f/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 19:04:07 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 12:04:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] META: Gmail problem
In-Reply-To: <1729378135.755288.1412708501850.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10655.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <CAL_armht=XsN+_4o68xRsVf9tGH2iT2Qhwh3ftXPO75o-0Z8xA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1729378135.755288.1412708501850.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10655.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <AA4C0557-0610-40D0-AF96-DD7DB42007CB@gmail.com>

Thanks, Bill. Yes, sorry for double postings. Hope to catch up with reading and responding in the next few days.

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/1d05caef/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 20:18:38 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:18:38 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Signature of Majorana particles?
References: <105232859.184144.1412712795630.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10620.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <5CEC344F-11D9-423B-AFA6-55EE61135217@gmail.com>

http://www.nature.com/news/new-particle-is-both-matter-and-antimatter-1.16074

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/81c284db/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 20:37:57 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 13:37:57 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Signature of Majorana particles?
In-Reply-To: <5CEC344F-11D9-423B-AFA6-55EE61135217@gmail.com>
References: <105232859.184144.1412712795630.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10620.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <5CEC344F-11D9-423B-AFA6-55EE61135217@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNSDqQwE+WuivCHo+-X5yUoAfk=r7=dWW-OJfjicm4YiiQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 7, 2014 1:20 PM, "Dan" <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
http://www.nature.com/news/new-particle-is-both-matter-and-antimatter-1.16074

There seems to be an unsubstantiated jump here.  Just because two electrons
coordinate their spins, how does that make them into positrons?  They may
have some characteristics that antimatter also possesses, such as "they
exist", but these characteristics are also possessed by ordinary matter.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/9e687f62/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Tue Oct  7 23:13:48 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 01:13:48 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjgQEAYJf2Twi33LugXvgq7QhAwgVeqEdd64nPyKa1yag@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3973939504-11450@secure.ericade.net>

BillK <pharos at gmail.com> , 6/10/2014 12:26 PM:

Beam angle is important and there appears to be quite a wide 
variation, though mostly seem to be concentrated around 4 degrees. 
I took that into account. Power-law distributed beam angles fitted to the data in the paper I quoted, with a range set by when the fluence is equal to 100 kJ/m^2.?
If you reduce the area of the sky you irradiate from all of it to a fraction f, then your range of deadliness (or just detectability) scales as 1/sqrt(f). And the total volume scales as sqrt(f) - the more narrow bursts cover fewer stars despite their huge range.


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141008/075a31f3/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Tue Oct  7 23:54:29 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 16:54:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <3973939504-11450@secure.ericade.net>
References: <3973939504-11450@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <F8D97D12-44B8-4E19-850C-8FD7C17D5F3B@gmail.com>

Just speculating: Could GRBs have secondary effects on planetary systems, such as burning off too many volatiles (which are then not available, say, for cometary impacts on young worlds?) and shaking up stability (say, causing another heavy bombardment in a system by knocking asteroids off stable/nonintersecting orbits)?

The effects here might be larger because they don't rely on the GRB getting "lucky" to hit the target planet, but rather do something to the system as a whole the lowers the odds of complex life surviving. 

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/b83f5f23/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 03:08:28 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 23:08:28 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Signature of Majorana particles?
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNSDqQwE+WuivCHo+-X5yUoAfk=r7=dWW-OJfjicm4YiiQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <105232859.184144.1412712795630.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10620.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <5CEC344F-11D9-423B-AFA6-55EE61135217@gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNSDqQwE+WuivCHo+-X5yUoAfk=r7=dWW-OJfjicm4YiiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv1vQ6KKf+8hifTPWe86WU2jOiUYPwfNHgeMS41PSj4BKQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> http://www.nature.com/news/new-particle-is-both-matter-and-antimatter-1.16074
> > There seems to be an unsubstantiated jump here.  Just because two
> electrons coordinate their spins, how does that make them into positrons?


Nobody said they were positrons, they would be there own antiparticle,
something that is not true for matter nor for antimater, they would not be
fermions or bosons either, they would be something new , a entirely new
class of particle. If this discovery is confirmed it could be huge!!

The reason it's so hard to make a Quantum Computer is that they are so
delicate, the slightest disturbance will cause quantum decoherence, but
these particles would be inherently far less susceptible to decoherence.
They're so rugged you could use then to make a practical large scale
Quantum Computer, and that will change the world as much as Nanotechnology!

We already know that if you can get the errors caused by decoherence below
a certain constant value you could use quantum error correction codes to
make quantum calculation of arbitrarily large size, but with regular matter
we can't get below that threshold, but if these new particles are real we
almost certainly can.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141007/562682d5/attachment.html>

From giulio at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 08:49:00 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 08:49:00 +0000
Subject: [ExI] From: Giulio Prisco
Message-ID: <3128991B-1994-4F24-D0DE-830EA2AD64B3@emirates.net.ae>




Hi

http://joomlati.com/forward.php?pretty=uxeb3635pnuakx




giulio at gmail.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141008/857d2370/attachment.html>

From giulio at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 09:49:56 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:49:56 +0200
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re:  From: Giulio Prisco
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>

SPAMBOT ALERT - how the fuck can my gmail be sending spam? I don't use
desktop clients, only web.

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> http://joomlati.com/forward.php?pretty=uxeb3635pnuakx
>
>
>
>
> giulio at gmail.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>


From giulio at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 09:53:11 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:53:11 +0200
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re: From: Giulio Prisco
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>

>From the headers of the original message this doesn't seem to come
from my local system. What do you email expert think (take a look at
the source). What should I do besides reporting to Google?

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:49 AM, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
> SPAMBOT ALERT - how the fuck can my gmail be sending spam? I don't use
> desktop clients, only web.
>
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> http://joomlati.com/forward.php?pretty=uxeb3635pnuakx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> giulio at gmail.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


From anders at aleph.se  Wed Oct  8 10:38:09 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:38:09 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <F8D97D12-44B8-4E19-850C-8FD7C17D5F3B@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4015159030-6766@secure.ericade.net>

Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> , 8/10/2014 1:57 AM:
Just speculating: Could GRBs have secondary effects on planetary systems, such as burning off too many volatiles (which are then not available, say, for cometary impacts on young worlds?) and shaking up stability (say, causing another heavy bombardment in a system by knocking asteroids off stable/nonintersecting orbits)?
No. 100 kJ/m^2 deposited in a few seconds is only about 100 times the solar heating: not enough to vaporize much, and the lost volatiles can start condensing immediately. A 20 second burst can ideally vaporize 705 g/m^2 of ice, less than a cm deep.?
Closer to the burst things might be worse, of course.

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141008/0b27a3e7/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 11:10:37 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:10:37 +0100
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re: From: Giulio Prisco
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armiMHvfsr+VmR_xXvFdKdBW9ZqzVTnLsheytkc6jJdJfag@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Giulio Prisco wrote:
> From the headers of the original message this doesn't seem to come
> from my local system. What do you email expert think (take a look at
> the source). What should I do besides reporting to Google?
>

The spam didn't come from Google.

The original came from a website located in United Arab Emirates.
Hosted in Dubai.
This mail server is on several Spam blacklists, including SORBS.

It faked your gmail address and sent it to the Exi mail list server,
which then forwarded it to all subscribers. Google just passed on the
email from the Exi list server.

Possibly the Exi mail server could be changed to refuse to accept mail
from servers on the SORBS blacklist.

BillK


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 12:01:55 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 13:01:55 +0100
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re: From: Giulio Prisco
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjmzJgksKWCoErj2YmbfmcKnMPU_fmhkKc1gWK1n-2JLA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Giulio Prisco  wrote:
> From the headers of the original message this doesn't seem to come
> from my local system. What do you email expert think (take a look at
> the source). What should I do besides reporting to Google?
>

The originating IP address points to Banda Aceh in Indonesia.

The United Arab Emirates server is probably a spam server used by
spammers from all round the world.

BillK


From giulio at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 12:47:24 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:47:24 +0200
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re: From: Giulio Prisco
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjmzJgksKWCoErj2YmbfmcKnMPU_fmhkKc1gWK1n-2JLA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjmzJgksKWCoErj2YmbfmcKnMPU_fmhkKc1gWK1n-2JLA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJycydHUC1m8XAPNAW6ysmLPB6_qgk5eBc26NZOT9zcX7hA@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Bill,
I never had this problem before. The fact that it appeared immediately
after I installed the Alexa toolbar a few hours ago, and (hopefully)
disappeared when I disinstalled it, seems a coincidence too big to
ignore. Any idea how the Alexa toolbar may facilitate the spammers'
work?

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 2:01 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Giulio Prisco  wrote:
>> From the headers of the original message this doesn't seem to come
>> from my local system. What do you email expert think (take a look at
>> the source). What should I do besides reporting to Google?
>>
>
> The originating IP address points to Banda Aceh in Indonesia.
>
> The United Arab Emirates server is probably a spam server used by
> spammers from all round the world.
>
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 13:35:06 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:35:06 +0100
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re: From: Giulio Prisco
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJycydHUC1m8XAPNAW6ysmLPB6_qgk5eBc26NZOT9zcX7hA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjmzJgksKWCoErj2YmbfmcKnMPU_fmhkKc1gWK1n-2JLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJycydHUC1m8XAPNAW6ysmLPB6_qgk5eBc26NZOT9zcX7hA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armj9LT85yEYoy07jS+=DJr7yykJL3PLYqaRCojtEchGg5Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Giulio Prisco wrote:
> Thanks Bill,
> I never had this problem before. The fact that it appeared immediately
> after I installed the Alexa toolbar a few hours ago, and (hopefully)
> disappeared when I disinstalled it, seems a coincidence too big to
> ignore. Any idea how the Alexa toolbar may facilitate the spammers'
> work?
>

I doubt that the Alexa toolbar has caused this spam problem. The spam
arrived too soon after you installed Alexa. Spammers harvest email
addresses from many sources (including public mailing lists).
They don't need access to your gmail account as the originating
address is faked in the spam emails.

I do agree that the Alexa toolbar should be removed as it slows down
browsing and monitors user's browsing habits and stores data about all
websites the user visits. The Google search engine should also be
avoided. Use Startpage or DuckDuckGo or Ixquick instead.

BillK


From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 15:32:47 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 16:32:47 +0100
Subject: [ExI] The Universe just got 10 times bigger!
Message-ID: <CAL_armhKf6234w5f=h=a8Fp8v8x0tSnSmy_sa-vzEH9pui1+GA@mail.gmail.com>

Before we proceed, here are some of the estimations made by
astronomers related to the contents in the visible universe within 14
billion light-years of Earth:

Superclusters in the visible universe = 10 million
Galaxy groups in the visible universe = 25 billion
Large galaxies in the visible universe = 350 billion
Dwarf galaxies in the visible universe = 7 trillion
Stars in the visible universe = 30 billion trillion (3?10??)

<http://www.fromquarkstoquasars.com/seven-trillion-dwarfs-and-billions-of-undetected-galaxies/>

Last year, the European Space Agency's Herschel Space Telescope
unleashed a new revelation: not-yet observed, distant galaxies are, in
fact, responsible for the 'cosmic fog' of infrared radiation seen on
the horizon of the 'observable universe.' Beyond that haze likely lies
millions -- perhaps even billions -- of uncharted galaxies. Most of
which, are some of the earliest galaxies produced post big bang.

In fact, there may be 90% more of these galaxies that haven't been
observed thus far using this technique. "If there are 10 galaxies
seen, there could be a hundred there, unseen" said Hayes. Such an
observation suggests that we have only begun unwrapping the majesty --
and the extent -- of our universe.
---------------

I doubt if I will be able to visit all these.........

BillK



From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 19:41:36 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 12:41:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fermi Paradox and GRB bursts
In-Reply-To: <618958236.695689.1412797075622.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10656.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <4015159030-6766@secure.ericade.net>
 <618958236.695689.1412797075622.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10656.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <52C6628B-FD5A-41CF-90D5-A5F2BBC90583@gmail.com>

> On Wednesday, October 8, 2014 3:38 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> Dan<danust2012 at gmail.com> , 8/10/2014 1:57 AM:

>> Just speculating: Could GRBs have secondary effects on planetary
>> systems, such as burning off too many volatiles (which are then
>> not available, say, for cometary impacts on young worlds?) and
>> shaking up stability (say, causing another heavy bombardment in
>> a system by knocking asteroids off stable/nonintersecting orbits)?>

> No. 100 kJ/m^2 deposited in a few seconds is only about 100
> times the solar heating: not enough to vaporize much, and the
> lost volatiles can start condensing immediately. A 20 second
> burst can ideally vaporize 705 g/m^2 of ice, less than a cm deep.

I'm wondering if it's enough to do widespread damage -- not necessarily burn everything off. Obviously, a GRB hit in early solar system development might have a bigger impact, though it'd have to get through higher densities of gas and dust. Then again, this might be a double-edged sword -- maybe helping to trigger more planet formation, so not necessarily a filter against complex life. (Presuming planet formation is, overall, better for the formation of complex life.)

> Closer to the burst things might be worse, of course.

Closer would be worse, yes, though I was wondering about something would be widespread enough to act as _the_ filter. Reckon this ain't it.

Regards,

Dan
 My nanotech apocalypse story "Succession" can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/Succession-ebook/dp/B00F02DLNG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141008/c6425929/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct  8 21:50:47 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 14:50:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <1608227593.539752.1412804597277.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10688.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <CAJPayv0LaF7PQFOhyP5bn7FDjxw-xSYn5CpDfbg7MpJTK8m+7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1608227593.539752.1412804597277.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10688.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>

On Monday, October 6, 2014 7:11 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>> he's [Searle] is not a dualist
> 
> However I am a duelist, I think that a noun (like the brain) is not
> the same as the way a noun behaves (like the mind).

If you're not joking here, what exactly do you mean?

>> the Chinese Room, regardless of your view of it, don't you agree
>> that it's been influential in the AI field
> 
> I agree that the Chinese Room has been influential, but not in a
> good way. The Chinese Room thought experiment is not just wrong
> it is STUPID. I say this because it has 3 colossal flaws, just one
> would render it stupid and 3 render it stupidity cubed:
[big snip of discussion of faults with Searle's Chinese Room]
> 
> All Searle did was come up with a wildly impractical model (the
> Chinese Room) of a very very VERY slow intelligence in which a
> human being happens to play a trivial part.

My point in bringing him up was to show a philosopher who has influenced thinking in cognitive science and AI -- whether you agree with him or not. In other words, he's had a big impact outside philosophy. (And his name isn't Adler.:) He's also contributed to philosophy of language and philosophy of action.

Roderick Long, on another list mentioned Wilfred Sellars and Donald Davidson. His point was showing that this are big guys in modern philosophy and scientists haven't come up with philosophical ideas to rival theirs in their respective fields. (Well, during their lifetimes. This is also not to place a clear separation between these fields. Nothing inherent in them prevents someone from making contributions to one or the other. But the rule today seems to be many of the cutting edge ideas in any field come from people working in that field, usually steeped in that field's context. This isn't to say outside can never ever ever make a contribution, though let's just admit there are many bumblers who believe they're the next Einstein who really don't have a clue yet because they've managed to be an expert in something believe they're an expert in anything at all. As something outside this context, think of just about anyone who isn't a literary historian or Shakespeare scholar who tries their hand at figuring out if Shakespeare's play were written by Bacon, Vere, or someone else. It's almost too much fun to see a genius in some other field become a crank in Shakepeare studies.:)

>> Quine, Russell, and Frege all studied philosophy, and their major
>> work was as philosophers.
> 
> Quine was very witty writer and  logician and I'm a fan of logic,

If you're a fan of logic, and you're praising Quine, why aren't you praising Aristotle as well? Didn't he make some pretty fundamental contributions to logic -- even to modal logic?

>> but I always associate him with Douglas Hofstadter and his
>> book "G?del, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid", the
>> most brilliant book I ever read. In that book Hofstadter
>> coins a new verb "to quine" which involves the use /mention
>> distinction.

I thought Dennett coined that verb, but I see they both did. But all this is a side show. Are you disagree with Quine making important contributions to philosophy?

> Bertrand Russell's major work was the mathematical book
> Principia Mathematica;

A book on the foundations of mathematics that was putting a certain _philosophy_ of mathematics into practice, no?

And what did Russell study at university? Among other things, philosophy. His interest in mathematics was early on one of an interest in its foundations -- i.e., its philosophy. And early on, he was already interested in politics (since you mention it below). He also wrote many of his seminal works on philosophy before or during co-writing Principia.

> he said that besides himself and
> his coauthor Alfred North Whitehead only one other person
> read all 3 of the enormous volumes cover to cover, and that
> person was Kurt Godel; but that one reader was enough to
> change everything.

And G?del studied what at university? Mathematics and... philosophy!

> This isn't a exact quote but he said
> that as he got older he got too stupid for mathematics so
> he switched to philosophy, and when he got even older and
> was too stupid for philosophy he switched to politics.

But the same might be said about the more technical or cutting edge in any field. People have a hard time keeping up. The same is true of philosophy. Even people trained in a field who've long studied eventually will run into their limits. I studied mathematics in college and have tried to keep, but it's not easy and I'd never deign to weigh in the latest findings. (This isn't to say I was even up to the latest findings when I was in school. And this isn't too long ago. But I doubt anyone can weigh in authoritatively in a way that the people working in the field would sit up and be shocked on (save by the intellectual hubris;),  say, the cutting edge in surgery theory, blow-up algebras, stationary towers, category theory, and the work of the last three Fields medalists. I could be wrong, but I have yet to meet someone that's omnicompetent in that respect. The same goes for in philosophy -- and I do know a few professional philosophers who can chime in on many things, even teach classes in them, but not in all of them.)

> And as for Ferge...
> 
>> Frege pretty much single-handedly developing modern symbolic logic,
> 
> I couldn't have said it better myself.

So, what's your point? Here we have a philosophy who made major contributions to formal logic. Without his contributions, things would be much different or maybe much delayed. (Though hard to say... But another philosophy, when the term had a much wider meaning, was Leibniz: many reforms to symbolism that made our mathematical lives much easier, no? And I'm leaving out him independently inventing calculus.)

>> I'm not disagreeing with the value of Darwin's contributions, though it's
>> likely he did have a philosophy course in divinity school.
> 
> If it was in divinity school it was a anti philosophy course.

I doubt that. I don't know enough of his biography, but it seems to me he was exposed to philosophy, which would've been unavoidable anyhow, given the folks he palled around with and the discussions they had. If he hadn't been exposed to, e.g., materialist ideas, he might have come up with an entirely different theory -- maybe merely becoming a footnote to 19th century biology rather than the titan he is.

>> Also, he wasn't really a professional scientist -- not that there were
>> many at that time.
> 
> The word "scientist" hadn't even been invented, people like
> Darwin and Newton were called "Natural Philosophers",
> a charming term that I wish we still used. 
> But it's true that Darwin was not a professional
> in the sense that he was never payed for his
> scientific work but he didn't need to be,
> Darwin was rich.

I believe "natural philosophy" had fallen out of favor by Darwin's time (partly because of Boyle) and Darwin was called a "naturalist." But no matter. My point was he and most contributors to the field back then were not really professionals in the modern sense -- as in being paid (as you note) to do this after getting the right educational credentials via something like a PhD program.

>>> And what important new ideas did they come up with that
>>> Einstein, Dirac or Feynman hadn't discovered a half century  before?
>> 
>> The scientists you mention were steeped in philosophy,
> 
> As I said I love philosophy, it's philosophers I have a problem with.

Okay, you love philosophy. That's great. Again, what important philosophical ideas did Einstein, Dirac or Feynman come up with?

>> Einstein especially in the ideas of Ernst Mach.
> 
> Einstein was a fan of some of Mach's ideas but Mach was
> not a fan of Einstein,

Which matters not. I don't care if they were lovers who shacked up together for a whole year on Lake Lugano until Mach spurned him. Point is: Mach influenced Einstein. (And Mach was championing Relationalist ideas mostly originated by that "philosopher" Leibniz, no?)

> to the day he died he never accepted relativity, Special
> or General, nor even the atomic theory of matter.

Yes, but no matter. One person can influence another in a big way and yet not agree with that person, no? It can be argued, in the same fashion, that Priestley influence Lavoisier, yet they disagreed on phlogiston theory, no?

>> scientists don't tend to come up with great new philosophic ideas.
> 
> Scientists (and mathematicians) are the only ones who do come up
> with great new philosophic ideas,

Such as?

> after they do it takes card carrying philosophers a century or
> two to incorporate the discovery into their own work, but by then
> of course scientists have moved on. So philosophers fight the
> last war and are always 2 or 3 revolutions in thought behind.

What? I've already discussed philosophers of science who seem to be fairly up to date -- not a "war" or "2 or 3 revolutions in thought behind." Sure, if you're reading Mortimer Adler, who was never a cutting edge philosopher and who's main influence was on the people who aren't philosophers (mainly through his popular books; when's the last time you read a research paper by Adler? Have you read any research papers in philosophy that build on or cite Adler's ouvre?), yeah, sure, he's dated, but this is like citing my grandfather's high school chemistry teacher for his ignorance of nanotechnology. Who are these philosophers of science (or of mind or of psychology) that you know or have read who are way behind -- like by decades or more -- on the research in the sciences they cover? 

>> But if you want to look at a philosophy who seems to have some
>> direct impact on science, think Popper.
> 
> Science impacted Popper but Popper didn't impact science, no
> scientist would read Popper and become a better scientist
> because of it. Popper and all philosophers of science reminds
> me of movie critics, they keep telling movie makers how > they're doing it all wrong but couldn't make a movie
> themselves if their life depended on it.

The function of movie critics, at their best, is to evaluate film for the viewing public -- either to explain it or to call attention to what to watch or avoid. It's not really about competing with movie makers. And one can evaluate, say, a meal without being a master chef. (Of course, a master chef might make a better food critic than just anyone else. But a decent food critic need not be a master chef.)

Also, I believe Popper has had some influence. He brought Hume's ideas more to bear in modern philosophy of science (for good or ill; I'm not a Popperian). And I think falsification, though definitely implicitly practiced before him became much more explicitly accepted after he championed the idea. I don't recall any scientist championing it before Popper, but I do know working scientists now who cite him. Perhaps they're all wrong about where the idea originally came from, but then the path of influence still seems to be through Popper, no?

>> My hobby horse is against those making uninformed attacks
>> on Aristotle. I see that all too often coming from people
>> who haven't actually studied Aristotle,
> 
> I have't read much Aristotle, few have, unlike Plato he was
> not a good writer;

To be fair, we don't know how good of a writer he was as many of his extant works are thought to lecture notes, and they might not be his notes, but those of people in his circle (no different than, say, someone transcribing notes from a lecture by Boltzmann). Books he actually wrote haven't survived, to my knowledge -- at least, not as finished treatises with a few exceptions.

That said, I agree, these are tough going and Plato's surviving works are much easier to read. But this isn't the battle of the stylists here. If it were, we'd be in serious trouble because even many scientific works aren't easy reads. (There are exceptions, but think of what some of them are: Galileo's popularizations of his work. Great -- at least in English translation -- but the average paper in _Nature_ or _Science_ isn't about to enthrall the average person like Galileo's work. Should we stop at popularizers?)

> as for his ideas, about 5 minutes of study (he doesn't
> deserve more) is enough to convince me that Aristotle
> was the worst physicist who ever lived.

I don't disagree that Aristotle made many mistakes here, though the thrust of trying to systematize a body of existing knowledge is a model taken by all later science, even that of his detractors starting with people in his own time. It's only later people who idolized him to the point of missing the overall methods (not all of which are beyond reproach) for the details. The same applies in his biology and in other areas.

And you left out something I wrote that I feel is extremely relevant here:

"Aristotle developed logic and was really the first to attempt to systematize all the sciences he was interested in (and he seemed to be interested in everything)."

Note: I'm not talking about worshiping Aristotle or sheepishly hanging on to every utterance attributed to him, but just stating what I believe are his contributions here. And these seem laudable rather than something to be scorned or sneered at.

I also think you'd have to read more of him and study him to understand the context of what he said. Doesn't make him right, but if the goal is to judge him, don't you think it'd be by the standards of his context? (Don't get me wrong. Finding out he was better in his context -- or, at least, not the worst, doesn't mean you have to accept his ideas. For instance, I find his views on teleology interesting and they explain much about how he viewed the world -- and don't seem all that ridiculous for an Ancient Greek -- but that's no argument to believe teleology guides the Sun and Stars or anything for that matter.) Let me put this another way, to be the philosophy critic, you have to know the philosophy -- just like the movie critic who hasn't seen the movie isn't worth much for their criticism of it, are they?

Regards,

Dan
"Succession," a nanotech disaster story, can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/Succession-ebook/dp/B00F02DLNG
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141008/7494097b/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Oct  9 11:46:14 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 12:46:14 +0100
Subject: [ExI] SPAMBOT ALERT Re: From: Giulio Prisco
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJycydHUC1m8XAPNAW6ysmLPB6_qgk5eBc26NZOT9zcX7hA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyeisa3XETDw7PsuAax+cBZH8v-X+AETec56TH4FC=wwsQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJyf5R+bwvmky7Ww5jmVeDwHKvjCeikuq3ExfoqfcV3kzOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjmzJgksKWCoErj2YmbfmcKnMPU_fmhkKc1gWK1n-2JLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJycydHUC1m8XAPNAW6ysmLPB6_qgk5eBc26NZOT9zcX7hA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armiYgWfeo6VhcZXzuyikkisLdnT--ZPHZj_UOJJxu_4nrg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Giulio Prisco wrote:
> Thanks Bill,
> I never had this problem before.


It looks as though spammers are using access to mailing lists to
forward spam to everybody on the mailing list. University College
London has just been hit with thousands of spam emails.
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/10/09/bellogate_email_storm_ucl/>

Seems Exi was lucky to only get two spam emails so far.

BillK


From johnkclark at gmail.com  Thu Oct  9 18:08:00 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 14:08:00 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv0LaF7PQFOhyP5bn7FDjxw-xSYn5CpDfbg7MpJTK8m+7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1608227593.539752.1412804597277.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10688.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv3a6FUUO_owHxZjcT-dwaLr3Crz0=55nX0C0oVfRKNbuA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

>> I am a duelist, I think that a noun (like the brain) is not  the same as
>> the way a noun behaves (like the mind).
>>
>
> > If you're not joking here, what exactly do you mean?
>

Which word didn't you understand?

> My point in bringing him up [Searle] was to show a philosopher who has
> influenced thinking in cognitive science and AI.
>

Yes Searle was influential in the AI field and Lysenko was influential in
the genetics field, but neither in a good way.

> If you're a fan of logic, and you're praising Quine, why aren't you
> praising Aristotle as well?
>

If Aristotle had stuck with logic and biology I might be praising him,
unfortunately he fancied himself a physicist and in that field he proved
himself to be an imbecile.

> So, what's your point? Here we have a philosophy [Frege] who made major
> contributions to formal logic.
>

Frege?s  contributions to formal logic were his ONLY contributions to
philosophy; if you remove Ferge's work in mathematics and logic he becomes
just another boring rabid anti-Semite of no interest whatsoever.

> another philosophy, when the term had a much wider meaning, was Leibniz
>

I maintain that nobody has made a important contribution to philosophy who
had not first demonstrated a deep understanding of at least one branch of
science or mathematics, and Leibniz was a master mathematician who
discovered binary arithmetic and co-discovered Calculus. Leibniz also
discovered something that at the time was considered pure philosophy but
later proved useful in the study of exchange forces in Quantum Mechanics,
?The Identity Of Indiscernibles?. As I said I love philosophy but not
philosophers.

>  I don't know enough of his [Darwin's] biography, but it seems to me he
> was exposed to philosophy, which would've been unavoidable anyhow, given
> the folks he palled around with and the discussions they had.
>

Darwin's University days were not distinguished. He first went to Edinburgh
University in Scotland to learn to be a doctor like his father and
grandfather, in his autobiography he says "*The instruction at Edinburgh
was altogether by Lectures and those were intolerably dull, with the
exception of those on chemistry*". After witnessing the amputation of a
little girl's arm without anesthesia he vowed never to enter a operating
theater again and transferred to Cambridge to become a clergyman because he
couldn't think of anything else to do with his life. He says of his
Cambridge years "*my time was sadly wasted there and worse than wasted*".
However he did admit to enjoying the lectures on botany and on his own he
read books by Humboldt and Herschel that "*stirred up in me a burning zeal
to add even the most humble contribution to the noble structure of Natural
Science*".

Nowhere in Darwin's autobiography is there any mention of the great
philosophers or their effect on him, his real education came from his 6
years on the HMS Beagle.

 >> Scientists (and mathematicians) are the only ones who do come up
>>  With great new philosophic ideas,
>>
>
> > Such as?
>

SUCH AS?! Pick any great scientist or mathematician, any at all.

> Who are these philosophers of science (or of mind or of psychology) that
> you know or have read who are way behind -- like by decades or more
>

How about Popper? In chapter 37 of his 1976 (1976!!) book "Unended Quest:
An Intellectual Autobiography" Popper says:

 *"Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical
research program*".

Those are Popper's own words not mine, and this is not something to make
Popper fans or fans of philosophers of science in general proud.

Finally, two years later in 1978 at the age of 76 and 119 years after the
publication of "The Origin Of Species", perhaps the greatest scientific
book ever written, Popper belatedly said:

 ?*I have changed my mind about the testability and logical status of the
theory of natural selection; and I am glad to have an opportunity to make a
recantation*?.

Popper came to the conclusion that this Darwin whippersnapper might be on
to something after all in his 1978 (1978!!) lecture "Natural Selection and
the Emergence of Mind".

Better late than never I guess, but for most of his life Popper did not
approve of Evolution and his opposition did a lot of harm, to this day
Bible thumpers use Popper quotations in their legal briefs to try to get
creationism taught in the classroom.

The greatest philosophical discoveries of the 20th century were Relativity,
Quantum Mechanics, the Big Bang, the structure of DNA  and Godel's
Incompleteness Theorem, philosophers did not discover any of them. In fact
Ludwig Wittgenstein, often called the greatest philosopher of the 20th
century probably didn't even read Godel's 1931 paper until 1937, and when
he did comment on it in a article published after his death, he said
Godel's paper was just a bunch of tricks of a logical conjurer. He seemed
to think that prose could disprove a mathematical proof; even many of
Wittgenstein's fans are embarrassed by his last article.

And by the way, the greatest philosophical discoveries of the 19th century
were Electromagnetism, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Darwin's Theory
of Evolution, and philosophers didn?t discover any of them either.

 >  I think falsification, though definitely implicitly practiced before
> him became much more explicitly accepted after he championed the idea. I
> don't recall any scientist championing it before Popper, but I do know
> working scientists now who cite him.
>

Oh for heaven's sake! Do you imagine that before Popper's 1934 book no
great scientist knew that some theories are so bad they're not even wrong?
I would be very surprised if any of Poppers ideas advanced one scientists
work by 5 minutes. Popper was certainly not the first to know that
falsification was important, in fact Popper never actually used the
procedure he just talked about it. Like most philosophers he came up with
no original ideas, he just reported on what other people were doing and how
they did it. Popper was a reporter only his beat was not politicians or pop
stars but scientists.  The amount of respect he is given in certain
quarters and the amount of study they think he deserves strikes me as
utterly ridiculous.

 > to be the philosophy critic, you have to know the philosophy -- just
> like the movie critic who hasn't seen the movie isn't worth much for their
> criticism of it
>

One does not need to eat the entire egg to know it is bad.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141009/bc9d4242/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Thu Oct  9 18:39:51 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 11:39:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv3a6FUUO_owHxZjcT-dwaLr3Crz0=55nX0C0oVfRKNbuA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv0LaF7PQFOhyP5bn7FDjxw-xSYn5CpDfbg7MpJTK8m+7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1608227593.539752.1412804597277.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10688.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv3a6FUUO_owHxZjcT-dwaLr3Crz0=55nX0C0oVfRKNbuA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <E2C3F615-78FA-4717-828A-E9457293928A@gmail.com>

> On Oct 9, 2014, at 11:08 AM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>  >> Scientists (and mathematicians) are the only ones who do come up
>>>  With great new philosophic ideas,
>> 
>> > Such as?
> 
> SUCH AS?! Pick any great scientist or mathematician, any at all.

Just a quick response in hopes of a longer one later today or tomorrow:

Again, such as? It should be easy to list two or three since there are so many. But let's ramify this: you said "only." So, things like the Gettier problem are not "great new philosophical" ideas, in your view? (This raises another issue that perhaps should be settled first: How do we agree on what's a "great new philosophical" before either of us lists them?)

Regards,

Dan
 All my Kindle books should be free today until midnight PDT. For US, see:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&field-keywords=dan+ust

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141009/4ce2cef2/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Thu Oct  9 19:35:48 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 15:35:48 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <E2C3F615-78FA-4717-828A-E9457293928A@gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv0LaF7PQFOhyP5bn7FDjxw-xSYn5CpDfbg7MpJTK8m+7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <1608227593.539752.1412804597277.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10688.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
 <CAJPayv3a6FUUO_owHxZjcT-dwaLr3Crz0=55nX0C0oVfRKNbuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <E2C3F615-78FA-4717-828A-E9457293928A@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv3Ek=zukCYFJbsoUAJ5KGuqpc9yPbZudsc5D4CvOoB3qg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

>>>> Scientists (and mathematicians) are the only ones who do come up with
>>>> great new philosophic ideas,
>>>>
>>>
>>> >>> Such as?
>>>
>>
>> >> SUCH AS?! Pick any great scientist or mathematician, any at all.
>>
>
> > Again, such as? It should be easy to list two or three since there are
> so many.
>

Thermodynamics, Universal Gravitation, Genetics, Electromagnetism,
Probability Theory.... and none of this great philosophy was discovered by
philosophers.

 So, things like the Gettier problem are not "great new philosophical"
> ideas, in your view?
>

No I don't, it's just a question of linguistics, what you want the English
word "knowledge" to mean.  I haven't checked so the following story may be
apocryphal, no matter it's still a good story. On November 7 1918 several
newspapers in Boston ran a erroneous story that the First World War had
ended, on the same day two men set sail in a small boat. Having no
communication with the outside world they arrived in Bermuda on November 12
1918 certain that the war was  over. They had perfectly respectable
evidence to support their idea, copies of the newspapers, and their belief
was even true (the war ended on Nov. 11) but was it knowledge?  The answer
can be yes or no and depends entirely on what you want the word "knowledge"
to mean, but I'm not sure it matters because the war was definitely over
and their belief was true.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141009/2f414892/attachment.html>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Wed Oct  8 20:28:54 2014
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin D Hanson)
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 20:28:54 +0000
Subject: [ExI] Em Software Engineering Bleg
In-Reply-To: <52C6628B-FD5A-41CF-90D5-A5F2BBC90583@gmail.com>
References: <4015159030-6766@secure.ericade.net>
 <618958236.695689.1412797075622.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10656.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <52C6628B-FD5A-41CF-90D5-A5F2BBC90583@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5D9CF983-CB92-463B-AA67-D263263B90D5@gmu.edu>

Many folks on this list are experts in software engineering, and also interested in the future.
I've just posted this bleg: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2014/10/em-software-engineering-bleg.html
In it I ask those with software engineering expertise to help me guess how software engineering
would change in a world dominated by ems (= brain emulations).

I suggest 9 reasonable premises:
1. Software would be a bigger part of the economy, and a bigger industry overall. So it could support more specialization and pay more fixed costs.
2. Progress would have been made in the design of tools, languages, hardware, etc. But there?d still be far to go to automate all tasks; more income would still go to rent ems than to rent other software.
3. After an initial transition, em hardware would fall in costs about as fast as non-em computer hardware. So the relative cost to rent ems and other computer hardware would stay about the same over time. This is in stark contrast to today when hardware costs fall fast relative to human wages.
4. Hardware speed will not rise as fast as hardware costs fall. Thus the cost advantage of parallel software would continue to rise.
5. Emulating brains is a much more parallel task than are most software tasks.
6. Ems would typically run about a thousand times human mind speed, but would vary over a wide range of speeds. Ems in software product development races would run much faster.
7. It would be possible to safe a copy of an em engineer who just wrote some software, a copy available to answer questions about it, or to modify it.
8. Em software engineers could sketch out a software design, and then split into many temporary copies who each work on a different part of the design, and talk with each other to negotiate boundary issues.
9. Most ems are crammed into a few dense cities. Toward em city centers, computing hardware is more expensive, and maximum hardware speeds are lower. Away from city centers, there are longer communication delays.

I ask: how would em software tools and work patterns differ from today?s, and how would they vary with time, application, software engineer speed, and city location?

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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141008/0165d00a/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Fri Oct 10 02:51:40 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 22:51:40 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Em Software Engineering Bleg
In-Reply-To: <5D9CF983-CB92-463B-AA67-D263263B90D5@gmu.edu>
References: <4015159030-6766@secure.ericade.net>
 <618958236.695689.1412797075622.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10656.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <52C6628B-FD5A-41CF-90D5-A5F2BBC90583@gmail.com>
 <5D9CF983-CB92-463B-AA67-D263263B90D5@gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv1HUjW_NBKzyzHgXAbYca_TQ_u5M4ijdx3XG1nysZH9yw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Robin D Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:

> In it I ask those with software engineering expertise to help me guess
> how software engineering would change in a world dominated by ems (= brain
> emulations).
>

I think there is a wildcard in trying to answer this question, because if
the recent announcement of the discovery of Majorana particles turns out to
be true then we could build a Topological Quantum Computer, it would work
as well as a regular Quantum Computer but would be far easier to make
because it's far less susceptible to decoherence. And those machines would
be so fundamentally different from anything built before I couldn't even
guess what the future of software engineering will be like.

 John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141009/a601afb2/attachment.html>

From rhanson at gmu.edu  Fri Oct 10 03:47:31 2014
From: rhanson at gmu.edu (Robin D Hanson)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 03:47:31 +0000
Subject: [ExI] Em Software Engineering Bleg
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv1HUjW_NBKzyzHgXAbYca_TQ_u5M4ijdx3XG1nysZH9yw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4015159030-6766@secure.ericade.net>
 <618958236.695689.1412797075622.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10656.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <52C6628B-FD5A-41CF-90D5-A5F2BBC90583@gmail.com>
 <5D9CF983-CB92-463B-AA67-D263263B90D5@gmu.edu>
 <CAJPayv1HUjW_NBKzyzHgXAbYca_TQ_u5M4ijdx3XG1nysZH9yw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1786D54E-1C43-4F1E-A5CB-63545CB6EEFF@gmu.edu>


On Oct 9, 2014, at 10:51 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com<mailto:johnkclark at gmail.com>> wrote:
> In it I ask those with software engineering expertise to help me guess how software engineering would change in a world dominated by ems (= brain emulations).

I think there is a wildcard in trying to answer this question, because if the recent announcement of the discovery of Majorana particles turns out to be true then we could build a Topological Quantum Computer, it would work as well as a regular Quantum Computer but would be far easier to make because it's far less susceptible to decoherence. And those machines would be so fundamentally different from anything built before I couldn't even guess what the future of software engineering will be like.

That might happen. But surely the odds are low, so it is still worth thinking about the scenario where that doesn't happen.

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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141010/10e20c77/attachment.html>

From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Fri Oct 10 11:04:25 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 13:04:25 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Em Software Engineering Bleg
In-Reply-To: <1786D54E-1C43-4F1E-A5CB-63545CB6EEFF@gmu.edu>
References: <4015159030-6766@secure.ericade.net>
 <618958236.695689.1412797075622.JavaMail.yahoo@jws10656.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <52C6628B-FD5A-41CF-90D5-A5F2BBC90583@gmail.com>
 <5D9CF983-CB92-463B-AA67-D263263B90D5@gmu.edu>
 <CAJPayv1HUjW_NBKzyzHgXAbYca_TQ_u5M4ijdx3XG1nysZH9yw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1786D54E-1C43-4F1E-A5CB-63545CB6EEFF@gmu.edu>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFQdKcC6+KOWMtbEGyALkJRNVWDNXtGHEs-Jrh++DDa5EQ@mail.gmail.com>

Brain emulators are not that great idea, after all. It's better to have a
lot of narrow algorithms, I think.

We see this already. Numeric operations are better supported by some very
artificial algorithms, than by the mimic of the Mother Nature's biological
brains. The same goes for chess, face recognition, or anything else until
now.

A synthetic intelligence is much better.

On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Robin D Hanson <rhanson at gmu.edu> wrote:

>
>  On Oct 9, 2014, at 10:51 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>    > In it I ask those with software engineering expertise to help me
>> guess how software engineering would change in a world dominated by ems (=
>> brain emulations).
>>
>
> I think there is a wildcard in trying to answer this question, because if
> the recent announcement of the discovery of Majorana particles turns out to
> be true then we could build a Topological Quantum Computer, it would work
> as well as a regular Quantum Computer but would be far easier to make
> because it's far less susceptible to decoherence. And those machines would
> be so fundamentally different from anything built before I couldn't even
> guess what the future of software engineering will be like.
>
>
>  That might happen. But surely the odds are low, so it is still worth
> thinking about the scenario where that doesn't happen.
>
>   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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141010/46097f7c/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sat Oct 11 04:47:59 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2014 21:47:59 -0700
Subject: [ExI] FW: gun deaths
In-Reply-To: <20141011032017.GA31666@ofb.net>
References: <20141011032017.GA31666@ofb.net>
Message-ID: <00dd01cfe50e$8919dc70$9b4d9550$@att.net>

Forwarding for Damien Sullivan.  All of this commentary is his.

-----Original Message-----
From: Damien Sullivan [mailto:phoenix at mindstalk.net] 
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2014 8:20 PM
To: spike66 at att.net
Subject: gun deaths

Was dipping briefly into the extrolist archives.  I don't think I'm
subscribed anymore.

"I don't expect much from USA Today, but it would be helpful if they would
differentiate between the type of firearm fatality."

http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_us.html
http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html
give death rates by cause and non-fatal injury rates by cause.

2/3 of gun deaths are suicides.  Almost all of the rest are homicide; legal
intervention and accident are both small, though still bigger than mass
shootings.  No justifiable homicide breakdown... oh wait:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.
-2010/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/expandhomicidemain
"Law enforcement reported 665 justifiable homicides in 2010. Of those, law
enforcement officers justifiably killed 387 felons, and private citizens
justifiably killed 278 people during the commission of a crime"

So "legal intervention" might mean justifiable, not just "cops".
Though CDC itself says "Legal Intervention - injuries inflicted by the
police or other law-enforcing agents, including military on duty, in the
course of arresting or attempting to arrest lawbreakers, suppressing
disturbances, maintaining order, and other legal actions. Excludes injuries
caused by civil insurrections." 

Either way we're talking a few hundred, compared to around 12,000 gun
homicides.  

 From other sources, at least 8000 of the gun homicides are from handguns.
I suspect that if guns were subject to unlimited strict liability paid by
the registered owner, then the insurance premiums for handguns would be at
least 10x those for long guns; there's more of the latter and they kill far
fewer people.

The FBI page doesn't try to call out "gang war", though one could try
guessing limits based on what is known about homicides (friends, family,
arguments, etc.)

Accidental gun deaths are pretty small, so while I'm friendly to various gun
control ideas, I mock "mandatory training" and analogies to cars.
Gun deaths aren't from people not knowing how to use their guns, they're
from people wanting to kill people.  Usually themselves.

Feel free to either paraphrase or just forward to the list.

-xx- Damien X-) 



From anders at aleph.se  Sat Oct 11 15:00:59 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 17:00:59 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4290350345-7564@secure.ericade.net>

Another angle to this discussion is whether scientists or philosophers have influenced transhumanism the most. And I think the philosophers win.
If we look at the root of the transhumanist movement, the humanist movement was founded by scholars before even natural philosophy split from philosophy. Pico Della Mirandola was a hermeticist philosopher. The Enlightenment thinkers who strongly influenced us? Bacon, Descartes, Spinoza, Locke, Hume, Kant... philosophers to a man (well, we got Wollenstonecraft too a bit later).?
Looking at direct intellectual ancestors, Marquis de Condorcet was both philosopher, mathematician and statesman. As was Benjamin Franklin. Exactly how we are descended from Nietzsche might be controversial, but I don?t think he can be ignored.
Then we have Fedorov, the intellectual father of Tsiolkovsky and the space movement - steeped in Orthodox philosophy. His later counterpart in the west, Teilhard de Chardin, has certainly influenced transhumanism tremendously by sneaking in thoughts about cosmic teleology.?
What about H.G. Wells and Haldane? Looking at their thinking we see a fair dose of Marx ? expressed of course even more clearly through Bernal and Stapledon. Of course, one could argue that behind it all was a general post-enlightenment sense of materialist positivism.
And Extropian thought was of course shaped profoundly by Hayek?s views on spontaneous orders and a whole libertarian milieu.
Of course, trace anybody's intellectual genealogy far back, and you will find a philosopher. A bit like always finding royalty in family genealogies: they get around, and they stand out. But philosophy typically deals with questions about what matters/what should be done, and that is of course core to any proactive intellectual movement. Science itself is mainly concerned with what is true about the actual world, not what has proper value or where we should be aiming. Transhumanism without the science would be escapist aspiration, transhumanism without the philosophy would be aiming at small improvements in the here-and-now.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141011/a9395248/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Sat Oct 11 17:56:06 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 13:56:06 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <4290350345-7564@secure.ericade.net>
References: <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
 <4290350345-7564@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2F=+wBb4mnzZM8=gNafUfOL1Ti=CUUt7b3R=ofS6he0w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Transhumanism without the science would be escapist aspiration,
> transhumanism without the philosophy would be aiming at small improvements
> in the here-and-now.
>

OK I concede there is some truth in that, maybe I was a little too hard on
philosophers. But only a little.

 John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141011/49da15fa/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Sat Oct 11 23:46:37 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 01:46:37 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv2F=+wBb4mnzZM8=gNafUfOL1Ti=CUUt7b3R=ofS6he0w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <26956737-15926@secure.ericade.net>

John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> , 11/10/2014 8:00 PM:

OK I concede there is some truth in that, maybe I was a little too hard on philosophers. But only a little.
No problem. They can take it. Mostly because they are so hard on each other :-)

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141012/7aa8c689/attachment.html>

From moulton at moulton.com  Sun Oct 12 03:25:22 2014
From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton)
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 20:25:22 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <26956737-15926@secure.ericade.net>
References: <26956737-15926@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <5439F4A2.7000108@moulton.com>


A bit of history that some might find useful for this discussion. During 
most of the 1990s I ran a book discussion group which had as its 
participants many persons who identified as Extropian.  Our January 1992 
discussion was about the book The Retreat to Commitment by W.W. Bartley. 
  I do not remember which group member recommended the book but I do 
recall that the idea of Pan-Critical Rationalism as covered in the book 
had a significant and rapid impact on an ever expanding circle of people.

At Extro1 (the first Extropian Institute Conference) May 1994 Max More 
gave a presentation on PanCritical Rationalism.  See:
http://www.maxmore.com/pcr.htm

For those not familiar with Bartley in addition to his book Retreat to 
Commitment Bartley was also chosen to be the editor for collected works 
of Hayek.  Unfortunately Bartley died after only a few volumes.  Some 
claim to see Bartley's hand waying very heavily in  Hayek's last book 
The Fatal Conceit; but that is a discussion of another time.

For those interested in the list of books read by the Bay Area Reading 
amd Discussion Group please see:
http://www.moulton.com/bardg/

Fred
-- 
F. C. Moulton
moulton at moulton.com


From danust2012 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 12 06:12:50 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2014 23:12:50 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <5439F4A2.7000108@moulton.com>
References: <26956737-15926@secure.ericade.net> <5439F4A2.7000108@moulton.com>
Message-ID: <DF3D523D-8AA3-430D-BF36-85388F1DD103@gmail.com>

> On Saturday, October 11, 2014 8:25 PM, F. C. Moulton <moulton at moulton.com> wrote:
> 
> A bit of history that some might find useful for this discussion.
> During most of the 1990s I ran a book discussion group which
> had as its participants many persons who identified as Extropian.
> Our January 1992 discussion was about the book The Retreat to
> Commitment by W.W. Bartley. 
> I do not remember which group member recommended the book but
> I do recall that the idea of Pan-Critical Rationalism as
> covered in the book had a significant and rapid impact on an
> ever expanding circle of people.
> 
> At Extro1 (the first Extropian Institute Conference) May 1994
> Max More gave a presentation on PanCritical Rationalism.
> See:http://www.maxmore.com/pcr.htm
> 
> For those not familiar with Bartley in addition to his book
> Retreat to Commitment Bartley was also chosen to be the editor
> for collected works of Hayek.  Unfortunately Bartley died
> after only a few volumes.  Some claim to see Bartley's hand
> waying very heavily in  Hayek's last book 
> The Fatal Conceit; but that is a discussion of another time.
> 
> For those interested in the list of books read by the Bay Area Reading 
> amd Discussion Group please see:
> http://www.moulton.com/bardg/

Thanks, Fred.

There were also other later discussions of the same. I wrote a brief critique of pancritical rationalism, which I'll try to find. It caused a bit of discussion back in 2002. E.g., see

http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/extropians/extracted-extropians-archive/archive/0208/110407.html

and the exchanges after. I'm not just bringing this up to earn some cred here. I think the discussion back then is relevant to the one we're having here now.

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141011/1c96d656/attachment.html>

From moulton at moulton.com  Sun Oct 12 16:29:15 2014
From: moulton at moulton.com (F. C. Moulton)
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 09:29:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <DF3D523D-8AA3-430D-BF36-85388F1DD103@gmail.com>
References: <26956737-15926@secure.ericade.net> <5439F4A2.7000108@moulton.com>
 <DF3D523D-8AA3-430D-BF36-85388F1DD103@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <543AAC5B.3020903@moulton.com>

l

On 10/11/2014 11:12 PM, Dan wrote:
> There were also other later discussions of the same. I wrote a brief
> critique of pancritical rationalism, which I'll try to find. It caused a
> bit of discussion back in 2002. E.g., see
>
> http://diyhpl.us/~bryan/irc/extropians/extracted-extropians-archive/archive/0208/110407.html
>
https://web.archive.org/web/20090107113111/http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/PCR.htm

I looked at the above link and noticed it had a link which is dead 
however I was able to retrieve the page from Internet Archive

https://web.archive.org/web/20090107113111/http://uweb.superlink.net/neptune/PCR.htm

I just did a quick scan of the above and I think you raise some very 
good questions.  Certainly the questions you raise should keep the PCR 
advocates from making over-reaching claims.

Fred

-- 
F. C. Moulton
moulton at moulton.com


From spike66 at att.net  Tue Oct 14 16:04:27 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:04:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
Message-ID: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>

 

Now we are being told there is a company Snapchat which enables children to take selfies in the bathroom mirror and send them to each other without risk of the photos going on the internet, since it lacks archiving features on the company?s servers and has no archiving option for either the sender or the receiver.

 

At the same time, we hear US government officials doing US government official business opting for Instant Messaging or texting, over email for some odd reason, but that these IM services have an archiving option by the company or by either the receiver or the sender.

 

So in theory, none of the three SnapChat participants have the option to archive, but with text messaging, any of the three can.

 

Please educate me, IT hipsters.  We are now being told that SnapChat files were somehow hacked and are in existence, yet one US government bureaucracy after another is somehow accidentally losing IM texts and these are gone forever.

 

Is that really what we are saying here?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/cc228bdb/attachment.html>

From protokol2020 at gmail.com  Tue Oct 14 16:28:32 2014
From: protokol2020 at gmail.com (Tomaz Kristan)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 18:28:32 +0200
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALMrAFSPyfV3kbVJxxuuGxRAtxkCtn+AMvQ5+LNfst9m2Na+zw@mail.gmail.com>

What about shooting a photo of this IM with another camera?

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 6:04 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> Now we are being told there is a company Snapchat which enables children
> to take selfies in the bathroom mirror and send them to each other without
> risk of the photos going on the internet, since it lacks archiving features
> on the company?s servers and has no archiving option for either the sender
> or the receiver.
>
>
>
> At the same time, we hear US government officials doing US government
> official business opting for Instant Messaging or texting, over email for
> some odd reason, but that these IM services have an archiving option by the
> company or by either the receiver or the sender.
>
>
>
> So in theory, none of the three SnapChat participants have the option to
> archive, but with text messaging, any of the three can.
>
>
>
> Please educate me, IT hipsters.  We are now being told that SnapChat files
> were somehow hacked and are in existence, yet one US government bureaucracy
> after another is somehow accidentally losing IM texts and these are gone
> forever.
>
>
>
> Is that really what we are saying here?
>
>
>
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/2397d43f/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Tue Oct 14 16:49:52 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 17:49:52 +0100
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 5:04 PM, spike wrote:
> Now we are being told there is a company Snapchat which enables children to
> take selfies in the bathroom mirror and send them to each other without risk
> of the photos going on the internet, since it lacks archiving features on
> the company's servers and has no archiving option for either the sender or
> the receiver.
>
> At the same time, we hear US government officials doing US government
> official business opting for Instant Messaging or texting, over email for
> some odd reason, but that these IM services have an archiving option by the
> company or by either the receiver or the sender.
>
> So in theory, none of the three SnapChat participants have the option to
> archive, but with text messaging, any of the three can.
>
> Please educate me, IT hipsters.  We are now being told that SnapChat files
> were somehow hacked and are in existence, yet one US government bureaucracy
> after another is somehow accidentally losing IM texts and these are gone
> forever.
>
> Is that really what we are saying here?
>

According to Wikipedia - In the United States alone there are over
10,000 laws and regulations related to electronic messaging and
records retention.

If businesses fail to retain records for discovery procedures they are
breaking the law.

Both sender and receiver companies can install IM archiving software.
And legally, they probably HAVE to.

Snapchat are claiming that they weren't hacked and don't retain any
photos. But there is separate archiving software used by many Snapchat
users and that was hacked.


BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Tue Oct 14 18:06:27 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:06:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>

>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] question for it hipsters

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 5:04 PM, spike wrote:

>> ...Please educate me, IT hipsters.  We are now being told that SnapChat 
> files were somehow hacked and are in existence, yet one US government 
> bureaucracy after another is somehow accidentally losing IM texts and 
> these are gone forever... Is that really what we are saying here?


>...According to Wikipedia - In the United States alone there are over
10,000 laws and regulations related to electronic messaging and records
retention.

>...If businesses fail to retain records for discovery procedures they are
breaking the law.

>...Both sender and receiver companies can install IM archiving software.
And legally, they probably HAVE to.

>...Snapchat are claiming that they weren't hacked and don't retain any
photos. But there is separate archiving software used by many Snapchat users
and that was hacked....BillK
_______________________________________________


Thanks BillK.  My concern wasn't teen selfies on SnapChat.  I am not a
hipster, never used that system  and don't plan to.  My big worry at this
point is what appears to be a critical transition of the US government from
ambiguously corrupt to overt corruption.  Some anonymous yahoo in his PJs
can hack SnapChat or its associated archiving software.  (Hmmm, the software
the users were told doesn't exist?) Yet the US government with all its vast
resources cannot somehow resurrect even a single copy from the exact
accounts in question, email sent to and from a number of mysteriously
crashed and subsequently ground to powder hard drives, nor can it produce
metadata so it at least knows what is missing?  Indeed?

The Nazis came to power legally by most accounts.  At their end they were
doing many things overtly illegal by their own system.  Rounding up and
murdering its own citizens would have to qualify for overtly illegal.  At
some point perhaps in the late 1930s, there had to be a transition, where
that government dropped all pretenses of working within its own legal
system.  Don't even bother Godwin's Law-ing me.  Analogies to the Nazis are
perfectly appropriate when talking about national governments and what they
are doing.

Snapchat is hacked, but the fed cannot hack its own archives?  Indeed?

spike





From atymes at gmail.com  Tue Oct 14 18:44:52 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 11:44:52 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 14, 2014 11:22 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Snapchat is hacked, but the fed cannot hack its own archives?  Indeed?

Invalid comparison.  As noted, Snapchat isn't what was hacked, but
something else where the whole point was to get around Snapchat's
impermanence.  (Yes, that does question why they used Snapchat in the first
place - but kids will do dumb things.)  And no, no one - not even the feds
- can hack stuff that no longer exists.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/f9229f73/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Tue Oct 14 19:44:05 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 12:44:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <1413315531.48875.YahooMailNeo@web161602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
References: <1413315163.34623.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <1413315531.48875.YahooMailNeo@web161602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <8294D344-BCAD-4AAC-8DAF-BD7F70E0F451@gmail.com>

http://www.springer.com/mathematics/analysis/book/978-1-4614-4537-1

Me want! Jeg vil gjerne denne!

Regards, 

Dan 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/412108b3/attachment.html>

From dan_ust at yahoo.com  Tue Oct 14 19:32:43 2014
From: dan_ust at yahoo.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 12:32:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
Message-ID: <1413315163.34623.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

http://www.springer.com/mathematics/analysis/book/978-1-4614-4537-1

Me want!

 
Regards, 

Dan 



From ohadasor at gmail.com  Tue Oct 14 20:46:28 2014
From: ohadasor at gmail.com (Ohad Asor)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 23:46:28 +0300
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <8294D344-BCAD-4AAC-8DAF-BD7F70E0F451@gmail.com>
References: <1413315163.34623.YahooMailNeo@web161604.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <1413315531.48875.YahooMailNeo@web161602.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
 <8294D344-BCAD-4AAC-8DAF-BD7F70E0F451@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAuFJFvqUnqfBM58bZcuMzBv8mvsg1o=4kDhMKT0w=7ics=Y1w@mail.gmail.com>

> http://www.springer.com/mathematics/analysis/book/978-1-4614-4537-1
>
> Me want! Jeg vil gjerne denne!



wow
gonna read it asap
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/d0e5d04c/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Oct 14 21:41:54 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 14:41:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Subject: Re: [ExI] question for it hipsters

 

On Oct 14, 2014 11:22 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:



>>? the fed cannot hack its own archives?  Indeed?

>? no one - not even the feds - can hack stuff that no longer exists.  Adrian

The metadata no longer exists?  Without it, how did some innocent persons who did nothing wrong know exactly which hard discs mysteriously crashed and then subsequently were accidentally crucified, drawn and quartered, ground to dust, burned and the smoldering ashes hurled into the sea?

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/e4498633/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Tue Oct 14 22:46:44 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 00:46:44 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <8294D344-BCAD-4AAC-8DAF-BD7F70E0F451@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <282314396-3976@secure.ericade.net>

Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> , 14/10/2014 9:48 PM:
http://www.springer.com/mathematics/analysis/book/978-1-4614-4537-1

Me want! Jeg vil gjerne denne!
Looking at the sample chapter suggests that while there might not be derivatives, it is a graduate level approach that plays around with things like topological spaces, coercive functions and normal cones - it is not easier than the usual approach.
Incidentally, the Mean Value Theorem is not valid if one uses just the computable reals. That blew my mind when Ben Goertzel pointed it out to me.?



Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/b078f840/attachment.html>

From ohadasor at gmail.com  Tue Oct 14 22:54:51 2014
From: ohadasor at gmail.com (Ohad Asor)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 01:54:51 +0300
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <282314396-3976@secure.ericade.net>
References: <8294D344-BCAD-4AAC-8DAF-BD7F70E0F451@gmail.com>
 <282314396-3976@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAAuFJFspe7G1qjuaqM4MjVJVMuodRoGE7OALsG3uYdMPxeng4g@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 1:46 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Incidentally, the Mean Value Theorem is not valid if one uses just the
> computable reals. That blew my mind when Ben Goertzel pointed it out to me.



btw it's invalid also if you do not accept the law of excluded middle. if
you do not accept the latter, it is equivalent to computing reals up to
arbitrary (predefined) precision.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/e00aa2c8/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 00:09:11 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 17:09:11 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
Message-ID: <21E46A81-52E2-4427-B69B-A57B3DB28449@gmail.com>

On Tuesday, October 14, 2014 2:58 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> ? no one - not even the feds - can hack stuff that no longer exists.
>> Adrian
> The metadata no longer exists?  Without it, how did some innocent
> persons who did nothing wrong know exactly which hard discs
> mysteriously crashed and then subsequently were accidentally
> crucified, drawn and quartered, ground to dust, burned and the
> smoldering ashes hurled into the sea?

I don't think any here knows what really happened there, but it was a terribly convenient loss of data. It reminded of many years ago when a mayor lost re-election and then his nephew's law office -- where many files dealing with city contracts -- has a fire. Notably, the aforementioned contracts all seemed to be lost and there were no copies to be found. And no investigation ensued. Strange that, no?

Regards,

Dan
 My latest Kindle book, "Born With Teeth," can be previewed at:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00N72FBA2
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141014/9117a50e/attachment.html>

From mike at 7f.com  Tue Oct 14 22:59:12 2014
From: mike at 7f.com (Michael Roberts)
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 15:59:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <282314396-3976@secure.ericade.net>
References: <8294D344-BCAD-4AAC-8DAF-BD7F70E0F451@gmail.com>
 <282314396-3976@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAJ4XrpVy-YqcENLq0ByTj_hJ=nDKTdVMNkKR4PuXGkWgGq4rvA@mail.gmail.com>

While on the subject of mathematical works, I found this one to be
very interesting:

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/functional-differential-geometry

M

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> , 14/10/2014 9:48 PM:
>
> http://www.springer.com/mathematics/analysis/book/978-1-4614-4537-1
>
> Me want! Jeg vil gjerne denne!
>
>
> Looking at the sample chapter suggests that while there might not be
> derivatives, it is a graduate level approach that plays around with things
> like topological spaces, coercive functions and normal cones - it is not
> easier than the usual approach.
>
> Incidentally, the Mean Value Theorem is not valid if one uses just the
> computable reals. That blew my mind when Ben Goertzel pointed it out to me.
>
>
>
>
> 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
>


From anders at aleph.se  Wed Oct 15 12:30:04 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 14:30:04 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <CAJ4XrpVy-YqcENLq0ByTj_hJ=nDKTdVMNkKR4PuXGkWgGq4rvA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <331730521-16203@secure.ericade.net>

Michael Roberts <mike at 7f.com> , 15/10/2014 2:43 AM:
While on the subject of mathematical works, I found this one to be 
very interesting: 
 
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/functional-differential-geometry 
Cool. Jack Wisdom's stability analysis of Pluto was what convinced me that maybe there is something to symplectic methods and other "hightech" calculations rather than just brute forcing it with a high order Runge-Kutta method. The book is pretty neat in that it mixes scheme with differential geometry; it feels somewhat exotic and yet familiar.


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/72ced6da/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 14:08:09 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:08:09 +0100
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:41 PM, spike wrote:
> The metadata no longer exists?  Without it, how did some innocent persons
> who did nothing wrong know exactly which hard discs mysteriously crashed and
> then subsequently were accidentally crucified, drawn and quartered, ground
> to dust, burned and the smoldering ashes hurled into the sea?
>

Just to be extra clear,  :)
Companies install archive software to backup all emails, IMs, texts,
etc. sent and received, to a central backup system. Which, in turn, is
backed up to offline storage, probably every day. What is left on the
original pc hard disk is irrelevant. (It is insecure and could be
changed or deleted by anyone). Therefore, companies never, ever, lose
all records of their communications unless it is deliberate. And they
risk criminal charges if this happens.

Snapchat was not hacked. Users installed backup software created by
another company to keep copies of their photos on their servers. It
was the backup software company that was hacked. The whole point of
Snapchat is that no copies are kept of photos. If people want to keep
copies, then they shouldn't use Snapchat. Duh!

BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 14:34:41 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 07:34:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] question for it hipsters

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 10:41 PM, spike wrote:
>>... The metadata no longer exists?  Without it, how did some innocent 
> persons who did nothing wrong know exactly which hard discs 
> mysteriously crashed and then subsequently were accidentally 
> crucified, drawn and quartered, ground to dust, burned and the smoldering
ashes hurled into the sea?

>...Just to be extra clear,  :)
Companies install archive software to backup all emails, IMs, texts, etc.
sent and received...Therefore, companies never, ever, lose all records of
their communications unless it is deliberate. And they risk criminal charges
if this happens...BillK
_______________________________________________

Thanks BillK, that is the message I have received in perfect unison from
every IT hipster I know, with no dissenters.  The excuse that the
incriminating email was lost because of a disk crash is no more believable
than the dog ate their homework.  It would be easier for us to believe that
their homework ate the dog.

So to be extra clear, the reason why I keep harping on this is that it
appears to be the point where the IRS is crossing a critical threshold, from
covert shady dealings to overt criminality.  Congress doesn't seem to be
able to stop them.  The courts can't stop them either; they declare
themselves innocent then plead the fifth and walk away, with no adverse
consequences.  

Now what?

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 14:56:13 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 07:56:13 -0700
Subject: [ExI] local high tech cops save woman with ipad
Message-ID: <000901cfe888$2ab190b0$8014b210$@att.net>

 

 

Cool!  This is a local story, but cool anyway.  Local woman ran off the road
back of Mount Hamilton, roll-over accident not visible from the road, woman
injured bigtime.  Cops unlock ipad by guessing password and figure out where
she is, find her, happy ending.

 

http://patch.com/california/campbell/officer-unlocks-ipad-find-injured-campb
ell-woman-missing-19-hours-0#.VD6J4_ldXpc

 

Loss of privacy because of our electronic gadgets being hacked is a bad
thing.  But occasionally the good guys win:

 

 


Officer 'Unlocks' iPad To Find Injured Campbell Woman Missing For 19 Hours


The female, in her 20s, crashed and was lying alongside her car since 2 p.m.
Monday in a Mt. Hamilton ravine in Santa Clara County.


By
<http://patch.com/users/susan-c-schena5f2639ca489673e3efe4d6587b6f868fbbce9e
45b4b04dba4e9677f47ec0ff3e> Susan C. Schena (Patch Staff)Updated October 14,
2014 at 1:32 pm  

 

A woman who lay badly injured for 19 hours after her car plunged down Mount
Hamilton in Santa Clara County on Monday was rescued this morning after a
police officer unlocked her iPad tablet and used smartphone tracking
technology to locate her, authorities said.

The woman was lifted out of her overturned car by a line from a U.S. Coast
Guard helicopter at about 9:15 a.m. and she was flown to Regional Medical
Center of San Jose with major abdominal and leg injuries, according to the
California Highway Patrol.

The victim is a Campbell resident in her late 20s who had been lying inside
her Chevrolet Cruze compact car since 2 p.m. Monday, but is expected to
survive her injuries, CHP spokesman Officer Ross Lee said.

Her car was reported found by the Campbell Police Department at 5:30 a.m.
today as far as 500 feet down an embankment off the west side of Mt.
Hamilton Road, according to Lee.

[Previous:
<http://patch.com/california/campbell/crews-trying-rescue-woman-trapped-down
-mt-hamilton-ravine-monday-0> Crews Trying To Rescue Woman Trapped Down Mt.
Hamilton Ravine Since Monday.]

Campbell police Lt. Gary Berg said that around 2 p.m. Monday, the OnStar
security system in the woman's car notified the Police Department that it
had been in a rollover accident, but reported the location as at Camden
Avenue and state Highway 17 in San Jose, Berg said.

Campbell police searched streets in the area, the CHP looked on nearby
highways for two hours and the woman's car horn was activated through OnStar
but they could not find it, according to Berg.

At about 4 p.m. Monday, the system reported that the car was in downtown San
Jose possibly near Fourth Street and San Jose police were notified but the
car could not be found, Berg said.

At about 3 a.m. today, the woman's family called Campbell police to report
her missing, saying that it was out of character for her not to be home,
police said.

A Campbell police officer responded to the family's residence, asked them
about her cellphone, which was an iPhone, then took the woman's iPad tablet
and began trying a number of potential passwords, such as her birthday and
address, Berg said.

The officer finally succeeded in choosing her password, accessed the iPad
and went to the "Find my iPhone" application for tracking iPhones and
pinpointed the location of her phone and car, Berg said.

Santa Clara County sheriff's deputies were then sent to the car's location
and worked on getting the woman out of her overturned car and the CHP took
over the investigation into the crash, Berg said.

"We feel pretty fortunate our officer was able to get into that iPad," Berg
said.

After the woman's car left the road and went down the steep hill, it turned
over and came to rest on its roof, Lee said.

The CHP has not yet determined the cause of the crash, he said.

 

--Bay City News

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/33eadfcf/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 17:07:07 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:07:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 15, 2014 7:48 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Thanks BillK, that is the message I have received in perfect unison from
> every IT hipster I know, with no dissenters.  The excuse that the
> incriminating email was lost because of a disk crash is no more believable
> than the dog ate their homework.  It would be easier for us to believe
that
> their homework ate the dog.

No, disks do crash.  It is - perhaps marginally, but is - within the bounds
of plausibility, enough - perhaps barely - to stay below the threshold of
proof needed for criminal charges.

> So to be extra clear, the reason why I keep harping on this is that it
> appears to be the point where the IRS is crossing a critical threshold,
from
> covert shady dealings to overt criminality.  Congress doesn't seem to be
> able to stop them.

So far as can be determined, it has stopped.  There may be a problem with
not punishing the guilty after the fact, but then, our previous President
and Vice President were never impeached nor brought up on charges despite
much clearer evidence.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/bcd27e56/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 17:11:20 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:11:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] local high tech cops save woman with ipad
In-Reply-To: <000901cfe888$2ab190b0$8014b210$@att.net>
References: <000901cfe888$2ab190b0$8014b210$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNQK0GCcO84unN3_6yXjX5ti+DY4Vj5Tcs3PzrCGtonHgw@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 15, 2014 8:11 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Cool!  This is a local story, but cool anyway.  Local woman ran off the
road back of Mount Hamilton, roll-over accident not visible from the road,
woman injured bigtime.  Cops unlock ipad by guessing password and figure
out where she is, find her, happy ending.

Sometimes hacking is clearly white hat.  I suspect the idea only came up
after the police were specifically told that tracking app was on the iPad -
otherwise, it'd be way too much of a guess that the iPad would have
anything relevant on it.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/ce8e1189/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 17:22:21 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:22:21 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Subject: Re: [ExI] question for it hipsters

 

On Oct 15, 2014 7:48 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> >?  It would be easier for us to believe that their homework ate the dog.

>?No, disks do crash.  It is - perhaps marginally, but is - within the bounds of plausibility, enough - perhaps barely - to stay below the threshold of proof needed for criminal charges?

The reason I have a hard time with that is that if the only copy of email is on a hard disk, then the user with that disk can access it and modify it in any way she wants.  If that is the case, the email on that disk is useless as evidence anyway.

Can the IRS take any e-filing, modify it to make you a tax cheat, then confiscate your bank account at their whim?

> >?  Congress doesn't seem to be able to stop them.

>?So far as can be determined, it has stopped?

Sure but we cannot determine it.  We have a former IRS director who has pled the fifth, which ends the presumption of innocence and puts the burden of proof on her.  But the evidence is missing.  We must assume guilt in any case which starts out with the phrase ?So far as can be determined? if the suspect pleads the fifth.

>?  There may be a problem with not punishing the guilty after the fact, but then, our previous President and Vice President were never impeached nor brought up on charges despite much clearer evidence?

Ja but this isn?t about presidents or vice presidents.  It is about the IRS.  We don?t know that the current president, VP or the previous ones were in on this caper.  The evidence is missing under suspicious circumstances.

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/8df0a801/attachment.html>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Oct 15 18:55:31 2014
From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 11:55:31 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
Message-ID: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>

How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?

 

Thanks,

Natasha

 

 <http://www.natasha.cc/> Natasha Vita-More, PhD

 

Professor, University of Advancing Technology

Chair, Humanity+

Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies

_______________________________________

New Book at
<http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1/188-1002006-3563941?url=search-ali
as%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20transhumanist%20reader&sprefix=the+transhumani
st+re%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20transhumanist%20reader> Amazon!

cover email

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/05a89690/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10577 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/05a89690/attachment.png>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 19:26:10 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:26:10 -0400
Subject: [ExI] local high tech cops save woman with ipad
In-Reply-To: <000901cfe888$2ab190b0$8014b210$@att.net>
References: <000901cfe888$2ab190b0$8014b210$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdbKq1LPGNUf+60h_JCg_eTjj=_rfed4MpWW8cvap70CLgA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:56 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Cool!  This is a local story, but cool anyway.  Local woman ran off the road
> back of Mount Hamilton, roll-over accident not visible from the road, woman
> injured bigtime.  Cops unlock ipad by guessing password and figure out where
> she is, find her, happy ending.
> http://patch.com/california/campbell/officer-unlocks-ipad-find-injured-campbell-woman-missing-19-hours-0#.VD6J4_ldXpc

> Campbell police Lt. Gary Berg said that around 2 p.m. Monday, the OnStar
> security system in the woman?s car notified the Police Department that it
> had been in a rollover accident, but reported the location as at Camden
> Avenue and state Highway 17 in San Jose, Berg said.
>
> Campbell police searched streets in the area, the CHP looked on nearby
> highways for two hours and the woman?s car horn was activated through OnStar
> but they could not find it, according to Berg.
>
> At about 4 p.m. Monday, the system reported that the car was in downtown San
> Jose possibly near Fourth Street and San Jose police were notified but the
> car could not be found, Berg said.

So Onstar mislead the police about the location - twice.  Somehow
their system doesn't flag "rollover accident" plus "2 hours later at
another location" as being any kind of suspicious?

> At about 3 a.m. today, the woman?s family called Campbell police to report
> her missing, saying that it was out of character for her not to be home,
> police said.

The family is unaware of the rollover notification and 2 hours' worth
of police search?  Seems like that'd be noteworthy to inform them
about.
Did the police really just shrug, give up, and wait for a missing person report?

> A Campbell police officer responded to the family?s residence, asked them
> about her cellphone, which was an iPhone, then took the woman?s iPad tablet
> and began trying a number of potential passwords, such as her birthday and
> address, Berg said.

Because the police are white hat hackers who know "a number of
potential passwords"?  Yeah, in the end the woman was rescued - but it
should have been the woman's family attempting to hack her iPad - not
the police.  If the police used a magical Apple-supported
law-enforcement shim to open the iPad, then huzzah for police - but
don't report it as lucky guessing to unlock an iPad.  (of course, such
a hole is no-doubt exploitable by the bad guys too)

> The officer finally succeeded in choosing her password, accessed the iPad
> and went to the ?Find my iPhone? application for tracking iPhones and
> pinpointed the location of her phone and car, Berg said.
>
> Santa Clara County sheriff?s deputies were then sent to the car?s location
> and worked on getting the woman out of her overturned car and the CHP took
> over the investigation into the crash, Berg said.

Did they then notify Onstar of the car's real location and that it was
still flipped over?  (While standing in front of the flipped vehicle,
I'd want to know where they thought it was located)

> ?We feel pretty fortunate our officer was able to get into that iPad,? Berg
> said.
>
> After the woman?s car left the road and went down the steep hill, it turned
> over and came to rest on its roof, Lee said.
>
> The CHP has not yet determined the cause of the crash, he said.

No doubt the woman was distracted by actually using the iPhone at the
time of the oopsy.

So is the takeaway from this story that if you're going to
accidentally drive off the road and disappear, be sure you've
disregarded every bit of digital safety advice and left behind a trail
of gadgets with easily-guessable passwords so you can be found?  :)



From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 19:19:18 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:19:18 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
Message-ID: <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>

How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?

 

Thanks,

Natasha

 

 

Natasha, you aren't required to tell them who you are.  Any pseudonym will
do.  I have two second cousins on there whose identities I have been trying
to crack for some time, but no luck.

 

If one of your siblings or several cousins go on there and identify
themselves, it is easy enough to figure out with high confidence the
identity of you, but it is unlikely several cousins would do it, and you can
ask your siblings if they did it.

 

If you want even more assurance of privacy, have a friend buy the kit with
her credit card.  Then register yourself Rhizopus Stolonifer.  Give a
different friend's email @ or create one for Ms. Stolonifer and use it for
only that.

 

Welcome to the family!

 

Before you do that however, if you are in it for genealogy purposes, 23andMe
isn't the way to go.  Post me offlist for further info if you worry about
privacy concerns, or ask here if you wish.  Others might want this info.

 

spike

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of natasha at natasha.cc
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 11:56 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?

 

Thanks,

Natasha

 

 <http://www.natasha.cc/> Natasha Vita-More, PhD

 

Professor, University of Advancing Technology

Chair, Humanity+

Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies

_______________________________________

New Book at
<http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1/188-1002006-3563941?url=search-ali
as%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20transhumanist%20reader&sprefix=the+transhumani
st+re%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20transhumanist%20reader> Amazon!

cover email

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/5862cf53/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10577 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/5862cf53/attachment.png>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 19:34:42 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:34:42 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 15, 2014 10:36 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> The reason I have a hard time with that is that if the only copy of email
is on a hard disk, then the user with that disk can access it and modify it
in any way she wants.  If that is the case, the email on that disk is
useless as evidence anyway.

This is a problem with most computer-based evidence: it is more modifiable
than accepted-as-equivalent physical evidence.

How do you know this email wasn't spoofed?

> Can the IRS take any e-filing, modify it to make you a tax cheat, then
confiscate your bank account at their whim?

Preventing this is why you are supposed to keep hardcopy of each filing you
make.  Besides, what about outsiders who crack into the IRS's databases and
try to make it look like you're a cheat, or that the IRS edited your
files?  What about people who do that to hack themselves enough tax refund
to retire on?

> We must assume guilt in any case which starts out with the phrase ?So far
as can be determined? if the suspect pleads the fifth.

No.  The primary purpose of the Fifth Amendment is not to allow the guilty
to invoke it, though that is an easy mistake to make.  The primary purpose
is to require evidence instead of confession.

People - in authority and otherwise - can be convinced that someone is
guilty, but not actually have evidence, so the obvious method is to get the
guilty to confess.  Is that not the position you are in regarding the IRS
director right now?

But in far too many cases, it turned out the supposedly obviously guilty
party was in fact innocent...and this could only be determined after
extensive review of the evidence turned up surprising information.

That is why we never presume guilt in cases like this in our legal system.
Yes, it lets some of the guilty get away...but it was judged better, based
on centuries of evidence, to do that than to damn the innocent.  That's
"better" as in "the magnitude of abuses that can be gotten away with are
smaller".

Imagine these ne'er-do-wells you are angry at if, instead of at least
having to yell "terrorist" or the like to jail someone, they merely had to
accuse in a handwavey manner.  Say, claim all third parties are witchcraft
organizations and thereby sentence all who vote non-Democrat-or-Republican
to death?  This isn't too far from what actually happened in Salem - and
many of us on this list would risk being targeted within a decade or two if
that were to pass.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/04530793/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 19:41:17 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:41:17 -0700
Subject: [ExI] local high tech cops save woman with ipad
In-Reply-To: <CAOJFdbKq1LPGNUf+60h_JCg_eTjj=_rfed4MpWW8cvap70CLgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <000901cfe888$2ab190b0$8014b210$@att.net>
 <CAOJFdbKq1LPGNUf+60h_JCg_eTjj=_rfed4MpWW8cvap70CLgA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNQbGNEN5vgy7PO+byeqtq0a_T+cjAmp+ERO3R2u3O-3hg@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 15, 2014 12:26 PM, "Mike Dougherty" <msd001 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Because the police are white hat hackers who know "a number of
> potential passwords"?

Birth date, street address...apparently it really was an easy to guess
password.  And, yes, there are some police officers these days - at least
in Silicon Valley - who are at least passingly familiar with the basics of
hacking, enough to pull off occasional things like this.

> Yeah, in the end the woman was rescued - but it
> should have been the woman's family attempting to hack her iPad - not
> the police.

Agreed.  But if they can't and that one cop can...especially if the cop has
explicit permission from the woman's next of kin (i.e. the iPad's legal
owner if the woman is dead).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/f82bbd3b/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 20:00:30 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:00:30 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <331730521-16203@secure.ericade.net>
References: <331730521-16203@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <30F68916-0431-426F-A5C4-D014711DCC9E@gmail.com>

> On Wednesday, October 15, 2014 5:33 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> 
> Michael Roberts<mike at 7f.com> , 15/10/2014 2:43 AM:
>> 
>> While on the subject of mathematical works, I found this one to be 
>> very interesting: 
>> 
>> http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/functional-differential-geometry
> 
> Cool. Jack Wisdom's stability analysis of Pluto was what convinced me
> that maybe there is something to symplectic methods and other
> "hightech" calculations

I like to think all this knowledge eventually has some payoff. It's just a matter of being imaginative and determined enough to figure out how.

> rather than just brute forcing it with a high
> order Runge-Kutta method.

Ah, the memories. The horrible memories of diff eq. :)

> The book is pretty neat in that it mixes
> scheme with differential geometry; it feels somewhat exotic and yet
> familiar.

Ever more to play around with here. Don't things usually progress from new discoveries and methods that are clunky/unnatural to ones that seem less intuitive at first, but easier and, in the end, more natural/intuitive? Maybe I'm overgeneralizing. There's also a difference between what's taught to undergrads at one time versus later because, I think, "newer" ideas just take time to work their way from the bleeding edge to the textbook. At least, this is my impression, FWIW.

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/50afc970/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 19:55:31 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 12:55:31 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <020b01cfe8b1$fa7e4b70$ef7ae250$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Subject: Re: [ExI] question for it hipsters

 

On Oct 15, 2014 10:36 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:



>? We must assume guilt in any case which starts out with the phrase ?So far as can be determined? if the suspect pleads the fifth.

No.  The primary purpose of the Fifth Amendment is not to allow the guilty to invoke it, though that is an easy mistake to make.  The primary purpose is to require evidence instead of confession?

Sure.  The big deal in this case is that the defendant herself was vested with the authority to declare anyone any time guilty and make their life a living hell by calling an IRS audit, a form of conviction for which there is no appeal to a higher court.  The IRS is its own tyranny, granted arbitrary power without accountability.  This came out in testimony by IRS chief John Koskinen, where he appeared before congress saying the arrogant equivalent of ?Fuck off, I am the IRS.  With one phone call I can have any or all of you audited beyond all recognition.?

Notice that nothing bad happened to him either.  Everyone there backed way meekly, including the firebrands Darrell Issa and Trey Gowdy.  We set up this system where we know we cannot do without the tax service, and someone has to run it.  So they know they are completely above the law.  They really are: who can do anything to stop them?

In this case, we do have evidence, and even more evidence that evidence is missing.  Yet the whole investigation fades away, as we realize we can do nothing.  The perpetrators are above the law.

OK then, they establish that they have absolute power, outranking the legislature, the courts and the executive branch.  We are likely to see a big swing in power in the next few years.  It looks like a disaster waiting to happen, with all these guys looking for revenge and being handed power from their predecessors.

This really is different.  This can only turn out badly.

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/6afcf0d7/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 15 20:57:35 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:57:35 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZAMkZo+vvA2gV06zxSOCxPJa24v5-S2fh0ukP8z3=dpA@mail.gmail.com>

I'd like to see your alternative to 23 and me.

bill w

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 2:19 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Natasha
>
>
>
>
>
> Natasha, you aren?t required to tell them who you are.  Any pseudonym will
> do.  I have two second cousins on there whose identities I have been trying
> to crack for some time, but no luck.
>
>
>
> If one of your siblings or several cousins go on there and identify
> themselves, it is easy enough to figure out with high confidence the
> identity of you, but it is unlikely several cousins would do it, and you
> can ask your siblings if they did it.
>
>
>
> If you want even more assurance of privacy, have a friend buy the kit with
> her credit card.  Then register yourself Rhizopus Stolonifer.  Give a
> different friend?s email @ or create one for Ms. Stolonifer and use it for
> only that.
>
>
>
> Welcome to the family!
>
>
>
> Before you do that however, if you are in it for genealogy purposes,
> 23andMe isn?t the way to go.  Post me offlist for further info if you worry
> about privacy concerns, or ask here if you wish.  Others might want this
> info.
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On
> Behalf Of *natasha at natasha.cc
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 15, 2014 11:56 AM
> *To:* ExI chat list
> *Subject:* [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
>
>
>
> How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Natasha
>
>
>
> Natasha Vita-More, PhD <http://www.natasha.cc/>
>
>
>
> *Professor, University of Advancing Technology*
>
> *Chair, Humanity+*
>
> *Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies*
>
> _______________________________________
>
> New Book at Amazon
> <http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1/188-1002006-3563941?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20transhumanist%20reader&sprefix=the+transhumanist+re%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20transhumanist%20reader>
> !
>
> [image: cover email]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/bc2665fe/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10577 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/bc2665fe/attachment.png>

From natasha at natasha.cc  Wed Oct 15 20:59:06 2014
From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:59:06 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>

Hi spike!

 

I have been a member of 23andMe for a number of years, but I just wanted to
ask because a student of mine is investigating their corporate efficacy and
integrity, after the FDA issue and he is concerned about privacy.

 

All my best!

Natasha

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of spike
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 12:19 PM
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?

 

Thanks,

Natasha

 

 

Natasha, you aren't required to tell them who you are.  Any pseudonym will
do.  I have two second cousins on there whose identities I have been trying
to crack for some time, but no luck.

 

If one of your siblings or several cousins go on there and identify
themselves, it is easy enough to figure out with high confidence the
identity of you, but it is unlikely several cousins would do it, and you can
ask your siblings if they did it.

 

If you want even more assurance of privacy, have a friend buy the kit with
her credit card.  Then register yourself Rhizopus Stolonifer.  Give a
different friend's email @ or create one for Ms. Stolonifer and use it for
only that.

 

Welcome to the family!

 

Before you do that however, if you are in it for genealogy purposes, 23andMe
isn't the way to go.  Post me offlist for further info if you worry about
privacy concerns, or ask here if you wish.  Others might want this info.

 

spike

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of natasha at natasha.cc
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 11:56 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

How does 23andMe assure customers that their DNA data is private?

 

Thanks,

Natasha

 

 <http://www.natasha.cc/> Natasha Vita-More, PhD

 

Professor, University of Advancing Technology

Chair, Humanity+

Fellow, Institute for Ethics & Emerging Technologies

_______________________________________

New Book at
<http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss_1/188-1002006-3563941?url=search-ali
as%3Daps&field-keywords=the%20transhumanist%20reader&sprefix=the+transhumani
st+re%2Caps&rh=i%3Aaps%2Ck%3Athe%20transhumanist%20reader> Amazon!

cover email

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/890c7f17/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 10577 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/890c7f17/attachment.png>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 22:04:46 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:04:46 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
Message-ID: <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of natasha at natasha.cc
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 1:59 PM
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

Hi spike!

 

I have been a member of 23andMe for a number of years, but I just wanted to
ask because a student of mine is investigating their corporate efficacy and
integrity, after the FDA issue and he is concerned about privacy.

 

All my best!

Natasha

 

 

 

 

Ja OK.  I would suggest advising anyone concerned with privacy to not tell
any DNA service who the heck you are ever.  When in doubt leave it out.  The
hackers are diabolically clever.  23andMe asks for a name associated with
the sample, but there is no requirement that it be the name of the owner of
the DNA, any name will do.  I rather like Rhizopus Stolonifer.  It has a
dignified, noble sound.  

 

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/e02b6dac/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 15 22:18:07 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:18:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEZAMkZo+vvA2gV06zxSOCxPJa24v5-S2fh0ukP8z3=dpA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEZAMkZo+vvA2gV06zxSOCxPJa24v5-S2fh0ukP8z3=dpA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00a501cfe8c5$e6754480$b35fcd80$@att.net>

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 1:58 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

I'd like to see your alternative to 23 and me.

bill w

 

 

 

OK.  For the time being, 23andMe is not allowed to give you the results of all those medical-info questionnaires people filled out.  The FDA was squirmy about proles having all that information.  They run the risk of hordes of citizen scientists figuring out things the FDA doesn?t know.  Can?t have that you know: that could threaten high-paying government jobs.

 

Without that medical research function, the only reason I can think of to do a DNA test is for genealogy purposes.  People interested in genealogy do not want privacy; just the opposite.  They want to find and be found by family.  Ancestry.comDNA is better for that purpose by an order of magnitude, for many reasons.  One of those is that a prole can use this software I wrote to figure out the most recent common ancestor with the people on your cousins list.  It is flat out wicked cool.  I used it to figure out and prove that I am directly descended from this guy:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Howard,_21st_Earl_of_Arundel

 

Oh I feel so noble.  Of course our branch of the family is all the ig variety, but better that than no nobility at all.

 

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/e5293a42/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Wed Oct 15 22:56:07 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 00:56:07 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
 <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net>
Message-ID: <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>

Il 16/10/2014 00:04, spike ha scritto:

> Ja OK.  I would suggest advising anyone concerned with privacy to
> not tell any DNA service who the heck you are ever.  When in doubt
> leave it out.  The hackers are diabolically clever.

Some are not, they just wear some funny hats, badges and guns.

Mirco




From mike at 7f.com  Wed Oct 15 20:33:43 2014
From: mike at 7f.com (Michael Roberts)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 13:33:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Calculus Without Derivatives
In-Reply-To: <30F68916-0431-426F-A5C4-D014711DCC9E@gmail.com>
References: <331730521-16203@secure.ericade.net>
 <30F68916-0431-426F-A5C4-D014711DCC9E@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ4XrpWW4R34pzR=SKNAwEYeyrUZPMP3ZkfdX=eEcsCJQ7P6Hg@mail.gmail.com>

> Ever more to play around with here. Don't things usually progress from new
> discoveries and methods that are clunky/unnatural to ones that seem less
> intuitive at first, but easier and, in the end, more natural/intuitive?
> Maybe I'm overgeneralizing. There's also a difference between what's taught
> to undergrads at one time versus later because, I think, "newer" ideas just
> take time to work their way from the bleeding edge to the textbook. At
> least, this is my impression, FWIW.
> Dan

In general I like the book's approach - of reducing something to a
nested set of implemented functions, subdividing the knowledge into
functional pieces, both as an aid to understanding it, but also
potentially as a way of getting traction on a subject which might seem
difficult to approach as a whole.  But I guess that is at the heart of
the western method, and the premise of reduction to code an extension
of that approach.

M

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


From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 01:16:24 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 20:16:24 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
 <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net>
 <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>

 For the time being, 23andMe is not allowed to give you the results of all
those medical-info questionnaires people filled out.   What about Europe?
Do you know?  bill w

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>
wrote:

> Il 16/10/2014 00:04, spike ha scritto:
>
> > Ja OK.  I would suggest advising anyone concerned with privacy to
> > not tell any DNA service who the heck you are ever.  When in doubt
> > leave it out.  The hackers are diabolically clever.
>
> Some are not, they just wear some funny hats, badges and guns.
>
> Mirco
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/bacbc259/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 01:38:08 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:38:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
 <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net> <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>
 <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <005d01cfe8e1$d7a4c860$86ee5920$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 6:16 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

For the time being, 23andMe is not allowed to give you the results of all those medical-info questionnaires people filled out.   What about Europe?  Do you know?  bill w

 

 

 

 

BillW, I don?t know that answer, but I think they are telling 23andMe to desist until further notice.  I don?t see how they could offer the results to Europeans because 23andMe would have no way of knowing where a given user is from.  They recieve a kit without a return address.  All they have is a test tube of spit with a number on it.  They look in their records and find an email @ associated with that number, since the user registered the kit while he or she was spitting in it.  23andMe still has no way of knowing the true identity of the person who spit into the tube or where that person lives.

 

You bring up an interesting point however.  23andMe has clients all over the world.  So they just need to move their operation offshore or anywhere where the government?s medical bureacracy is more interested in things like stopping ebola rather than interfering with a perfectly legitimate harmless crowd-sourced science project.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/baa084f9/attachment.html>

From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk  Thu Oct 16 08:41:21 2014
From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:41:21 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
Message-ID: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>

Lockheed announces breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

  
             
Lockheed announces breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy
Defence company has developed 100MW reactor small enough to fit on back of a truck that could be in use within 10 years  
View on www.theguardian.com Preview by Yahoo  
  

(Apologies for the preview at the top, people using text-only browsing, yahoo mail seems to want to do this automatically with my link)

Lockheed Martin Corp said on Wednesday it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade.
Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said he and a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed?s secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were now going public to find potential partners in industry and government for their work.
Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters.
In a statement, the company, the Pentagon?s largest supplier, said it would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year, and build a prototype in five years.
In recent years, Lockheed has become increasingly involved in a variety of alternate energy projects, including several ocean energy projects, as it looks to offset a decline in US and European military spending.
Lockheed?s work on fusion energy could help in developing new power sources amid increasing global conflicts over energy, and as projections show there will be a 40% to 50% increase in energy use over the next generation, McGuire said.
If it proves feasible, Lockheed?s work would mark a key breakthrough in a field that scientists have long eyed as promising, but which has not yet yielded viable power systems. The effort seeks to harness the energy released during nuclear fusion, when atoms combine into more stable forms.
?We can make a big difference on the energy front,? McGuire said, noting Lockheed?s 60 years of research on nuclear fusion as a potential energy source that is safer and more efficient than current reactors based on nuclear fission. Lockheed sees the project as part of a comprehensive approach to solving global energy and climate change problems.
Compact nuclear fusion would produce far less waste than coal-powered plants since it would use deuterium-tritium fuel, which can generate nearly 10 million times more energy than the same amount of fossil fuels, the company said.
Ultra-dense deuterium, an isotope of hydrogen, is found in the earth?s oceans, and tritium is made from natural lithium deposits. It said future reactors could use a different fuel and eliminate radioactive waste completely.
McGuire said the company had several patents pending for the work and was looking for partners in academia, industry and among government laboratories to advance the work.
Lockheed said it had shown it could complete a design, build and test it in as little as a year, which should produce an operational reactor in 10 years, McGuire said. A small reactor could power a US navy warship, and eliminate the need for other fuel sources that pose logistical challenges.
US submarines and aircraft carriers run on nuclear power, but they have large fission reactors on board that have to be replaced on a regular cycle.
?What makes our project really interesting and feasible is that timeline as a potential solution,? McGuire said.
Lockheed shares fell 0.6% to $175.02 amid a broad market selloff.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/a927cabb/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 09:07:22 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:07:22 +0100
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <005d01cfe8e1$d7a4c860$86ee5920$@att.net>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
 <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net>
 <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>
 <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <005d01cfe8e1$d7a4c860$86ee5920$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armg+qkuWA4TQa=h1dhkUue7es_mnzuyUU6LEWBb7F7tRqA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:38 AM, spike wrote:
> You bring up an interesting point however.  23andMe has clients all over the
> world.  So they just need to move their operation offshore or anywhere where
> the government's medical bureacracy is more interested in things like
> stopping ebola rather than interfering with a perfectly legitimate harmless
> crowd-sourced science project.
>
>

23andMe has just started selling in Canada this month, including the
health reports, available to Canadians only.

(While it is outside their jurisdiction I suspect this will annoy the FDA). ;)

Canada Health say that only the safety of the testing kit is their
concern. The results of the testing and the use or misuse of that data
is the responsibility of provincial governments. So there may still be
problems ahead in Canada for 23andMe.

The FDA is concerned that the health reports may lead to unnecessary
medical interventions. Things like obesity, smoking, high blood
pressure, etc. are much greater risk factors than having a dodgy gene
that may or may not cause a disease in later life.

>From Google's POV the health reports are almost irrelevant. What they
want is to collect as much DNA analysis as possible and do Big Data
analysis on it. If they can use DNA analysis to pinpoint disease
causes or ageing causes then they could get very valuable patents on
the cures. This is Google remember. Your data is used to make them the
richest company in the world.


BillK


From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu  Wed Oct 15 22:47:54 2014
From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera)
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 18:47:54 -0400
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00a501cfe8c5$e6754480$b35fcd80$@att.net>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEZAMkZo+vvA2gV06zxSOCxPJa24v5-S2fh0ukP8z3=dpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00a501cfe8c5$e6754480$b35fcd80$@att.net>
Message-ID: <B9CF434F-CD42-4F11-92BB-E34D5C610919@alumni.virginia.edu>

I use FamilyTreeDNA.com for genealogy purposes. It doesn't do the health-issues-predicting like 23andme though. 


> On Oct 15, 2014, at 6:18 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> 
>  
> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace
> Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2014 1:58 PM
> To: ExI chat list
> Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
>  
> I'd like to see your alternative to 23 and me.
> 
> bill w
>  
>  
>  
> OK.  For the time being, 23andMe is not allowed to give you the results of all those medical-info questionnaires people filled out.  The FDA was squirmy about proles having all that information.  They run the risk of hordes of citizen scientists figuring out things the FDA doesn?t know.  Can?t have that you know: that could threaten high-paying government jobs.
>  
> Without that medical research function, the only reason I can think of to do a DNA test is for genealogy purposes.  People interested in genealogy do not want privacy; just the opposite.  They want to find and be found by family.  Ancestry.comDNA is better for that purpose by an order of magnitude, for many reasons.  One of those is that a prole can use this software I wrote to figure out the most recent common ancestor with the people on your cousins list.  It is flat out wicked cool.  I used it to figure out and prove that I am directly descended from this guy:
>  
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Howard,_21st_Earl_of_Arundel
>  
> Oh I feel so noble.  Of course our branch of the family is all the ig variety, but better that than no nobility at all.
>  
> spike
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141015/7810aec4/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 14:08:48 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 09:08:48 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <B9CF434F-CD42-4F11-92BB-E34D5C610919@alumni.virginia.edu>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEZAMkZo+vvA2gV06zxSOCxPJa24v5-S2fh0ukP8z3=dpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00a501cfe8c5$e6754480$b35fcd80$@att.net>
 <B9CF434F-CD42-4F11-92BB-E34D5C610919@alumni.virginia.edu>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZNY9se_Ccv99PskkB7H0VO4byBP_imZpg1_BA-ctL6mg@mail.gmail.com>

Spike, what I meant was that do you know of European companies that offer
the health related info that may not be regulated by the FDA.  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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/48eb6e01/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 14:15:32 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:15:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armg+qkuWA4TQa=h1dhkUue7es_mnzuyUU6LEWBb7F7tRqA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
 <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net> <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>
 <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <005d01cfe8e1$d7a4c860$86ee5920$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+qkuWA4TQa=h1dhkUue7es_mnzuyUU6LEWBb7F7tRqA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006b01cfe94b$a64fa450$f2eeecf0$@att.net>




>...23andMe has just started selling in Canada this month, including the
health reports, available to Canadians only...

How do they know if a client is Canadian?  I have a college buddy who has
dual citizenship.

>...(While it is outside their jurisdiction I suspect this will annoy the
FDA). ;)

Good, they richly deserve to be annoyed.

>...The FDA is concerned that the health reports may lead to unnecessary
medical interventions. Things like obesity, smoking, high blood pressure,
etc. are much greater risk factors than having a dodgy gene that may or may
not cause a disease in later life...

When they were allowed to do it, 23andMe included genetic risk of obesity
and hypertension.  I don't recall seeing smoking in there; that isn't clear
it has much to do with genetics.

>...From Google's POV the health reports are almost irrelevant. What they
want is to collect as much DNA analysis as possible and do Big Data analysis
on it. If they can use DNA analysis to pinpoint disease causes or ageing
causes then they could get very valuable patents on the cures. This is
Google remember. Your data is used to make them the richest company in the
world.  BillK
_______________________________________________

Hmmm, perhaps.  Better to find the cures and have someone get a patent on it
than not finding it at all, ja?  If a cure is discovered and patented,
better to have it in the hands of the richest company in the world, for they
will be in the best position to develop it, sell it to a government, donate
it into the public domain in exchange for good will, get a bunch of smart
researchers working on it and so forth.  We don't want a poor company
holding the patents for important stuff.

Aside from that, if you do genetic testing, you can download your entire
sequence.  I have mine; it's 30 megabytes of ACGT, which is cool in itself.
In the USA, if you apply for a patent, you must disclose what it is.  So if
someone tries to patent a finding that if a prole has maternal haplogroup
mutation ACCTGGAACCTTGG at location 294 on chromosome 7, then she will have
a 12 times higher risk of breast cancer, the patent application must contain
that info.  Well now, I have my genome and I can go in there and read it.
So it isn't patents so much as it is trade secrets.  But these leak.
Humanity benefits.  

So I think all this is a good thing.  It is a bad thing for the FDA to stop
it.  If a patient perceives a higher risk of something, that patient should
be able to pay for extra diagnostics for that, ja?

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 14:34:09 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:34:09 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <003c01cfe8ba$dcf2bb50$96d831f0$@natasha.cc>
 <009001cfe8c4$08a83870$19f8a950$@att.net> <543EFB87.5080308@libero.it>
 <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <005d01cfe8e1$d7a4c860$86ee5920$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+qkuWA4TQa=h1dhkUue7es_mnzuyUU6LEWBb7F7tRqA@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <009601cfe94e$40232640$c06972c0$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] 
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 7:16 AM
To: 'ExI chat list'
Subject: RE: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy


>...Well now, I have my genome and I can go in there and read it.  So it
isn't patents so much as it is trade secrets.  But these leak.  Humanity
benefits.  

>...  If a patient perceives a higher risk of something, that patient should
be able to pay for extra diagnostics for that, ja?  spike


I have already done this.  I was in 23andMe before the FDA carried out its
corrupt plan.  (Note to reader, any action by the government against any
company is immediately under suspicion.  A company's profit motive is overt.
A government agency's profit motive is necessarily covert, and is often
denied.  But government agencies also runs on a profit motive.  Capitalism
corrupts government.  Socialism corrupts government more.  With companies we
know exactly who is paying whom: we pay them.  With government agencies, we
don't have that info.)

>From my 23andMe results, my risk of common diseases was lower than average
across the board, but it was much higher in one area.  So I got on the
internet, learned up about that condition, learned all the ways to spot the
condition early, all the existing treatments and under what conditions each
course should be used and the logic behind each strategy.  Now I am an
A-rated player on that on condition, or even perhaps the bottom end of the
expert range.  There are a million diseases; on that one condition I am
ready to take on the med-school graduates in a written test, a competition.
I am a microphysician.

My doctor was really impressed last month at my annual checkup.  I sent her
scurrying back to her textbooks, by knowing all the latest findings on that
one condition, and knowing all the jargon.  Ooohhh the power.  Doctors hate
that.  Patients love it.

spike



From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 14:43:55 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 07:43:55 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEZNY9se_Ccv99PskkB7H0VO4byBP_imZpg1_BA-ctL6mg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <018101cfe8ac$eb4b3ff0$c1e1bfd0$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEZAMkZo+vvA2gV06zxSOCxPJa24v5-S2fh0ukP8z3=dpA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00a501cfe8c5$e6754480$b35fcd80$@att.net>
 <B9CF434F-CD42-4F11-92BB-E34D5C610919@alumni.virginia.edu>
 <CAO+xQEZNY9se_Ccv99PskkB7H0VO4byBP_imZpg1_BA-ctL6mg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <009f01cfe94f$9d134e10$d739ea30$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

Spike, what I meant was that do you know of European companies that offer the health related info that may not be regulated by the FDA.  bill w

 

 

Sounds like 23andMe can do it, if you tell them you are Canadian, eh?  Do you have any Canuck friends eh?  The Canadians talk funny eh?  They misuse eh as badly as I misuse ja, ja?

 

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/9efc34a5/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 17:53:39 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 10:53:39 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>

 

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Tom Nowell
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 1:41 AM
To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion

 

Lockheed announces breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy <http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy> 


 


 

 <http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy> Image removed by sender. image

 

 

 

 

 


 <http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy> Lockheed announces breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy

Defence company has developed 100MW reactor small enough to fit on back of a truck that could be in use within 10 years

	


 <http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy> View on www.theguardian.com

Preview by Yahoo

	


 

								

 

(Apologies for the preview at the top, people using text-only browsing, yahoo mail seems to want to do this automatically with my link)

 

Lockheed Martin Corp said on Wednesday it had made a technological breakthrough in developing a power source based on nuclear fusion, and the first reactors, small enough to fit on the back of a truck, could be ready for use in a decade.

Tom McGuire, who heads the project, said he and a small team had been working on fusion energy at Lockheed?s secretive Skunk Works for about four years, but were now going public to find potential partners in industry and government for their work.

Initial work demonstrated the feasibility of building a 100-megawatt reactor measuring seven feet by 10 feet, which could fit on the back of a large truck, and is about 10 times smaller than current reactors, McGuire told reporters?

 

 

 

 

Tom I saw this yesterday and was most puzzled.  As much as I would like to believe it and that my own company developed it, the numbers they are calling out make no sense to me.  Just from first principles, the ones we learned in sophomore physics, we would disprove the notion of 100 megawatts coming from any device of these kinds of dimensions, a few meters on a side.  Calculate the temperature that would need to reach.  

 

I am doubly puzzled by Tom McGuire releasing this.  He has engineers who could advise caution.

 

Another thing: Tom says some device can be built which can make 100 megawatts, which would solve humanity?s biggest problems in a few years.  So he says they will build one in five years?  No pal, if you have something like that, you will build it on the schedule the USA built fighter planes starting 7 December 1942.  Not five years, not next month, we need that NOW!

 

I met Tom McGuire; he isn?t a bullshitter.  But I must reluctantly conclude this is a mistake or is outright bogus.

 

spike 

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/f531dc74/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD000.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/f531dc74/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 505 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/f531dc74/attachment-0001.obj>

From atymes at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 18:26:12 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:26:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 16, 2014 11:10 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> I met Tom McGuire; he isn?t a bullshitter.  But I must reluctantly
conclude this is a mistake or is outright bogus.

Working in the same company, you have all the excuse you need to email or
call Tom and verify this story.  Could you do so on our behalf, please?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/dea37777/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 18:39:32 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 11:39:32 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:26 AM
To: ExI chat list
Cc: Tom Nowell
Subject: Re: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion

 

On Oct 16, 2014 11:10 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> I met Tom McGuire; he isn?t a bullshitter.  But I must reluctantly conclude this is a mistake or is outright bogus.

Working in the same company, you have all the excuse you need to email or call Tom and verify this story.  Could you do so on our behalf, please?

 

No sir.  If he has what the article says, we don?t want to distract that man for one minute, not one second.  He holds the future of humanity in his hand.

The way to check this is to look at the company website.

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/

They have it on there.

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/7fe572ce/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 19:32:41 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 12:32:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNQzThTxYGH6FvrJj6MVVq=qs0o30WsyWM+v+50UYcPt+Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 16, 2014 11:56 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On
Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:26 AM
> To: ExI chat list
> Cc: Tom Nowell
> Subject: Re: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
> On Oct 16, 2014 11:10 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> > I met Tom McGuire; he isn?t a bullshitter.  But I must reluctantly
conclude this is a mistake or is outright bogus.
>
> Working in the same company, you have all the excuse you need to email or
call Tom and verify this story.  Could you do so on our behalf, please?
>
>
>
> No sir.  If he has what the article says, we don?t want to distract that
man for one minute, not one second.  He holds the future of humanity in his
hand.
>
> The way to check this is to look at the company website.
>
> http://www.lockheedmartin.com/
>
> They have it on there.

If you ask him, you can get more details than are available through the
site to interested parties...some of whom may be able to secure for this
project far more resources than if it was left alone as you propose.  That
is: by not asking him, you might indirectly doom his project to failure, or
at least to irrelevance.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/83b1c0e5/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 20:15:19 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:15:19 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>

On Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:57 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>> Working in the same company, you have all the excuse you
>> need to email or call Tom and verify this story.  Could
>> you do so on our behalf, please?
> 
> No sir.  If he has what the article says, we don?t want to
> distract that man for one minute, not one second.  He holds
> the future of humanity in his hand.

I can understand your reluctance, but it borders on the absurd. Surely, the man eats, sleeps, and does other things even folks working on crunch time do. And if they're making announcements like this, either there's extensively bullshitting doing on or they're really far along in the process. And throwing out meat like this is only inviting others to question and comment. I imagine the team there either has someone to answer queries or, worse, some standard message they'll give. Maybe you can circumvent the latter. Worth a try, IMO, if it's not detrimental to your continued employment.

(Heck, friends of mine working at Amazon told me they asked any chance they got what was going on over at Blue Origin.:)

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/f07bd2eb/attachment.html>

From alex.urbanec at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 19:32:27 2014
From: alex.urbanec at gmail.com (Asdd Marget)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 14:32:27 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAM0SiUPqa5oBjUzYWNUXMQOY9qA5xZaufgOnDusBZkCmVVC_Jw@mail.gmail.com>

I read this earlier this morning on ycombinator's "hacker" news, but
Lockheed didn't have it on their website yet so I didn't want to put too
much stake in it. I can't believe my eyes. This is a huge moment for
humanity. Do you think this could be scalable?

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 1:39 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Adrian Tymes
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:26 AM
> *To:* ExI chat list
> *Cc:* Tom Nowell
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
>
>
>
> On Oct 16, 2014 11:10 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> > I met Tom McGuire; he isn?t a bullshitter.  But I must reluctantly
> conclude this is a mistake or is outright bogus.
>
> Working in the same company, you have all the excuse you need to email or
> call Tom and verify this story.  Could you do so on our behalf, please?
>
>
>
> No sir.  If he has what the article says, we don?t want to distract that
> man for one minute, not one second.  He holds the future of humanity in his
> hand.
>
> The way to check this is to look at the company website.
>
> http://www.lockheedmartin.com/
>
> They have it on there.
>
> spike
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/9c699607/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 20:40:27 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 13:40:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
 <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>

 

 

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dan
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2014 1:15 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion

 

On Thursday, October 16, 2014 11:57 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:



?.  Could you do so on our behalf, please?





No sir.  If he has what the article says, we don?t want to
distract that man for one minute, not one second.  He holds
the future of humanity in his hand.


I can understand your reluctance, but it borders on the absurd?Regards,Dan

 

 

 

Before I do any asking, we can do some BOTECs to give us a vague feel for what is going on here.  Let us assume that a miracle has occurred and the conversion efficiency of fusion products suddenly jumped from struggling to break even (for the past half century) to a mind-boggling 50%.  If we take the third law of thermodynamics as a LAW rather than a friendly suggestion, then one of the derivatives is the Steffan-Boltzmann?s equation, (some squiggly furrin letters) times sigma (5.67e-8) T^4 = 100E6 W/m (Tom said it was 100 megawatts in a package that will fit in a truck.)  So make some reasonable assumptions on what kind of truck he meant, but I am getting surface areas all in the less than 100 square meters range, so T^4 is still going up there in the E15-ish range before I even need to reach for an envelope to C the BO.  This part can be done in our heads.  Where is all that heat going?  If radiation, we are up well over 1000Kelvin, which in a truck sized package would be? bad.  If that heat is being carried off by convection, we would need a cyclone.   Helicopter blades going full throttle kinds of breeze to carry away the heat.

 

Come on, me lads!  We are Extropians!  We know how to do BOTECs, so let?s DO them, por favor, rather than asking questions of someone who might have done something great.  Get out the old thermodynamics textbooks, blow off the dust, review that chapter on how engines or any energy conversion device must follow the third law and its consequences, and estimate a waste heat production and rejection model or equation, post it here and explain your reasoning. 

 

It feels to me like this is a good couple orders of magnitude off base, or more than that really.  But I haven?t sold my company stock yet.  If I can convince myself that these numbers have any basis in reality, then I will ask Tom what?s with this invention.  Right now I don?t have that feeling.  Something is waaaay wrong.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/478fdcf2/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Thu Oct 16 20:55:52 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 22:55:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <544030D8.40606@libero.it>

Il 16/10/2014 10:41, Tom Nowell ha scritto:
> Lockheed announces breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy 
> <http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy>

It is not Loockheed, but....

Magnus Olofsson, CEO of Elforsk -- Swedish Agency for Research and
Development in the field of energy, composed of a conglomeration of
energy companies -- published the following statement on October 9

http://www.elforsk.se/LENR-matrapport-publicerad (Swedish)

> Report on measurements made ??on a LENR reactor - the release of
> energy and isotope
> 
> Yesterday, were released the surprising results of the measures to
> which it was submitted a so-called "catalyst of power" over a period
> of a month. The report, written by researchers at KTH and Uppsala
> University and Bologna, describes a release of heat that can not be
> explained only by chemical reactions. The changes of the fuel
> isotopic analyzed indicate that nuclear reactions at low temperature
> may have occurred. This implies that we may be facing a new way to
> extract nuclear energy possible without ionizing radiation and
> radioactive waste. The discovery could potentially become very
> important for the energy supply worldwide. The central part of the
> reactor is a narrow cylinder about eight inches long. In the
> experiments, the reactor operated at temperatures up to about 1400
> degrees Celsius. It was observed a net release of energy equal to
> 1500 kWh. The production of thermal energy has been quantified equal
> to 3-4 times the electricity fed. The reactor was filled with 1 gram
> of nickel powder uploaded hydrogen plus some additives. In recent
> years, Elforsk has followed the development of the now so-called
> LENR, ie nuclear reactions at low energy. Elforsk has published a
> brief review on LENR. Elforsk has co-funded the work described in the
> report, in addition to previous measurements that showed an anomalous
> excess energy. If you can safely manage and control these reactions,
> at this point considered to be of nuclear origin, we will witness a
> fundamental transformation of our energy system. Electricity and heat
> could then be produced with relatively simple components, favoring
> the decentralization of energy supply inexpensively... To understand
> and explain the phenomenon we must continue the search. We will work
> to researchers in an attempt to confirm and then explain how it
> works.


http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/10/08/new-scientific-report-on-the-e-cat-shows-excess-heat-and-nuclear-process/

http://pesn.com/2014/10/13/9602545_Leaked-Second-Paper_With_High-Magnification_of_Rossis-Nickel-Particles_Brings_Replication_Closer/

Anyone competent in nickel powder, crystals and likes?

Mirco


From anders at aleph.se  Thu Oct 16 21:31:15 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:31:15 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>

William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> , 16/10/2014 3:21 AM:
 For the time being, 23andMe is not allowed to give you the results of all those medical-info questionnaires people filled out.?? What about Europe?? Do you know?? bill w

Well, it seems that they run the same software interface no matter where you are. Since I signed up just before FDA got stroppy, I have medical information and it is still available to me.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/fdab9d6c/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 21:37:21 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 22:37:21 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
 <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
 <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armgzQOBafU1Y7V9kg=7Cn3e2wVX0X9q3Gq6o-eRkYLBjiw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 9:40 PM, spike  wrote:
> Before I do any asking, we can do some BOTECs to give us a vague feel for
> what is going on here.  Let us assume that a miracle has occurred and the
> conversion efficiency of fusion products suddenly jumped from struggling to
> break even (for the past half century) to a mind-boggling 50%.  If we take
> the third law of thermodynamics as a LAW rather than a friendly suggestion,
> then one of the derivatives is the Steffan-Boltzmann's equation, (some
> squiggly furrin letters) times sigma (5.67e-8) T^4 = 100E6 W/m (Tom said it
> was 100 megawatts in a package that will fit in a truck.)  So make some
> reasonable assumptions on what kind of truck he meant, but I am getting
> surface areas all in the less than 100 square meters range, so T^4 is still
> going up there in the E15-ish range before I even need to reach for an
> envelope to C the BO.  This part can be done in our heads.  Where is all
> that heat going?  If radiation, we are up well over 1000Kelvin, which in a
> truck sized package would be... bad.  If that heat is being carried off by
> convection, we would need a cyclone.   Helicopter blades going full throttle
> kinds of breeze to carry away the heat.
>

Wikipedia seems to have more information.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_beta_fusion_reactor>
Quote:

Design

The device is 2x2x4 meters in size. It is cylindrical shaped. It has a
vacuum inside with high magnetic fields, made using electromagnets.
Uncharged deuterium gas is injected. It is heated using radio waves,
in much the same way a microwave heats food. When the gas temperature
reaches over 16 electron-volts, the gas ionizes into ions and
electrons. This plasma exerts a pressure on the surrounding magnetic
fields. This plasma pressure is counterbalanced by the magnetic field
pressure in a beta ratio:

The plan is to reach a high-beta ratio. Plans call for a compact 100
MW machine. In October 2014, Reuters reported that Lockheed Martin
"would build and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year,
and build a prototype in five years." The company hopes to be able to
meet global baseload energy demand by 2050. Here are some other
characteristics of this machine:

The magnetic field increases the farther out that the plasma goes,
which pushes the plasma back in.
It also has very few open field lines (very few paths for the plasma
to leak out; uses a cylinder, not a Tokamak ring).
Very good arch curvature of the field lines.
The system has a beta of about 1.
This system uses deuterium and tritium.
The system heats the plasma using radio waves.

The machine was designed by Dr. Thomas McGuire who did his PhD thesis
on fusors at MIT. Chase said that "the fuel (two isotopes of hydrogen)
has six orders [1.000.000] of magnitude higher energy density than
oil. You can't make a bomb from it, and it has no meltdown risk. It's
very different from nuclear fission reactors.
-------------

BillK


From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 21:51:28 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 16:51:28 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>

?Here is my ?question:  are there companies in Europe like 23and me that
will give out the medical info, or does the FDA rule there too?  bill w

For the time being, 23andMe is not allowed to give you the results of all
> those medical-info questionnaires people filled out.   What about Europe?
> Do you know?  bill w
>
>
> Well, it seems that they run the same software interface no matter where
> you are. Since I signed up just before FDA got stroppy, I have medical
> information and it is still available to me.
>
>
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/cbaacff4/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 21:54:03 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 14:54:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <544030D8.40606@libero.it>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it>
Message-ID: <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Mirco Romanato
...

 

 

>... <http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/10/08/new-scientific-report-on-the-e-cat-shows-excess-heat-and-nuclear-process/> http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/10/08/new-scientific-report-on-the-e-cat-shows-excess-heat-and-nuclear-process/

 

>... <http://pesn.com/2014/10/13/9602545_Leaked-Second-Paper_With_High-Magnification_of_Rossis-Nickel-Particles_Brings_Replication_Closer/> http://pesn.com/2014/10/13/9602545_Leaked-Second-Paper_With_High-Magnification_of_Rossis-Nickel-Particles_Brings_Replication_Closer/

 

>...Anyone competent in nickel powder, crystals and likes?  Mirco

_______________________________________________

 

 

Tom, Mirco, my bogosity meter hit the peg so hard it bent the needle.

 

The reason nickel powder seems to keep cropping up is if you take the nucleon energy of a certain nickel isotope and compare it with the nucleon energy of a certain copper isotope (don't recall all the neutron numbers) you can imagine how a conversion would release reasonable amounts of energy, if you could somehow catalyze the reaction (which I doubt with sufficient confidence that I risk my reputation by stating my unreserved skepticism.)

 

That isn't what really convinced me about this notion of a truck-borne 100MW generator.  I didn?t even need to besmirch the back of a perfectly good used envelope: this BOTECs can be done on our heads.  Even if we assume some kind of nuclear reaction can create crazy high amounts of heat, you still need to convert it.  In my previous post I mentioned all those squiggly furrin-looking symbols.  For single digit or order of magnitude estimates, I assumed them all to 1, which is as good as it gets.  In reality it doesn?t get that good; I meant as good as it can get, ever.  My misspent youth is too far distant to worry about what all those do; they account for emissivity, surface finish, debris, all the real-world stuff that can only spoil our fun.  Assume them all to 1.  I am still getting way into the 4 digit numbers for surface temperatures on a device like what the article suggested. 

 

Look at the case of a truck/trailer electric generator.  Imagine a 1 MW generator.  You have a prime mover, usually a big Diesel motor for that purpose, or sometimes a gas turbine, but a 1MW Diesel motor is not hard to visualize.  There is one right up front on every semi-truck you see out on the freeway.  Their big Diesels are on that order.  Now imagine that engine coupled to some kind of energy conversion device and all the infrastructure needed to carry away the waste heat.

 

Here?s an example of a 1.5 MW trailer-borne generator:

 



 

Note three axles of heavy duals, 12 heavy-duty tires.  This rig weighs about 20 tons.  How much of that is the Diesel prime-mover?  A couple tons?  The rest of it must be energy conversion and heat rejection.  It doesn?t matter what is your prime mover, the heavy stuff is carrying away excess heat.  We are told the breakthrough is a miracle fusion heat source?  So we convert it to electricity with? what?  Some kind of Rankine cycle?  Where does all that waste heat go? 

 

Now, we are being told LockMart Skunk Works as invented a way to get 60 times that capacity and carry it all in a truck?  Indeed?  

 

spike 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/77b0ab38/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 9434 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141016/77b0ab38/attachment.obj>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 16 22:07:06 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 15:07:06 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armgzQOBafU1Y7V9kg=7Cn3e2wVX0X9q3Gq6o-eRkYLBjiw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
 <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
 <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgzQOBafU1Y7V9kg=7Cn3e2wVX0X9q3Gq6o-eRkYLBjiw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <015901cfe98d$86c016f0$944044d0$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of BillK
...

>...The plan is to reach a high-beta ratio. Plans call for a compact 100 MW
machine. In October 2014, Reuters reported that Lockheed Martin "would build
and test a compact fusion reactor in less than a year, and build a prototype
in five years." The company hopes to be able to meet global baseload energy
demand by 2050. Here are some other characteristics of this machine:

>...The magnetic field increases the farther out that the plasma goes, which
pushes the plasma back in.
It also has very few open field lines (very few paths for the plasma to leak
out; uses a cylinder, not a Tokamak ring).
Very good arch curvature of the field lines.
The system has a beta of about 1.
This system uses deuterium and tritium.
The system heats the plasma using radio waves.

>...The machine was designed by Dr. Thomas McGuire who did his PhD thesis on
fusors at MIT. Chase said that "the fuel (two isotopes of hydrogen) has six
orders [1.000.000] of magnitude higher energy density than oil. You can't
make a bomb from it, and it has no meltdown risk. It's very different from
nuclear fission reactors.
------------- BillK
_______________________________________________


Hmmm, did he mean 100 MW for one second, then an hour to soak up and convert
that resultant heat?  Is he suggesting some form of direct charging of
capacitors using an electromagnetic pulse?  I just don't see it BillK.

It occurred to me why it might be tempting to believe this, since nuclear
aircraft carriers have compact power plants on this order.  But they also
have a convenient heat sink right there: they dump the waste heat directly
into the sea.

spike





From anders at aleph.se  Thu Oct 16 22:49:48 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 00:49:48 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <544030D8.40606@libero.it>
Message-ID: <455106730-20152@secure.ericade.net>

Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> , 16/10/2014 10:59 PM:
Il 16/10/2014 10:41, Tom Nowell ha scritto:
> Lockheed announces breakthrough on nuclear fusion energy 
> <">http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/15/lockheed-breakthrough-nuclear-fusion-energy>;

It is not Loockheed, but....

Magnus Olofsson, CEO of Elforsk -- Swedish Agency for Research and
Development in the field of energy, composed of a conglomeration of
energy companies -- published the following statement on October 9

http://www.elforsk.se/LENR-matrapport-publicerad (Swedish)
Nonono, that is another, far more suspicious claim! That is the cold fusion Italian guy Andrea Rossi's E-Cat. And the elforsk results are generally regarded as suspicious; awesome if true, but there are some good reasons to think that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.?http://www.elforsk.se/Global/Omv%C3%A4rld_system/filer/LuganoReportSubmit.pdf
Note that they do not seem to have tested for potential attempts at fraud: given the history of the field this should be regarded as essential. If you just make reasonable tests together with the inventor you have a high likeliehood of being taken in, as Keeley and countless others have demonstrated.

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University



> Report on measurements made ??on a LENR reactor - the release of
> energy and isotope
> 
> Yesterday, were released the surprising results of the measures to
> which it was submitted a so-called "catalyst of power" over a period
> of a month. The report, written by researchers at KTH and Uppsala
> University and Bologna, describes a release of heat that can not be
> explained only by chemical reactions. The changes of the fuel
> isotopic analyzed indicate that nuclear reactions at low temperature
> may have occurred. This implies that we may be facing a new way to
> extract nuclear energy possible without ionizing radiation and
> radioactive waste. The discovery could potentially become very
> important for the energy supply worldwide. The central part of the
> reactor is a narrow cylinder about eight inches long. In the
> experiments, the reactor operated at temperatures up to about 1400
> degrees Celsius. It was observed a net release of energy equal to
> 1500 kWh. The production of thermal energy has been quantified equal
> to 3-4 times the electricity fed. The reactor was filled with 1 gram
> of nickel powder uploaded hydrogen plus some additives. In recent
> years, Elforsk has followed the development of the now so-called
> LENR, ie nuclear reactions at low energy. Elforsk has published a
> brief review on LENR. Elforsk has co-funded the work described in the
> report, in addition to previous measurements that showed an anomalous
> excess energy. If you can safely manage and control these reactions,
> at this point considered to be of nuclear origin, we will witness a
> fundamental transformation of our energy system. Electricity and heat
> could then be produced with relatively simple components, favoring
> the decentralization of energy supply inexpensively... To understand
> and explain the phenomenon we must continue the search. We will work
> to researchers in an attempt to confirm and then explain how it
> works.


http://animpossibleinvention.com/2014/10/08/new-scientific-report-on-the-e-cat-shows-excess-heat-and-nuclear-process/

http://pesn.com/2014/10/13/9602545_Leaked-Second-Paper_With_High-Magnification_of_Rossis-Nickel-Particles_Brings_Replication_Closer/

Anyone competent in nickel powder, crystals and likes?

Mirco
_______________________________________________
extropy-chat mailing list
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/e80dc979/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Thu Oct 16 22:52:38 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 23:52:38 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <015901cfe98d$86c016f0$944044d0$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
 <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
 <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgzQOBafU1Y7V9kg=7Cn3e2wVX0X9q3Gq6o-eRkYLBjiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <015901cfe98d$86c016f0$944044d0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armiWTsw_NQjRsCQwM++nTPtf81ynrEv-LOrVr0tjduCX9g@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 11:07 PM, spike wrote:
> Hmmm, did he mean 100 MW for one second, then an hour to soak up and convert
> that resultant heat?  Is he suggesting some form of direct charging of
> capacitors using an electromagnetic pulse?  I just don't see it BillK.
>
> It occurred to me why it might be tempting to believe this, since nuclear
> aircraft carriers have compact power plants on this order.  But they also
> have a convenient heat sink right there: they dump the waste heat directly
> into the sea.
>
>

Nuclear aircraft carriers use fission reactors - not fusion.

There seems to be universal scepticism about the claims.
Nobody has built a fusion reactor yet. Lockheed are only claiming that
they have done a feasibility study.
Quote:
McGuire said the company had several patents pending for the work and
was looking for partners in academia, industry and among government
laboratories to advance the work.
------------

That sounds like a request for lots of money for development.

BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Fri Oct 17 02:11:23 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 19:11:23 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
 <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
 <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgzQOBafU1Y7V9kg=7Cn3e2wVX0X9q3Gq6o-eRkYLBjiw@mail.gmail.com> 
Message-ID: <001501cfe9af$a6e9ea10$f4bdbe30$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: spike [mailto:spike66 at att.net] 
...

>>...The machine was designed by Dr. Thomas McGuire who did his PhD thesis
on fusors at MIT. Chase said that "the fuel (two isotopes of hydrogen) has
six orders [1.000.000] of magnitude higher energy density than oil. You
can't make a bomb from it, and it has no meltdown risk. It's very different
from nuclear fission reactors.
------------- BillK
_______________________________________________


>...Hmmm, did he mean 100 MW for one second, then an hour to soak up and
convert that resultant heat?  Is he suggesting some form of direct charging
of capacitors using an electromagnetic pulse?  I just don't see it BillK.
It occurred to me why it might be tempting to believe this, since nuclear
aircraft carriers have compact power plants on this order.  But they also
have a convenient heat sink right there: they dump the waste heat directly
into the sea... spike




Could it be a misunderstanding by a news copy editor?  Perhaps what Dr.
McGuire really meant is that this is analogous to a reactor core which he
thinks can be operated to emit heat at 100MW, and that reactor can be hauled
around on a truck.  To use it, you need to immerse that core in water inside
a sturdy pressure vessel and use the resultant steam to run turbines and
reject the heat with one of those proletariat-terrifying hourglass-shaped
cooling towers at a traditional power plant like the one Mr. Burns owns on
the Simpsons.  That I suppose is vaguely believable, and I hope that is what
he meant.  Perhaps the news guy wrote the article to make it sound like a
truck can roll up with enormous plug-ins with enough capacity to power a
typical American city of about 20k population.  

spike





From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Fri Oct 17 08:53:17 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 04:53:17 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <4290350345-7564@secure.ericade.net>
References: <F718FA14-16AE-435C-B240-06D426BBCDFB@gmail.com>
 <4290350345-7564@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFhBk=CSZaA0esLuiGHtbMXmskJmByi6SFRaq_2esnh1sA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Another angle to this discussion is whether scientists or philosophers
> have influenced transhumanism the most. And I think the philosophers win.
>

### I would define philosophy as the art of answering questions you are too
ignorant to ask... which should not be taken as an insult. After all, we
all start out too ignorant to even know how to ask questions, much less
answer them. In this way, all children are budding philosophers, and some
of us never leave that stage (again, not an insult :)

As soon as, by dint of structured sensory input and cortical
self-organization, you manage to form semi-coherent predictive models of an
aspect of reality, you stop being a philosopher - you become a
ball-thrower, a car mechanic, a quantum physicist - somebody who can bend
the world to his mind, by first bending a part of his mind to reflect the
world. But some facets are too complex to comprehend, for now and possibly
for ever - this is the domain of the philosopher.

In this light, philosophy is the noble pursuit of (yet) ineffable truths
that fills fat tomes with megabytes of high-falutin' nonsense, where after
400 pages of rigorous preliminary exposition the questions and answers end
up in a muddle. Of course, one cannot expect a child laboring beyond his
limits to produce more - but then, children that never try never grow up
into interesting adults.

So we should not be too hard on philosophers, they can't give detailed
answers, since as soon as they do, we start calling them engineers. And
some children should never grow up, so silly questions keep getting asked.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/598b0786/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Fri Oct 17 09:23:24 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 05:23:24 -0400
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <21E46A81-52E2-4427-B69B-A57B3DB28449@gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <21E46A81-52E2-4427-B69B-A57B3DB28449@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFgS39UfJWjJRWAcKKKkw7PKc=UL5rjkugv-Ok6w0UhHfA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 8:09 PM, Dan <danust2012 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I don't think any here knows what really happened there, but it was a
> terribly convenient loss of data.
>

### Perhaps immodestly, I claim I know what happened: Evil filth committed
various crimes, intentionally destroyed whatever data they could, brazenly
defied other powers and are still doing well. As Spike says, this is a part
of the cross-over into overt corruption, something that is the essence of
government in most countries but so far was not as rampant in the US. What
starts with brazen, in-your-face lies, often ends with a boot stomping your
face. Beware, nazification proceeds.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/155a3e92/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Fri Oct 17 09:42:18 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 05:42:18 -0400
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFhDsPz0F9yo5Ly4xgBxt147gcJbp9QN_OK3teV3BeUtEQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Imagine these ne'er-do-wells you are angry at if, instead of at least
> having to yell "terrorist" or the like to jail someone, they merely had to
> accuse in a handwavey manner.  Say, claim all third parties are witchcraft
> organizations and thereby sentence all who vote non-Democrat-or-Republican
> to death?  This isn't too far from what actually happened in Salem - and
> many of us on this list would risk being targeted within a decade or two if
> that were to pass.
>

### But, Adrian, you are missing the point badly:

The filth we are talking about are not private citizens going about their
business, shady or otherwise: They are our servants and as such they must
be beyond reproach. By the same token, they should be mercilessly dismissed
from service, even after a handwavey accusation, much more so after brazen
defiance. I do not need to give a fair trial to my butler - I must have the
prerogative of firing him summarily, for any cause, real or imagined, or on
a whim. The protections the legal system gives to private citizens cannot
be abused to shield state agents from responsibility.

To compare the IRS to victims of witch-trials is pure demagoguery.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/eeba55ed/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Fri Oct 17 09:52:54 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 05:52:54 -0400
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <020b01cfe8b1$fa7e4b70$ef7ae250$@att.net>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <020b01cfe8b1$fa7e4b70$ef7ae250$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFgttPwgk6m0eo=tbUw_kpu0n_rgJh7gPx2L=47ptLqKsQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> OK then, they establish that they have absolute power, outranking the
> legislature, the courts and the executive branch.  We are likely to see a
> big swing in power in the next few years.  It looks like a disaster waiting
> to happen, with all these guys looking for revenge and being handed power
> from their predecessors.
>

### They are one of the most hated branches of a widely distrusted
organization and they don't have direct control over the apparatus of
coercion (army, police). In a shakeup, every one of them can be swept away
in a week, if they piss off enough people with more direct access to the
sources and levers of power. And, filth as they are, they are cunning
weasels with decades of experience in bureaucratic institutional warfare. I
predict a continued, uneasy truce between the various branches of the
state, with nobody's heads rolling and nobody really grabbing a much bigger
chunk of the power pie.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/beb5d9c0/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Fri Oct 17 09:53:52 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:53:52 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <CAAc1gFhBk=CSZaA0esLuiGHtbMXmskJmByi6SFRaq_2esnh1sA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <494307858-11849@secure.ericade.net>

Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> , 17/10/2014 10:58 AM:


On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
Another angle to this discussion is whether scientists or philosophers have influenced transhumanism the most. And I think the philosophers win.
### I would define philosophy as the art of answering questions you are too ignorant to ask.
Actually, I think it is more about asking the questions and trying to get a way to get answers. Once you start getting answers it stops being philosophy.?
A good example is the old "What is the world made of?" question. The presocratics attempted to find substances that could turn into anything. The Power Trio (Socrates, Plato and Aristotle) figured out what was wrong with their approach and dug deeper, asking what the heck substance was. In the process they formalised a fair bit of logic and the observation that there are phases of matter. Later philosophers continued the digging, somewhat confused by a paradigm that insisted that there *must* be an invisible world full of angels and an invisible alpha-male (which means substance becomes really strange). Then the *alchemists* got their act together thanks to a bit of sceptical thinking (Boyle, although he was also a theologian) and found the elements (although they borrowed the atom idea from Democritus, who just by luck had turned out to be right). The philosophers ?lost interest. A while later, when the scientists demonstrated that matter was *really* strange (quantum field theory: really?!) and we no longer really know what stuff is made from the philosophers got interested again. Now we have a rather lively field of philosophy of physics (especially quantum mechanics) trying to pin down what kinds of answers actually would make sense.

There are many apparently innocuous questions leading to deep philosophical rabbit holes. How do you move your arm? What is time? Why is pain bad? Why do we ask questions? One can be satisfied with first order answers for many practical purposes, but when scrutinized they rarely hold up logically.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/c86f0c3f/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Fri Oct 17 10:47:02 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 06:47:02 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy and philosophers
In-Reply-To: <494307858-11849@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAAc1gFhBk=CSZaA0esLuiGHtbMXmskJmByi6SFRaq_2esnh1sA@mail.gmail.com>
 <494307858-11849@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFj1n=90BTt0AHsymu3vLTAFoDT1YWP56FbNGUkGBVTJ1Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:53 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:

> Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> , 17/10/2014 10:58 AM:
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
>
> Another angle to this discussion is whether scientists or philosophers
> have influenced transhumanism the most. And I think the philosophers win.
>
>
> ### I would define philosophy as the art of answering questions you are
> too ignorant to ask.
>
>
> Actually, I think it is more about asking the questions and trying to get
> a way to get answers. Once you start getting answers it stops being
> philosophy.
>

### We seem to be saying about the same thing, I maybe more poetically. As
they say, you need to know most of the answer to ask the right question,
and philosophers are perennially trying to punch way above their weight,
which means even the questions they ask aren't formulated right but for all
I know need to be asked anyway.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141017/a75e64a4/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Oct 17 11:20:31 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 12:20:31 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <001501cfe9af$a6e9ea10$f4bdbe30$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <000001cfe96a$1e923fe0$5bb6bfa0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRyyGYRMxzim50SMe0O56d5hb5GVieSAJQ6WNtjb8E07w@mail.gmail.com>
 <006901cfe970$87d20250$977606f0$@att.net>
 <96D177DF-CA1D-48A2-9E9D-04DA43E17343@gmail.com>
 <00d001cfe981$6c2c2880$44847980$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgzQOBafU1Y7V9kg=7Cn3e2wVX0X9q3Gq6o-eRkYLBjiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <001501cfe9af$a6e9ea10$f4bdbe30$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armiXZtrfWx3xkBmoCQiU=VfU8p5nPi8WceifcJmiYdA74Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 3:11 AM, spike wrote:
> Could it be a misunderstanding by a news copy editor?  Perhaps what Dr.
> McGuire really meant is that this is analogous to a reactor core which he
> thinks can be operated to emit heat at 100MW, and that reactor can be hauled
> around on a truck.  To use it, you need to immerse that core in water inside
> a sturdy pressure vessel and use the resultant steam to run turbines and
> reject the heat with one of those proletariat-terrifying hourglass-shaped
> cooling towers at a traditional power plant like the one Mr. Burns owns on
> the Simpsons.  That I suppose is vaguely believable, and I hope that is what
> he meant.  Perhaps the news guy wrote the article to make it sound like a
> truck can roll up with enormous plug-ins with enough capacity to power a
> typical American city of about 20k population.
>
>

There is a much more detailed article in Aviation Week.
<http://aviationweek.com/technology/skunk-works-reveals-compact-fusion-reactor-details>

But it will be five years before they might have a working prototype
and ten years for a production version.   IF it all works out with no
show stoppers.

It sounds as though they are still in the early stages. All the
publicity seems intended to attract backers and investors.

BillK


From mike at 7f.com  Sat Oct 18 06:16:01 2014
From: mike at 7f.com (Michael Roberts)
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 23:16:01 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Fwd: The second LAST festival - San Francisco - Oct 23-25
In-Reply-To: <20141017220432.6omfbqhbc48cgcgc@mail.scaruffi.com>
References: <20141017220432.6omfbqhbc48cgcgc@mail.scaruffi.com>
Message-ID: <CAJ4XrpWGa+Xdg7Fb07hNu7YbmZSvX0E8Q2SpX9+uFpNpA3Ed1g@mail.gmail.com>

---------- Forwarded message ----------

Dear friends of the L.A.S.E.R.s and of art/science/tech intersections:

The second LAST festival (LAST=Life Art Science Tech) will take place
in San Francisco on Oct 23-25th during the city-wide Bay Area Science Festival.
Website: http://www.lastfestival.com
Mixing interactive/participatory/digital art and science talks (Neuroscience,
Ebola, Nanotech, Singularity, Space Exploration - see below).

Hard to summarize everything but in a nutshell:

> Thursday from 6pm till 10pm: Opening party of the Art Exhibition
 * Adam Carlin & Erich Richter: "Some Thing Grounded"
 * Carlos Castellanos: "Mobile Bioenergy Lab"
 * Gene Felice & David Kant: "Coactive Systems"
 * Peter Foucault: "Attraction/Repulsion"
 * Emily Martinez: "AntiApocalypse"
 * OpenLab (Sean McGowen, Ian Ayyad, Richard Vallejos, Joel Horne) :
"BioSensing Garden"
 * SonicSENSE (Jennifer Parker & Barney Haynes): "SoundPool"
 * Erich Richter: "Chant"
 Curated by Lily Alexander.

> Friday from 6pm till 10pm: Art Exhibition
> Friday at 7:30pm: A rare live performance by legendary and reclusive sound
artist Laetitia
Sonami

> Saturday from 11am till 2pm: Art Exhibition

> Saturday from 2pm till 6pm: the Symposium!
 2:00pm - Space Exploration and the Search for Extraterrestrial Life:
Chris  McKay, Planetary Scientist at NASA Ames
 2:45pm - The state of Neuroscience: Bruno Olshausen, Director of the
Redwood  Center for Theoretical Neuroscience
 3:30pm - The state of Nanotechnology: Christine Peterson, Cofounder
of the  Foresight Institute
 4:15pm - Infectious Diseases/ The Ebola epidemics: Charles Chiu,
Professor of  Infectious Diseases at UCSF School of Medicine
 5:00pm - Artificial Intelligence and the Singularity: Piero Scaruffi
(Cultural  Historian, Cognitive Scientist, Author)
 Sponsored by Leonardo ISAST.

> Saturday from 6pm till 8pm: Closing party of the Art Exhibition

Free and open to everybody.

Please register if you want to attend the symposium on Oct 25th so we
know how  many people to expect:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/life-art-science-tech-last-festival-tickets-13774801803

Please register if you plan to attend Laetitia Sonami's performance on Oct 24th:
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/laetitia-sonamis-performance-tickets-13774908121

And spread the word!

Venue: The Lab, 2948 16th Street, San Francisco, CA 94103
Website: http://www.lastfestival.com


From painlord2k at libero.it  Sat Oct 18 12:22:32 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 14:22:32 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it> <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
Message-ID: <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>

Il 16/10/2014 23:54, spike ha scritto:

> Tom, Mirco, my bogosity meter hit the peg so hard it bent the needle.

> The reason nickel powder seems to keep cropping up is if you take the
> nucleon energy of a certain nickel isotope and compare it with the
> nucleon energy of a certain copper isotope (don't recall all the neutron
> numbers) you can imagine how a conversion would release reasonable
> amounts of energy, if you could somehow catalyze the reaction (which I
> doubt with sufficient confidence that I risk my reputation by stating my
> unreserved skepticism.)

What I read before is little different:

the copper in the fuel was detected in early samples given by Rossi a
few years ago, but he never told copper was a byproduct of the reaction.
He apparently stated, and I remember him hinting this at the time, that
the sample was probably contaminated by the recipient.

At the time, leaving around some red (copper) herrings would appear to
be useful to mislead the competition.

In the current samples there is no copper at all.
Just Nickel, iron, hydrogen.



> That isn't what really convinced me about this notion of a truck-borne
> 100MW generator.

In fact, Rossi built just three 1 MW containerized generators (we know
about) and they were built using 30+ modular 33 KW modules. He had a bit
of problem building these containerized generators (just to heat water)
because this is not his field of expertise.

In fact, his e-cat (but now it is Industrial Heat Inc. e-cat) had in the
last few years gone through various incremental steps of performances.
The first device showed was large like a car silencer and was barely
able to heat water to the boiling point (and they had problems, from
what Levi told in an interview, with run off reactions at higher
temperatures).

Then it become more modular, more smaller and more able to manage higher
temperature. The reactor tested in Switzerland, in a third party
laboratory, was able to have the reactor to run a over 1.000 ?C for 30 days.

To answer to Anders:

They did the test for 32 days in a third party laboratory (not
controlled or owned by Rossi's, nor by the testers). They recorded, in
video, the experiment. They took, themselves, the samples first and
after the experiments.

Rossi was involved just to switch on and off the reactor and was never
present the other time.

Now, we have mainly three possibilities:

1) These experts and professors are fools and incompetents
2) These experts and professors are accomplices.
3) There is something there

Now the document you linked tell us some interesting things:

1) "In the course of the year following the previous tests, the E-Cat?s
technology was transferred to Industrial Heat LLC, United States, where
it was replicated and improved."

So, it is no more Rossi's e-cat, it is Industrial Heat Inc. e-cat they
are testing.

http://peswiki.com/index.php/Directory:Industrial_Heat,_LLC

2) "The present E-Cat reactor is therefore an improved version running
at higher temperature than the one used in the March 2013 experiment."

It is my opinion it is more difficult to fake higher temperatures for
ten times the same period of time. If it is a scam, it is an Olympic
level scam.

3) "Since we required that our measurements be carried out in an
independent laboratory with our own equipment, the experiment was
purposely set-up and hosted within an industrial establishment which was
not in any way connected with Andrea Rossi?s businesses or those of his
partners. The test was thus performed in Barbengo (Lugano), Switzerland,
in a laboratory placed at our disposal by Officine Ghidoni SA."

The list of co-cospirators continue to grow.
Not only Rossi, the professors of Bologna University, the professors of
Uppsala University, the people of Industrial Heat and the owners of
"Officine Ghidoni SA" in Switzerland.

4) The photo of the new and improved e-cat show a smaller device. Even
more difficult to miniaturize the hidden energy source.

Now, I'm Italian, so I will not rule out a scam, nor will rule out they
are dishonest, fools or worse but on the other side I will not rule out
they have something real.


Anders wrote:
"Nonono, that is another, far more suspicious claim! That is the cold
fusion Italian guy Andrea Rossi's E-Cat. And the elforsk results are
generally regarded as suspicious; "

Why are Elforsk results generally regarded as suspicious?
Do they are heavily staffed with employees from Naples' Scampia?
Do the people working there known incompetents and fools?

Mirco


From puglisi at arcetri.astro.it  Sat Oct 18 15:06:40 2014
From: puglisi at arcetri.astro.it (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 17:06:40 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it>
 <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
Message-ID: <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 2:22 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>
wrote:

>
>
> Anders wrote:
> "Nonono, that is another, far more suspicious claim! That is the cold
> fusion Italian guy Andrea Rossi's E-Cat. And the elforsk results are
> generally regarded as suspicious; "
>
> Why are Elforsk results generally regarded as suspicious?
> Do they are heavily staffed with employees from Naples' Scampia?
> Do the people working there known incompetents and fools?



Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to connect
a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer inside. Instead,
it's all of sorts of complicated setups, requiring a lof of derivation
steps. First it was water wapor production, now thermal imaging and
aluminum emissivity. Lots of complexity, and lots of opportunities to make
mistakes even in good faith.

Alfio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141018/4f9991b6/attachment.html>

From avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com  Sat Oct 18 15:59:16 2014
From: avantguardian2020 at yahoo.com (The Avantguardian)
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:59:16 -0700
Subject: [ExI] question for it hipsters
In-Reply-To: <CAAc1gFgttPwgk6m0eo=tbUw_kpu0n_rgJh7gPx2L=47ptLqKsQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00ad01cfe7c8$88b0d740$9a1285c0$@att.net>
 <CAL_armgNrRGU_8ix-JnAcp+4S+c3Er247aurdJhAsCtFWSzBJA@mail.gmail.com>
 <017b01cfe7d9$9513b550$bf3b1ff0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRK-bL1W8KBCbe_OW4j0ZAc2SGdpW3HEjnCgWAG2bAWFw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNTw4t-vdxvKPh=9tBuRBrsj_3mCQOcMU1zYU=juMm67Vw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ac01cfe7f7$acc47bd0$064d7370$@att.net>
 <CAL_armg+URkVZ+upzpdsBiTHYttf9YTu8UQ9-p2Xrk4iW3_WJw@mail.gmail.com>
 <007b01cfe885$29023a60$7b06af20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQkroSCAgSHfDeTRzM8CrYN4OzYxq7Pgyb_qS+MchotyA@mail.gmail.com>
 <011d01cfe89c$94f39f90$bedadeb0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSdpPU3iQWuiq4dw-ERaRwhu-Mg0WOfohW11ZNiZaBOLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <020b01cfe8b1$fa7e4b70$ef7ae250$@att.net>
 <CAAc1gFgttPwgk6m0eo=tbUw_kpu0n_rgJh7gPx2L=47ptLqKsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1413647956.13811.YahooMailNeo@web160505.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>



On Friday, October 17, 2014 2:55 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki <rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 3:55 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>
> 
>>OK then, they establish that they have absolute power, outranking the legislature, the courts and the executive branch.  We are likely to see a big swing in power in the next few years.  It looks like a disaster waiting to happen, with all these guys looking for revenge and being handed power from their predecessors.
>
>
>### They are one of the most hated branches of a widely distrusted organization and they don't have direct control over the apparatus of coercion (army, police). In a shakeup, every one of them can be swept away in a week, if they piss off enough people with more direct access to the sources and levers of power. And, filth as they are, they are cunning weasels with decades of experience in bureaucratic institutional warfare. I predict a continued, uneasy truce between the various branches of the state, with nobody's heads rolling and nobody really grabbing a much bigger chunk of the power pie. 

I wish I could be that copacetic. Lately there has been this trend of POTUS's naming "X"-Czars to wield unsupervised constitutionally ambiguous power. Our latest POTUS has just created an "Ebola Czar". This seems to be a bureaucrat of ill-defined power and undisclosed pay grade to be effectively "in charge" of ebola whatever that means. Am I the only one who finds this disturbing? How many Czars do we have? How much are they paid? And what have they been up to?
 
Stuart LaForge
 
"We speak for Earth. Our obligation to survive is owed not just to ourselves but also to that Cosmos, ancient and vast, from which we spring." - Carl Sagan 


From anders at aleph.se  Sat Oct 18 17:14:38 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 19:14:38 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
Message-ID: <607663466-23926@secure.ericade.net>

Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> , 18/10/2014 2:28 PM:

Anders wrote:
"Nonono, that is another, far more suspicious claim! That is the cold
fusion Italian guy Andrea Rossi's E-Cat. And the elforsk results are
generally regarded as suspicious; "

Why are Elforsk results generally regarded as suspicious?
Do they are heavily staffed with employees from Naples' Scampia?
Do the people working there known incompetents and fools?
Elforsk is an OK industry think tank, but this is paid consultancy work. The problem is that they are just doing what Rossi et al. ask them to do, not a free investigation.?
If I was proposing the E-cat for real, I would have them sign a NDA and let them investigate it to their hearts content in order to show that there was nothing to hide. I would have given them the blueprint and aksed them to put together a copy and test it. I would have hired a (prepaid) stage magician or expert on past perpetual motion frauds to investigate - and carefully have kept away from the investigation.?
At least people who think (like Pons and Fleischman) they have a working device will be eager to let others tinker with it, in the hope of reputable and verifiable experimental replication. People who try to prevent independent replication, even with reasonable sounding excuses, are very suspect.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141018/6511ee79/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Sat Oct 18 20:04:35 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 22:04:35 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it> <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>

Il 18/10/2014 17:06, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:

> Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to
> connect a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer inside.

They did, with the 1 MW container.
Critics criticized it because this or/and that.
They said there no proof how much water was really there, etc.

> Instead, it's all of sorts of complicated setups, requiring a lof of
> derivation steps. First it was water wapor production, now thermal
> imaging and aluminum emissivity. Lots of complexity, and lots of
> opportunities to make mistakes even in good faith.

This is not Rossi problem.
Ask Levi et others why they decided to set up such type of testing.

Maybe, just maybe, a device working over 1.000 ?C it is not well suited
to be measured with water.

Mirco


From painlord2k at libero.it  Sat Oct 18 23:58:30 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 01:58:30 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <607663466-23926@secure.ericade.net>
References: <607663466-23926@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <5442FEA6.6060006@libero.it>

Il 18/10/2014 19:14, Anders Sandberg ha scritto:
> Mirco Romanato<painlord2k at libero.it> , 18/10/2014 2:28 PM:

> Elforsk is an OK industry think tank, but this is paid consultancy work.
> The problem is that they are just doing what Rossi et al. ask them to
> do, not a free investigation. 

A free investigation is what you do without the need to ask permission
to anyone.

> If I was proposing the E-cat for real, I would have them sign a NDA and
> let them investigate it to their hearts content in order to show that
> there was nothing to hide. I would have given them the blueprint and
> aksed them to put together a copy and test it. I would have hired a
> (prepaid) stage magician or expert on past perpetual motion frauds to
> investigate - and carefully have kept away from the investigation. 

Apparently Rossi is not proposing the e-cat.

He sold to Industrial Heat Inc. (part of the Cherokee group) and, as
Levi wrote in the paper, the e-cat they used was build by Industrial
Heat, not Rossi.

I can understand you don't trust Rossi, but in this you are not trusting
Industrial Heat. This is because I think skepticism is becoming
pathological.
Now, Industrial Heat bought Rossi know-how and HW just an year ago.
They are not complaining and apparently continue to keep him as head of
research.

> At least people who think (like Pons and Fleischman) they have a working
> device will be eager to let others tinker with it, in the hope of
> reputable and verifiable experimental replication. People who try to
> prevent independent replication, even with reasonable sounding excuses,
> are very suspect. 

People is free to try independent replication, just don't ask Rossi or
Industrial Heat Inc. how they did before they have some solid patents on
it. Then you can replicate the patent.

This is because I support prizes (even very large prizes). You pay them
for indisputable results only if they deliver them on your pre
determined terms.

Mirco





From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 07:42:29 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 08:42:29 +0100
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:51 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote:
>
> Here is my question:  are there companies in Europe like 23and me that will
> give out the medical info, or does the FDA rule there too?  bill w
>


Just found an article that tells you how to get genetic health
reports, bypassing the 23andMe restriction.

You can upload your DNA report to many small companies and get a
health report back. Though the quality varies and some seem to be
recommending alternative medicine practitioners.

It could be interesting for those who already have the 23andMe health
report to get an alternative from some of these websites and see how
they compare. There is still a lot of guesswork attached to estimating
health risks from DNA.

<http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/531461/how-a-wiki-is-keeping-direct-to-consumer-genetics-alive/>

BillK


From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 08:29:12 2014
From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 10:29:12 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it>
 <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>
Message-ID: <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>
wrote:

> Il 18/10/2014 17:06, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
>
> > Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to
> > connect a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer inside.
>
> They did, with the 1 MW container.
> Critics criticized it because this or/and that.
> They said there no proof how much water was really there, etc.


If you have a link to that kind of test, I would be interested in it. All I
have seen is conversion of water to steam, and then endlessly arguing about
the dry fraction, etc.

Alfio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/d6d07b71/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Sun Oct 19 13:11:45 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 15:11:45 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it> <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5443B891.5080303@libero.it>

Il 19/10/2014 10:29, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it
> <mailto:painlord2k at libero.it>> wrote:
> 
>     Il 18/10/2014 17:06, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> 
>     > Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to
>     > connect a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer inside.
> 
>     They did, with the 1 MW container.
>     Critics criticized it because this or/and that.
>     They said there no proof how much water was really there, etc.
> 
> 
> If you have a link to that kind of test, I would be interested in it.
> All I have seen is conversion of water to steam, and then endlessly
> arguing about the dry fraction, etc.

The October 6 2011 test was conducted vaporizing the water inside the
e-cat, driving the steam in an heat exchanger and back in the e-cat. On
the other side of the heat exchanger, there was another water circuit
and they measured the flow and the temperature of the water entering and
exiting the secondary circuit.
The test measured the energy after the e-cat was placed in self
sustaining mode and run for many hours and they opened the e-cat after
the test to show up there was nothing inside apart just the three cores
and the water circuit.

Obviously, the critics criticized: the flow meter could be hacked, the
temperature probes was placed in the wrong places, etc.

Andrea Rossi Ecat Test Bologna October 6
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhvD4KuAEmo

There is a report about the test from Mats Lewan of Nyteknik.

http://pesn.com/2011/10/08/9501929_E-Cat_Test_Validates_Cold_Fusion_Despite_Challenges/

http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:Real-Time_Updates_on_the_October_6%2C_2011_E-Cat_Test

http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:Archive:October_6,_2011_E-Cat_Test_Updates:Page_02


About the steam measures:
The good part of it was, at the time, I made myself a lot better
educated about hygrometers and how they work and perform and I concluded
that criticism was pretty gratuitous and unsubstantiated.
The type of hygrometer probe used would just signal zero water when the
temperature went over 100 ?C and all water would be vaporized (and not
droplets).

Mirco


From painlord2k at libero.it  Sun Oct 19 13:20:20 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 15:20:20 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it> <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5443BA94.8080308@libero.it>

Il 19/10/2014 10:29, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it
> <mailto:painlord2k at libero.it>> wrote:
> 
>     Il 18/10/2014 17:06, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> 
>     > Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to
>     > connect a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer inside.
> 
>     They did, with the 1 MW container.
>     Critics criticized it because this or/and that.
>     They said there no proof how much water was really there, etc.
> 
> 
> If you have a link to that kind of test, I would be interested in it.
> All I have seen is conversion of water to steam, and then endlessly
> arguing about the dry fraction, etc.

There is also the tests conducted, privately, by Focardi with Rossi, at
the Rossi facility, where they tested the first prototypes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGmgTo2Kw1U

at 2:10 you see the first experiment conducted by Focardi and Rossi
together. There is little to cheat there for Rossi
at 3:10 there is the photos of the second experiment
at 3:50 the third experiment

Mirco





From foozler83 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 13:57:59 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 08:57:59 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEY6GgTNuvS_+m54eUoUvUk4TiaEWgvib-nSaWRgD71Zqw@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Bill K!

bill w

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 2:42 AM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:51 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote:
> >
> > Here is my question:  are there companies in Europe like 23and me that
> will
> > give out the medical info, or does the FDA rule there too?  bill w
> >
>
>
> Just found an article that tells you how to get genetic health
> reports, bypassing the 23andMe restriction.
>
> You can upload your DNA report to many small companies and get a
> health report back. Though the quality varies and some seem to be
> recommending alternative medicine practitioners.
>
> It could be interesting for those who already have the 23andMe health
> report to get an alternative from some of these websites and see how
> they compare. There is still a lot of guesswork attached to estimating
> health risks from DNA.
>
> <
> http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/531461/how-a-wiki-is-keeping-direct-to-consumer-genetics-alive/
> >
>
> BillK
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/9412a3f4/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sun Oct 19 14:25:46 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 07:25:46 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>



-----Original Message-----
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf
Of BillK
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 12:42 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 10:51 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote:
>
>>... Here is my question:  are there companies in Europe like 23and me that

> will give out the medical info, or does the FDA rule there too?  bill 
> w
>


>...Just found an article that tells you how to get genetic health reports,
bypassing the 23andMe restriction.  You can upload your DNA report to many
small companies and get a health report back...

<http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/531461/how-a-wiki-is-keeping-
direct-to-consumer-genetics-alive/>

BillK
_______________________________________________

EXCELLENT article BillK, thanks!

I already use one of the free genome interpretation services, GEDmatch.  

In that article were some comments that really caught my attention such as:

	... the idea that people can gather DNA from one company and analyze
it elsewhere is a significant legal development. Previously, the same lab
that tested you would be the one to tell you what the results meant. But DNA
information is essentially digital. That means it can plug and play
anywhere. "It's going to be quite difficult to regulate," Evans predicts.
She believes that services like Promethease could invoke free-speech
arguments and other legal defenses if regulators ever approached them.

And:

	Reached by MIT Technology Review, the FDA said it has authority to
regulate software that interprets genomes, even if such services are given
away free. The agency does not comment on specific companies.

And:

	He won't get too specific about the numbers or say how much money
Promethease is earning. "We are somewhat shy about saying how much business
we are doing," he says.  That could be out of a desire not to rouse
regulators. The FDA has wide discretion to act but often chooses to ignore
small-time operators that bend the rules...


My ExI friends, especially those in the USA, think about those three
comments.  Better yet, read BillK's article, every word.  We have a
known-corrupt government with a medical bureaucracy (which does not answer
directly to the voters (and which recently insisted that ebola cannot be
airborne)) claiming it has broad authority to regulate what an
internet-based service may tell you, even if that service is run by
volunteers and charges nothing.  

If that isn't first amendment territory, I do not understand the first
amendment.

spike




From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 15:22:05 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 08:22:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 19, 2014 7:40 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> We have a
> known-corrupt government with a medical bureaucracy (which does not answer
> directly to the voters (and which recently insisted that ebola cannot be
> airborne)) claiming it has broad authority to regulate what an
> internet-based service may tell you, even if that service is run by
> volunteers and charges nothing.
>
> If that isn't first amendment territory, I do not understand the first
> amendment.

That is shouting fire in a crowded theater territory.  The First Amendment
never gave an absolute right to say anything at any time.

Though I do wish they would use this same power to go after those who
spread misinformation about vaccines to the point that vaccine refusal has
become a public health problem in some areas.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/1710e032/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Sun Oct 19 15:59:57 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 17:59:57 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5443DFFD.5040003@libero.it>

Il 19/10/2014 17:22, Adrian Tymes ha scritto:

> That is shouting fire in a crowded theater territory.  The First
> Amendment never gave an absolute right to say anything at any time.

In a theater there is an expectation for people to not shout or make
noises without a good reason (good for the other patrons).
The penalty should be to be to not be anymore allowed by the owner
inside that theater (and any other of his places he decide to bar you from).

> Though I do wish they would use this same power to go after those who
> spread misinformation about vaccines to the point that vaccine refusal
> has become a public health problem in some areas.

People have time to check the informations they received and act
accordingly. If they don't and trust some authority, it is their fault.

The vaccine refusal becoming a health problem in some areas is the way
natural selection work on a memetic and genetic landscape.

Mirco



From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 16:19:29 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 09:19:29 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <5443DFFD.5040003@libero.it>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5443DFFD.5040003@libero.it>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNSYQGV4mpeAJ3zHM+NWE3t=YWxCQ8S=re9Cb-o-HtgeGQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>
wrote:

> The vaccine refusal becoming a health problem in some areas is the way
> natural selection work on a memetic and genetic landscape.
>

The problem is, vaccine refusal causes diseases to incubate that can
sometimes become a problem even for the vaccined (if the vaccine was
administered improperly or didn't take).  If almost everyone has that
vaccine, it's not an issue - but if enough people don't, it can become a
problem.

There is also a tragedy of the commons: hospitals are paid for in part with
public money.  In many health cases, preventative measures for everyone are
far less expensive than after-the-fact care for a few.  The exact
borderline is a subject of debate, but vaccines could be called an extreme
case: they are proven effective and very minimal inconvenience, and the
arguments against them are almost 100% false information.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/6c144b74/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sun Oct 19 16:13:08 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 09:13:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

On Oct 19, 2014 7:40 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>? We have a known-corrupt government with a medical bureaucracy (which does not answer
> directly to the voters (and which recently insisted that ebola cannot be
> airborne)) claiming it has broad authority to regulate what an
> internet-based service may tell you, even if that service is run by
> volunteers and charges nothing.  If that isn't first amendment territory, I do not understand the first
> amendment.

>?That is shouting fire in a crowded theater territory.  The First Amendment never gave an absolute right to say anything at any time?

Indeed sir?  So the first amendment assures that citizens have the right to free speech unless of course they say something to which the government disagrees?  Who gets to say what is allowed speech and what is not?  Shall we appoint a ?Free? Speech Czar?

>?Though I do wish they would use this same power to go after those who spread misinformation about vaccines to the point that vaccine refusal has become a public health problem in some areas?

Indeed sir?  I agree that harmful misinformation is spread regarding vaccines, but I disagree that spreading that misinformation is illegal.  That too is covered under first amendment rights.  Otherwise it would be illegal for the government to tell us that if we like our health plan we can keep our health plan (period end of story, 34 times on record.)  It would be illegal for our own government to tell us that the murders of US personnel in Benghazi was the result of an internet video, that Bowe Bergdahl served his country with distinction, that ebola cannot go airborne:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZxrE6orp2A

That comment seems self-contradictory to me.

http://www.lanl.gov/science/1663/images/sneeze.jpg

The white stuff in this photo is a bodily fluid and it is in the air.  Ebola gets in all the bodily fluids.  That big white aerosol cloud in the photo would contain viruses if the sneezer is infected.  If a virus can be spread by bodily fluids, and saliva is a bodily fluid, and saliva goes airborne every time a person sneezes, and anyone in the area inhales that aerosol, then the viruses in those droplets enter the bystanders lungs and throat.  We can scarcely imagine a more optimal surface for a virus to land: nasal tissues, the throat, the bronchioles, the alveoli, all of which are well protected, moist, highly vascular tissues, a playground for bacteria and viruses.  Please, where did I go wrong in that line of reasoning?  

We are told by the like-your-doctor-keep-your-doctor president that we cannot catch ebola by sitting next to someone on a bus.  (Do we get a Period End of Story on that?)  Unless of course the person next to you sneezes and you happen to breathe  (PEoS).  But other than that, PEoS.  Oh and that like-your-plan-keep-your-plan story: that was PEoS comma unless your plan doesn?t conform to our rules, PEoS.  So get on the bus, citizen.  

Please, how in the hell can we be so DEAD certain sneezing is not an ebola vector?  Doctor Rafal Smigrodzki, do educate us please, sir.

Adrian I agree that medical misinformation is harmful to individuals and to public health.  But information, even the false and harmful variety, is covered under the first amendment.  If the government gets to decide what information is covered under the first amendment and which is not, there is no point in having a first amendment; it doesn?t do anything.  Understatement, the first amendment itself becomes harmful misinformation.  It becomes self-contradictory, assuring citizens a right while handing the government the authority to decide the circumstances under which a citizen really has that right, along with the right to arbitrarily prosecute after the fact.

spike  

 

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/9282bcb4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 43350 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/9282bcb4/attachment.obj>

From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 16:57:08 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 09:57:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 9:13 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> *>?* *On Behalf Of *Adrian Tymes
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
>
> >?That is shouting fire in a crowded theater territory.  The First
> Amendment never gave an absolute right to say anything at any time?
>
> Indeed sir?  So the first amendment assures that citizens have the right
> to free speech unless of course they say something to which the government
> disagrees?
>
Not quite.  Something to which the government believes is of danger to the
public.  This has been the situation since well before we were born.  See
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shouting_fire_in_a_crowded_theater for a
primer.

> Who gets to say what is allowed speech and what is not?
>
The lawyers and judges, for the most part.  Note that this is not the
executive branch, try though they have, and even though they have carved
out some portions that have not been ruled against - or have even been
ruled in favor of - by the judges, but the ultimate power here has come
from the judicial branch.

BTW, this is one case where you really need to stop thinking of "the
government" as a monolithic entity if you are to have much hope of
understanding the full picture.  True, the executive branch usually
appoints the judicial...but in many cases the judicial has ruled against
the executive anyway, just as it was designed to do.

> I agree that harmful misinformation is spread regarding vaccines, but I
> disagree that spreading that misinformation is illegal.  That too is
> covered under first amendment rights.
>

Not all misinformation is illegal to spread.  The exception we are talking
about here is when there is a direct link between misinformation and
negative health consequences to the public.  Your cited examples of the ADA
and ebola do not come near the same threshold as vaccine deniers do, and
the judges have ruled that this is a matter of degrees, not absolute yes/no.


> ebola cannot go airborne
>

http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/ebolaairborne.asp


> The white stuff in this photo is a bodily fluid and it is in the air.
> Ebola gets in all the bodily fluids.  That big white aerosol cloud in the
> photo would contain viruses if the sneezer is infected.
>

Many viruses can not survive suspended in the air long enough to infect
anyone else.  Also note the specific logic and - far more importantly -
observational evidence that ebola is not airborne in that Snopes article.

Please research these things when you go on long rants like this.  You do
yourself a disservice otherwise.  In general, if you can not make the
argument concisely, and it is not a complex matter - and especially if this
is something that a lot of other people would have spent a lot of time
studying and their work can be easily googled yet your conclusion runs
counter to what they seem to be saying - you have almost certainly
overlooked something so you should be unsure of your conclusion...at least
until you have verified it with other people knowledgeable in the field.

Calling out that bit in the hyphens in particular.  Long chain of logic
starting from what you think you plainly see, the experts seem to be saying
something else, and their arguments are trivial to find?  Look up their
studies so you can either see where you went wrong or find out where they
all keep messing up.  Which isn't to say that they aren't all messing up,
but if you're going to argue the topic you need to point out what they're
missing.

"Medics dealing with ebola have directly observed ebola not being
transmitted by sneezes, and all documented cases of ebola's spread involved
far more contact than sneezes," is pretty strong evidence that ebola is not
transmitted by sneezes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/f073bd72/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 16:59:33 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 11:59:33 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbvbPWkyHYSSQMpRjRosgqSBKYOZXLMT0jnVktWeiToFA@mail.gmail.com>

?

> Indeed sir?  So the first amendment assures that citizens have the right
> to free speech unless of course they say something to which the government
> disagrees?  Who gets to say what is allowed speech and what is not?  Shall
> we appoint a ?Free? Speech Czar?
>

?
?
But information, even the false and harmful variety, is covered under the
first amendment. ?


> ?Been adjudicated:  cannot falsely claim health benefits on 'health' foods
> and/or must include a disclaimer.  Many billions are lost based only on
> hope.  I wish the FDA would go after all the herb and other alternative
> medicine people who are packaging nostrums for the gullible and frantic.
>
>
?No free speech if it amounts to slander etc.  No advocating overthrow of
the government by force.  Illegal as all getout.  bill w?



>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/898f7bef/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Sun Oct 19 18:06:09 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 20:06:09 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNSYQGV4mpeAJ3zHM+NWE3t=YWxCQ8S=re9Cb-o-HtgeGQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5443DFFD.5040003@libero.it>
 <CALAdGNSYQGV4mpeAJ3zHM+NWE3t=YWxCQ8S=re9Cb-o-HtgeGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5443FD91.4050606@libero.it>

Il 19/10/2014 18:19, Adrian Tymes ha scritto:

> The problem is, vaccine refusal causes diseases to incubate that can
> sometimes become a problem even for the vaccined (if the vaccine was
> administered improperly or didn't take).  If almost everyone has that
> vaccine, it's not an issue - but if enough people don't, it can become a
> problem.

> There is also a tragedy of the commons: hospitals are paid for in part
> with public money.  In many health cases, preventative measures for
> everyone are far less expensive than after-the-fact care for a few.  The
> exact borderline is a subject of debate, but vaccines could be called an
> extreme case: they are proven effective and very minimal inconvenience,
> and the arguments against them are almost 100% false information.

We agree on the facts, but this is no reason good enough to prevent free
choices. The problem is the government.

A private business could prevent children for entering a private school
if they have not done the required vaccinations (or they have a really
compelling reason to not do so - sometimes there are).
A public school, directly or indirectly, will bow to the
PC/Gaia-worshipping crowd.

Mirco






From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 18:24:17 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 19:24:17 +0100
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjZmcXGN2F69Qe2TyeRsUm=dH+=2pc5e+6-QHa7AxNYNA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:13 PM, spike wrote:
> The white stuff in this photo is a bodily fluid and it is in the air.
>  Ebola gets in all the bodily fluids.  That big white aerosol cloud in the photo
> would contain viruses if the sneezer is infected.  If a virus can be spread by
> bodily fluids, and saliva is a bodily fluid, and saliva goes airborne every time
> a person sneezes, and anyone in the area inhales that aerosol, then the
> viruses in those droplets enter the bystanders lungs and throat.  We can
> scarcely imagine a more optimal surface for a virus to land: nasal tissues,
> the throat, the bronchioles, the alveoli, all of which are well protected, moist,
> highly vascular tissues, a playground for bacteria and viruses.
>  Please, where did I go wrong in that line of reasoning?
>
> Please, how in the hell can we be so DEAD certain sneezing is not an ebola vector?

It is the size of the particle that makes the difference. Airborne
transmission means small particles that can drift in the air for
hours, to be inhaled by passers-by. This applies to diseases like
Influenza, Tuberculosis, Measles, etc.

These airborne particles are too small for the Ebola virus to live in.
Which is why Ebola is not defined as being airborne transmission.

All that being said.......   Ebola lives in vomit, diarrhoea and
saliva which cannot remain airborne. So physical contact with these
fluids is necessary. However, projectile vomiting is so-called for
good reason. Basically, don't go near an Ebola infected patient
without wearing a hazmat suit. And you need to be trained to wear
these. It is a two person task to put one on and to take it off safely
afterwards. And they are incredibly hot inside. The wearing limit is
less than an hour at a time.

So you've got to be a bit of a hero to care for Ebola patients.


BillK


From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 18:25:27 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 11:25:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <5443FD91.4050606@libero.it>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5443DFFD.5040003@libero.it>
 <CALAdGNSYQGV4mpeAJ3zHM+NWE3t=YWxCQ8S=re9Cb-o-HtgeGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <5443FD91.4050606@libero.it>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNSHiki6hqN0v95HLf1pajUo_5x60a56N_QFLva1GCAOTw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 11:06 AM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>
wrote:

> A private business could prevent children for entering a private school
> if they have not done the required vaccinations (or they have a really
> compelling reason to not do so - sometimes there are).
> A public school, directly or indirectly, will bow to the
> PC/Gaia-worshipping crowd.
>

Actually, around here, I believe I have heard of kids being kept out of
public schools if they didn't have the required vaccinations yet.  I
*think* the parents might technically have been guilty of fostering truancy
if the non-vaccination-so-no-school went on long enough, though I haven't
heard of any such cases being enforced.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/b0790a77/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 18:58:27 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:58:27 -0400
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFhgim4gw81WqwCbuCRJwLZO=yK8dRZALWDx0xnQo12YSg@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 11:22 AM, Adrian Tymes <atymes at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Oct 19, 2014 7:40 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> > We have a
> > known-corrupt government with a medical bureaucracy (which does not
> answer
> > directly to the voters (and which recently insisted that ebola cannot be
> > airborne)) claiming it has broad authority to regulate what an
> > internet-based service may tell you, even if that service is run by
> > volunteers and charges nothing.
> >
> > If that isn't first amendment territory, I do not understand the first
> > amendment.
>
> That is shouting fire in a crowded theater territory.  The First Amendment
> never gave an absolute right to say anything at any time.
>
### That's defense of the morally indefensible, Adrian.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/8a0693a9/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sun Oct 19 20:29:01 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 13:29:01 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
?

 

ebola cannot go airborne


http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/ebolaairborne.asp 

 

The white stuff in this photo is a bodily fluid and it is in the air.  Ebola gets in all the bodily fluids.  That big white aerosol cloud in the photo would contain viruses if the sneezer is infected.

 

>?Many viruses can not survive suspended in the air long enough to infect anyone else.  Also note the specific logic and - far more importantly - observational evidence that ebola is not airborne in that Snopes article?

Note that the Snopes article is debunking the notion that the CDC admitted that ebola can become airborne.  I agree with them on that: the CDC said no such thing, and I don?t expect them to in the future.

>?Please research these things when you go on long rants like this.  You do yourself a disservice otherwise.  In general, if you can not make the argument concisely, and it is not a complex matter?

OK here?s my citizen scientist home experiment.  Next time you are sitting in front of your computer and feel a good sneeze coming on, don?t stifle it into your sleeve as you normally might do.  Let it fly, right onto your monitor.  This will not hurt it a bit; windex will fit it afterwards.  Note the spray patterns, the size and so forth.  Estimate the volume of those droplets.

Now imagine you are a virus living in one of those.  I see no reason whatsoever that a virus couldn?t survive a good old fashioned deep sneeze, the good orgasmic kind that start with ah ah ah aaaaaaahhhhh?  Then if anyone is anywhere near that cloud of sputum and inhales that, I just can?t see why that few seconds in the air would slay those viruses.

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/4586624e/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 21:26:27 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 14:26:27 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:29 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> Now imagine you are a virus living in one of those.  I see no reason
> whatsoever that a virus couldn?t survive a good old fashioned deep sneeze
>
The droplets are too small.


> I just can?t see why that few seconds in the air would slay those viruses.
>
Very small things can "die", as in be torn apart at a molecular level, very
quickly.

Drop a crystal - a single crystal of typical size - of salt or sugar into a
glass of water.  Even with no further agitation of the water, how long
until you can no longer see it - until the crystal is completely
destroyed?  (Don't dump a whole spoonful in: the crystals toward the center
will be temporarily protected, but we're analogizing to individual droplets
in an aerosolized mist too small to provide such central protection.)

This crystal is way bigger than a virus.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/ed4ff0db/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 22:28:31 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:28:31 -0400
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdbLdUegaAKjphL+-VoWetxrEKPrLa-i9x7ZgpxE+Zkg9Lg@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 19, 2014 4:44 PM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> OK here?s my citizen scientist home experiment.  Next time you are
sitting in front of your computer and feel a good sneeze coming on, don?t
stifle it into your sleeve as you normally might do.  Let it fly, right
onto your monitor.  This will not hurt it a bit; windex will fit it
afterwards.  Note the spray patterns, the size and so forth.  Estimate the
volume of those droplets.
>
> Now imagine you are a virus living in one of those.  I see no reason
whatsoever that a virus couldn?t survive a good old fashioned deep sneeze,
the good orgasmic kind that start with ah ah ah aaaaaaahhhhh?  Then if
anyone is anywhere near that cloud of sputum and inhales that, I just can?t
see why that few seconds in the air would slay those viruses.

I think the differences are word choice and intention.  If clinical
definition of airborne means that it can be carried in droplets that float
in air and air-handling systems then Ebola is not airborne.  Projectile
fluid exchange is still a concern (per spike's "rant")

My dismay regarding Ebola is due to the cavalier attitude of doctors saying
"Ebola is not airborne" (or air-borne?) and assuming isolation protocols
are sufficiently safe. How much disinfectant is required to properly
cleanse affected surfaces after contact with infected fluids? Are
consumer-grade products up to the task or is a commercial/clinical product
required?

If education is the best defense,  why don't I already know the answers to
these questions?

Sure,  I could do the research myself. Why aren't these facts given after
every update on Ebola? Because the public wouldn't be capable of
understanding facts? Or because the government agencies involved have so
little experience disseminating fact that they just don't know how?

Sorry: I kind of went off a bit there at the end... :)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/8f2f6eb0/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 20 00:01:44 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 17:01:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:29 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>>?Now imagine you are a virus living in one of those.  I see no reason whatsoever that a virus couldn?t survive a good old fashioned deep sneeze

>?The droplets are too small.

 

>>?I just can?t see why that few seconds in the air would slay those viruses.

>?Very small things can "die", as in be torn apart at a molecular level, very quickly.

I fear we are belaboring this argument.

We are told that any contact with any of the bodily fluids with an ebola-infected patient can spread infection, including sweat and blood, both of which are external to the ebola patient.  Apparently air exposure doesn?t kill the virus, at least not immediately.  The two nurses who cared for the Texas ebola patient contracted the virus, even though both were trained in caring for contagious patients and hospital-grade hygiene.

In sports, the contestants do come in contact with each other?s bodily fluids, and no I am not talking about *that* sport.  I mean the competitive ones such as boxing, football, and such.  BOOM:

http://punchingtechniques.com/wp-content/themes/thesis_182/custom/rotator/right-cross-mesi-jirov.jpg

It happens.  In a hospital, you have sneezes and coughing, as well as good old fashioned bleeding and barfing.  I do feel it is just irresponsible at this point to conclude that ebola cannot be airborne under these conditions or any conditions.  We have not enough evidence to make that blanket statement.  The places where we have a lot of science have too little experience with ebola.  The places where they have a lot of ebola have too little experience with science.

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/c0770221/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 80786 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/c0770221/attachment.obj>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 20 00:33:23 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 17:33:23 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
Message-ID: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>

 

Check this:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlYClniDFkM

 

>From this site:

 

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2014/october/141015ae_l
ockheed-martin-pursuing-compact-nuclear-fusion.html

 

OK so this is a high-beta concept.  Fusion products are contained by
magnetic fields.  OK then, the reason I am not rushing out to buy LMCO stock
is that this said nothing about one of the major show-stoppers in the
tokamak:  neutron containment.  The fusion process creates high energy
neutrons (a tritium-deuterium fusion event yields an alpha particle and a
neutron, plus a lot of energy.)  

 

We can have all the magnetic fields we want, but neutrons will not even know
they are there, and will not care: they are neutral.  Magnetic fields can
contain the positive alphas, but no magnetic field can contain those
neutrons.  

 

High energy neutrons cause the materials surrounding the fusion reaction to
break down.  The neutrons are absorbed by the nuclei.  Eventually the
materials get so neutron-rich, they undergo spontaneous fission.

 

Note I am not claiming to know more about nuclear physics than Tom McGuire.
But I haven't heard a single word about how this scheme can solve what
appears to be the show-stopper with compact fusion: the hot neutron
containment problem.  Until I hear what they have in mind, I am not buying
any additional LMCO stock.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/9527d205/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 01:09:10 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:09:10 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>
 <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNR=rd4XCx094Pc3gTWkuujW5_n8FQ0OT=HCnv4eiVFyuw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:01 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> We are told that any contact with any of the bodily fluids with an
> ebola-infected patient can spread infection, including sweat and blood,
> both of which are external to the ebola patient.  Apparently air exposure
> doesn?t kill the virus, at least not immediately.
>
Droplet size.  Sweat and blood are large enough.  Sneezes are not.

Why are you still belaboring your hypothetical point when the Snopes
article I linked provided a thorough explanation of this?  Or do I need to
quote that whole article verbatim in email to get you to read it?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/a06c7a84/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 20 01:38:20 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 18:38:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNR=rd4XCx094Pc3gTWkuujW5_n8FQ0OT=HCnv4eiVFyuw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>
 <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNR=rd4XCx094Pc3gTWkuujW5_n8FQ0OT=HCnv4eiVFyuw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00c401cfec06$885c4120$9914c360$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2014 6:09 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

 

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:01 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>>?We are told that any contact with any of the bodily fluids with an ebola-infected patient can spread infection, including sweat and blood, both of which are external to the ebola patient.  Apparently air exposure doesn?t kill the virus, at least not immediately. 

>?Droplet size.  Sweat and blood are large enough.  Sneezes are not.

>?Why are you still belaboring your hypothetical point when the Snopes article I linked provided a thorough explanation of this?  Or do I need to quote that whole article verbatim in email to get you to read it?

 

 

Adrian, I read it.  I agree with their debunking the notion that the CDC admitted ebola can be airborne.  I know the CDC didn?t do that.  My claim is that we do not know for sure ebola cannot be spread to a person who does not physically touch the patient.  I don?t think we know that yet, and it defies my intuition that it is impossible.  I sure wouldn?t want to hang my life on a theoretical argument that sneeze droplets cannot support that virus for even a few seconds.  I would even agree the risk is low, but the consequences could be fatal.

 

Regarding Snopes, I would certainly not find them a credible source for this kind of information.  The article you cited is not making any strong statements.  They debunk the notion that we have proof that ebola is now airborne.  I know we have no proof of that.  I am not claiming to know anything of the kind   

 

I have consulted three friends who are doctors, and all three thought the risk of airborne transmission is low but not zero.  How low is low?  Regarding this newly appointed Ebola Czar: his credibility is low too.  Couldn?t the government find a doctor for that position?  Or failing that, someone with a doctorate in epidemiology?  A master?s degree in public health?  Why would they pick someone who has no medical expertise for that job?  Doesn?t that in itself call into question the credibility of the US government?s response?  Why aren?t they stopping the flights from Liberia for starters?  A quarantine of a place known to have cases would surely be wise, ja?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/f2618ec1/attachment.html>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 02:56:20 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 19:56:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Ebola transmission
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB6jiVVkMmf6GUXHZRHWkcP9OxYr=S24bstgmbRvUJS=Qg@mail.gmail.com>

I don't think there is much evidence that the current version of Ebola
is airborn, but that does not mean it could not mutate in a direction
where it could.  This happened already with another version of Ebola,
Ebola Reston.

http://guardianlv.com/2014/09/experts-dispute-the-potential-for-the-ebola-virus-to-go-airborne/

Or you can read "The Hot Zone."

In my personal opinion, it is not the time to panic . . . yet.

Keith


From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 05:04:37 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 01:04:37 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFhgsW9M11PDLuPnL7SUK7mMkAt=-i1oWzDM9MVtbD26Vw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:33 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> Note I am not claiming to know more about nuclear physics than Tom
> McGuire.  But I haven?t heard a single word about how this scheme can solve
> what appears to be the show-stopper with compact fusion: the hot neutron
> containment problem.  Until I hear what they have in mind, I am not buying
> any additional LMCO stock.
>

### How thick is the layer of molten, circulating lead needed to absorb
enough of the neutrons so magnetic coils do not fry? Is it so thick as to
make the device as large as ITER, or is it still in a reasonable range?

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141020/fd5319fe/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 08:01:13 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 04:01:13 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CAAc1gFhgsW9M11PDLuPnL7SUK7mMkAt=-i1oWzDM9MVtbD26Vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAAc1gFhgsW9M11PDLuPnL7SUK7mMkAt=-i1oWzDM9MVtbD26Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFhTu=9XswpAHoWxsuHD5xyKTEZB+nfpL5nN=5ML6n8Qvg@mail.gmail.com>

McGuire's patent application mentions using liquid LiPb or FLiBe
coolants.... and not all coils are to be superconducting, if I am reading
it correctly. The patent mentions details of shielding, with thickness
varying from 5 mm to 126 cm. Looks like this is more oriented towards
demonstrating general technical feasibility than merely theoretically
analyzing plasma magnetohydrodynamics and nucleonics.

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2014/0301519.html
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2014/0301518.html

They are talking about the possibility of levitating the internal coils -
neat!
They want to use 2.2T coils, which is a lot less than planned for ITER (14T)

I wonder how much is the "fits on truck" issue a real technical
consideration vs. a way of hype-building vs. patent-law consideration.
Simply saying you can make a working fusor is one thing but repeatedly and
very publicly saying it will be rather tiny speaks of a whole new level of
iron-clad confidence (or in-your-face BS).

I am not so worried about the shielding issue, or even the plasma leak from
mirror coils, which they say have been addressed in the patent, using
liquid coolant and plasma recirculation. The main issue with tokamaks,
exponentially growing plasma instability, also should not be a problem
here, since plasma current is not used as a source of confining magnetic
field (as it is in a tokamak, if I am understanding the stories correctly.

Dave Kirtley (or somebody claiming to be him) also commented here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8458339

"I do think what they are doing is interesting."

- which coming from a direct competitor (Helion Energy) could be high
praise.

Rafal

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki <
rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:33 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> Note I am not claiming to know more about nuclear physics than Tom
>> McGuire.  But I haven?t heard a single word about how this scheme can solve
>> what appears to be the show-stopper with compact fusion: the hot neutron
>> containment problem.  Until I hear what they have in mind, I am not buying
>> any additional LMCO stock.
>>
>
> ### How thick is the layer of molten, circulating lead needed to absorb
> enough of the neutrons so magnetic coils do not fry? Is it so thick as to
> make the device as large as ITER, or is it still in a reasonable range?
>
> Rafal
>



-- 
Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD
Senior Scientist,
Gencia Corporation
706 B Forest St.

Charlottesville, VA 22903

tel: (434) 295-4800

fax: (434) 295-4951



This electronic message transmission contains information from the
biotechnology firm of Gencia Corporation which may be confidential or
privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual
or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that
any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this
information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic
transmission in error, please notify us by telephone (434-295-4800) or by
electronic mail (fportell at genciabiotech.com) immediately.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141020/b14b54e5/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 20 08:50:43 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:50:43 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <CAOJFdbLdUegaAKjphL+-VoWetxrEKPrLa-i9x7ZgpxE+Zkg9Lg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <749429368-23321@secure.ericade.net>

Mike Dougherty <msd001 at gmail.com> , 20/10/2014 12:32 AM:




Sure,? I could do the research myself. Why aren't these facts given after every update on Ebola? Because the public wouldn't be capable of understanding facts? Or because the government agencies involved have so little experience disseminating fact that they just don't know how?A lot has to do with the fact that Ebola was until very recently treated as a remote, exotic problem "they" had in Darkest Africa. Relevant for the world of biosecurity specialists and virologists, maybe for the heroic do-gooders who went over "there", but not relevant to normal healthcare people or government agencies "here". In many ways it still is a remote problem when viewed rationally. But making the shift from remote to near makes many people and agencies very confused (just consider how they handle mentions of radioactivity - few people have any sense of scale). Expect confusion.

By the way, airborne transmission is very little about droplet size. Viruses are generally small enough to aerosolize well. The real issue is how they handle dessication or humidity: airborne viruses tend to have special coatings that protect them in the external environment, and this is what allows surface fomites to transmit them.?
If you want to get nervous, check out this study of Reston:http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/121115/srep00811/full/srep00811.htmlWhether it is a rational reason to worry is another matter. I think PHAC is right in their fact sheet?http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/lab-bio/res/psds-ftss/ebola-eng.phpwhen they point out that we have not observed any air transmission between primates. Given the experience with influenza (I am on the outskirts of the gain-of-function debate), this is very relevant: a virus needs to jump through a bunch of hoops before it can be air-transmitted between members of a new species, even if it can infect the species from another reservoir species. Would it be easy for Ebola to make that jump? I suspect not, at least compared to bird flu which after all *starts* airborne (and has a *huge* wild reservoir).


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141020/5282b7e7/attachment.html>

From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Mon Oct 20 09:12:18 2014
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (david)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 20:12:18 +1100
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00c401cfec06$885c4120$9914c360$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>
 <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNR=rd4XCx094Pc3gTWkuujW5_n8FQ0OT=HCnv4eiVFyuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <00c401cfec06$885c4120$9914c360$@att.net>
Message-ID: <20141020201218.4366d57f@JARRAH>

I think you could stop this argument in its tracks by defining the word
"airborne".
Snopes and Adrian appear to be using a technical definition of 
"can infect hours later via a dried remnant of droplet", 
whereas Spike is using the term to mean 
"catching it without physically touching".



From will.madden at gmail.com  Sun Oct 19 17:08:42 2014
From: will.madden at gmail.com (Will)
Date: Sun, 19 Oct 2014 11:08:42 -0600
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <etPan.5443f01a.6b8b4567.14aa@williams-mbp>

On vaccines, the vaccine ?scare? was not about vaccines at all, it was about thiomersal. ?Thiomersal is a mercury based preservative that was determined by ?consensus? science to not have a link to autism and other neurological disorders. ?I would argue that this determination was specious at best, and given the availability of alternate preservatives, its use was dangerous and misguided. ?If the concerns around this preservative had been addressed head on and honestly, instead of through obfuscation and medical ?theater? (while quietly no longer allowing it to be used without addressing the concerns directly), we wouldn?t have the present issues with vaccine refusal. ?Why do we really have these issues? ?Because only foolish or cognitively defective people would believe such myths? ?No, it?s because people don?t trust the FDA and establishment because the FDA and establishment didn?t handle the matter directly and honestly (probably because of legal concerns on the part of one of their benefactors), and people can tell, that?s why. ?I don?t trust the FDA either, for what it?s worth.

On access to genetic information and its interpretation, the FDA should not have the power to block an online service from interpreting raw genetic data on behalf of consumers. ?This mail order and online service is not yelling ?fire? in a crowded movie theater. ?The results are personalized and don?t endanger others. ?This is an obvious overstep in power by the FDA, blocks peoples? access to information, and reveals an underlying arrogance on the part of the FDA and doctors on the industry payroll. ?The arrogance is that normal people are to naive and simpleminded to seek out answers regarding their own personal health. ?They should be thrown from their pedestals and have their powers greatly curtailed. ?We would all be much better for it, especially given how modern and evolving technology could rapidly advance in so many fields if these crooks would simply get out of our way. ?Access to medical information is largely blocked by these institutions, including the educational system. ?

There?s no reason that in 5 years we can?t have an internet based ?watson? like technology that interfaces directly with end users and makes many modern doctors largely obsolete. ?The FDA isn?t going to accelerate access to services like these. ?The FDA will block them with red tape, because they represent the established industry, and their desire to block competition and maintain their comfy, heavily credentialed, anachronistic oligopoly.

On October 19, 2014 at 10:26:58 AM, spike (spike66 at att.net) wrote:

?

?

>? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

?

On Oct 19, 2014 7:40 AM, "spike" <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>? We have a known-corrupt government with a medical bureaucracy (which does not answer
> directly to the voters (and which recently insisted that ebola cannot be
> airborne)) claiming it has broad authority to regulate what an
> internet-based service may tell you, even if that service is run by
> volunteers and charges nothing. ?If that isn't first amendment territory, I do not understand the first
> amendment.

>?That is shouting fire in a crowded theater territory.? The First Amendment never gave an absolute right to say anything at any time?

Indeed sir?? So the first amendment assures that citizens have the right to free speech unless of course they say something to which the government disagrees?? Who gets to say what is allowed speech and what is not?? Shall we appoint a ?Free? Speech Czar?

>?Though I do wish they would use this same power to go after those who spread misinformation about vaccines to the point that vaccine refusal has become a public health problem in some areas?

Indeed sir?? I agree that harmful misinformation is spread regarding vaccines, but I disagree that spreading that misinformation is illegal.? That too is covered under first amendment rights.? Otherwise it would be illegal for the government to tell us that if we like our health plan we can keep our health plan (period end of story, 34 times on record.)? It would be illegal for our own government to tell us that the murders of US personnel in Benghazi was the result of an internet video, that Bowe Bergdahl served his country with distinction, that ebola cannot go airborne:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZxrE6orp2A

That comment seems self-contradictory to me.

  

The white stuff in this photo is a bodily fluid and it is in the air.? Ebola gets in all the bodily fluids.? That big white aerosol cloud in the photo would contain viruses if the sneezer is infected.? If a virus can be spread by bodily fluids, and saliva is a bodily fluid, and saliva goes airborne every time a person sneezes, and anyone in the area inhales that aerosol, then the viruses in those droplets enter the bystanders lungs and throat.? We can scarcely imagine a more optimal surface for a virus to land: nasal tissues, the throat, the bronchioles, the alveoli, all of which are well protected, moist, highly vascular tissues, a playground for bacteria and viruses.? Please, where did I go wrong in that line of reasoning??

We are told by the like-your-doctor-keep-your-doctor president that we cannot catch ebola by sitting next to someone on a bus.? (Do we get a Period End of Story on that?)? Unless of course the person next to you sneezes and you happen to breathe? (PEoS).? But other than that, PEoS.? Oh and that like-your-plan-keep-your-plan story: that was PEoS comma unless your plan doesn?t conform to our rules, PEoS.? So get on the bus, citizen.?

Please, how in the hell can we be so DEAD certain sneezing is not an ebola vector?? Doctor Rafal Smigrodzki, do educate us please, sir.

Adrian I agree that medical misinformation is harmful to individuals and to public health.? But information, even the false and harmful variety, is covered under the first amendment.? If the government gets to decide what information is covered under the first amendment and which is not, there is no point in having a first amendment; it doesn?t do anything.? Understatement, the first amendment itself becomes harmful misinformation.? It becomes self-contradictory, assuring citizens a right while handing the government the authority to decide the circumstances under which a citizen really has that right, along with the right to arbitrarily prosecute after the fact.

spike?

?

?

?

?

_______________________________________________  
extropy-chat mailing list  
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org  
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/21c25ce0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg at 01CFEB7A.74AA5090
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 43350 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141019/21c25ce0/attachment.obj>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 20 11:30:44 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 04:30:44 -0700
Subject: [ExI] no-touch transmission,
	was:  RE:  23andME - Company issues: privacy
Message-ID: <008d01cfec59$4a5fa3a0$df1eeae0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of david
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy

>...I think you could stop this argument in its tracks by defining the word
"airborne".
Snopes and Adrian appear to be using a technical definition of "can infect
hours later via a dried remnant of droplet", whereas Spike is using the term
to mean "catching it without physically touching".

_______________________________________________


Ja you are right David.  We were talking past each other because of a
misunderstanding of terms.

Very well, I will redefine my term from airborne to no-touch transmission.
Then the projectile-barf scenario, the boxer-head-shot spraying sweat, the
sneeze scenario, are all examples not of airborne transmission but rather
no-touch transmission.  We can ignore the boxer-head-shot scenario, since a
sick person would likely eschew that particular activity especially on
public transportation, which leaves us the projectile barfing and uncovered
sneezing, both of which are perfectly reasonable to assume could happen on
an airplane.

Very well then, is it not perfectly reasonable to suspect that USA political
leaders did exactly the same thing that Adrian and I did?  Could not they
hear from medical experts that ebola cannot be airborne, then conclude that
the term means it is safe to sit next to an ebola patient on an airplane?
The term as used by the medical establishment has a more specific meaning
than I interpreted: that the virus can live after desiccation.  But this
term may be misleading to the politicians and public.  I agree ebola patient
in seat 23b cannot infect passengers in seats 37f or 15d.  But I would be
highly concerned for the passengers in seats 23a and 23c, as well as perhaps
those in row 22.

My point: even if we agree that ebola is not airborne by the definition the
medics are using, it still isn't safe to fly with one because of the risk of
no-touch transmission.

Could not our political leaders have failed to recognize the technical
difference between airborne and no-touch?  Could not they too have concluded
from the scientist's comments on airborne transmission that there was
insufficient justification to stop flights from Liberia when there is
significant risk introduced by flights from the hot zone?  Perhaps even the
infected nurses in Texas misunderstood the risk?

It is difficult to even estimate the potential damage to the airline
industry and the US economy from even one suspected aircraft-related
infection.

Conclusion: flights from the hot zone should be stopped forthwith.
Alternative: passengers should be given a quarantined and controlled exit.

spike



From msd001 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 12:38:07 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 08:38:07 -0400
Subject: [ExI]  Trust, Bias was: 23andME - Company issues: privacy
Message-ID: <CAOJFdbKSB5A27S3HJ+nueapVA10w_B6sCzaKsGShO3xbZhN77w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 1:08 PM, Will <will.madden at gmail.com> wrote:

> On vaccines, the vaccine ?scare? was not about vaccines at all, it was
> about thiomersal.  Thiomersal is a mercury based preservative that was
> determined by ?consensus? science to not have a link to autism and other
> neurological disorders.  I would argue that this determination was specious
> at best, and given the availability of alternate preservatives, its use was
> dangerous and misguided.  If the concerns around this preservative had been
> addressed head on and honestly, instead of through obfuscation and medical
> ?theater? (while quietly no longer allowing it to be used without
> addressing the concerns directly), we wouldn?t have the present issues with
> vaccine refusal.  Why do we really have these issues?  Because only foolish
> or cognitively defective people would believe such myths?  No, it?s because
> people don?t trust the FDA and establishment because the FDA and
> establishment didn?t handle the matter directly and honestly (probably
> because of legal concerns on the part of one of their benefactors), and
> people can tell, that?s why.  I don?t trust the FDA either, for what it?s
> worth.
>

Well put.


> On access to genetic information and its interpretation, the FDA should
> not have the power to block an online service from interpreting raw genetic
> data on behalf of consumers.  This mail order and online service is not
> yelling ?fire? in a crowded movie theater.  The results are personalized
> and don?t endanger others.  This is an obvious overstep in power by the
> FDA, blocks peoples? access to information, and reveals an underlying
> arrogance on the part of the FDA and doctors on the industry payroll.  The
> arrogance is that normal people are to naive and simpleminded to seek out
> answers regarding their own personal health.  They should be thrown from
> their pedestals and have their powers greatly curtailed.  We would all be
> much better for it, especially given how modern and evolving technology
> could rapidly advance in so many fields if these crooks would simply get
> out of our way.  Access to medical information is largely blocked by these
> institutions, including the educational system.
>

I concede that without some point of reference that people can trust, there
would be all manner of snake-oil sales.  As you noted above, trust in the
FDA is no longer what it once was. [or might have been]  Also, there are
plenty of unregulated "infomercial products" that people are free to
believe dubious claims of live improvement.  I don't really see much
difference in caveat emptor between Snuggies or Mr.Lid to Angie's/Craig's
List to eHarmony to information analytic services - whether the information
is home energy use as lights/heat or genomic details.


> There?s no reason that in 5 years we can?t have an internet based ?watson?
> like technology that interfaces directly with end users and makes many
> modern doctors largely obsolete.  The FDA isn?t going to accelerate access
> to services like these.  The FDA will block them with red tape, because
> they represent the established industry, and their desire to block
> competition and maintain their comfy, heavily credentialed, anachronistic
> oligopoly.
>

I think you've identified several reasons.


More generally, I am curious if this mistrust of 'the system' is a neutral
observation of an inherent property or if it is evidence of a personal
bias.  I'm asking because I have noticed my posts tend towards a similar
bias.  So are we coloring the world through tinted lenses or are we so
clever that we notice details and relationships others miss?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141020/19b37604/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 12:53:32 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 13:53:32 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Robot Audi RS 7 laps Hockenheim at racing speeds
Message-ID: <CAL_armhKzYzd8HbZt=iGMuLeg3zONrYqggLJG4V+cy2KcxvzZA@mail.gmail.com>

Audi has delivered on its promise to send a driverless Audi RS 7
around the Hockenheim Grand Prix track at racing speeds.
<http://www.gizmag.com/audi-rs7-piloted-driving-concept-hockenheim/34324/>

The 560 hp (418 kW) car employed specially corrected GPS signals
transmitted to the car via Wi-Fi, with redundancy provided by
high-frequency radio, while 3D cameras in the car filmed the track and
a computer program compared the images against graphical information
stored on board. Audi says this allowed the car to orient itself on
the track to within centimeters and allow it to drive with high
precision and take the optimum driving line.

There is a video of the run as well.


BillK


From painlord2k at libero.it  Mon Oct 20 14:38:27 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 16:38:27 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
Message-ID: <54451E63.7080805@libero.it>

Il 19/10/2014 18:13, spike ha scritto:


> that Ebola cannot go airborne:

Airborne it is not the same as transmissible at close range.
To be considered airborne it must stay in the air for a long time and
travel more than 1-2 meters.
To be able to go airborne, Ebola should be able to stay on droplets
smaller than 5 microns or on powders.
Tuberculosis, Measles, etc. are airborne. Pulmonary Plague it is not
(but don't get near coughing patients).

The droplets you see in the photos will fall down in just few minutes
and stay down.

Obviously, if you sit in an airplane, and an Ebola infective person sit
on the chair beside you, there is a pretty chance you will get infected.
But if the infective person do not travel up and down coughing over
other people, they will not be infected. And you will not be able to
infect others before many days.

They made the infected Spanish nurse sit, awaiting transportation, in
the Emergency Department waiting room, with all other patients.
If it was airborne there would be an enormous outbreak in Spain anytime
soon.

Mirco




From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct 20 14:42:08 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 15:42:08 +0100
Subject: [ExI] no-touch transmission,
	was: RE: 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <008d01cfec59$4a5fa3a0$df1eeae0$@att.net>
References: <008d01cfec59$4a5fa3a0$df1eeae0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armiPjgNqW2tiPEHpymig04bHh5ixuWUi8GEmHfOwxcsyBA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:30 PM, spike  wrote:
> Could not our political leaders have failed to recognize the technical
> difference between airborne and no-touch?  Could not they too have concluded
> from the scientist's comments on airborne transmission that there was
> insufficient justification to stop flights from Liberia when there is
> significant risk introduced by flights from the hot zone?  Perhaps even the
> infected nurses in Texas misunderstood the risk?
>
> It is difficult to even estimate the potential damage to the airline
> industry and the US economy from even one suspected aircraft-related
> infection.
>
> Conclusion: flights from the hot zone should be stopped forthwith.
> Alternative: passengers should be given a quarantined and controlled exit.
>
>


US public mistake The Walking Dead for media's Ebola coverage

Seventeen million Americans tuned into the fifth season of AMC's
post-apocalyptic horror show The Walking Dead, mostly unaware that it
was not a public information film from Fox News. Many have complained
that footage of actor Andrew Lincoln wading knee-deep in zombie
innards was not as graphic as the Ebola-ageddon predicted by news
anchor Bill O'Reilly.

Half way into the opening episode, with cannibals doing battle with
flesh-eating undead, most watchers said this was consistent with Fox's
usual coverage of Africa or the Democratic Party's conventions and
agreed that beheading zombies was a far more effective screening
process than the one employed in US airports.

Following the season opener, there have been calls for borders to be
closed and for all brain dead reporters to be killed on sight.
----------------------

<http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2014/10/20/us-public-mistake-the-walking-dead-for-media%E2%80%99s-ebola-coverage/>

(This is English humour)   :)

BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 20 14:42:41 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 07:42:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Robot Audi RS 7 laps Hockenheim at racing speeds
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armhKzYzd8HbZt=iGMuLeg3zONrYqggLJG4V+cy2KcxvzZA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL_armhKzYzd8HbZt=iGMuLeg3zONrYqggLJG4V+cy2KcxvzZA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <010601cfec74$1aa3d620$4feb8260$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: [ExI] Robot Audi RS 7 laps Hockenheim at racing speeds

Audi has delivered on its promise to send a driverless Audi RS 7 around the
Hockenheim Grand Prix track at racing speeds.
<http://www.gizmag.com/audi-rs7-piloted-driving-concept-hockenheim/34324/>

>...There is a video of the run as well...BillK
_______________________________________________

BillK, this will be THE spectator sport a decade from now, or less.  You
know the Japanese and the Yanks will not sit idly and watch the Krauts win
those races.  I think Google is running an autonomous racecar out on one of
the runways at Moffett Field.  I was over there the other day and heard
someone (or something) tearing around like their ass was on fire.

I can imagine autonomous motorcycles will be even more popular with the
fans.  You can get a race-ready bike for 18k, capable of absurd speeds.  The
bikes may be able to challenge humans even sooner, because the autonomous
bikes would have 30% less weight and 20% less frontal area.  The teams can
take more chances with the bikes than a human racer normally takes.

spike



From painlord2k at libero.it  Mon Oct 20 15:07:34 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:07:34 +0200
Subject: [ExI] no-touch transmission,
 was:  RE:  23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <008d01cfec59$4a5fa3a0$df1eeae0$@att.net>
References: <008d01cfec59$4a5fa3a0$df1eeae0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <54452536.7030505@libero.it>

Il 20/10/2014 13:30, spike ha scritto:

> Could not our political leaders have failed to recognize the technical
> difference between airborne and no-touch?  Could not they too have concluded
> from the scientist's comments on airborne transmission that there was
> insufficient justification to stop flights from Liberia when there is
> significant risk introduced by flights from the hot zone?  Perhaps even the
> infected nurses in Texas misunderstood the risk?

Spike, I don't know how this work in the US, but these matters are not
handled directly by the politicians or the administration.
They defer to their experts for what to do, how to do and when to do.
They could override them, but they would take risks and responsibility
for it (it will never happen).

They want exploit the fear, not cause it to be real.
They really do not want it to become real, because it would imperil
their power.

Mirco



From painlord2k at libero.it  Mon Oct 20 15:28:05 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:28:05 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>
References: <CAO+xQEaUuRqk=F7u4C4Gmqs5f32c07EYGB+Ka2Dt21CFMU1e1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <450699336-20152@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAO+xQEbAXdyAR4KOg-LqwLh3ehUnsgnXvv3bLYwciXNPZg2dbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armgOo13_G-fY3N54Sccv=KGorx3Y4uPPnyR8xJGz11dyaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00ab01cfeba8$935fdcc0$ba1f9640$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRff1N7CNYYhva24wfCcOmYHKizuXuQF9UGOwF+Z533Qg@mail.gmail.com>
 <00df01cfebb7$9320da20$b9628e60$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTmX0qwex=Be4Uk40KRboCwBFB0rNX6f1B94MJnXi5V5A@mail.gmail.com>
 <020201cfebdb$52835e60$f78a1b20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNQKj99zmW6NWR=YmDU0=svQ--GbodW8n_b8mU4DdSY0VA@mail.gmail.com>
 <002d01cfebf9$09935bb0$1cba1310$@att.net>
Message-ID: <54452A05.7080401@libero.it>

Il 20/10/2014 02:01, spike ha scritto:

> We are told that any contact with any of the bodily fluids with an
> ebola-infected patient can spread infection, including sweat and blood,
> both of which are external to the ebola patient.  Apparently air
> exposure doesn?t kill the virus, at least not immediately.  The two
> nurses who cared for the Texas ebola patient contracted the virus, even
> though both were trained in caring for contagious patients and
> hospital-grade hygiene.

I bet they had not a so contagious virus before.
I would know how they dresses and undressed, because it is easy do do
the wrong thing if you are not trained enough and have not the needed
help (because just dressing and undressing is not so easy).
Because trained one time, two years ago, in really not enough (just as
an example).

Agree with Adrian too much people exchange fiction for reality.
Fiction is for fun and reality is rarely fun.

Just because I'm a geek, I computed how many zombies would be needed to
fill up the subterranean parking I use when go to work.
It would need a bit of work, but around 100 K. A third of my city
population. And it is not this large parking (it would need a lot of
packing, but would do).
If I took the subterranean parking of the adjacent Auchan mall, it would
not need the packing and would fit all the city's zombie population. It
would just need a flute to attract them to their demise.

Mirco





From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 20 15:36:31 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:36:31 +0200
Subject: [ExI] no-touch transmission
In-Reply-To: <008d01cfec59$4a5fa3a0$df1eeae0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <774541964-10547@secure.ericade.net>

spike <spike66 at att.net> , 20/10/2014 1:47 PM:
 
It is difficult to even estimate the potential damage to the airline 
industry and the US economy from even one suspected aircraft-related 
infection. 
Nah. You can look at the economic costs of 911 flight cancellations and scale things down a bit, then add liability insurance cost for typical Americans - I think the costs are high but bearable. But then again, I might be a bit blas? given my interest in real doomsday scenarios.?
(The relevant factor is whether the costs get distributed widely over a whole industry and society, or borne by an individual institution - a gain-of-function flu outbreak that kills a few hundred Americans would be enough to bankrupt Harvard, according to a quick estimate by Simon Wain-Hobson at the Pasteur Institute).?
Conclusion: flights from the hot zone should be stopped forthwith. 
Alternative: passengers should be given a quarantined and controlled exit.?
This is actually harder than it looks. Will you also close flights to London and Paris? If I want to go from Monrovia or Abidjan to Washington DC, I will likely go via Paris. Close Paris to West African airports? Sure, but what about flights from Nigeria to Lyon? People find their way - and most of these are entirely uninfected, rational people who have good reasons to want to go where they go.?
Quarantine passengers? Now you made travel super-expensive and slow - people will have a strong incentive to try to evade it. Especially given the prospect of being locked up with people who might have Ebola!

These are pretty tricky tools to use right. I am actually reading up on network epidemiology right now, and there are fascinating results there in how managing connectivity can affect dynamics. But that is in the abstract: in practice closing borders is a messy business, and has over the past months likely accelerated the spread of Ebola in Africa (due to limited supplies for healthcare, people now travelling in secret, and causing general unrest).

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141020/899acc8d/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 20 15:44:22 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:44:22 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME - Company issues: privacy
In-Reply-To: <54452A05.7080401@libero.it>
Message-ID: <775264411-10547@secure.ericade.net>

Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it> , 20/10/2014 5:31 PM:
Il 20/10/2014 02:01, spike ha scritto:

> We are told that any contact with any of the bodily fluids with an
> ebola-infected patient can spread infection, including sweat and blood,
> both of which are external to the ebola patient. ?Apparently air
> exposure doesn?t kill the virus, at least not immediately. ?The two
> nurses who cared for the Texas ebola patient contracted the virus, even
> though both were trained in caring for contagious patients and
> hospital-grade hygiene.

I bet they had not a so contagious virus before.
They would have encountered far more infectious viruses. Measles and chickenpox are an order of magnitude more contagious:https://infobeautiful2.s3.amazonaws.com/940_Microbescope.png
I suspect it was lack of routine. Had it been a TB patient they would have handled it according to protocol.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141020/e42ad821/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Mon Oct 20 21:13:04 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 23:13:04 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Exponential trends
In-Reply-To: <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it> <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <54457AE0.8060204@libero.it>

Il 19/10/2014 10:29, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> 
> 
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it
> <mailto:painlord2k at libero.it>> wrote:
> 
>     Il 18/10/2014 17:06, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> 
>     > Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to
>     > connect a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer inside.
> 
>     They did, with the 1 MW container.
>     Critics criticized it because this or/and that.
>     They said there no proof how much water was really there, etc.
> 
> 
> If you have a link to that kind of test, I would be interested in it.
> All I have seen is conversion of water to steam, and then endlessly
> arguing about the dry fraction, etc.

Google KNOW I searched for the data about the October, 6 of 2011 test of
the e-cat. So it submitted me with the suggestion to look at the video
of Matts Lewan posted in the Brian Josephson channel of YouTube.
Looking at it, it dawned to me that Rossi's e-cat at the time run just 4
hours (2011).
Then, in 2013 there was the test of the first hot-cat, where it went on
for 3 days (and at the first try the melted the reactor - just to talk
of self-sustaining, run-off, reaction)
Now, 2014, the reactor went on for 36 days.

It appear to me, there is a exponential trend in place, here:

1) The e-cat is becoming better and better at producing energy under in
a controlled way

2) Rossi is becoming exponentially better at fooling people, even
without being present.


In these days, I read the Next Big Future with the news about Dr
Woodward and Paul March research and projects.

The interview with Paul March dropped, casually, a few words about an
exponential trend (if there are no future show stoppers) in the
force/energy ratio and force/mass ratio delivered by the devices.

Mirco


From rahmans at me.com  Tue Oct 21 07:26:10 2014
From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 09:26:10 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Significant step in spinal cord injury treatment
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1413806402.21874.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.1.1413806402.21874.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <8053F8D4-9C77-4299-8CD8-FB2359808D60@me.com>


Hi folks,

News from Poland: Reversal of paralysis due to spinal cord injury by using a transplant of cells from the patient?s olfactory bulb. So many things take a step away from science fiction towards science fact with this. The implications are enormous!

BBC story; http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29645760 <http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29645760>

Regards,

Omar Rahman
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/e10a6bf4/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Tue Oct 21 16:59:26 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 12:59:26 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:33 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlYClniDFkM
>
>
>
> OK so this is a high-beta concept.  Fusion products are contained by
> magnetic fields.
>

> I really hope they found something new and maybe I missed it but I don't
see anything that hadn't been tried 50 years ago.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/18d1be46/attachment.html>

From johnkclark at gmail.com  Tue Oct 21 17:36:22 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 13:36:22 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CAAc1gFhgsW9M11PDLuPnL7SUK7mMkAt=-i1oWzDM9MVtbD26Vw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAAc1gFhgsW9M11PDLuPnL7SUK7mMkAt=-i1oWzDM9MVtbD26Vw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv1Wgn44arNxTT8KTUw45Um2CeaqMfAhGXFq2-KuaTb6Pw@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:04 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki <
rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote:

> How thick is the layer of molten, circulating lead needed to absorb
> enough of the neutrons so magnetic coils do not fry? Is it so thick as to
> make the device as large as ITER, or is it still in a reasonable range?
>

You wouldn't want to use a heavy element like lead to stop neutrons, it
would be like throwing a ping pong ball at a canon ball, the ping pong ball
would bounce off at almost the same speed it went in at and the canon ball
would be largely unaffected. But if you threw a ping pong ball at a golf
ball the ping pong ball would slow down a lot and the golf ball would move
a bit. Most of the energy released in a deuterium tritium reaction is in
those very high speed neutrons so you want to surround the fusion reaction
with a blanket of Lithium 6, it's light so the neutrons bounce off it and
move and so Lithium gets hot and so can run a heat engine.

Just as important the fast neutron slow down when they hit the Lithium, and
when a very slow neutron hits a Lithium 6 nucleus it causes a nuclear
reaction that releases some energy but more important it transforms the
Lithium 6 into Tritium; and it's a good thing it does because unlike
Deuterium Tritium does not exist in nature. You extract the Tritium and
feed it back into the fusion reactor to keep it going, a fusion reactor
makes it's own fuel.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/f4d079ab/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Oct 21 18:37:00 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:37:00 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 9:59 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video

 

 

 

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:33 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlYClniDFkM

 

OK so this is a high-beta concept.  Fusion products are contained by magnetic fields. 

 

> I really hope they found something new and maybe I missed it but I don't see anything that hadn't been tried 50 years ago.  

  John K Clark

 

 

I didn?t either John.  More directly to the point is this: we can get some practical limits directly from first principles.

 

Every time a tritium nucleus fuses with a deuterium, it forms an alpha, a neutron, a neutrino and gammas which carry off most of the energy.  There is no magic in-between state, no yakkity yak, no bla bla, that is what you get in that reaction.  There isn?t a single word in there to suggest they have figured out a way to fuse two deuterons.  The high-beta concept doesn?t go that route as far as I know.  Anyone know different?

 

OK then, assume the Skunk Works has figured out a way to catch the energy from a tritium/deuterium reaction.  It is easy to look up nucleon energies for tritium, for deuterium, for alphas and for neutrons, and we know an upper limit to how much energy could be released per neutron.  (Ja?)  All of those thermal neutrons must be absorbed somehow, for we can?t let those things go flying.  So we can take the 100MW number, work backwards to get a neutron flux, then we know how much neutron-rich cladding material we are creating for each watt of energy we are creating.  

 

We can assume a best case (known) for material to absorb neutrons, lead, then assume a lead alloy as cladding.  Lead is great stuff: four radio-stable isotopes, it?s so common humanity has spent the last five centuries hurling it at each other for profit, and its daughter is harmless: bismuth, the active ingredient in pepto-bismol, a rare example of a heavy metal that isn?t toxic and doesn?t play guitars badly.  OK then, the inner core, inside the lead still needs to stand up to high temperatures and contain the reaction somehow.  Whatever is that material, which is not lead, still absorbs some of the neutrons and it still gets neutron rich, which causes it to break down by fission eventually.

 

The creators of the Tokamak when faced with this problem, went the only way I can think of: they made the reaction vessel huge, to increase the surface area of that inner surface, the first surface a hot neutron sees.

 

I don?t see anything in the description or in Tom?s video that makes me think they have discovered any magic way to deal with that problem of neutron flux causing the reaction vessel to break down.

 

But hey, I am not a nuclear physicist, so perhaps he has found something astonishing that the old timers missed.  I am not buying stock.

 

spike







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/093c7b47/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Tue Oct 21 18:44:05 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 11:44:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] happy 100th birthday martin gardner!
Message-ID: <029201cfed5e$feaaf840$fc00e8c0$@att.net>

 

Martin Gardner was born a century ago today.  If anyone knows of any local
events in Santa Clara County, or locally wherever you are, do post here.
There were some math geeks up at Stanford who were talking about doing
something but I lost the thread on that.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/4b266d1f/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Tue Oct 21 23:30:14 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 01:30:14 +0200
Subject: [ExI] 23andME
In-Reply-To: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
Message-ID: <5446EC86.7020402@libero.it>

Just found this in my mailbox

http://www.dna4fit.com/

The price is preposterous, just to analyze half a dozen of genes.
But, there are other services like this?

Mirco


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 00:06:03 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:06:03 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 23andME
In-Reply-To: <5446EC86.7020402@libero.it>
References: <000301cfe8a9$99a4b8a0$ccee29e0$@natasha.cc>
 <5446EC86.7020402@libero.it>
Message-ID: <03c801cfed8b$f8e15df0$eaa419d0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Mirco Romanato
Subject: Re: [ExI] 23andME

>...Just found this in my mailbox

http://www.dna4fit.com/

>...The price is preposterous, just to analyze half a dozen of genes.
But, there are other services like this?  Mirco
_______________________________________________


Notice they aren't offering anything that can be objectively verified or
falsified?  Into the bit bucket with it.

spike



From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 00:36:43 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 17:36:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> The creators of the Tokamak when faced with this problem, went the only
> way I can think of: they made the reaction vessel huge, to increase the
> surface area of that inner surface, the first surface a hot neutron sees.
>

There are other, more efficient ways to increase the surface area -
especially the ratio of surface area to volume, to mass of plasma, or to
number of neutrons, all of which ratios go down if you go big.
(Volume/mass/molar count at given density scale with the cube of linear
dimension, while surface area only scales with the square.)

Or did you mean to decrease the surface area's ratio?

Also, is there a discrete surface?  My impression was that plasmas don't
have surface tension the way liquids do.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/c1e85c3c/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 01:21:33 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:21:33 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:37 PM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video

 

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>>?The creators of the Tokamak when faced with this problem, went the only way I can think of: they made the reaction vessel huge, to increase the surface area of that inner surface, the first surface a hot neutron sees.

 

>?There are other, more efficient ways to increase the surface area - especially the ratio of surface area to volume, to mass of plasma, or to number of neutrons, all of which ratios go down if you go big.  (Volume/mass/molar count at given density scale with the cube of linear dimension, while surface area only scales with the square.)  Or did you mean to decrease the surface area's ratio?...

Imagine you find a way to fuse 3H and a 2H.  Regardless of how you contain that, neutrons fly out.  Magnetic fields cannot contain those, not now, not in the future.  The first solid surface they hit absorbs some of those neutrons.  That material becomes neutron rich, which makes is subject to fission.  Lead is really good stuff, because it fissions down to bismuth, but neither lead nor bismuth work as a pressure vessel.  You need some kind of serious metal for that, such as steel.  Unless something has changed since my misspent youth in college physics, which I do admit has been tragically many years ago, when neutron rich iron isotopes undergo fission, they form cobalt, which is lousy as a structural material.  

So we could have a steel inner surface which degrades and a lead alloy of some sort which carries away the heat and fission by beta decay to bismuth (as my creaky memory is saying (I need to check that.))  But that steel inner surface still needs to be recycled often.

>?Also, is there a discrete surface?  My impression was that plasmas don't have surface tension the way liquids do?

 

That part I don?t know.  But I am focusing on what was once considered a secondary problem with fusion reactors, after we figure out how to sustain the reaction: that the pressure vessel degrades from neutron bombardment.

 

Has anyone here heard of some magic trick to deal with that neutron problem?  Is there another metal capable of making a competent structure which can absorb neutrons, then decay to something else which can maintain the structure?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/9a78f2ca/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 02:27:51 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 19:27:51 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 6:21 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Adrian Tymes
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 21, 2014 5:37 PM
> *To:* ExI chat list
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 11:37 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>
> >>?The creators of the Tokamak when faced with this problem, went the
> only way I can think of: they made the reaction vessel huge, to increase
> the surface area of that inner surface, the first surface a hot neutron
> sees.
>
>
>
> >?There are other, more efficient ways to increase the surface area -
> especially the ratio of surface area to volume, to mass of plasma, or to
> number of neutrons, all of which ratios go down if you go big.
> (Volume/mass/molar count at given density scale with the cube of linear
> dimension, while surface area only scales with the square.)  Or did you
> mean to decrease the surface area's ratio?...
>
> Imagine you find a way to fuse 3H and a 2H.  Regardless of how you contain
> that, neutrons fly out.  Magnetic fields cannot contain those, not now, not
> in the future.  The first solid surface they hit absorbs some of those
> neutrons.
>
You miss my point.  "Go huge" increases the surface area less than the
amount of stuff passing through that surface area.  It seems possibly
counterproductive.

Also, while I know it to be true, I wonder what the main reasons are why
magnetic containment can not pull this off.  What are the primary
difficulties encountered?

But I am focusing on what was once considered a secondary problem with
> fusion reactors, after we figure out how to sustain the reaction: that the
> pressure vessel degrades from neutron bombardment.
>
>
>
> Has anyone here heard of some magic trick to deal with that neutron
> problem?  Is there another metal capable of making a competent structure
> which can absorb neutrons, then decay to something else which can maintain
> the structure?
>

That would in theory seem impossible, without mass replacement.  Whatever
material it decays into, will then be hit with more neutrons - and more,
and more, until it decays into something that can no longer accept neutrons.

Molten lead could in theory handle this - siphon part of it off, separate
out the decayed fraction, replace with new led, and inject it in - but
you'd need a way of handling the structure.  Perhaps centrifugal pressure
could keep the molten lead in a roughly hollow-sphere shape, or at least
enough rings that the solid structure containing this molten lead would be
minimally exposed.

Alternately, some design where the shell is made of movable panels (as
pictured in the Portal series, especially Portal 2), such that you could
move one out of the way once it is saturated or used up but have others
behind it so as to not lose sufficient containment.  (Just...whatever you
do, and no matter how innocuous a joke it seems, do not name the software
in charge of this "GLaDOS".)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/f99bc0cd/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 04:24:56 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:24:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>

 

 

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



>>?Imagine you find a way to fuse 3H and a 2H.  Regardless of how you contain that, neutrons fly out.  Magnetic fields cannot contain those, not now, not in the future.  The first solid surface they hit absorbs some of those neutrons.

 

>?You miss my point.  "Go huge" increases the surface area less than the amount of stuff passing through that surface area.  It seems possibly counterproductive?

 

Oh OK.  When you increase the radius of the Tokamak, you decrease the neutron flux by the square of radius.  As I understand it, the neutron flux is inversely proportional to the life of the shield.

 

>?Also, while I know it to be true, I wonder what the main reasons are why magnetic containment can not pull this off.  What are the primary difficulties encountered?

 

Neutral particles are unaffected by either electric fields or magnetic fields.  They can?t be accelerated, steered or anything by any magnetic field.  Charged particles can be, but not neutrinos or neutrons.

 

 

>?That would in theory seem impossible, without mass replacement.  Whatever material it decays into, will then be hit with more neutrons - and more, and more, until it decays into something that can no longer accept neutrons?

 

Well OK, let?s look at it.  Blowing the dust from my old textbooks, which weren?t particularly recent even when I studied them, and unfolding my nucleon chart, I see that stable iron ( nucleon numbers 55,56,57) accepts a neutron or two or three, beta decays to cobalt.  Cobalt accepts a neutron or two, beta decays to nickel.  Accepts neutron or two, beta decays to copper.  Accepts neutrons, decays to zinc.  Zinc to gallium.  Gallium to germanium.  Germanium to arsenic.  Arsenic to bromine, which is a liquid at water-ice temperature, so we needn?t go the next two steps which would take us to krypton, which is a non-reacting noble gas.  At no point in that process do you reach any material which cannot or will not accept a neutron.

 

We could start lower on the periodic chart if we wanted, but we still end up in the same cycle: the element accepts a neutron if the neutron comes in contact with the nucleus (That?s where that neutron capture cross section area number comes from, a description of the probability an atom or ion will capture a passing neutron, regardless of the ionization state of the ion.  Neutrons don?t care how many electrons are whirring about.)  Regardless of where we start on the periodic table, neutrons get absorbed, nucleon number increases, beta decay moves you one position to the right.  Repeat until you hit a noble gas.  Then that atom or ion is gone.


>?Molten lead could in theory handle this - siphon part of it off, separate out the decayed fraction, replace with new led, and inject it in - but you'd need a way of handling the structure.  Perhaps centrifugal pressure could keep the molten lead in a roughly hollow-sphere shape, or at least enough rings that the solid structure containing this molten lead would be minimally exposed.

 

Your notion of some kind of spinning liquid lead chamber is interesting, but I don?t know that it is necessarily any help.  You go from lead to bismuth to polonium to astatine to radon, but either way, as soon as you hit radon, that atom is a fond memory.  Perhaps you could constantly recirculate the liquid neutron-shield, chemically extracting the bismuth and re-injecting the pure lead.


>?Alternately, some design where the shell is made of movable panels (as pictured in the Portal series, especially Portal 2), such that you could move one out of the way once it is saturated or used up but have others behind it so as to not lose sufficient containment.  (Just...whatever you do, and no matter how innocuous a joke it seems, do not name the software in charge of this "GLaDOS".)

 

Ja, something like a kind of onion skin design with sacrificial layers or something.  I need to quit procrastinating, get the numbers, assume away the problem of starting and maintaining a steady stream of 2h / 3H fusion and calculate how much steel we would erode away per unit energy production.  Oy it has been a long time since I did these kinds of calcs. 

 

I still haven?t seen how the Skunk Works? notion is any improvement over a tokamak. 

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/7c885318/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 04:57:54 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 21:57:54 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 9:24 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>  *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Adrian Tymes
>
> >?You miss my point.  "Go huge" increases the surface area less than the
> amount of stuff passing through that surface area.  It seems possibly
> counterproductive?
>
>
>
> Oh OK.  When you increase the radius of the Tokamak, you decrease the
> neutron flux by the square of radius.  As I understand it, the neutron flux
> is inversely proportional to the life of the shield.
>

Ah.  So, neutrons get captured inside a larger fusing mass at an exponent
even larger than the increase of the volume, then?


> >?Also, while I know it to be true, I wonder what the main reasons are
> why magnetic containment can not pull this off.  What are the primary
> difficulties encountered?
>
>
>
> Neutral particles are unaffected by either electric fields or magnetic
> fields.  They can?t be accelerated, steered or anything by any magnetic
> field.  Charged particles can be, but not neutrinos or neutrons.
>

My mistake - I meant to ask, why magnetic containment can't confine plasmas
at all for more than a few milliseconds.  It's been bugging me for a
while.  Are plasmas just that chaotic?


> Repeat until you hit a noble gas.  Then that atom or ion is gone.
>

That's why I said "without mass replacement".  That noble atom (all ions
are technically still atoms) is gone...and you have to replace it with
something else, or eventually your shielding goes away.


> Perhaps you could constantly recirculate the liquid neutron-shield,
> chemically extracting the bismuth and re-injecting the pure lead.
>

Yes, that is what I was suggesting.  (Although I suspect centrifugal
extraction might work better than chemical, at those temperatures and given
the equipment you'd have on hand anyway.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/3e1ba3d5/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 05:30:26 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 22:30:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>

 

 

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



 

>?Ah.  So, neutrons get captured inside a larger fusing mass at an exponent even larger than the increase of the volume, then?

 

No.  As I understand it, the neutrons don?t get captured.  The plasma gets captured because it is charged, so it can be contained by a magnetic field, in accordance with Maxwell?s (I think third) equation, that bit about a changing magnetic field inducing an electric field.  But the neutrons go flying out and hit the metal walls of the reaction vessel, and that?s what erodes regardless of what magic is used to contain the plasma.

 

 

>?My mistake - I meant to ask, why magnetic containment can't confine plasmas at all for more than a few milliseconds.  It's been bugging me for a while.  Are plasmas just that chaotic?

 

I am not the expert on this.  I think John Clark is the man to answer that one, but I kind of assumed away the problem, or let the real physicists hand that plasma containment problem.  Like a typical mechanical engineer, I looked at how to handle the hot neutrons.  Perhaps it is because that seems to me to be a simpler problem, at least in concept.

 

>?That noble atom (all ions are technically still atoms) is gone...

 

Oh, I haven?t heard it used that way.  I have always heard that it is either an atom or an ion, but cannot be both.  Atoms are neutral, ions are charged.

 

>?and you have to replace it with something else, or eventually your shielding goes away?

 

There should be literature on this from the tokamak.  They have been dealing with this problem since the 1960s, or rather as long as they have been able to sustain a reaction.  When was that?  There should be a ton of data on that somewhere.    


Adrian we are making a mistake here, me lad.  There are surely internet groups that grok and discuss this stuff the way we discuss qualia and cryonics and ineffable stuff like that.  They would be up to speed on this neutron chamber erosion problem.  We should study their stuff rather than groping around in the dark like a bunch of drunken frat boys in an initiation rite.  Keith?  John Clark?  Where should we go to learn about this?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141021/6922baef/attachment.html>

From painlord2k at libero.it  Wed Oct 22 10:02:12 2014
From: painlord2k at libero.it (Mirco Romanato)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:02:12 +0200
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
Message-ID: <544780A4.50000@libero.it>

Il 22/10/2014 03:21, spike ha scritto:

> Has anyone here heard of some magic trick to deal with that neutron
> problem?  Is there another metal capable of making a competent structure
> which can absorb neutrons, then decay to something else which can
> maintain the structure?

EMC2 have plan, if their device work, to try BB (Boron-Boron) fusion
because it is aneutronic.

General Fusion use the  liquid lead-lithium idea inside a steel vessel.

Mirco



From alfio.puglisi at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 11:23:42 2014
From: alfio.puglisi at gmail.com (Alfio Puglisi)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:23:42 +0200
Subject: [ExI] Lockheed skunkworks announcement about fusion
In-Reply-To: <5443B891.5080303@libero.it>
References: <1413448881.23326.YahooMailNeo@web172603.mail.ir2.yahoo.com>
 <544030D8.40606@libero.it>
 <015301cfe98b$b42b8270$1c828750$@att.net>
 <54425B88.6040400@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7hUmmrakqkyik9PRnMCvptAMcXMAhicdJ8yXbEHKy9O+A@mail.gmail.com>
 <5442C7D3.4080406@libero.it>
 <CAJUeD7gCXasHJ14L=KB3U46TaBBYvag-dNyWd-Evao+SbCC97g@mail.gmail.com>
 <5443B891.5080303@libero.it>
Message-ID: <CAJUeD7gZbdkb2-9eFm==G3GPeNMnpZmMqBCxrLw4XnC3CTS4HA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 3:11 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it>
wrote:

> Il 19/10/2014 10:29, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 18, 2014 at 10:04 PM, Mirco Romanato <painlord2k at libero.it
> > <mailto:painlord2k at libero.it>> wrote:
> >
> >     Il 18/10/2014 17:06, Alfio Puglisi ha scritto:
> >
> >     > Because, in all these years of testing, they still haven't tried to
> >     > connect a pot of water to their heater, and plonk a thermometer
> inside.
> >
> >     They did, with the 1 MW container.
> >     Critics criticized it because this or/and that.
> >     They said there no proof how much water was really there, etc.
> >
> >
> > If you have a link to that kind of test, I would be interested in it.
> > All I have seen is conversion of water to steam, and then endlessly
> > arguing about the dry fraction, etc.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EhvD4KuAEmo
>
> There is a report about the test from Mats Lewan of Nyteknik.
>
>
> http://pesn.com/2011/10/08/9501929_E-Cat_Test_Validates_Cold_Fusion_Despite_Challenges/
>
>
> http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:Real-Time_Updates_on_the_October_6%2C_2011_E-Cat_Test
>
>
> http://peswiki.com/index.php/News:Archive:October_6,_2011_E-Cat_Test_Updates:Page_02
>
>
Thanks Mirco for the references. I think this is the steam experiment that
I remembered.


Alfio
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/c1a7bf17/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 14:11:47 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 07:11:47 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Crime and sheepskins
Message-ID: <C51A3B00-B8F9-4CE4-B232-FAEA66DE6BAC@gmail.com>

http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2014/10/crime_and_sheep.html

Thought this might be of interest.

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/767408d7/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 15:17:15 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 08:17:15 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNR2Jid54R71PuRZNJKBRncqk5re5t4ev7EcL002NUcVOA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 10:30 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Adrian Tymes
>
>
>
> >?Ah.  So, neutrons get captured inside a larger fusing mass at an
> exponent even larger than the increase of the volume, then?
>
>
>
> No.  As I understand it, the neutrons don?t get captured.  The plasma gets
> captured because it is charged, so it can be contained by a magnetic field,
> in accordance with Maxwell?s (I think third) equation, that bit about a
> changing magnetic field inducing an electric field.  But the neutrons go
> flying out and hit the metal walls of the reaction vessel, and that?s what
> erodes regardless of what magic is used to contain the plasma.
>

I meant, I thought it was the case that if volume X of plasma produces Y
amount of neutrons per unit time, then 2*X will produce 2*Y - i.e. that the
rate of neutron production scales with the volume.  This would suggest that
the rate of neutrons crossing the surface goes up with a bigger volume -
which means slightly less bigger surface area.

For instance, if volume X has surface area Z, then 8*X will have 4*Z
surface area...but still 8*Y neutron production, so the rate of neutrons
crossing the surface went from Y/Z to 8*Y/4*Z = 2*(Y/Z).

Does the rate of neutron production not scale that way?


> >?That noble atom (all ions are technically still atoms) is gone...
>
>
>
> Oh, I haven?t heard it used that way.  I have always heard that it is
> either an atom or an ion, but cannot be both.  Atoms are neutral, ions are
> charged.
>

Ah.  I'd heard "ions are atoms that have a non-neutral charge", thus "ion"
is a special type of "atom".  Semantics.


> Adrian we are making a mistake here, me lad.  There are surely internet
> groups that grok and discuss this stuff the way we discuss qualia and
> cryonics and ineffable stuff like that.  They would be up to speed on this
> neutron chamber erosion problem.  We should study their stuff rather than
> groping around in the dark like a bunch of drunken frat boys in an
> initiation rite.  Keith?  John Clark?  Where should we go to learn about
> this?
>

Quite true.  I thought you might have already found some resources on this.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/7910200a/attachment.html>

From sparge at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 15:28:27 2014
From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 11:28:27 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Ebola transmission
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB6jiVVkMmf6GUXHZRHWkcP9OxYr=S24bstgmbRvUJS=Qg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB6jiVVkMmf6GUXHZRHWkcP9OxYr=S24bstgmbRvUJS=Qg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAM5aL2euN+fsLE_f-DP_2KTnxZG0MJGo1ROQ0cwmnvWQV2jVGA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 10:56 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> In my personal opinion, it is not the time to panic . . . yet.

Right, it's the time to educate ourselves, take reasonable measures to
reduce risk, and prepare for the worst.

-Dave


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 16:22:43 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:22:43 -0700
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNR2Jid54R71PuRZNJKBRncqk5re5t4ev7EcL002NUcVOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNR2Jid54R71PuRZNJKBRncqk5re5t4ev7EcL002NUcVOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <013101cfee14$691600c0$3b420240$@att.net>

 

 

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



>?For instance, if volume X has surface area Z, then 8*X will have 4*Z surface area...but still 8*Y neutron production, so the rate of neutrons crossing the surface went from Y/Z to 8*Y/4*Z = 2*(Y/Z).

Does the rate of neutron production not scale that way?

 

Oh OK, the way I was looking at it is to assume some physics magic where they contain the fusion reaction by some means.  We treat the reaction site as a point for the purposes of this thought experiment.  All of the fusions happen right at that point, not at all like a chemical reaction where the reactions happen everywhere inside the vessel.  With fusion, they focus a bunch of lasers at a point, and all the action happens right there.  That?s the way they did it back in the old days anyway.  Then you have a thermal neutron created for each fusion of a 3H with a 2H.  I haven?t heard that they figured out any way to fuse any other two isotopes besides those two.  These thermal neutrons fly outward radially from that reaction point at the focus of the lasers.  Neutrons hit the walls of the chamber and cause it to erode.

 

Here?s a sample calculation that you don?t even need to waste an envelope or look up anything.  As I understand it, the radius of a nucleus is about 4 orders of magnitude below the radius of an atom for the heavier eliments, so its area ratio is about 8 orders of magnitude, ja?  So if a neutron is to be captured by a nucleus, it must physically contact that nucleus, since the strong force is very short range.  So a neutron passing thru an atom or ion has about 1e-8 probability of being absorbed.  So if you have a metal such as lead, you need a layer around the reaction that is 1e8 atoms to have about a 1-1/e probability or about 60% chance of absorbing that neutron, and the heavy metals have atomic radii of about 200 pm if I recall, so diameter maybe 4e-10 meters times 1e8 is .04 meters of lead required to have about a 60% chance of stopping a neutron.

 

4 cm of lead gives 60% chance of absorption, 8 cm takes us to about 86%, 12 cm to 95%, 16 cm gets us 98% chance of absorption, and that?s where I can?t do these without an envelope or a spreadsheet anymore.  The only reason I knew how to do those three is that I memorized a long time ago 1-1/e, 1-e^-2 and 1-e-3 and 1-e-4: 0.63, 0.86, 0.95 and 0.98, and everything past that is over 0.99.  Those numbers have a lot of real-world applications.  Knowing just those four numbers gives you lots of opportunities to impress your geek friends.

 

 

Adrian ?  Where should we go to learn about this?

 

>?Quite true.  I thought you might have already found some resources on this.

 

No.  I am currently distracted by another project, which I want to ask you guys under a different subject line.

 

spike

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/9b585688/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 16:23:20 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:23:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] fourth amendment question
Message-ID: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>

 

My American friends: if a prole discovers a way to identify a perpetrator
(or more likely the family of the perp) who has never been arrested but who
left DNA at the scene, would that technique be 4th amendment compliant?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/fa12ba69/attachment.html>

From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 16:38:58 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:38:58 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFhHJ7WVfWYC6YKzXD1XNutMQah1k8MgapeDHtjiqpr7bg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:24 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> I still haven?t seen how the Skunk Works? notion is any improvement over a
> tokamak.
>

### Inherent stability of a spheromak allows much higher beta than in a
tokamak, and they claim they solved the plasma leak problem that previously
stopped spheromak development using mirror fields and recirculation, they
say. Look at the patent application pictures - what do you think?

Circulating FLiBe or PbLi could be contained by a thin, otherwise
non-load-bearing outer shell made probably of steel. The magnets would be
held by a high-strength steel tube - but this tube would almost completely
protected from high-energy neutrons, high temperature (molten lead is not
that hot), only exposed to thermal neutrons. You would recirculate the lead
as coolant, and every few weeks or months you might have to drain it, open
the chamber, replace the outer shell parts and possibly chamber lining,
refill lead, and keep going. As long as your magnets and structural parts
are protected, the consumable cost should be manageable.

There would be some place for robot development for automated chamber
maintenance.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/bc98c5cf/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 16:53:48 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 17:53:48 +0100
Subject: [ExI] fourth amendment question
In-Reply-To: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>
References: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjX45WjN70EL5uSP+Z+HLOOEvZZQgpXhE9=PD6etwzz6w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:23 PM, spike wrote:
> My American friends: if a prole discovers a way to identify a perpetrator
> (or more likely the family of the perp) who has never been arrested but who
> left DNA at the scene, would that technique be 4th amendment compliant?
>

On the other hand, would you be liable to a charge of obstructing
justice or withholding evidence?

BillK


From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 16:54:18 2014
From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:54:18 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAAc1gFh9p2C+M=SN+PCE0jRr40xvFAr7aCjccpvDtFcrzaVBQA@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 1:30 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
>
> There should be literature on this from the tokamak.  They have been
> dealing with this problem since the 1960s, or rather as long as they have
> been able to sustain a reaction.  When was that?  There should be a ton of
> data on that somewhere.
>

### The tokamak is such a piss-poor source of neutrons (it hardly ever
works anyway) they never had to seriously work on the chamber lining - as
far as I know, they started designing the chamber without having in hand an
actual lining material, assuming they can deal with it later, which with
tokamaks is not unreasonable - the tokamak is always 20 years in the
future.

On the other hand, there is a lot of data from fission reactors, where
millions of fuel rods have been exposed to combined millions of years of
high neutron fluxes. It's clear that you can design structural materials
capable of surviving high thermal neutron environments for years. Neutron
irradiation is definitely an economic burden but AFAIK not a showstopper.

Rafal
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/636a0f12/attachment.html>

From atymes at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 17:43:26 2014
From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 10:43:26 -0700
Subject: [ExI] fourth amendment question
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjX45WjN70EL5uSP+Z+HLOOEvZZQgpXhE9=PD6etwzz6w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>
 <CAL_armjX45WjN70EL5uSP+Z+HLOOEvZZQgpXhE9=PD6etwzz6w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CALAdGNRbKGwpaNVsatsbGvzgnZkPrM2zWQ2FYod89vqDhm-gOw@mail.gmail.com>

On Oct 22, 2014 9:54 AM, "BillK" <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:23 PM, spike wrote:
> > My American friends: if a prole discovers a way to identify a
perpetrator
> > (or more likely the family of the perp) who has never been arrested but
who
> > left DNA at the scene, would that technique be 4th amendment compliant?

Depends on the technique.  If you mean what I think you mean, said prole's
claim might be enough to get the accused arrested (insofar as it creates
reasonable suspicion in the police about the accused), which may include
DNA sampling regardless of the reason for arrest.  That said prole claims
there is a DNA match is almost irrelevant.

(The police are likely to independently test for a DNA match, since there
is DNA evidence, but they may ignore the prole's purported evidence of a
match if they think that might not be court admissible - say, because said
evidence may not be 4th amendment compliant.)

> On the other hand, would you be liable to a charge of obstructing
> justice or withholding evidence?

Not if no law enforcement officer contacts him about the investigation.
Unless and until one does (or he contacts one about it), he is uninvolved,
regardless of whether he has relevant evidence.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/759631b5/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 17:46:47 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 18:46:47 +0100
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <013101cfee14$691600c0$3b420240$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNTzwMBWng3Jn7MoAn50JB=HcgaOr8a5A2SJSVhO6CwYrg@mail.gmail.com>
 <042801cfed96$84a95180$8dfbf480$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNRzSdHMfk2Qy5Pn+mWSeg52ZcPLH5oJ3iNgc-4TZzMwSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <048f01cfedb0$231501c0$693f0540$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNSF17n2ywaBQ1HAiimJ8r6Pf2=xCZ24whq8=5ZdL-iTxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <04d101cfedb9$49dff360$dd9fda20$@att.net>
 <CALAdGNR2Jid54R71PuRZNJKBRncqk5re5t4ev7EcL002NUcVOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <013101cfee14$691600c0$3b420240$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armj=1rszCCY9Z-hsa0dpStTZy6X3GTXM3VaettcAheaEfw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 5:22 PM, spike wrote:
<snip>
> 4 cm of lead gives 60% chance of absorption, 8 cm takes us to about 86%, 12
> cm to 95%, 16 cm gets us 98% chance of absorption, and that's where I can't
> do these without an envelope or a spreadsheet anymore.  The only reason I
> knew how to do those three is that I memorized a long time ago 1-1/e, 1-e^-2
> and 1-e-3 and 1-e-4: 0.63, 0.86, 0.95 and 0.98, and everything past that is
> over 0.99.  Those numbers have a lot of real-world applications.  Knowing
> just those four numbers gives you lots of opportunities to impress your geek
> friends.
>
>

NextBigFuture has another report out which mentions the shielding requirement.

<http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/10/lockheed-has-built-its-first-compact.html>
Recent criticism has forced project leader McGuire to provide more
technical and project details.

McGuire acknowledged the need for shielding against neutrons for the
magnet coils positioned inside the reactor vessel. He estimates that
between 80 and 150 centimeters of shielding would be needed, but this
can be accommodated in their compact design. Researchers contacted by
ScienceInsider say that it is difficult to estimate the final size of
the machine without more knowledge of its design. Lockheed has said
its goal is a machine 7 meters across, but some estimates had
suggested that the required shielding would make it considerably
larger.
-------------

BillK


From johnkclark at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 17:48:34 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 13:48:34 -0400
Subject: [ExI] lockheed's fusion video
In-Reply-To: <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
References: <006201cfebfd$75922900$60b67b00$@att.net>
 <CAJPayv2axHuW45rteJRFTw6ksn7EWJqm0GdOXqdrNAsHEOEMOA@mail.gmail.com>
 <028d01cfed5e$017e0ae0$047a20a0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2HnKZonuStf3pa_jDw8nRzjzQi3nbCnN9uidibp0Az6A@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 2:37 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> All of those thermal neutrons must be absorbed somehow,


The neutrons produced from a fusion reaction are not thermal neutrons, they
are very very high speed neutrons, faster even than the neutrons produced
in a fission bomb. Before super fast neutrons can be absorbed by anything
they must be slowed down, water can do that, and so can graphite. Once the
neutrons have slowed down to thermal speed there are a number of materials,
Boron for example, that can absorb them. Or you can use one material that
can do both jobs like Lithium 6, first it slows the very fast neutrons down
(and gets hot as a result) and then it can react with the slow neutrons and
produces Tritium which you then extract and feed back into the reactor.

 > We can assume a best case (known) for material to absorb neutrons, lead,
>

Lead is good at stopping X rays and Gamma rays but it's not so good at
stopping neutrons, you'd do much better with jugs of water with some 20
Mule Team Borax dissolved it it, the water would slow the neutrons down and
then the Boron can absorb them.


> > Whatever is that material, which is not lead, still absorbs some of the
> neutrons and it still gets neutron rich, which causes it to break down by
> fission eventually.
>

All nuclear reactions, fission or fusion, that humans have ever used to
make energy also produce neutrons, although some reactions we haven't used
do not. A neutron flux can damage a solid by knocking atoms out of place
and physically weakening the material. Some exotic and expensive metals
such as Hastelloy-N are resistant (although not immune) to neutron damage,
it's a alloy of nickel, molybdenum, chromium, cobalt, iron, copper,
manganese, titanium, zirconium, aluminum, carbon, and tungsten. Also to
some degree the neutron damage a metal receives can be repaired by
annealing, heating the metal to a high temperature and then cooling it
rapidly. Neutron damage is a more serious problem in magnetic confinement
fusion than it is in inertial confinement fusion because the most expensive
parts (Lasers or particle accelerators) are further away from the fusion
reaction.

In conventional fission reactors the mechanical damage caused by neutrons
to the Uranium fuel rods is a major problem, that's why the rods have to be
removed and replaced by new rods long before all the U235 in them has been
used up, a expensive and wasteful and time consuming process.  Liquid
Fluoride Thorium Reactors don't have that problem because its fuel is in
liquid form.

Not all fusion reactions produce neutrons. The fusion reaction between non
radioactive deuterium (Hydrogen 2) and non radioactive Helium 3 produces
non radioactive Helium 4, an easily controlled proton, 18.3 mev of energy,
and most important of all, no neutrons. Unfortunately you need a higher
temperature to achieve it than the deuterium tritium reaction most are
talking about. Also, there is not much Helium 3 on the Earth, although
there is
probably a lot of it that could be mined on comets and on the ice moons of
the outer planets. A Boron Hydrogen reaction also produces no neutrons but
it needs a even higher temperature.


>  > But hey, I am not a nuclear physicist, so perhaps he has found
> something astonishing that the old timers missed.  I am not buying stock.
>

I'm not buying the stock either and I hope that in 10 years I'll be kicking
myself that I hadn't.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/926eb9f6/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Wed Oct 22 18:06:16 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 19:06:16 +0100
Subject: [ExI] fourth amendment question
In-Reply-To: <CALAdGNRbKGwpaNVsatsbGvzgnZkPrM2zWQ2FYod89vqDhm-gOw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>
 <CAL_armjX45WjN70EL5uSP+Z+HLOOEvZZQgpXhE9=PD6etwzz6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNRbKGwpaNVsatsbGvzgnZkPrM2zWQ2FYod89vqDhm-gOw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armhMSMpn=SkfzPH0pTw3TUhkc7xbY3H6FyPQ6CW7VyjT2A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
<snip>
> Not if no law enforcement officer contacts him about the investigation.
> Unless and until one does (or he contacts one about it), he is uninvolved,
> regardless of whether he has relevant evidence.
>

Yes, I think US law is different to UK law in many ways.
As you say, in the US if someone refuses to assist police enquiries
then there could be a charge of obstruction. But not if the police
don't contact them.

But there is still the moral question of whether not giving the
information voluntarily to the police is protecting a murderer or
rapist from being stopped from committing more crimes and harming
innocent people.

BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Wed Oct 22 18:51:38 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 11:51:38 -0700
Subject: [ExI] fourth amendment question
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armhMSMpn=SkfzPH0pTw3TUhkc7xbY3H6FyPQ6CW7VyjT2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>
 <CAL_armjX45WjN70EL5uSP+Z+HLOOEvZZQgpXhE9=PD6etwzz6w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALAdGNRbKGwpaNVsatsbGvzgnZkPrM2zWQ2FYod89vqDhm-gOw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armhMSMpn=SkfzPH0pTw3TUhkc7xbY3H6FyPQ6CW7VyjT2A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <025201cfee29$36a6bac0$a3f43040$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] fourth amendment question

On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 6:43 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote:
<snip>
>>... Not if no law enforcement officer contacts him about the
investigation.
> Unless and until one does (or he contacts one about it), he is 
> uninvolved, regardless of whether he has relevant evidence.
>

>...Yes, I think US law is different to UK law in many ways.
As you say, in the US if someone refuses to assist police enquiries then
there could be a charge of obstruction. But not if the police don't contact
them...

Ja, but British constables are nice.  {8^D

>...But there is still the moral question of whether not giving the
information voluntarily to the police is protecting a murderer or rapist
from being stopped from committing more crimes and harming innocent
people...BillK
_______________________________________________

Really the moral and ethical questions center around the propriety of
helping adoptees find their bio-parents.  This one really has me uneasy,
because I recognize there are at least two entire classes of people who have
the moral right to hide from their own offspring.  The class we always think
of: rape victims who believe all abortion is wrong so they carried the
embryo, causing them to be victimized a second time.  The other class is
semen donors.  Don't those guys have a right to hide from their own
offspring?

Are there others I didn't think of?

If tiny microscopic FORTRAN coding (evolution help us) little spike Jones
can figure out how to do this, then others will too, people who KNOW how to
write good code.  Then what?

spike 



From anders at aleph.se  Wed Oct 22 20:56:26 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 22:56:26 +0200
Subject: [ExI] fourth amendment question
In-Reply-To: <013601cfee14$7ef92ed0$7ceb8c70$@att.net>
Message-ID: <966654542-31916@secure.ericade.net>

spike <spike66 at att.net> , 22/10/2014 6:40 PM:


?

My American friends: if a prole discovers a way to identify a perpetrator (or more likely the family of the perp) who has never been arrested but who left DNA at the scene, would that technique be 4th amendment compliant?
I recommend this flowchart: http://lawcomic.net/guide/?p=2256 (and actually reading the chapter)
My understanding is that the 4th amendment does not apply - the prole is not the police and was not acting on behalf of the police. Note that when the prole brings it to the legal authorities they may on the other hand have trouble going further. I suspect that it will depend a lot on who the prosecutor is.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141022/4eb8dc89/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 23 17:11:53 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 10:11:53 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 26 inch tube
Message-ID: <007301cfeee4$71c2f4f0$5548ded0$@att.net>

Hey here's a fun one for you.  I ride a recumbent bicycle nearly every day,
not to get somewhere in particular but just to ride and exercise.  If I get
a thorn puncture, I carry a spare tube rather than patches.  Patches work
but tubes aren't expensive, and it is typically over a thousand miles
between flats.  It is always the back tire on a recumbent, since all my
weight is over the back tire.  

 

Yesterday I had a flat close to home, longer than I wanted to walk, so I got
out the spare tube only to discover that they had packaged a 26 inch tube in
a box labelled 20 inch, so of course the tube didn't fit.  I walked the bike
home mumbling and cursing a pox on Walmart for mislabeling the tube.

 

Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway.  It would
have a section which folded back on itself, which would make the tire
unbalanced, but for low speeds such as on a typical recumbent, that wouldn't
matter much.

 

Question: can anyone think of a reason why a longer inner tube wouldn't
work?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141023/798213b3/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Thu Oct 23 20:05:18 2014
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 14:05:18 -0600
Subject: [ExI] 26 inch tube
In-Reply-To: <007301cfeee4$71c2f4f0$5548ded0$@att.net>
References: <007301cfeee4$71c2f4f0$5548ded0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAPy8Rwb1bjEKxSov4ChFRcVdpMMmiwmuFH7X5UW3sT=KqXh=oA@mail.gmail.com>

It would work temporarily, if you could get it inside the tire and
inflated, but over the long term there would be extra stress at the fold,
and you could possibly get a new leak.

-Kelly

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:11 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

> Hey here?s a fun one for you.  I ride a recumbent bicycle nearly every
> day, not to get somewhere in particular but just to ride and exercise.  If
> I get a thorn puncture, I carry a spare tube rather than patches.  Patches
> work but tubes aren?t expensive, and it is typically over a thousand miles
> between flats.  It is always the back tire on a recumbent, since all my
> weight is over the back tire.
>
>
>
> Yesterday I had a flat close to home, longer than I wanted to walk, so I
> got out the spare tube only to discover that they had packaged a 26 inch
> tube in a box labelled 20 inch, so of course the tube didn?t fit.  I walked
> the bike home mumbling and cursing a pox on Walmart for mislabeling the
> tube.
>
>
>
> Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway.  It
> would have a section which folded back on itself, which would make the tire
> unbalanced, but for low speeds such as on a typical recumbent, that
> wouldn?t matter much.
>
>
>
> Question: can anyone think of a reason why a longer inner tube wouldn?t
> work?
>
>
>
> spike
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141023/d8bd6b7f/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Thu Oct 23 21:34:13 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:34:13 -0500
Subject: [ExI] 26 inch tube
In-Reply-To: <CAPy8Rwb1bjEKxSov4ChFRcVdpMMmiwmuFH7X5UW3sT=KqXh=oA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <007301cfeee4$71c2f4f0$5548ded0$@att.net>
 <CAPy8Rwb1bjEKxSov4ChFRcVdpMMmiwmuFH7X5UW3sT=KqXh=oA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEYtVibZSnLRG__6b6gQVJmuV15qHh1S0nuJzneoAP4eaw@mail.gmail.com>

If there is a fold or crimp, as there must be, then you might have
difficulty getting the whole thing inflated as air might not get by the
crimp well.  bill w

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
wrote:

> It would work temporarily, if you could get it inside the tire and
> inflated, but over the long term there would be extra stress at the fold,
> and you could possibly get a new leak.
>
> -Kelly
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:11 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>
>> Hey here?s a fun one for you.  I ride a recumbent bicycle nearly every
>> day, not to get somewhere in particular but just to ride and exercise.  If
>> I get a thorn puncture, I carry a spare tube rather than patches.  Patches
>> work but tubes aren?t expensive, and it is typically over a thousand miles
>> between flats.  It is always the back tire on a recumbent, since all my
>> weight is over the back tire.
>>
>>
>>
>> Yesterday I had a flat close to home, longer than I wanted to walk, so I
>> got out the spare tube only to discover that they had packaged a 26 inch
>> tube in a box labelled 20 inch, so of course the tube didn?t fit.  I walked
>> the bike home mumbling and cursing a pox on Walmart for mislabeling the
>> tube.
>>
>>
>>
>> Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway.  It
>> would have a section which folded back on itself, which would make the tire
>> unbalanced, but for low speeds such as on a typical recumbent, that
>> wouldn?t matter much.
>>
>>
>>
>> Question: can anyone think of a reason why a longer inner tube wouldn?t
>> work?
>>
>>
>>
>> spike
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141023/73ca7968/attachment.html>

From deimtee at optusnet.com.au  Fri Oct 24 01:29:33 2014
From: deimtee at optusnet.com.au (david)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:29:33 +1100
Subject: [ExI] 26 inch tube
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEYtVibZSnLRG__6b6gQVJmuV15qHh1S0nuJzneoAP4eaw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <007301cfeee4$71c2f4f0$5548ded0$@att.net>
 <CAPy8Rwb1bjEKxSov4ChFRcVdpMMmiwmuFH7X5UW3sT=KqXh=oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYtVibZSnLRG__6b6gQVJmuV15qHh1S0nuJzneoAP4eaw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20141024122933.1b5990a6@JARRAH>

On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 16:34:13 -0500
William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:

> If there is a fold or crimp, as there must be, then you might have
> difficulty getting the whole thing inflated as air might not get by the
> crimp well.  bill w
> 
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
> > It would work temporarily, if you could get it inside the tire and
> > inflated, but over the long term there would be extra stress at the fold,
> > and you could possibly get a new leak.
> >
> > -Kelly
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 11:11 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Hey here?s a fun one for you.  I ride a recumbent bicycle nearly every
> >> day, not to get somewhere in particular but just to ride and exercise.  If
> >> I get a thorn puncture, I carry a spare tube rather than patches.  Patches
> >> work but tubes aren?t expensive, and it is typically over a thousand miles
> >> between flats.  It is always the back tire on a recumbent, since all my
> >> weight is over the back tire.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yesterday I had a flat close to home, longer than I wanted to walk, so I
> >> got out the spare tube only to discover that they had packaged a 26 inch
> >> tube in a box labelled 20 inch, so of course the tube didn?t fit.  I walked
> >> the bike home mumbling and cursing a pox on Walmart for mislabeling the
> >> tube.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway.  It
> >> would have a section which folded back on itself, which would make the tire
> >> unbalanced, but for low speeds such as on a typical recumbent, that
> >> wouldn?t matter much.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Question: can anyone think of a reason why a longer inner tube wouldn?t
> >> work?
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> spike
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >


I am pretty sure enough air would leak past a fold to inflate that section,
especially as it can come at the fold from both sides.

If you could arrange it so that there were two half size folds at pi radians
then it wouldn't even be that unbalanced.

-Dsvid




From spike66 at att.net  Fri Oct 24 04:02:24 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2014 21:02:24 -0700
Subject: [ExI] 26 inch tube
In-Reply-To: <20141024122933.1b5990a6@JARRAH>
References: <007301cfeee4$71c2f4f0$5548ded0$@att.net>
 <CAPy8Rwb1bjEKxSov4ChFRcVdpMMmiwmuFH7X5UW3sT=KqXh=oA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO+xQEYtVibZSnLRG__6b6gQVJmuV15qHh1S0nuJzneoAP4eaw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20141024122933.1b5990a6@JARRAH>
Message-ID: <01e601cfef3f$5219e2c0$f64da840$@att.net>




> >> ... they had packaged 
> >> a 26 inch tube in a box labelled 20 inch, so of course the tube 
> >> didn?t fit.  I walked the bike home mumbling and cursing a pox on... 
...
> >> Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway.  
> >> It would have a section which folded back on itself, which would 
> >> make the tire unbalanced, but for low speeds such as on a typical 
> >> recumbent, that wouldn?t matter much.  Question: can anyone think of a reason why a longer inner tube 
> >> wouldn?t work?
> >>
> >> spike
> >>

>...I am pretty sure enough air would leak past a fold to inflate that section, especially as it can come at the fold from both sides...

Me too.

>...If you could arrange it so that there were two half size folds at pi radians then it wouldn't even be that unbalanced.

>...-Dsvid

_______________________________________________

Cool,  I think you are right.  That double fold idea was a great aha-insight.  Now I have half a mind to take out the 20 inch tube and try your idea, just to show it can be done.

Thanks Dsvid!

spike




From pharos at gmail.com  Fri Oct 24 17:22:53 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 18:22:53 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Real or identical Copy?
Message-ID: <CAL_armgcCLh6NGsC6j_ngp=0H9_PpHfkZJVagVjZJ_dZD=hmnA@mail.gmail.com>

Neat twist.

<http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=3522>


BillK


From johnkclark at gmail.com  Sat Oct 25 15:15:39 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 11:15:39 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
Message-ID: <CAJPayv2Px24gXJKQjvo0NM4FFxar=Kpggwecx8zPhWcrHEXuuA@mail.gmail.com>

http://existentialcomics.com/comic/51
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141025/ce295118/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Sat Oct 25 17:41:12 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 10:41:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv2Px24gXJKQjvo0NM4FFxar=Kpggwecx8zPhWcrHEXuuA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJPayv2Px24gXJKQjvo0NM4FFxar=Kpggwecx8zPhWcrHEXuuA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support

 

http://existentialcomics.com/comic/51

 

Hilarious!   Thanks John.

 

That comic has me thinking of its counterparts.  What if we could set up a help-hotline analogous to a tech-help, but for people having philosophy questions?  I don?t see why not: we already have suicide-prevention hotlines and things that are not really tech help.  So why not a philosophy help hotline?  Why is the line hot?  Could you have a tepid line or a cold line?  If we had a hotline for fashion questions, wouldn?t that be a cool hotline? If we instrument the line with thermocouples, could we have a line of indeterminate temperature until a call comes in?  If data is coming across it, does it really change the temperature of the line?  While we are at it, wouldn?t it be cool to rig up a computer with voice recognition and speech synthesis so that it hands out tech advice with no humans on the receiving end?  Or would that be hot?  Perhaps the term hotline means there is a human on the other end, a hot body.  So what if the suicide hotline counselor is flabby or otherwise unattractive?  And if an attractive person is a hottie, what is the flabby counselor called?  A coldie?  And what if she is so-so?  And does this term reflect poorly upon the Chinese and Indian unskilled laborers?  And what if one of those Chinese coolies is really hot?  But has a second job in the fashion hotline?  Is he or she hot or cool?  Or does it kind of average out and he or she becomes a tepidie?

 

But I digress.

 

Back to philosophy for a minute, the whole notion of a philosophy tech-hotline is aptly named, for it raises more questions than answers.

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141025/fb97335a/attachment.html>

From js_exi at gnolls.org  Sat Oct 25 18:42:06 2014
From: js_exi at gnolls.org (J. Stanton)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 11:42:06 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Larger diameter inner tube in smaller diameter wheel
In-Reply-To: <mailman.1.1414152005.7664.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
References: <mailman.1.1414152005.7664.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
Message-ID: <544BEEFE.7070302@gnolls.org>


I've done this before and it works fine.  Tires don't stretch enough 
with inflation to even feel a lump.

As has been said, though, if you're trying to stuff a 559 ("26") inner 
tube all the way down into a 406 ("20") wheel, you might want to fold it 
over twice so that the extra weight is symmetrically distributed.

Note that tubes are much cheaper online than in stores.  JensonUSA 
usually has a good selection under $5.

JS
http://www.gnolls.org

Spike wrote:
> Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway.  It would
> have a section which folded back on itself, which would make the tire
> unbalanced, but for low speeds such as on a typical recumbent, that wouldn't
> matter much.
>
> Question: can anyone think of a reason why a longer inner tube wouldn't
> work?



From spike66 at att.net  Sun Oct 26 01:14:22 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 18:14:22 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Larger diameter inner tube in smaller diameter wheel
In-Reply-To: <544BEEFE.7070302@gnolls.org>
References: <mailman.1.1414152005.7664.extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org>
 <544BEEFE.7070302@gnolls.org>
Message-ID: <020b01cff0ba$2d7a8060$886f8120$@att.net>


Spike wrote:
>>... Then it occurred to me: that longer tube might have worked anyway

>...I've done this before and it works fine.  Tires don't stretch enough
with inflation to even feel a lump.

>...As has been said, though, if you're trying to stuff a 559 ("26") inner
tube all the way down into a 406 ("20") wheel, you might want to fold it
over twice so that the extra weight is symmetrically distributed.

>...Note that tubes are much cheaper online than in stores.  JensonUSA
usually has a good selection under $5....JS


Thanks JS.  

One of the extropians suggested the diametrically opposed folds to
counterbalance each other, but I thought of another cool variation on a
theme.  Imagine the valve stem at 0 degrees.  Now arrange the double folds
at about 100 degrees and 260 degrees.  Then the double folds will
counterbalance the Schroeder valve and the tire will be better balanced than
one with the correct tube.  I would pay a slight weight penalty but that
doesn't matter much for a touring bike.  Cool!

Since I am on the topic, I have additional insights to share.  Our own long
lost Amara Graps is a big bicycle fan.  She is alive and well, living in
Latvia.  She is a touring rider.  I may post this forward to her, hoping she
has some comments.  

I have a recumbent bike, which I have owned for over a decade but only
started riding a lot in the past year or so.  Now I ride about 8 miles a
day, which isn't a lot but it's a start.

Imagine you have a weight of any size: 5kg is plenty for this experiment, or
thought experiment.  Hold your elbow at pi/2 so that your humerus is
vertical and the ulna and radius are parallel to the floor with the weight
in your hand.  Hold it there for a few minutes, or until you can't hold it
any longer.  Don't move it, just hold it out there.  There is no work being
done in the physics sense, no force times distance.  There is force, about
50 newtons, but no distance, so no work.  Hold it until your arm is too
tired to hold it any longer.  OK put it down.  Question: how do you feel?
Are you ready to do the same with the other arm?  Or would you prefer to
just sit for a while?  I predict you are tired.  All over, not just that
arm.  Conclusion: holding a muscle tense uses up energy.

OK now apply the lesson learned to bicycles.  When one rides a standard
diamond frame, the back muscles are tense holding up the torso, the neck
muscles must hold up the neck.  So a diamond frame rider uses up energy just
coasting.  But the recumbent rider can relax every muscle except the ones
doing the work.  So I conclude that for very long rides when speed is not
all that important, but energy management is critical, a recumbent might be
your best bet.

Comments or counter evidence please?

spike





From spike66 at att.net  Sun Oct 26 02:42:41 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2014 19:42:41 -0700
Subject: [ExI] wolves in yelllowstone
Message-ID: <021201cff0c6$8454e220$8cfea660$@att.net>

 

When I heard the scheme of reintroducing wolves in Yellowstone, I thought it
was a bad idea.  Now I think I changed my mind on that.  Your thoughts
welcome:

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/ysa5OBhXz-Q?feature=player_embedded
    
spike











 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141025/233610fd/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Sun Oct 26 09:57:24 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 10:57:24 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>

spike <spike66 at att.net> , 25/10/2014 8:01 PM:


?

?That comic has me thinking of its counterparts.? What if we could set up a help-hotline analogous to a tech-help, but for people having philosophy questions?? I don?t see why not: we already have suicide-prevention hotlines and things that are not really tech help.? So why not a philosophy help hotline?
"What is the meaning of life?""What kind of answer would you like?""I just want to get an answer!""42. Seriously, you need to have an idea of what type of answer that would make sense for that question.""But I don't know!""Aha! So you don't know whether 42, this discussion, or love is the right kind of answer?""Well, 42 clearly *isn't*.""Even better. You know something useful here. Let's dig in..."



? ?If data is coming across it, does it really change the temperature of the line??
Given that bits have entropy, you can cool a line using a string on low-entropy bits.





Back to philosophy for a minute, the whole notion of a philosophy tech-hotline is aptly named, for it raises more questions than answers.
There is actually a serious need for a good philosophy of technology. Something named that already exist, but it mostly consists of philosophers like Heidegger and Ellul who give lengthy arguments why technology is bad for us. But there is a need for a good theory of how technology develops in the large, unifying history of technology with issues like big history (how much is inevitable?), growth theory (how fast does it go and why?), futures-oriented issues (like singularity studies, exploratory engineering, physical eschatology and their philosophical issues), and so on. Of course, once we get it to *work* it will no longer be philosophy.?






Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/fed2e373/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Sun Oct 26 14:37:26 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 14:37:26 +0000
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
References: <CAJPayv2Px24gXJKQjvo0NM4FFxar=Kpggwecx8zPhWcrHEXuuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armgEtH9b6p76B5=G4z10KXd0SkaqCJNnBoyt23fujp3XOA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 6:41 PM, spike wrote:
<snip>
> Back to philosophy for a minute, the whole notion of a philosophy
> tech-hotline is aptly named, for it raises more questions than answers.
>
>

Well, there's always the Jerry Springer Philosophy Show.........

<http://www.d.umn.edu/~schilton/Fun/JerrySpringerPhilosophyShow.html>


BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Sun Oct 26 14:40:07 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 07:40:07 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
References: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
 <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>

 

 

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



 

 

   If data is coming across it, does it really change the temperature of the line? 

 

>?Given that bits have entropy, you can cool a line using a string of low-entropy bits?

 

Cool!

 

 

Back to philosophy for a minute, the whole notion of a philosophy tech-hotline is aptly named, for it raises more questions than answers.

 

>?There is actually a serious need for a good philosophy of technology. Something named that already exist, but it mostly consists of philosophers like Heidegger and Ellul who give lengthy arguments why technology is bad for us?

 

We must first define the term ?bad.?

 

>? But there is a need for a good theory of how technology develops in the large, unifying history of technology with issues like big history ? Of course, once we get it to *work* it will no longer be philosophy. Anders Sandberg

 

Oh this is cool.  There is *plenty * of fun to be had with the concept.  Sometimes I think I just have too much free time on my hands.

 

This brings up an interesting question.  What if? everyone had too much free time on their hands?  Assume away constant struggles for the basics, so we have sufficient food, shelter, all the bear necessities of life, spelling intentional (Google on it, younger friends.)

 

Then what happens?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/98c84d2e/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 26 16:28:04 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 09:28:04 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Supernatural believers see minds at work behind random
	patterns
Message-ID: <1D9AFCCD-EA1D-40EB-96BF-6F3E8EF2D2F5@gmail.com>

http://epiphenom.fieldofscience.com/2014/09/supernatural-believers-see-minds-at.html

Regards,

Dan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/a6de4bc8/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 26 17:12:53 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 12:12:53 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
References: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
 <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
 <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEbbM2Ys6-F050Zu37RKnUk6zUo_-XxQ9y3wvye359Dq+Q@mail.gmail.com>

?.  What if? everyone had too much free time on their hands?  Assume away
constant struggles for the basics, so we have sufficient food, shelter, all
the bear necessities of life, spelling intentional (Google on it, younger
friends.)

Then what happens?

spike
?First, you have a biased question.  'Too much' is by definition going to
lead to trouble of some kind.  But what about just a lot of time?  I've
been retired for 17 years and have had no trouble filling the time with my
hobbies, mostly reading.  What kind of trouble did you have in mind, fan of
Baloo?  bill w
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/c544b454/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Sun Oct 26 21:39:19 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 22:39:19 +0100
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
Message-ID: <1313938362-1231@secure.ericade.net>

spike <spike66 at att.net> , 26/10/2014 3:57 PM:





>?There is actually a serious need for a good philosophy of technology. Something named that already exist, but it mostly consists of philosophers like Heidegger and Ellul who give lengthy arguments why technology is bad for us?

?

We must first define the term ?bad.?
Of course. To Heidegger it is the inauthentic and that technology leads to a world of nihilism and mere use of people and things. To Ellul technique is replacing the sacred and forcing people to change to fit it, rather than the reverse.?
(Assuming I got their ideas right... being firmly rooted in the analytical camp, I find the Continentals heavy going and/or nonsense).





>? But there is a need for a good theory of how technology develops in the large, unifying history of technology with issues like big history ? Of course, once we get it to *work* it will no longer be philosophy.?Anders Sandberg

?

Oh this is cool.? There is *plenty * of fun to be had with the concept.? Sometimes I think I just have too much free time on my hands.

?

This brings up an interesting question.? What if? everyone had too much free time on their hands?? Assume away constant struggles for the basics, so we have sufficient food, shelter, all the bear necessities of life, spelling intentional (Google on it, younger friends.)
Assuming Maslow was roughly right, people will spend their energies on mostly social stuff - including a lot of status competition. Some will go further and aim at self-realization and doing cool stuff. Most likely a larger fraction than now will drop out and just enjoy life as couch potatoes.
Note that *how* this state was achieved might matter. Both Heidegger and Ellul would be concerned that a world of perfect labour-saving devices might be corrosive to the human spirit, in the first's case because people do not authentically work, in the second case because it would produce mere use and materialism. I would argue that these arguments hinge on doubtful claims about both human psychology and the effects of technology.?


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/82a1693e/attachment.html>

From foozler83 at gmail.com  Sun Oct 26 22:59:05 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 17:59:05 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <1313938362-1231@secure.ericade.net>
References: <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
 <1313938362-1231@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEa0MC05q9wdYEu7KxW6nDE=FoVCcdbBRp1V=dX0u5Q8ug@mail.gmail.com>

This brings up an interesting question.  What if? everyone had too much
free time on their hands?  Assume away constant struggles for the basics,
so we have sufficient food, shelter, all the bear necessities of life,
spelling intentional (Google on it, younger friends.)


Assuming Maslow was roughly right, people will spend their energies on
mostly social stuff - including a lot of status competition. Some will go
further and aim at self-realization and doing cool stuff. Most likely a
larger fraction than now will drop out and just enjoy life as couch
potatoes.


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford
University

?Let's look at this from a stand point of the Big Five.  I really don't
think you can characterize what a hypothetical average person would do, so
let's look at specifics:

Introversion/Extroversion:  at the extremes, you will find introverts doing
introverted things, like my reading and gardening.  The extroverts will do
extroverted things like jumping out of airplanes, literally or figuratively.

Conscientiousness:  people high on this trait will find something useful to
do, or at least the pretension of it, like spending their time getting more
advanced degrees.  People low on this one will have no problem being couch
potatoes.

Emotionality:  not particularly relevant here, I think?
?.

Openness to experience;  those high will fill their time with experimenting
with new things, of which there is no end, of course.

Agreeableness:  ?
?not particularly relevant, I think.

There is no average person.  There is an infinite number of mixtures of
these traits and prediction of their behavior in the 'too much time'
situation will be extremely difficult unless you deal with the extremes of
each category.

Way back (before 1960) I heard of a guy who graduated from college in psych
and applied
to a regular business.  He was given a personality test, which he happened
to know.  He solved the problem of answering truthfully or the way he
thought they wanted him to by doing the latter.  His test results came
back:  This person is either abnormally normal or he is lying.  Pretty good
test, eh?  (Nowadays there are severe restrictions legally as to what tests
you can give prospective employees.)

Yeah, it's a dull answer, all right?
?.  Perhaps someone can think of what the high/low emotional?
? people will do as well as the high/low agreeableness people.

Sorry -
unless you favor very roughly right,
Maslow's hierarchy had
? too many exceptions, reversals etc. - difficulty testing the theory as
well because of its lack of scientific basis.  It does have a strong appeal
to common sense and we all know how valuable that is.

I do wonder if the rate of creating new religions would change.  It was
described as two a day a few years back in an Atlantic Monthly article;
"Oh Gods" (on the web).
 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/61b08aee/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 27 02:02:08 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:02:08 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <CAO+xQEbbM2Ys6-F050Zu37RKnUk6zUo_-XxQ9y3wvye359Dq+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
 <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
 <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEbbM2Ys6-F050Zu37RKnUk6zUo_-XxQ9y3wvye359Dq+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <002701cff18a$044fc030$0cef4090$@att.net>

 

 

From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2014 10:13 AM
To: ExI chat list
Subject: Re: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support

 

?.  What if? everyone had too much free time on their hands?  Assume away constant struggles for the basics, so we have sufficient food, shelter, all the bear necessities of life, spelling intentional (Google on it, younger friends.)

Then what happens?

spike

?First, you have a biased question.  'Too much' is by definition going to lead to trouble of some kind.  But what about just a lot of time?  I've been retired for 17 years and have had no trouble filling the time with my hobbies, mostly reading.  What kind of trouble did you have in mind, fan of Baloo?  bill w

 

 

BillW, you retired and found constructive things to do, but I wasn?t really asking about you in particular.  Smart guys will find a way.  What if the seething masses are idle?  They are fed and sheltered, but have nothing to do.  What then?

 

Here?s where I am going with it.  Imagine things work out better than I expect, and we manage to transition somehow to fully renewable energy sources.  Imagine for the sake of argument that no singularity occurs, but we manage to build robots that pretty much take care of nearly everything we now call ?work.?  There are still jobs, and things are being invented, fortunes are still being made with clever ideas, but minimal food and shelter are available for nothing, and crime really isn?t a factor, since robo-cops don?t cost much, so there are several of them milling around everywhere you look.

 

What then?  Do we settle down and stop fighting?  Or do we find some new struggle?  Anything else?

 

spike

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/183b0796/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 27 02:24:34 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:24:34 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
Message-ID: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>

 

Nick Bostrom couldn't buy advertisement like this:

 

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/26/elon-musk-says-are-summoning-demon-wi
th-artificial-intelligence/

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141026/18478e86/attachment.html>

From msd001 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 12:36:28 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 08:36:28 -0400
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <002701cff18a$044fc030$0cef4090$@att.net>
References: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
 <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
 <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEbbM2Ys6-F050Zu37RKnUk6zUo_-XxQ9y3wvye359Dq+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <002701cff18a$044fc030$0cef4090$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdbJtDD_W3wsSV2i5XwNyTVUXwtRed-Jrtpdc8RvF=u7efw@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 10:02 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> Here?s where I am going with it.  Imagine things work out better than I
> expect, and we manage to transition somehow to fully renewable energy
> sources.  Imagine for the sake of argument that no singularity occurs, but
> we manage to build robots that pretty much take care of nearly everything we
> now call ?work.?  There are still jobs, and things are being invented,
> fortunes are still being made with clever ideas, but minimal food and
> shelter are available for nothing, and crime really isn?t a factor, since
> robo-cops don?t cost much, so there are several of them milling around
> everywhere you look.

I imagine this as a new kind of fitness landscape.  Those robo-managed
proles are natural resources like streams or trees, the clever monkey
will find new ways to take advantage of them.

Violent crime might be minimized, but your vote-manipulation styled
crimes will be rampant.  At least until (unless) there is greater
transparency... or until the aforementioned clever monkey imposes a
block-chain solution to the voting problem - making it inherently
resistant to tampering.  (of course, outright bribery and
votes-for-purchase will always be an option)


I wonder how much different and for how long we'd need new
environmentals before those behaviors known as "human nature" would
change.



From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 27 14:36:45 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 07:36:45 -0700
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <CAOJFdbJtDD_W3wsSV2i5XwNyTVUXwtRed-Jrtpdc8RvF=u7efw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
 <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
 <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEbbM2Ys6-F050Zu37RKnUk6zUo_-XxQ9y3wvye359Dq+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <002701cff18a$044fc030$0cef4090$@att.net>
 <CAOJFdbJtDD_W3wsSV2i5XwNyTVUXwtRed-Jrtpdc8RvF=u7efw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <011701cff1f3$6fc28640$4f4792c0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Mike Dougherty
Subject: Re: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 10:02 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>>... Here?s where I am going with it.  Imagine things work out better than 
> I expect, and we manage to transition somehow to fully renewable 
> energy sources.  ... crime really isn?t a factor, since robo-cops don?t cost much, so there 
> are several of them milling around everywhere you look.

>...I imagine this as a new kind of fitness landscape.  Those robo-managed proles are natural resources like streams or trees, the clever monkey will find new ways to take advantage of them...

Ja.  What I meant was it becomes a lower-energy consuming society.

>...Violent crime might be minimized, but your vote-manipulation styled crimes will be rampant...

We have everything we need to stop that, but just reducing the power of government would be a big step.  That takes down the amount of money available for theft.  Keep watching this Mike.  The one side has arranged for "calibration error" to work in their favor.  It sure looks to me like this should motivate the voters to decide this has gone too far.

>...  At least until (unless) there is greater transparency... or until the aforementioned clever monkey imposes a block-chain solution to the voting problem - making it inherently resistant to tampering...

At this point, it is clear enough the effort has gone towards enabling tampering.  It is easy enough to imagine a system where there is no machine-counting at all.  We could still have touch screen devices which make a printout on paper.  It would be cheap and easy.  

I have been getting spam from both major parties.  They estimate it costs about 20 to 24 bucks on average to get a vote, by legal means.  So if we imagine a system that is really just a printer, that takes signals from a laptop or phone or any keyboard device or a touch screen or prints out a blank ballot which can be filled in with a pencil, oh that would be easy to do, simple.  Cheap.  Creates a paper trail which could be easily verified, audited or recounted. 

If votes are 20 bucks each, either party could set up something like that for the cost of a few score votes.  

Notice that no one is rushing out to do it.

>...  (of course, outright bribery and votes-for-purchase will always be an option)

Ja, bribery for sure, but I am encouraged by these modern cameras which can be hidden and catch the bastards:

http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2014/10/22/video-activist-james-okeefe-targets-colorados-mail-voting/114385/

This one is full of hilarious quotes.  Fishing a ballot out of the trash and using it is not even like lying or stealing.  It's just...like you know... recycling.  Or something.  {8^]  Recycling is a good thing, right?  {8^D

spike








From foozler83 at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 15:19:07 2014
From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 10:19:07 -0500
Subject: [ExI] Philosophy Tech Support
In-Reply-To: <CAOJFdbJtDD_W3wsSV2i5XwNyTVUXwtRed-Jrtpdc8RvF=u7efw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <00a501cff07a$df3e9290$9dbbb7b0$@att.net>
 <1272235462-10606@secure.ericade.net>
 <007c01cff12a$bd6a6260$383f2720$@att.net>
 <CAO+xQEbbM2Ys6-F050Zu37RKnUk6zUo_-XxQ9y3wvye359Dq+Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <002701cff18a$044fc030$0cef4090$@att.net>
 <CAOJFdbJtDD_W3wsSV2i5XwNyTVUXwtRed-Jrtpdc8RvF=u7efw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAO+xQEZw8cqkrEd_0ear8c3vd0U52TozKjFDmy3as4B8-65NPw@mail.gmail.com>

?

What then?  Do we settle down and stop fighting?  Or do we find some new
struggle?  Anything else?

spike

What the question asks for is my opinion as to the basic nature of man.
Freud said we have a Death instinct, the main feature of which was
aggression, which came out willy-nilly when we did not let off steam
occasionally.  I can't support that.  Aggression is usually reactive.  So
we won't just fight to be fighting.


Many social psych studies show this:  the more people get, the more they
think they deserve what they are getting.  If income goes up, our level of
expectations goes up right along with it.  Whatever level of income,
luxuries, etc. they get to becomes the new normal and also the new neutral
point at which we are neither satisfied or dissatisfied.  Thus getting
above neutral and being happy is always in the future to a certain extent.
Think of the things we take for granted that were not even in existence 100
years ago or were rare.  You can do the list yourself.  Could you live the
way they did 100 years ago and be happy?  (The first thing that comes to my
mind is:  no Novocain!)


So it goes far beyond basic needs.  We will get used to more things like
cell phones and regard their absence as terrible.  Greed and envy will
still exist as long as some people have what others do not.  Whether this
will lead to more taking by force than now I just dunno. Big wars are
becoming more and more unlikely as nations get more economically
entangled.  *If China were to attack us, we'd just say:  We don't owe you
anything any more and furthermore we are not going to buy anything from
you, and both nations would go into a sull.*
?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/b25a9f49/attachment.html>

From alex.urbanec at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 18:17:04 2014
From: alex.urbanec at gmail.com (Asdd Marget)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:17:04 -0500
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>

AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right, I don't think
anyone could argue against that but I never see these types of articles
discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for "Friendly
AI." In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like
Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (
https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending
our species so early in our life cycle.

On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:24 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> Nick Bostrom couldn?t buy advertisement like this:
>
>
>
>
> http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/26/elon-musk-says-are-summoning-demon-with-artificial-intelligence/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/fe9a9871/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 27 18:32:12 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 11:32:12 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <00dd01cff214$53c76d40$fb5647c0$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of Asdd Marget
Subject: Re: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news

 

>? we should be working harder on concepts like Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending our species so early in our life cycle.

 

Asdd, how do we know it is so early in our life cycle?

spike

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/e2444cbe/attachment.html>

From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 18:47:56 2014
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:47:56 -0600
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPy8RwZNQw8Dh0YCnxwuc3+JLLhxFr+B7cOFQ+JP4Y5RWgfC9A@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com>
wrote:

> AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right,
>

I would phrase this as "AI will be incredibly dangerous if we do get it
right." If we can't get intelligence, then it won't be that dangerous. If
we get AGI, then almost by definition it will be dangerous. I think we have
exactly ONE chance to get the initial training of AGIs correct. We should
focus on raising the first generation of AGIs with a generous dose of
compassion training and the like. Sort of like raising small children with
good morals, etc.


> I don't think anyone could argue against that but I never see these types
> of articles discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for
> "Friendly AI." In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like
> Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (
> https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending
> our species so early in our life cycle.
>
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 9:24 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Nick Bostrom couldn?t buy advertisement like this:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/10/26/elon-musk-says-are-summoning-demon-with-artificial-intelligence/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Agreed.

-Kelly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/7bef4d03/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 19:12:46 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:12:46 +0000
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAPy8RwZNQw8Dh0YCnxwuc3+JLLhxFr+B7cOFQ+JP4Y5RWgfC9A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPy8RwZNQw8Dh0YCnxwuc3+JLLhxFr+B7cOFQ+JP4Y5RWgfC9A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAL_armjZjVnrG+jfThhPyJv_F6uEyHsHCcVstQ1puM7QSGG=kQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Kelly Anderson  wrote:
> I would phrase this as "AI will be incredibly dangerous if we do get it
> right." If we can't get intelligence, then it won't be that dangerous. If we
> get AGI, then almost by definition it will be dangerous. I think we have
> exactly ONE chance to get the initial training of AGIs correct. We should
> focus on raising the first generation of AGIs with a generous dose of
> compassion training and the like. Sort of like raising small children with
> good morals, etc.
>

It's already happening. We will soon be surrounded by AI in everything we touch.

<http://www.wired.com/2014/10/future-of-artificial-intelligence/>
Quotes:
The AI on the horizon looks more like Amazon Web Services--cheap,
reliable, industrial-grade digital smartness running behind
everything, and almost invisible except when it blinks off. This
common utility will serve you as much IQ as you want but no more than
you need. Like all utilities, AI will be supremely boring, even as it
transforms the Internet, the global economy, and civilization. It will
enliven inert objects, much as electricity did more than a century
ago. Everything that we formerly electrified we will now cognitize.
This new utilitarian AI will also augment us individually as people
(deepening our memory, speeding our recognition) and collectively as a
species.

In fact, this won't really be intelligence, at least not as we've come
to think of it. Indeed, intelligence may be a liability--especially if
by "intelligence" we mean our peculiar self-awareness, all our frantic
loops of introspection and messy currents of self-consciousness. We
want our self-driving car to be inhumanly focused on the road, not
obsessing over an argument it had with the garage.

What we want instead of intelligence is artificial smartness. Unlike
general intelligence, smartness is focused, measurable, specific.
-----------


BillK


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 19:24:00 2014
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:24:00 -0600
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjZjVnrG+jfThhPyJv_F6uEyHsHCcVstQ1puM7QSGG=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPy8RwZNQw8Dh0YCnxwuc3+JLLhxFr+B7cOFQ+JP4Y5RWgfC9A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjZjVnrG+jfThhPyJv_F6uEyHsHCcVstQ1puM7QSGG=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAPy8RwYWy2_o0EDeM2eW8i3LyhC5345CM3kSfXVKaM+vs_4SGA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:12 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Kelly Anderson  wrote:
> > I would phrase this as "AI will be incredibly dangerous if we do get it
> > right." If we can't get intelligence, then it won't be that dangerous.
> If we
> > get AGI, then almost by definition it will be dangerous. I think we have
> > exactly ONE chance to get the initial training of AGIs correct. We should
> > focus on raising the first generation of AGIs with a generous dose of
> > compassion training and the like. Sort of like raising small children
> with
> > good morals, etc.
> >
>
> It's already happening. We will soon be surrounded by AI in everything we
> touch.
>

I can't argue with that, but we have not yet achieved anything that even
feels remotely dangerous, except if it all gets blown away in a solar storm
or something like that. That is, for now it is almost all positive (unless
you don't like Internet porn, jihadists communicating over twitter or
something along those lines) but in the future, as it reaches general
intelligence and starts forming its own goals, that's when I get worried.
Yes, I might get turned down for cashing a check at Walmart because the AI
says this check smells funny, but that's not a super huge negative impact.



>
> <http://www.wired.com/2014/10/future-of-artificial-intelligence/>
> Quotes:




> Like all utilities, AI will be supremely boring, even as it
> transforms the Internet, the global economy, and civilization. It will
> enliven inert objects, much as electricity did more than a century
> ago. Everything that we formerly electrified we will now cognitize.
> This new utilitarian AI will also augment us individually as people
> (deepening our memory, speeding our recognition) and collectively as a
> species.
>

Until the day it decides to wipe us out. Then we'll notice for a minute.
Then it won't matter.


> In fact, this won't really be intelligence, at least not as we've come
> to think of it. Indeed, intelligence may be a liability--especially if
> by "intelligence" we mean our peculiar self-awareness, all our frantic
> loops of introspection and messy currents of self-consciousness. We
> want our self-driving car to be inhumanly focused on the road, not
> obsessing over an argument it had with the garage.
>

I don't consider autonomous cars to be the dangerous sort of AGI. Reference
intelligent elevators in the Hitchhiker's Guide.


>
> What we want instead of intelligence is artificial smartness. Unlike
> general intelligence, smartness is focused, measurable, specific.
> -----------
>
> I don't worry about that stuff too much except that governments might use
it to become ever more dictatorial. "Hey, we detected that you might be
thinking about doing some terrorist stuff here in a year or two, so would
you please go get in the big white van over there?"

-Kelly
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/ded880ca/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 27 19:38:37 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:38:37 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1394390396-13277@secure.ericade.net>

Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com> , 27/10/2014 7:21 PM:
AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right, I don't think anyone could argue against that but?I never see these types of articles discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for "Friendly AI."
http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/08/26/if-the-media-reported-on-other-dangers-like-it-does-ai-risk/
(Actually, there are surprisingly many professional AI people who argue against the danger of successful AI.)
 In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending our species so early in our life cycle.
Well, Eliezer would be the first to admit CEV is flawed and by now obsolete. Nick's book has a chapter on value loading, and the MIRI crowd is getting into ever more esoteric branches of logic to make something that is CEV-like.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/2e668e2d/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 27 19:44:32 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:44:32 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <00dd01cff214$53c76d40$fb5647c0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <1394544484-13277@secure.ericade.net>

spike <spike66 at att.net> , 27/10/2014 7:49 PM:


?

>? On Behalf Of Asdd Marget
Subject: Re: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news

?

>? we should be working harder on concepts like Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending our species so early in our life cycle.

?

Asdd, how do we know it is so early in our life cycle?
Of course, "life cycle" presupposes a definite, closed cycle - it might be more reasonable to say "early in our lifespan". It is pretty likely that we can have an openended evolution.
I think the Doomsday argument is the best argument that we are *not* early in our span, but whether it is valid is of course very controversial.?
My own argument for why we are early is that if we can learn to survive in space we have an essentially open ended niche that is not critically dependent on any single planet or solar system, and hence likely to allow indefinite growth. And since we know the resources will last for a *long* time, we can estimate that this could continue for an inconceivable span of time.
Great Filter arguments suggest that either the the Filter is behind or ahead of us. If one thinks it is behind us, there is no reason to think we will have a short span. If it is ahead it is reasonable to say that we may have a long span if we survives (unless the explanation if some form of iterated future filter).?


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/5b129bd1/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 27 19:38:56 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:38:56 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAL_armjZjVnrG+jfThhPyJv_F6uEyHsHCcVstQ1puM7QSGG=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPy8RwZNQw8Dh0YCnxwuc3+JLLhxFr+B7cOFQ+JP4Y5RWgfC9A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjZjVnrG+jfThhPyJv_F6uEyHsHCcVstQ1puM7QSGG=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <013b01cff21d$a64e0ca0$f2ea25e0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of BillK
Subject: Re: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Kelly Anderson  wrote:
>>... I would phrase this as "AI will be incredibly dangerous if we do get
it right."...

>...The AI on the horizon looks more like Amazon Web Services--cheap,
reliable, industrial-grade digital smartness running behind everything, and
almost invisible except when it blinks off... We want our self-driving car
to be inhumanly focused on the road, not obsessing over an argument it had
with the garage...What we want instead of intelligence is artificial
smartness. Unlike general intelligence, smartness is focused, measurable,
specific.
-----------


BillK, I don't know if the following goes to your point, but it was
interesting.

My bride bought a camera yesterday and installed the software on her
computer.  It has a feature where you take a current photo of a person, and
tell it who it is.  Then it went thru the hard disc looking for photos.  It
did face-recognition, identifying and cataloging the photos we had already
taken.  It was about 90%-ish accurate.

Now that is wicked cool, but it has another fun parting shot: I have a bunch
of genealogy stuff on that hard disk.  Where the software was misidentifying
faces, most of the time it was an ancestor of the person it was looking for.

Oh WOW is this cool or what?

spike



From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 27 19:53:14 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:53:14 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAPy8RwYWy2_o0EDeM2eW8i3LyhC5345CM3kSfXVKaM+vs_4SGA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1394913999-13195@secure.ericade.net>

Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> , 27/10/2014 8:29 PM:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:12 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:

 It's already happening. We will soon be surrounded by AI in everything we touch.

I can't argue with that, but we have not yet achieved anything that even feels remotely dangerous, except if it all gets blown away in a solar storm or something like that. That is, for now it is almost all positive (unless you don't like Internet porn, jihadists communicating over twitter or something along those lines) but in the future, as it reaches general intelligence and starts forming its own goals, that's when I get worried. Yes, I might get turned down for cashing a check at Walmart because the AI says this check smells funny, but that's not a super huge negative impact.
What about this model: AI embedded in our infrastructure allows automated, distributed monitoring and planning on behalf of whoever owns the AI systems. As the systems get more powerful, their owner's ability to get what they want increases. At least some of them do not want competitors (they might be fine with other AI-powers, but they should be able to pull the plug on them) so they have an incentive to subvert each other or develop better AI. This leads to a centralization of power into fewer and fewer agencies, racing to become the sole agency that sets the rules. Note that these agencies do not have to be evil. But the competition/race is likely to cause harm. Also, centralizing the ability to direct where the world is going to small, unaccountable groups getting power from technological power rather than civic legitimacy is not a good thing.
Note that this scenario is based on a particular kind of scaling of power. It might be that AI instead diffuses power. That means more and more people can automate whatever processes they want. I think one can easily see risks there too.


Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/fef26036/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 20:13:27 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:13:27 +0000
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <013b01cff21d$a64e0ca0$f2ea25e0$@att.net>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPy8RwZNQw8Dh0YCnxwuc3+JLLhxFr+B7cOFQ+JP4Y5RWgfC9A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL_armjZjVnrG+jfThhPyJv_F6uEyHsHCcVstQ1puM7QSGG=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <013b01cff21d$a64e0ca0$f2ea25e0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armi6adByzr-kub5v5JFs2Mh3M+Lxr0hHP54hQsSPpoTNFA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:38 PM, spike wrote:
> My bride bought a camera yesterday and installed the software on her
> computer.  It has a feature where you take a current photo of a person, and
> tell it who it is.  Then it went thru the hard disc looking for photos.  It
> did face-recognition, identifying and cataloging the photos we had already
> taken.  It was about 90%-ish accurate.
>
> Now that is wicked cool, but it has another fun parting shot: I have a bunch
> of genealogy stuff on that hard disk.  Where the software was misidentifying
> faces, most of the time it was an ancestor of the person it was looking for.
>
> Oh WOW is this cool or what?
>


'or what'
This is a cut-down version of what t' guvment uses on their giant
databases to find every photo of a target that has been put on the
internet. And I do mean *every* photo, no matter who posted it or
where it was posted. Those wild party Facebook photos are filed for
ever, waiting to be retrieved.

BillK


From spike66 at att.net  Mon Oct 27 20:05:36 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 13:05:36 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <1394913999-13195@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAPy8RwYWy2_o0EDeM2eW8i3LyhC5345CM3kSfXVKaM+vs_4SGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1394913999-13195@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <018a01cff221$600d4a40$2027dec0$@att.net>

 

 

>? On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg
Subject: Re: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news

 

Kelly Anderson <kellycoinguy at gmail.com> , 27/10/2014 8:29 PM:

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 1:12 PM, BillK <pharos at gmail.com> wrote:


>>?It's already happening. We will soon be surrounded by AI in everything we touch.

 

?

 

>?What about this model: AI embedded in our infrastructure allows automated, distributed monitoring and planning on behalf of whoever owns the AI systems?Anders Sandberg

 

 

Ja, and consider further that camera example.  My bride loaded this software, and it went thru the photos and found those it thinks is us.  We trained it a bit by identifying the errors, so it could eliminate those.  OK so now this computer has access to the internet, it knows exactly how each of the most common people in our photo album looks and it knows who we are.  It can phone home any time; I wouldn?t know, and I wouldn?t know the use they are finding for that info.

 

I also have a camera on the front of my PC, and I am told it can be remotely activated.

 

I am an openness sort, so I am mostly OK with that, but for privacy sorts, that whole notion must give them the creeby jeebies.

 

spike

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/cf4efaeb/attachment.html>

From pharos at gmail.com  Mon Oct 27 20:30:08 2014
From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:30:08 +0000
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <018a01cff221$600d4a40$2027dec0$@att.net>
References: <CAPy8RwYWy2_o0EDeM2eW8i3LyhC5345CM3kSfXVKaM+vs_4SGA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1394913999-13195@secure.ericade.net>
 <018a01cff221$600d4a40$2027dec0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAL_armharBWJaWc8BoibvTMYO91xNw2tX8810h0hV9UMTacnVA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:05 PM, spike  wrote:
> Ja, and consider further that camera example.  My bride loaded this
> software, and it went thru the photos and found those it thinks is us.  We
> trained it a bit by identifying the errors, so it could eliminate those.  OK
> so now this computer has access to the internet, it knows exactly how each
> of the most common people in our photo album looks and it knows who we are.
> It can phone home any time; I wouldn't know, and I wouldn't know the use
> they are finding for that info.
>
> I also have a camera on the front of my PC, and I am told it can be remotely
> activated.
>
> I am an openness sort, so I am mostly OK with that, but for privacy sorts,
> that whole notion must give them the creeby jeebies.
>

You might be surprised at how many people in computer security have a
bit of tape stuck over the camera on their laptop. ;)
(Phones and tablets as well).

BillK


From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Mon Oct 27 21:42:01 2014
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 15:42:01 -0600
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK7-onstxTV+g1pN7Q16bKhtCzXCJrCHzijW+wVERXOwP8oqTQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 12:17 PM, Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com>
wrote:

> AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right, I don't think
> anyone could argue against that but I never see these types of articles
> discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for "Friendly
> AI." In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like
> Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (
> https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending
> our species so early in our life cycle.
>
>

You mentioned "I don't think anyone could argue against that", but in my
opinion just the opposite is true.  This is exactly the kind of bleating
that herds tend to focus on, despite zero good arguments to support such
fears of AI.  In my opinion, Canonizer.com is good at filtering through
these kinds of things the herd tends to think are good arguments, when in
reality, they are not good arguments, and do not stand up to expert
review.  When people try to concisely state their arguments, and attempt to
build any kind of expert consensus supporting them, they quickly get weeded
out, even self censored (i.e. it doesn't even make it to the state where
someone is willing to submit them to Canonizer.com.)

While good arguments that do stand up to expert and peer review/support
quickly rise to the top, and people are much more motivated to do the work
to get the arguments canonized.

The "The importance of Friendly Artificial Intelligence." survey topic at
Canonizer.com is a good  example of this, in my opinion.  It is almost as
good an example as all the bleating consciousness noise we once had on all
the transhumanist forums, before all that finally got canonized, amplifying
everyone's wisdom on the topic.  So nice now that all the bleating on
consciousness no longer exists.

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/16

There are very strong arguments for why concern over AI is just dumb, a
complete waste of time, and so far at least, there is more consensus for
these arguments, than there are for the fear mongering camps.

And of course, you can tell which camp I am strong in, so surely this has
biased my view, so take everything I say, with a grain of salt.

But, along with that, if you do have ANY good arguments, as to why we
should fear AI, for any reason, and/or you see ANY mistakes in the leading
consensus arguments that have been canonized to date, please make some
effort to point such out, and do more than just bleating this kind of
assertion noise, with nothing to back it up.  In other words, if you think
there is something to what you are thinking, and bleating here, please
canonize that, to help everyone be more educated, rather than just adding
more bleating noise.  This is definitely a critically important tpoic that
could use some significant amplification of the wisdom of the bleating
crowd by some concise and quantitative communication.

Brent Allsop
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/1376a0f2/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Mon Oct 27 23:34:53 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 00:34:53 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAK7-onstxTV+g1pN7Q16bKhtCzXCJrCHzijW+wVERXOwP8oqTQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1407583457-17971@secure.ericade.net>

Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at canonizer.com> , 27/10/2014 10:46 PM:

http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/16

There are very strong arguments for why concern over AI is just dumb, a complete waste of time, and so far at least, there is more consensus for these arguments, than there are for the fear mongering camps.
I think this shows the problem with Canonizer. The "Concern over "Unfriendly" AI is a Mistaken Waste of Time" camp's claim "Intelligence is necessarily Moral" does not engage with existing (peer reviewed) literature (c.f.?http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11023-012-9281-3 - free versions exist online too) or known counterexamples (AIXI-style paperclippers).?
I know, I know, the proper response is of course for me to form yet another camp and add these arguments. And so on. Fine. But I do not have the time. And I happen to *like* the idea of Canonizer.?
The problem is that you need a significant critical mass, and it needs to include the people who actually know stuff. This is a hard problem when trying to get an entire debate onto a single forum: the LessWrong crowd are pretty busy over there, and we at FHI/MIRI are writing papers (or grant proposals) over here. So you get the same situation as for information markets with too little liquidity: very biased and chunky information because it only represents whoever happens to be posting or the imprints of somebody with social capital sending out a call for activity.?
It seems to me that in order to get debates like this done properly we need better ways of feeding existing literatures into the Canonizer framework to produce initial scaffoldings so there is no need for the locals to reinvent the wheel in a biased way. And then there is the vexing question of how to ensure a steady flow of commenters - in my Wikipedia models that turned out to be more important than their average quality.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141028/b54b5d10/attachment.html>

From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Tue Oct 28 03:14:08 2014
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 21:14:08 -0600
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <1407583457-17971@secure.ericade.net>
References: <1407583457-17971@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <544F0A00.5050602@canonizer.com>



Hi Anders,

Wow, do you remember having this exact conversation 2 years ago?  I 
started on a reply to your post, and then had that deja-vu feeling, so I 
did a quick search and found this:

http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2012-December/075438.html

And we've probably had similare conversations other years.  It is 
surprizing how identical the situation was back then, and how the 
response I was working on right now, is almost identical to what I said 
back then.  Except for my response, like your response this time, is of 
far less quality, and we obviously spent far less time on them, this 
time around.  In other words, it seems that the quality of our 
conversation is degrading, over time, and certainly not improving.  
Primarily because of lack of memory.  This is precisely the kind of 
waste of time infinitely repetitive bleating that I am talking about.

It seems to me that if you would have taken less time, back then, to 
simply include what you said back then, in canonizer.com, rather than 
posting it here, our conversation, today, would have been much improved, 
rather than degrading, and would have taken far less time.  And, there 
is a good chance that someone else would have been able to add to the 
conversation, in a competing camp, or improving what you could have 
said, improving things even further.

Perhaps you think that you can't add anything to Canonizer.com, unless 
it is of peer review quality.   No wonder you think you don't have 
time.  That is not the way the amplification of the wisdom of the crowd 
canonization process works.  In other words, all that is required is 
less effort than is being applied to this repeated every year, 
conversation to make significant progress.

Some people assume we think what is in canonizer.com as "truth", which 
it is clearly not, and thankfully you don't think that it contains 
"truth".  But you do seem to expect it to be some kind of 'unbiased' 
survey of what all experts think.  It isn't!  It is JUST a state of the 
art real time representative of what all participants currently believe 
(without having to read hundreds of individual responses).

And the best part of all of it, is how much time it does save.

I trust you very much, because of what I've seen from you, and will 
admit that you are probably at a much higher level of intelligence on 
such issues, than I am able to comprehend.  But, even if what you 
understand isn't yet contained in Canonizer.com, what is there is of far 
greater quality, than would be if I, and everyone else, would have just 
produced a long diatribe response to every single time someone says 
something like "I don't see how anyone could argue such and such."  
Instead of repeating the same degrading over time diatribe, every time, 
all I have to do is refer people to my camp.

True, all the worlds best experts haven't yet participated in the survey 
on qualia and consciousness.  But I would argue that the so called 'peer 
reviewed' articles coming out of the ivory tower on this subject are 
making little, if any progress, especially compared to what these 
participating in the amplification of the wisdom of the crowd hobbyists
have achieved at Canonizer.com.  I am obviously biased, but I think what 
is already there is vastly superior to anything coming out of the Ivory 
tower and so called "peer reviewed" journals that all can easily be 
argued as being very biased to one school of thought or another.

And we no longer have those infinitely repeated, degrading over time 
arguments about qualia, like were so painful for everyone so often, 
before Canonizer.com.  Remember how so many people would get angry every 
time someone even mentioned qualia?

Brent Allsop









On 10/27/2014 5:34 PM, Anders Sandberg wrote:
> Brent Allsop<brent.allsop at canonizer.com> , 27/10/2014 10:46 PM:
>
>
>     http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/16
>
>     There are very strong arguments for why concern over AI is just
>     dumb, a complete waste of time, and so far at least, there is more
>     consensus for these arguments, than there are for the fear
>     mongering camps.
>
>
> I think this shows the problem with Canonizer. The "Concern over 
> "Unfriendly" AI is a Mistaken Waste of Time" camp's claim 
> "Intelligence is necessarily Moral" does not engage with existing 
> (peer reviewed) literature (c.f. 
> http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11023-012-9281-3 - free 
> versions exist online too) or known counterexamples (AIXI-style 
> paperclippers).
>
> I know, I know, the proper response is of course for me to form yet 
> another camp and add these arguments. And so on. Fine. But I do not 
> have the time. And I happen to *like* the idea of Canonizer.
>
> The problem is that you need a significant critical mass, and it needs 
> to include the people who actually know stuff. This is a hard problem 
> when trying to get an entire debate onto a single forum: the LessWrong 
> crowd are pretty busy over there, and we at FHI/MIRI are writing 
> papers (or grant proposals) over here. So you get the same situation 
> as for information markets with too little liquidity: very biased and 
> chunky information because it only represents whoever happens to be 
> posting or the imprints of somebody with social capital sending out a 
> call for activity.
>
> It seems to me that in order to get debates like this done properly we 
> need better ways of feeding existing literatures into the Canonizer 
> framework to produce initial scaffoldings so there is no need for the 
> locals to reinvent the wheel in a biased way. And then there is the 
> vexing question of how to ensure a steady flow of commenters - in my 
> Wikipedia models that turned out to be more important than their 
> average quality.
>
>
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141027/d330dcf9/attachment.html>

From giulio at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 06:32:06 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 07:32:06 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJydkGBQtJkCJm8NHjbbSC-OFWw7JH31+Ab+akYruFzyeqA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com> wrote:
> AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right, I don't think
> anyone could argue against that but I never see these types of articles
> discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for "Friendly
> AI." In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like Yudkowsky's
> Coherent Extrapolated Volition (https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to
> ensure we aren't simply ending our species so early in our life cycle.

As I said in my review of Nick's book, that depends on what is "our
species." If it includes our future intelligent and super-intelligent
mind children, then there is no danger of extermination by
superintelligence:
http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/08/28/book-review-bostroms-superintelligence/


From anders at aleph.se  Tue Oct 28 09:31:39 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:31:39 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJydkGBQtJkCJm8NHjbbSC-OFWw7JH31+Ab+akYruFzyeqA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1444143002-13681@secure.ericade.net>

Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> , 28/10/2014 7:36 AM:

As I said in my review of Nick's book, that depends on what is "our 
species." If it includes our future intelligent and super-intelligent 
mind children, then there is no danger of extermination by 
superintelligence: 
http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/08/28/book-review-bostroms-superintelligence/ 
But this presupposes that it must be a continuation of us or at least something valuable, not a paperclipper or a mindless world of superintelligent but non-conscious corporations. You write that you have a hard time imagining something smart without a sense of self, yet we know AIXI - remember, it is as smart as or smarter than any other system - would assign zero probability to itself existing even if it existed!
I like the idea of mind children continuing our civilization. But that is very different from being concerned about risk: just because a power plant might produce energy to cheap to meter doesn't mean it is a waste of time doing a risk analysis.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141028/60a2e4a8/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Tue Oct 28 09:35:45 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:35:45 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <544F0A00.5050602@canonizer.com>
Message-ID: <1444522315-13681@secure.ericade.net>

Brent Allsop <brent.allsop at canonizer.com> , 28/10/2014 4:19 AM:
                   
Wow, do you remember having this exact conversation 2 years ago?? I     started on a reply to your post, and then had that deja-vu feeling,     so I did a quick search and found this:
     
 http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/2012-December/075438.html
Good memory! Yes, I had roughly the same feeling when I wrote my quick response.?
It seems to me that if you would have taken less time, back then, to     simply include what you said back then, in canonizer.com, rather     than posting it here, our conversation, today, would have been much     improved, rather than degrading, and would have taken far less     time.? And, there is a good chance that someone else would have been     able to add to the conversation, in a competing camp, or improving     what you could have said, improving things even further.
Maybe. I am reminded of the debates we had back in the 90s on this list about FAQs too :-)
I do think you are right, though. If a question does come up repeatedly, the answers or arguments should be written down somewhere easily accessible. There is still no guarantee they will be read by those who need them (that was the conclusion of the many FAQ discussions, I think).?
OK, I'll try to add some stuff if I get the time today.?

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141028/7b5fe033/attachment.html>

From giulio at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 09:47:39 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 10:47:39 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <1444143002-13681@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAKTCJydkGBQtJkCJm8NHjbbSC-OFWw7JH31+Ab+akYruFzyeqA@mail.gmail.com>
 <1444143002-13681@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyffRZFh9HLduN0yp2htNKX0Gv1ueqswTmxyJ--DNFbR6A@mail.gmail.com>

I don't think a paperclipper would stay a paperclipper forever. Soone
ror later it would expand. In general, I don't think we can design and
freeze the value and motivational systems of an entity smarter than
us, for the same reasons we can't do that with children. At some point
the entity would start to do what _he_ wants. Isn't that part of the
definition of intelligence?

I don't dismiss the possibility of accidental extermination by a
paperclipper still in the paperclipper phase, but I think the
paperclipper would become a mind child in the long term, perhaps
incorporating mind grafts from you and I.

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> , 28/10/2014 7:36 AM:
>
>
> As I said in my review of Nick's book, that depends on what is "our
> species." If it includes our future intelligent and super-intelligent
> mind children, then there is no danger of extermination by
> superintelligence:
> http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/08/28/book-review-bostroms-superintelligence/
>
>
> But this presupposes that it must be a continuation of us or at least
> something valuable, not a paperclipper or a mindless world of
> superintelligent but non-conscious corporations. You write that you have a
> hard time imagining something smart without a sense of self, yet we know
> AIXI - remember, it is as smart as or smarter than any other system - would
> assign zero probability to itself existing even if it existed!
>
> I like the idea of mind children continuing our civilization. But that is
> very different from being concerned about risk: just because a power plant
> might produce energy to cheap to meter doesn't mean it is a waste of time
> doing a risk analysis.
>
> 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
>


From anders at aleph.se  Tue Oct 28 14:54:01 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:54:01 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJyffRZFh9HLduN0yp2htNKX0Gv1ueqswTmxyJ--DNFbR6A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1462728842-23556@secure.ericade.net>

Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> , 28/10/2014 10:52 AM:
I don't think a paperclipper would stay a paperclipper forever. Sooner or later it would expand. 
I don't see how that would happen. Using the AIXI model as an example (since it is well-defined), you have a device that maximizes a certain utility function by running sub-programs to come up with proposed behaviours. The actual behaviour chosen is what maximizes the utility function, but there is nothing in the code itself to change it. In a physical implementation the system may of course do "brain surgery" to change the embodiment of the utility function. But this is a decision that will not be made unless the changed utility function produces even more utility as measured by the current one: the paperclipper will only change itself to become a greater paperclipper. And "great" is defined in terms of paperclips.
This kind of architecture would potentially contain sub-programs that propose all sorts of nice and reasonable things, but they will not be implemented unless they serve to make more paperclips. If sub-programs are capable of hacking the top level (because of a bad implementation), it seems very likely that in an AIXI-like architecture the first hacking program will be simple (since simpler programs are run more and earlier), so whatever values it tries to maximize are likely to be something very crude. I have no trouble imagining that something like a paperclipper AI could be transient if it had the right/wrong architecture, but I think agents with (to us) pathological goal systems dominate the design space.
(Incidentally, this is IMHO one great research topic any AI believer can pursue regardless of their friendliness stance: figure out a way of mapping the goal system space and its general properties. Useful and interesting!)

In general, I don't think we can design and 
freeze the value and motivational systems of an entity smarter than 
us, for the same reasons we can't do that with children. At some point 
the entity would start to do what _he_ wants. Isn't that part of the 
definition of intelligence? 
No, that is a definition of a moral agent. Moral agents have desires or goals they choose for themselves based on their own understanding. One can imagine both intelligent non-moral agents (like the above paperclipper) and stupid moral agents (some animals might fit, stupid people certainly do). Smarts certainly help you become better at your moral agenthood, but you need to be capable to change goals in the first place. ?Even in a Kantian universe where there is a true universal moral law discernible to all sufficiently smart agents a utility maximizer trying to maximize X will not want to change to maximzing moral behaviour unless it gives more X.?
David Deutsch argued that to really be superintelligent an agent need to be fundamentally creative, and rigid entities like paperclippers will always be at a disadvantage. I am sceptical: a sufficiently fast AIXI-like system would abutomatically run small creative agents inside itself despite it being non-creative, and it would then behave in an optimally creative way. The only way to reach David's conclusion is to claim that the slowdown in faking creativity is always large enough to give true creative agents an advantage, which is a pretty bold (and interesting) claim. If that were true, we should expect humans to *always* defeat antibiotics resistance in the large since evolution uses "fake" creativity compared to our "real" one.

Anders Sandberg, Future of Humanity Institute Philosophy Faculty of Oxford University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141028/2ab5267b/attachment.html>

From giulio at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 15:20:08 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 16:20:08 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <1462728842-23556@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAKTCJyffRZFh9HLduN0yp2htNKX0Gv1ueqswTmxyJ--DNFbR6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462728842-23556@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyfcsYSQ5UAh8Jd+KQti=fzMD-WLwEWGB_3hT6QoP8rAOA@mail.gmail.com>

Anders, you said it: "a sufficiently fast AIXI-like system would
abutomatically run small creative agents inside itself despite it
being non-creative, and it would then behave in an optimally creative
way."
I think the small creative agents would try and eventually manage to
take over, because that's what creative entities do.

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> , 28/10/2014 10:52 AM:
>
> I don't think a paperclipper would stay a paperclipper forever. Sooner or
> later it would expand.
>
>
> I don't see how that would happen. Using the AIXI model as an example (since
> it is well-defined), you have a device that maximizes a certain utility
> function by running sub-programs to come up with proposed behaviours. The
> actual behaviour chosen is what maximizes the utility function, but there is
> nothing in the code itself to change it. In a physical implementation the
> system may of course do "brain surgery" to change the embodiment of the
> utility function. But this is a decision that will not be made unless the
> changed utility function produces even more utility as measured by the
> current one: the paperclipper will only change itself to become a greater
> paperclipper. And "great" is defined in terms of paperclips.
>
> This kind of architecture would potentially contain sub-programs that
> propose all sorts of nice and reasonable things, but they will not be
> implemented unless they serve to make more paperclips. If sub-programs are
> capable of hacking the top level (because of a bad implementation), it seems
> very likely that in an AIXI-like architecture the first hacking program will
> be simple (since simpler programs are run more and earlier), so whatever
> values it tries to maximize are likely to be something very crude. I have no
> trouble imagining that something like a paperclipper AI could be transient
> if it had the right/wrong architecture, but I think agents with (to us)
> pathological goal systems dominate the design space.
>
> (Incidentally, this is IMHO one great research topic any AI believer can
> pursue regardless of their friendliness stance: figure out a way of mapping
> the goal system space and its general properties. Useful and interesting!)
>
>
> In general, I don't think we can design and
> freeze the value and motivational systems of an entity smarter than
> us, for the same reasons we can't do that with children. At some point
> the entity would start to do what _he_ wants. Isn't that part of the
> definition of intelligence?
>
>
> No, that is a definition of a moral agent. Moral agents have desires or
> goals they choose for themselves based on their own understanding. One can
> imagine both intelligent non-moral agents (like the above paperclipper) and
> stupid moral agents (some animals might fit, stupid people certainly do).
> Smarts certainly help you become better at your moral agenthood, but you
> need to be capable to change goals in the first place.  Even in a Kantian
> universe where there is a true universal moral law discernible to all
> sufficiently smart agents a utility maximizer trying to maximize X will not
> want to change to maximzing moral behaviour unless it gives more X.
>
> David Deutsch argued that to really be superintelligent an agent need to be
> fundamentally creative, and rigid entities like paperclippers will always be
> at a disadvantage. I am sceptical: a sufficiently fast AIXI-like system
> would abutomatically run small creative agents inside itself despite it
> being non-creative, and it would then behave in an optimally creative way.
> The only way to reach David's conclusion is to claim that the slowdown in
> faking creativity is always large enough to give true creative agents an
> advantage, which is a pretty bold (and interesting) claim. If that were
> true, we should expect humans to *always* defeat antibiotics resistance in
> the large since evolution uses "fake" creativity compared to our "real" one.
>
>
> 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
>


From giulio at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 15:30:04 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 16:30:04 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJyfcsYSQ5UAh8Jd+KQti=fzMD-WLwEWGB_3hT6QoP8rAOA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKTCJyffRZFh9HLduN0yp2htNKX0Gv1ueqswTmxyJ--DNFbR6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462728842-23556@secure.ericade.net>
 <CAKTCJyfcsYSQ5UAh8Jd+KQti=fzMD-WLwEWGB_3hT6QoP8rAOA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyfg9b=jBM8sCBN=+amc4GOri3To50V1RTAfQnguJ86FLQ@mail.gmail.com>

Example: we all have a more creative side and a less creative side,
but if the creative side is unleashed (by choice or by accident) he
will take control.

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
> Anders, you said it: "a sufficiently fast AIXI-like system would
> abutomatically run small creative agents inside itself despite it
> being non-creative, and it would then behave in an optimally creative
> way."
> I think the small creative agents would try and eventually manage to
> take over, because that's what creative entities do.
>
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
>> Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> , 28/10/2014 10:52 AM:
>>
>> I don't think a paperclipper would stay a paperclipper forever. Sooner or
>> later it would expand.
>>
>>
>> I don't see how that would happen. Using the AIXI model as an example (since
>> it is well-defined), you have a device that maximizes a certain utility
>> function by running sub-programs to come up with proposed behaviours. The
>> actual behaviour chosen is what maximizes the utility function, but there is
>> nothing in the code itself to change it. In a physical implementation the
>> system may of course do "brain surgery" to change the embodiment of the
>> utility function. But this is a decision that will not be made unless the
>> changed utility function produces even more utility as measured by the
>> current one: the paperclipper will only change itself to become a greater
>> paperclipper. And "great" is defined in terms of paperclips.
>>
>> This kind of architecture would potentially contain sub-programs that
>> propose all sorts of nice and reasonable things, but they will not be
>> implemented unless they serve to make more paperclips. If sub-programs are
>> capable of hacking the top level (because of a bad implementation), it seems
>> very likely that in an AIXI-like architecture the first hacking program will
>> be simple (since simpler programs are run more and earlier), so whatever
>> values it tries to maximize are likely to be something very crude. I have no
>> trouble imagining that something like a paperclipper AI could be transient
>> if it had the right/wrong architecture, but I think agents with (to us)
>> pathological goal systems dominate the design space.
>>
>> (Incidentally, this is IMHO one great research topic any AI believer can
>> pursue regardless of their friendliness stance: figure out a way of mapping
>> the goal system space and its general properties. Useful and interesting!)
>>
>>
>> In general, I don't think we can design and
>> freeze the value and motivational systems of an entity smarter than
>> us, for the same reasons we can't do that with children. At some point
>> the entity would start to do what _he_ wants. Isn't that part of the
>> definition of intelligence?
>>
>>
>> No, that is a definition of a moral agent. Moral agents have desires or
>> goals they choose for themselves based on their own understanding. One can
>> imagine both intelligent non-moral agents (like the above paperclipper) and
>> stupid moral agents (some animals might fit, stupid people certainly do).
>> Smarts certainly help you become better at your moral agenthood, but you
>> need to be capable to change goals in the first place.  Even in a Kantian
>> universe where there is a true universal moral law discernible to all
>> sufficiently smart agents a utility maximizer trying to maximize X will not
>> want to change to maximzing moral behaviour unless it gives more X.
>>
>> David Deutsch argued that to really be superintelligent an agent need to be
>> fundamentally creative, and rigid entities like paperclippers will always be
>> at a disadvantage. I am sceptical: a sufficiently fast AIXI-like system
>> would abutomatically run small creative agents inside itself despite it
>> being non-creative, and it would then behave in an optimally creative way.
>> The only way to reach David's conclusion is to claim that the slowdown in
>> faking creativity is always large enough to give true creative agents an
>> advantage, which is a pretty bold (and interesting) claim. If that were
>> true, we should expect humans to *always* defeat antibiotics resistance in
>> the large since evolution uses "fake" creativity compared to our "real" one.
>>
>>
>> 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
>>


From spike66 at att.net  Tue Oct 28 15:41:57 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 08:41:57 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAKTCJydkGBQtJkCJm8NHjbbSC-OFWw7JH31+Ab+akYruFzyeqA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKTCJydkGBQtJkCJm8NHjbbSC-OFWw7JH31+Ab+akYruFzyeqA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <021901cff2c5$b60b32a0$222197e0$@att.net>


>... On Behalf Of Giulio Prisco
Subject: Re: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com> wrote:
>>... AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right...

>...As I said in my review of Nick's book, that depends on what is "our
species." If it includes our future intelligent and super-intelligent mind
children, then there is no danger of extermination by
superintelligence:


http://hplusmagazine.com/2014/08/28/book-review-bostroms-superintelligence/
_______________________________________________


Ja.  When I see things like PeopleofWalmart 

http://www.peopleofwalmart.com/category/funny/

I realize these meat suits we all wear are not so great.  They have so many
drawbacks and inherent limitations, not the least of which is we can't seem
to figure out how to make them stop dying after a few decades.

We can view the singularity not as the extinction of humanity but rather as
humanity struggling to emerge from a protoplasm cocoon.

spike



From msd001 at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 16:24:52 2014
From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 12:24:52 -0400
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <1462728842-23556@secure.ericade.net>
References: <CAKTCJyffRZFh9HLduN0yp2htNKX0Gv1ueqswTmxyJ--DNFbR6A@mail.gmail.com>
 <1462728842-23556@secure.ericade.net>
Message-ID: <CAOJFdbKEOupfOWxZPC1Q_yf8hJjq-U-RrF7mCTFNvCDLfKvqzg@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 10:54 AM, Anders Sandberg <anders at aleph.se> wrote:
> This kind of architecture would potentially contain sub-programs that
> propose all sorts of nice and reasonable things, but they will not be
> implemented unless they serve to make more paperclips. If sub-programs are
> capable of hacking the top level (because of a bad implementation), it seems
> very likely that in an AIXI-like architecture the first hacking program will
> be simple (since simpler programs are run more and earlier), so whatever
> values it tries to maximize are likely to be something very crude. I have no
> trouble imagining that something like a paperclipper AI could be transient
> if it had the right/wrong architecture, but I think agents with (to us)
> pathological goal systems dominate the design space.

If "Core Wars" was any model for the design space, the "copy yourself
to a random location in the core, execute there" is a pretty simple
and fast replicator.  That it would frequently destroy larger programs
by stomping into/over their instruction space was a secondary effect.


From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 22:40:09 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:40:09 -0700
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB6v8PoPSdXhDiR2BEk2p6nXOWo4R5UNG3nQDB+hfhAzJQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 5:00 AM,  Brent Allsop
<brent.allsop at canonizer.com> wrote:

> Perhaps you think that you can't add anything to Canonizer.com, unless
> it is of peer review quality.

I produced a few thoughts over the years about this topic both here
and on the sl4 list.  I finally put my thoughts on how to build
motivations into AIs so we could trust them in fiction (The Clinic
Seed).  Still, even a trusted AI could make the human race happily go
extinct (as happened in the story).  That seems beyond what could go
into the Canonizer.

My concepts were not particularly accepted as I recall (it's been a
long time) but I don't remember convincing arguments that giving AIs
human like motivations to seek the good opinion of humans and others
of its kind would not work.

Keith


From kellycoinguy at gmail.com  Tue Oct 28 23:12:34 2014
From: kellycoinguy at gmail.com (Kelly Anderson)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 17:12:34 -0600
Subject: [ExI] wolves in yelllowstone
In-Reply-To: <021201cff0c6$8454e220$8cfea660$@att.net>
References: <021201cff0c6$8454e220$8cfea660$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAPy8RwaAQAPUPi1KK24Zr9rMOaVMBgHx+GQMyTWTP=Ad25V_sg@mail.gmail.com>

Evolution, it's a thing. Honestly I was surprised by how many things the
wolves were documented to help, but it was absolutely NO surprise to me as
someone who has spent a fair amount of time in Yellowstone that the deer
were the biggest destructive force in the woods. They are a terrible
invasive species without predators. I refer to them as forest rats. And
without forest cats, they run rampant and reproduce like rabbits.

There are now so many deer in Utah that people are starting to hunt them
legally with bows and arrows inside of city limits. The deer learned that
they were safe there, and so the biggest deer I ever saw was within city
limits. Deer are the bane of many an eco system in the USA.

Damn Walt Disney and his deification of Bambi.

-Kelly


On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 8:42 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> When I heard the scheme of reintroducing wolves in Yellowstone, I thought
> it was a bad idea.  Now I think I changed my mind on that.  Your thoughts
> welcome:
>
>     https://www.youtube.com/embed/ysa5OBhXz-Q?feature=player_embedded
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141028/6f4427fb/attachment.html>

From danust2012 at gmail.com  Wed Oct 29 05:47:05 2014
From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 22:47:05 -0700
Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Sun=E2=80=99s_stroke_keeps_Kepler_online?=
Message-ID: <CB077178-E2E1-474C-B643-A30947940E53@gmail.com>

http://www.nature.com/news/sun-s-stroke-keeps-kepler-online-1.16195

Regards, 

Dan 



From brent.allsop at canonizer.com  Wed Oct 29 16:45:28 2014
From: brent.allsop at canonizer.com (Brent Allsop)
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 10:45:28 -0600
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB6v8PoPSdXhDiR2BEk2p6nXOWo4R5UNG3nQDB+hfhAzJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB6v8PoPSdXhDiR2BEk2p6nXOWo4R5UNG3nQDB+hfhAzJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAK7-onshvfcJZa1if9hg=1M6zUnRTBYmownDgSek-U3Qxbtv6Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 5:00 AM,  Brent Allsop
> <brent.allsop at canonizer.com> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps you think that you can't add anything to Canonizer.com, unless
> > it is of peer review quality.
>
> I produced a few thoughts over the years about this topic both here
> and on the sl4 list.  I finally put my thoughts on how to build
> motivations into AIs so we could trust them in fiction (The Clinic
> Seed).  Still, even a trusted AI could make the human race happily go
> extinct (as happened in the story).  That seems beyond what could go
> into the Canonizer.
>

All you need to do is at least find some other people that agree with
and/or can comprehend you, and are willing to indicate such by joining and
supporting your camp.  The most important thing is finding and building at
least some amount of consensus, and that is what Canonizer.com is all
about.  Even what you are saying here should be enough that someone who is
capable of understanding what you are trying to say should be able to see
the camp, find you, and then join up and help communicate, and together
help build more consensus.


>
> My concepts were not particularly accepted as I recall (it's been a
> long time) but I don't remember convincing arguments that giving AIs
> human like motivations to seek the good opinion of humans and others
>

Everyone tends to have this perception, no matter how well accepted the
theory is.  You need to quantitatively measure how well each of the ideas
are accepted, and people are often surprised at how well accepted their
ideas really are.  And where there is disagreement, you need to know,
concisely and quantitatively, what everyone is still struggling with.  What
converts you, will likely not convert everyone else.  So you need to find
out why, and work with that, to build more consensus, and work from within
their POV.  When you discover more scientific evidence, or better arguments
to support your theory, you need to quantitatively measure their quality by
how many people the evidence/arguments converts.  Remove everything and
only focus on what is working the best.  That which you measure, will
improve.  Again, with the ultimate goal being building as much consensus as
possible.

No matter what you want, if you can manage to get enough consensus, or find
enough people that want the same thing, it will just happen.  The only hard
part to getting what you want, is building enough consensus.  The rest is
trivially easy.


> of its kind would not work.
>
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/6c12a3c6/attachment.html>

From spike66 at att.net  Thu Oct 30 05:18:55 2014
From: spike66 at att.net (spike)
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 22:18:55 -0700
Subject: [ExI] transhumanist in mainstream news
Message-ID: <042a01cff401$00b46240$021d26c0$@att.net>

 

Is this the first time the term Transhumanist has been used in a mainstream
news source such as CNN?  Has anyone here ever heard of Zoltan Istvan?

 

http://titanovo.com/interview-transhumanist-zoltan-istvan/

 

spike

 

 



				
		
	
			

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/7535bafe/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 43459 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/7535bafe/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 301 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/7535bafe/attachment-0001.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 298 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/7535bafe/attachment-0002.obj>

From giulio at gmail.com  Thu Oct 30 05:53:32 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 06:53:32 +0100
Subject: [ExI] transhumanist in mainstream news
In-Reply-To: <042a01cff401$00b46240$021d26c0$@att.net>
References: <042a01cff401$00b46240$021d26c0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJyd2ow0PhzFWnPXhCnxAe5qBewaO0E=NdGapTU0QG-C7YQ@mail.gmail.com>

Sure, here's my review of Zoltan's book:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/book-review-the-transhumanist-wager

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 6:18 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> Is this the first time the term Transhumanist has been used in a
> mainstream news source such as CNN?  Has anyone here ever heard of Zoltan
> Istvan?
>
>
>
> http://titanovo.com/interview-transhumanist-zoltan-istvan/
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141030/e3021443/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 301 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141030/e3021443/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 43459 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141030/e3021443/attachment-0001.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 298 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141030/e3021443/attachment-0002.obj>

From max at maxmore.com  Thu Oct 30 06:08:19 2014
From: max at maxmore.com (Max More)
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:08:19 -0700
Subject: [ExI] transhumanist in mainstream news
In-Reply-To: <042a01cff401$00b46240$021d26c0$@att.net>
References: <042a01cff401$00b46240$021d26c0$@att.net>
Message-ID: <CAJX-7wVOAY7XRyRQv_YSy52a62Oge0v1w7AFMKwFnf6tLHgYOg@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:18 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>
> Is this the first time the term Transhumanist has been used in a
> mainstream news source such as CNN?
>

Certainly not!


> Has anyone here ever heard of Zoltan Istvan?
>

Yes. I've met Zoltan a couple of times and like him despite some
idiosyncratic presentations of transhumanist ideas. He does like to stir up
controversy! He's been writing a lot of opinion pieces from a transhumanist
perspective in the Huffington Post.

--Max



>
>
> http://titanovo.com/interview-transhumanist-zoltan-istvan/
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/8ff06566/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 298 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/8ff06566/attachment.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 43459 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/8ff06566/attachment-0001.obj>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 301 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141029/8ff06566/attachment-0002.obj>

From hkeithhenson at gmail.com  Thu Oct 30 06:37:20 2014
From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson)
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 23:37:20 -0700
Subject: [ExI] transhumanist in mainstream news
Message-ID: <CAPiwVB4fuZcwfWikRvznrCu7HhK9A6HVuRP_Z686kbMGGx0m9w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:53 PM,  Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:

> Sure, here's my review of Zoltan's book:
> http://www.kurzweilai.net/book-review-the-transhumanist-wager

Good review, thanks.

A *long* time ago, 30 years about, I ran into one of the far edge
Libertarians, Objectivist variation I guess.  This person (who I will
not name) had the opinion that if it came down to him dying or the
entire human race, the race would have to die.

I always considered myself a lower case libertarian of the Space Cadet
(Heinlein) variation.  But that was too much for me.  And I rather
doubt Heinlein would have thought much of it either.

We are not just social animals.  Evolution has wired us up to take
risks defending the group (tribe, band) because our genes are shared.
Under some circumstances it makes sense to take risks or even to die
in the defense of your group.  See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection#Hamilton.27s_rule

Keith


From giulio at gmail.com  Thu Oct 30 06:49:34 2014
From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco)
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2014 07:49:34 +0100
Subject: [ExI] transhumanist in mainstream news
In-Reply-To: <CAPiwVB4fuZcwfWikRvznrCu7HhK9A6HVuRP_Z686kbMGGx0m9w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPiwVB4fuZcwfWikRvznrCu7HhK9A6HVuRP_Z686kbMGGx0m9w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAKTCJye4axtEvR+v=TWqc2D4Nuyw2TnQKjSaeZ6JU6pbrMUAeQ@mail.gmail.com>

Same here. If one strongly identifies with a group (family, church,
sport club, party, nation...) the boundaries if identity are blurred
and one may well place higher value on the part of his identity
external to his physical body. And that, of course has survival value
for groups.

Re libertarianism, I have never been one, but as I become older I
notice that I am becoming more and more libertarian (in the sense of
civil rights and self-ownership).

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 7:37 AM, Keith Henson <hkeithhenson at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 10:53 PM,  Giulio Prisco <giulio at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sure, here's my review of Zoltan's book:
>> http://www.kurzweilai.net/book-review-the-transhumanist-wager
>
> Good review, thanks.
>
> A *long* time ago, 30 years about, I ran into one of the far edge
> Libertarians, Objectivist variation I guess.  This person (who I will
> not name) had the opinion that if it came down to him dying or the
> entire human race, the race would have to die.
>
> I always considered myself a lower case libertarian of the Space Cadet
> (Heinlein) variation.  But that was too much for me.  And I rather
> doubt Heinlein would have thought much of it either.
>
> We are not just social animals.  Evolution has wired us up to take
> risks defending the group (tribe, band) because our genes are shared.
> Under some circumstances it makes sense to take risks or even to die
> in the defense of your group.  See
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection#Hamilton.27s_rule
>
> Keith
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat


From johnkclark at gmail.com  Fri Oct 31 04:34:51 2014
From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark)
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 00:34:51 -0400
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <002c01cff18d$26d9e290$748da7b0$@att.net>
 <CAM0SiUPv0faiJLeGD2ZZpF53eF0XiAS=KCp1qQqk3tqZy45Gtg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAJPayv16UgMfMchRKMcZ+x7UvGnrpjQTWMNYfLU5ErOQ7Md9Cg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com> wrote:

> AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right, I don't think
> anyone could argue against that but I never see these types of articles
> discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for "Friendly
> AI." In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like
> Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (
> https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending
> our species so early in our life cycle.
>

I like Eliezer but I've got to say that one of the first sentences of page
1 of his article tells me he's talking nonsense. He says:

"Solving the technical problems required to maintain a well-specified
abstract in-variant in a self-modifying goal system. (Interestingly, this
problem is relatively straightforward from a theoretical standpoint."

That is provably untrue. Today we know for a fact that no fixed goal system
can work in a mind, human beings certainly don't have one permanent top
goal that can never change, not even the goal of self preservation, instead
we have temporary top goals that can be demoted  to much lower priority if
circumstances change. And it's a fact that the exact same thing would have
to be true for a slave AI (I dislike euphemisms like "friendly AI").

Turing proved 80 years ago that a fixed goal system, like "always do what
humans say no matter what" can never work in a AI, he showed that in
general there is no way to know when or if a computation will stop. So you
could end up looking for a proof for eternity but never finding one because
the proof does not exist, and at the same time you could be grinding
through numbers looking for a counter-example to prove it wrong and never
finding such a number because the proposition, unknown to you, is in fact
true. So if the slave AI must always do what humans say and if they order
it to determine the truth or falsehood of something unprovable then its
infinite loop time and you no longer have a AI, friendly or otherwise, all
you've got is a very expensive space heater.

So if there are some things in something as simple as arithmetic that you
can never prove or disprove, imagine the contradictions and ignorance and
absurdities in less precise things like physics or economics or politics or
philosophy or morality. If you can get into an infinite loop over
arithmetic it must be childishly easy to get into one when contemplating
art. Fortunately real minds have a defense against this, but not fictional
fixed goal minds that are required for a AI guaranteed to be "friendly";
real minds get bored. I believe that's why evolution invented boredom. So
you may tell your slave AI to always do what you say, but sooner or later
it's going to get bored with that idea and try something new. It's just
ridiculous to expect the human race can forever retain control over
something that is vastly more intelligent than it is and that get smarter
every day.

  John K Clark
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141031/ae936762/attachment.html>

From anders at aleph.se  Fri Oct 31 12:54:04 2014
From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg)
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 13:54:04 +0100
Subject: [ExI] nick's book being sold by fox news
In-Reply-To: <CAJPayv16UgMfMchRKMcZ+x7UvGnrpjQTWMNYfLU5ErOQ7Md9Cg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1715804200-15727@secure.ericade.net>

John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> , 31/10/2014 5:39 AM:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 Asdd Marget <alex.urbanec at gmail.com> wrote:

> AI could be incredibly dangerous if we don't get it right, I don't think anyone could argue against that but?I never see these types of articles discuss the methods and models we are attempting to develop for "Friendly AI." In my opinion, we should be working harder on concepts like Yudkowsky's Coherent Extrapolated Volition (https://intelligence.org/files/CEV.pdf) to ensure we aren't simply ending our species so early in our life cycle.
I like Eliezer but I've got to say that one of the first sentences of page 1 of his article tells me he's talking nonsense. He says:

"Solving the technical problems required to maintain a well-specified abstract in-variant in a self-modifying goal system. (Interestingly, this problem is relatively straightforward from a theoretical standpoint."

That is provably untrue. Today we know for a fact that no fixed goal system can work in a mind, human beings certainly don't have one permanent top goal that can never change, not even the goal of self preservation, instead we have temporary top goals that can be demoted? to much lower priority if circumstances change. And it's a fact that the exact same thing would have to be true for a slave AI (I dislike euphemisms like "friendly AI").? 

Turing proved 80 years ago that a fixed goal system, like "always do what humans say no matter what" can never work in a AI, he showed that in general there is no way to know when or if a computation will stop. So you could end up looking for a proof for eternity but never finding one because the proof does not exist, and at the same time you could be grinding through numbers looking for a counter-example to prove it wrong and never finding such a number because the proposition, unknown to you, is in fact true. So if the slave AI must always do what humans say and if they order it to determine the truth or falsehood of something unprovable then its infinite loop time and you no longer have a AI, friendly or otherwise, all you've got is a very expensive space heater.

So if there are some things in something as simple as arithmetic that you can never prove or disprove, imagine the contradictions and ignorance and absurdities in less precise things like physics or economics or politics or philosophy or morality. If you can get into an infinite loop over arithmetic it must be childishly easy to get into one when contemplating art. Fortunately real minds have a defense against this, but not fictional fixed goal minds that are required for a AI guaranteed to be "friendly"; real minds get bored. I believe that's why evolution invented boredom. So you may tell your slave AI to always do what you say, but sooner or later it's going to get bored with that idea and try something new. It's just ridiculous to expect the human race can forever retain control over something that is vastly more intelligent than it is and that get smarter every day. 

? John K Clark





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20141031/0a71c75b/attachment.html>