From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 00:33:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:33:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <026a01d203e8$6c955e30$45c01a90$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2016 2:35 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation On Aug 31, 2016 2:10 PM, "spike" > wrote: > Recall that not everyone believes that Mrs. Clinton?s rivals will use nukes. I don?t think that is a big risk. Yes I know what he said. But I don?t think he will do that, once he sees the alternatives, some of which are even scarier in some ways, but can be done quietly under the radar, since it doesn?t create a mushroom cloud and doesn?t run the risk of triggering a nuclear war. Trump has made it clear he doesn't care about that. "Quietly under the radar" is the opposite of what he wants? Ja, my argument is not that Trump is acceptable, nor that Clinton is acceptable. I don?t accept the notion that choosing between a criminal and a crazy is all we have, because alternatives cannot win, because they have no press coverage, and have no press coverage because they cannot win. My contention is that if either of the front runners win, the result will be bad. When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. This does not look to me like the face of a person who fears government. It looks to me like a face of one with contempt for law. Trump has demonstrated contempt for law by what he has said. Clinton has demonstrated contempt for law by what she has done. Meanwhile Johnson tells us the truth: a US president is not a king nor an emperor: http://reason.com/archives/2016/08/31/neither-dictator-nor-king They are not there to do good deeds or run family charities on the side. That isn?t what US presidents do. Our system is broken. We must fix it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 5553 bytes Desc: not available URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 00:48:26 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 17:48:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <028001d203ea$8d53b6b0$a7fb2410$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Dan TheBookMan Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation On Aug 31, 2016, at 1:55 PM, spike > wrote: On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 2:14 PM, spike > wrote: ?> >>?>?John, the problem with these lines of argument is that it tends towards ends-justify-the-means in government which is dangerous? ?>>>?Sometimes the ends justify the means and sometimes they don't. If the ends never justify the means ?then nobody would ever do anything because there would be no way to do it? >>?Oh my, John, I disagree with that comment so very much. The end does not justify the means if the means are illegal. >?Whoa! So, since it was illegal to escape from, say, East Germany during the Cold War, escaping was wrong because illegal means can't be justified by the end of obtaining freedom?...Regards, Dan Dan if one is working in government, then one must obey the laws of that government. Otherwise nothing that person does or pretends to do is of any value. In the case in question, one who runs a family charity is running for an office in which that cannot be done. So it effectively removes a person doing charity from good works, which is negative good work, which is bad work, and is a bad deed. To legitimately hold office, one would need to remove one?s name from the charity. Without the Clinton name on that foundation, no one will give to it. Without Clinton?s eligibility for high office, no one would have paid her all that money for speeches either, any more than anyone read her books. The big money for speeches (from universities (which have far bigger needs than a speech)) have the appearance of a pay-to-play. The donations to the Clinton foundation have the appearance of pay to play. The deletion of email already under subpoena demonstrates contempt for law and the appearance of impropriety. The arrangement in Clinton?s personal assistant?s employment was outright contract fraud, and is not even ambiguous. Regarding ends-justify-the-means arguments, those lead to situations like those carried out by the German government on 30 June 1934. The means were illegal but the ends were thought to be good at the time: ridding the world of those who would oppose the Nazis. Extrajudicial executions were OK if the slain were bad guys. End result: the need to escape that you mentioned as an example. Any end-justifies-the-means attitude anywhere in government is dangerous. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 02:50:07 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 22:50:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:55 PM, spike wrote: > ?>?Sometimes the ends justify the means and sometimes they don't. If the >> ends never justify the means ?then nobody would ever do anything because >> there would be no way to do it? > > > > > Oh my, John, I disagree with that comment so very much. he end does not > justify the means if the means are illegal. > ?We don't really have much of a disagreement here, it's just that I don't like the phrase the end doesn't justify the means > ?> ? > who attacked the US embassy in Libya for instance, and why. > ?ISIS attacked and they did for the same reason that most atrocities are committed, they did it for god. ? > ?>? > There are standards in place, legal safeguards, so that a top brass-hat at > the Pentagon can?t just hire his favorite secretary and make her a . > > ? What standards? If I'm ? her boss and think she has great ability then I'll promote her. Abedin ? was Hillary's ? deputy chief of staff ? and then her status was changed to ?special government employee? ? which was perfectly legal and it allowed her to also work for the ? Clinton Foundation ? . Where is the substance to all this? There are standards in place, legal safeguards, so that a top brass-hat at > the Pentagon can?t just hire his favorite secretary and make her a GS12. A GS12 ? makes about $61,000 a year, seems pretty modest to me for a ? deputy chief of staff ? for the Secretary of State?, Abedin ? probably could have make 10 times ?as much? in ?a? ?business ? job.? ?> ? > Her arrangement with Ms. Abedin is fire. It is contract fraud. ?What fraud? No doubt the people at Fox News and Breitbart ? have invented some wonderful ?conspiracy theories, but the law deals in facts and so do I. > ?> ? > But not contract fraud. It doesn?t even apply to Trump for he has never > held an elected office nor any government position. > Speaking of Trump, why are his business interests so shrouded in secrecy? why doesn't he want us to see his tax records? Donald says he won't put his business empire in a blind trust ?if he wins ? but instead will let his wife and kids run it ?. Makes any conflict interest Hillary may have seem pretty trivial. ? > > ?>?they all accept campaign contributions? > > > > But they don?t sell government favors for them. > ?And neither did Hillary. ? ?I do admit however that one very sleazy character did donate to the Clinton Foundation, in 2009 he gave $100,000 and his name was Donald Trump. ? ?>? >> >?Contributions to the Clinton foundation help millions of people but >> ?Hillary doesn't get a nickel of the money? > > > ?> ? > I see. Can you prove that? > ?Hillary shouldn't have to prove her innocence, but never mind it doesn't matter because yes I can prove it. Outside audits of the Clinton Foundation from 1998 through 2014 are online, and the IRS tax forms are available too, look for yourself: https://www.clintonfoundation.org/about/annual-financial-report ? ?And if that's not good enough you can see Hillary's personal tax returns and that of her husband going all the way back to 1977, see for yourself: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/page/tax-returns/ ? And you can also find the tax returns of Tim Kaine, her VP running mate. By the way, do you know where I can find Trump's tax returns? I've been trying to find them for some time but even mighty Google can't help me for some reason. It's almost as if somebody had something to hide. ?> ? > Having a family charity puts the burden on the recipient of contributions > to prove there is no connection between the charity and government access, > no connection of any kind between anything in the family charity and the > candidate ?There is no law that I've heard of that demands such a thing. And why didn't anybody make a big deal about the Bush family charity, the Points of Light foundation, during not one but 2 ?presidential administration? > ?>>? >> >> ?I ? >> disagree, I believe it has everything to do with her opponent, you should >> always vote for the least bad person who has a chance to win? > > > > Ja, but how do we define the term ?bad? please? ?I'll give you something far better than a definition, I'll give you examples. having a administrator assistant whose husband likes to put pictures of his penis on Facebook is bad, starting a conventional war in Iraq is very bad, and starting a nuclear war is apocalyptically ?bad? > ?> ? > Illegal is bad. ?Yes.? > ?> ? > Crazy is a different kind of bad. ?Yes it's a different kind of bad. If you're the guy who can tell the captain of a Trident Nuclear Submarine what to do then craze is *INFINITY* worse than illegal, and so is stupid. ? > > >> ?>? >> As I have said it is infinitely (and I don't use that word lightly) more >> important to avoid a apocalyptically bad president than it is to elect a >> great one?. > > ? ? > ?> ? > But not a criminal. ?It's true that being insane is not a crime and neither is being an imbecile, but* WHO CARES*? ? > ?> ? > Recall that not everyone believes that Mrs. Clinton?s rivals will use > nukes. I don?t think that is a big risk. Yes I know what he said. But I > don?t think he will do that, once he sees the alternatives, Are ?you really willing to bet your life and the life of everyone ? ?you know on your hunch ?that Donald Trump is not as crazy and not as stupid as he appears to be? My hunch is that if he had to choose between looking foolish and destroying the world Donald would destroy the world. > ?> ? > The notion of voting for a criminal in order to escape the risk of nuclear > weapons being used is illegitimate. ?Avoiding a nuclear war isn't a strong enough intensive?! ? > ?> ? > We should be working to take the nuclear football away from the president. ? Spike, there is precisely a 0% chance of the president losing his control of the nuclear football in the next 338 ?7? hours. Like it or not we must deal with the world that is not the world we might want ?;? and if he wins then ?as certain as day follows night ? in 141 days Donald (who thinks he knows more about military strategy than any General) ?will ? get to play with the football instead of his Twitter account. > >> ?> ? >> ?The charges brought against the two are grotesquely ridiculously >> unsymmetrical? > > ?> ? > It isn?t that serious a charge really. Fraud conviction, 1 to 5 in the > big house, > ?Is ordering somebody to murder a child because you don't like their father a serious charge? How about torturing for fun? ?> > Those criticisms aren?t much about which one will make a better president > > ?Then what's the point of them? All I'm interest is finding which one would be a dreadful president and ?and quite possibly the last president so I can vote for the other one. > ?>? > The rest is irrelevant. If the candidate is a criminal, we can?t elect, > regardless of how bad is her opponent. > > ?Why can't we? I can find no evidence that Hillary has violated any law and apparently no prosecutor can either, but I don't give a damn even if she's a criminal because in the bad president game crazy and stupid outranks illegal, and Donald is both and Hillary is neither. I said months ago that I just didn't get it and I still don't ?.? Trump ? is anti-science ? anti-free market anti-free speech ?and ? anti-encryption, Trump is ? far more secretive than Hillary and will have vastly more conflicts of interest than Hillary ever could ?. And he's as dumb as a sack of rocks. In short Trump stands for everything that Extropianism ? doesn't, and ? yet it's Hillary the list really hates not Donald. I don't get it. ? ? John K Clark > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 03:56:03 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 20:56:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?A GS12 makes about $61,000 a year, seems pretty modest to me for a ? deputy chief of staff for the Secretary of State? Ja, so how did Abedin go from there to 135k, while on salary to the Clinton Foundation and Doug Band?s Teneo Corporation? What exactly was she doing for all that and during that time? The contract signed when she went into that arrangement should be very informative. Abedin might have been legal had she given up her position at the State Department, but that would cause her to lose her clearances. Can?t have that. For Abedin to retain a salary of 135k at State requires a contract, which requires a careful documentation of what Abedin is actually doing for that sum. For something that looks as suspicious as this arrangement, you need an army of contracts inspectors and an audit team, then a second army of inspectors and auditors to watch the first army, then a few independent inspectors to watch all of them. There?s a reason why this kind thing shown below doesn?t happen: If an auditor finds Miss Buxley making a salary equal to or higher than General Halftrack?s, for starters, Halftrack?s career is finished (or whoever signed off on the arrangement and Halftrack can prove he didn?t know.) Then if it is found he did know and did not document the arrangement, he will be serving time in the brig. Contract fraud is taken very seriously in government. In 2012, Abedin was being paid higher than a Brigadier General. OK then, show us the contract. Who signed off on that? Is that person busy for the next 1 to 5 years? ?>>? ?Her arrangement with Ms. Abedin is fire. It is contract fraud. ?>?What fraud? In government, one cannot just pick someone, make them an assistant and pay her whatever they want with our money. There is a process in place to prevent situations like Halftrack would be in if his secretary is discovered to be making 135k with no clear description of her duties and no contracts inspection procedure in place. To not have all that is contract fraud. It is not as serious as leaking classified information of course, but it is a crime. You mentioned you hadn?t heard of Huma Abedin before a few weeks ago. Don?t worry, you will. ?>?It's true that being insane is not a crime and neither is being an imbecile, but WHO CARES? ? I cares. What difference at this point does it make? ?>?And he's as dumb as a sack of rocks. In short Trump stands for everything that Extropianism doesn't, and yet it's Hillary the list really hates not Donald. I don't get it. John K Clark Eh, it isn?t that the list hates either of them really. It hates power-grabbing crazies and power-grabbing criminals in high offices. So don?t vote for them. It makes a difference. Governments must follow their own laws. Governments must fear the people they are elected to serve. The people must not fear the people they elected to serve. Otherwise we have a nuclear-armed banana republic. Hear the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 23010 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gjlewis37 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 09:42:11 2016 From: gjlewis37 at gmail.com (Gregory Lewis) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:42:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> Message-ID: I repeat the remarks by others I'd prefer this list not be infected by too much discussion on current affairs, and I'd prefer a higher level of discussion than 'Trump is a crazy with a potential finger on the big red button'/'Clinton is corrupt!' I think one of the important things with charity is to evaluate the likely output (c.f. Effective Altruism etc.) and on this the Clinton Foundation is pretty opaque. A (critical, albeit as far as I can tell fairly well-reasoned) take is via Nathan Robinson here: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2016/08/the-clinton-foundations-problems-are-deeper-tha Gregory Lewis Public Health Registrar, East of England Mob: 07874 919786 On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 4:56 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *John Clark > > > > >?A GS12 makes about $61,000 a year, seems pretty modest to me for a ? > > deputy chief of staff for the Secretary of State? > > > > Ja, so how did Abedin go from there to 135k, while on salary to the > Clinton Foundation and Doug Band?s Teneo Corporation? What exactly was she > doing for all that and during that time? The contract signed when she went > into that arrangement should be very informative. > > > > Abedin might have been legal had she given up her position at the State > Department, but that would cause her to lose her clearances. Can?t have > that. > > > > For Abedin to retain a salary of 135k at State requires a contract, which > requires a careful documentation of what Abedin is actually doing for that > sum. For something that looks as suspicious as this arrangement, you need > an army of contracts inspectors and an audit team, then a second army of > inspectors and auditors to watch the first army, then a few independent > inspectors to watch all of them. > > > > There?s a reason why this kind thing shown below doesn?t happen: > > > > > > > > If an auditor finds Miss Buxley making a salary equal to or higher than > General Halftrack?s, for starters, Halftrack?s career is finished (or > whoever signed off on the arrangement and Halftrack can prove he didn?t > know.) Then if it is found he did know and did not document the > arrangement, he will be serving time in the brig. Contract fraud is taken > very seriously in government. > > > > In 2012, Abedin was being paid higher than a Brigadier General. OK then, > show us the contract. Who signed off on that? Is that person busy for the > next 1 to 5 years? > > > > > > ?>>? ?Her arrangement with Ms. Abedin is fire. It is contract fraud. > > > > ?>?What fraud? > > > > In government, one cannot just pick someone, make them an assistant and > pay her whatever they want with our money. There is a process in place to > prevent situations like Halftrack would be in if his secretary is > discovered to be making 135k with no clear description of her duties and no > contracts inspection procedure in place. To not have all that is contract > fraud. It is not as serious as leaking classified information of course, > but it is a crime. > > > > You mentioned you hadn?t heard of Huma Abedin before a few weeks ago. > Don?t worry, you will. > > > > > > ?>?It's true that being insane is not a crime and neither is being an > imbecile, but* WHO CARES*? ? > > > > I cares. > > > > What difference at this point does it make? > > > > ?>?And he's as dumb as a sack of rocks. In short Trump stands for > everything that Extropianism doesn't, and yet it's Hillary the list really > hates not Donald. I don't get it. John K Clark > > > > Eh, it isn?t that the list hates either of them really. It hates > power-grabbing crazies and power-grabbing criminals in high offices. So > don?t vote for them. > > > > It makes a difference. Governments must follow their own laws. > Governments must fear the people they are elected to serve. The people > must not fear the people they elected to serve. Otherwise we have a > nuclear-armed banana republic. > > > > Hear the footsteps. > > > > 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: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 23010 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 12:20:13 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 08:20:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nothing to worry about? In-Reply-To: References: <45DDA68C-EFA0-46C7-A90A-42CB3CCE5F00@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:33 PM, BillK wrote: PERC appears to be linked to the Koch brothers. > > ### If it's linked to the Koch brothers, I am ready to trust them. Koch brothers are true American heroes, who rose against the Behemoth and gave it poke in the eye, earning themselves the undying hatred of leftoids everywhere. Hail the Koch brothers! Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 13:13:11 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 06:13:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Rapid emergence of life shown by discovery of 3, 700-million-year-old microbial structures Message-ID: <9769082A-1CFB-402E-A06F-FE2229006760@gmail.com> http://www.nature.com.proxy.readcube.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature19355.html I know it's behind a paywall. Anyhow, I wonder if a more active search under the ice wouldn't yield these kinds of finds faster. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 14:18:45 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 10:18:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Gregory Lewis wrote: ?> ? > I repeat the remarks by others I'd prefer this list not be infected by too > much discussion on current affairs, and I'd prefer a higher level of > discussion than 'Trump is a crazy with a potential finger on the big red > button'/'Clinton is corrupt!' > Sometimes it's necessary to talk about unpleasant things and yes I agree a nuclear fireball would be unpleasant; but discussions about the Singularity are on topic and AI and Nanotechnology aren't the only things that can cause a Singularity, an H-bomb can too. Any sort of Singularity would be important and that is also why I get impatient when people talk about trivialities like the pay grade of assistants. ?The presidency is a high pressure job and to me Trump looks like a mental breakdown waiting to happen. The current Governor of Main seems to be undergoing some sort of mental breakdown right now, imagine if he were the president and had the nuclear launch codes. ? ?> ? > I think one of the important things with charity is to evaluate the likely > output (c.f. Effective Altruism etc.) and on this the Clinton Foundation is > pretty opaque. > ?This is a great example of what I'm talking about. Spike can't understand why I say the list hates Hillary not Donald, but outside audits of the Clinton Foundation are online going back to 1999 and her personal tax records are online going back to 1977. In contrast Donald won't let us see his tax records and his business relationships are a confusing tangled mess that he makes no effort to untangle for us. And yet it's Clinton who is opaque not Trump. The list prefers the anti-scientific anti-free market anti-free speech anti-encryption candidate who won't put his business empire in a blind trust if he becomes president. It's simply not the case that the list dislikes both of them equally and I am honestly confused as to why. I have been asking for months for somebody to give me a clear logical explanation for this very strange phenomenon but so far no luck. I don't get it. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 14:35:04 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 07:35:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> Message-ID: <009101d2045e$085c4f70$1914ee50$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Gregory Lewis Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation >?I repeat the remarks by others I'd prefer this list not be infected by too much discussion on current affairs, and I'd prefer a higher level of discussion than 'Trump is a crazy with a potential finger on the big red button'/'Clinton is corrupt!' Criticism accept, and I will struggle to refrain henceforth, keep the level of discussion at 30k ft, meta rather than micro. >?I think one of the important things with charity is to evaluate the likely output (c.f. Effective Altruism etc.) and on this the Clinton Foundation is pretty opaque. ? Here?s a meta-discussion then on transparency: this 53 second commentary tells everything we need to know regarding transparency and end-justifies-the-means politics. Dr. Gruber sums it up in less than a minute. He tried to walk it back later, but no, he was caught telling the truth, it was recorded on video, it will never go away and can never be unsaid. A rare 53 seconds of pure truth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G790p0LcgbI spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 17:23:25 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 13:23:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Rapid emergence of life shown by discovery of 3, 700-million-year-old microbial structures In-Reply-To: <9769082A-1CFB-402E-A06F-FE2229006760@gmail.com> References: <9769082A-1CFB-402E-A06F-FE2229006760@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 9:13 AM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: http://www.nature.com.proxy.readcube.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ > nature19355.html > > > I know it's behind a paywall. > > Anyhow, I wonder if a more active search under the ice wouldn't yield > these kinds of finds faster. > ?It probably would but the average ice thickness in Greenland is 1.2 miles and it's 2 miles in places so finding more will be difficult. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 18:11:01 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 11:11:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> Message-ID: <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?I get impatient when people talk about trivialities like the pay grade of assistants? In contrast Donald won't let us see his tax records and his business relationships are a confusing tangled mess that he makes no effort to untangle for us. And yet it's Clinton who is opaque not Trump. ? John K Clark ? Ah, OK I see the disconnect, and how two things are being compared which are so dissimilar: Trump was playing with his money. Mrs. Clinton was playing with ours. Trump isn?t breaking any laws: the IRS already has his tax returns. Mrs. Clinton has shown repeated disregard for our laws, with the industrial grade deletion of subpoenaed evidence. She has shown contempt for our laws with that very questionable arrangement with her aide. Unless she can show us a contract with details on what her aide was doing, that isn?t just questionable, it is illegal. That arrangement gives the appearance that perhaps other countries (where governments durn sure are corrupt) might perhaps possibly view a donation to the Clinton Foundation as a way to get access to the US State Department. Just sayin? (as the g droppin? sayin? goes.) Not that any government anywhere would perhaps think that, or misinterpret it, or that perhaps bad guys from places like {fill in any known corrupt government} might somehow contact an aide who is mysteriously employed in three different places simultaneously might be the way in to our State Department. Or perhaps they did, but just sayin? John. Maybe. Trump refuses to show us how he was making his money. Mrs. Clinton refuses to show us how she was spending ours. Easy solution: don?t vote for them. Hear the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 19:26:57 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:26:57 -0500 Subject: [ExI] a little more fun Message-ID: A ham sandwich is better than nothing. Nothing is better than eternal happiness. Thus, a ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 19:36:28 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 12:36:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] a little more fun In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 1, 2016, at 12:26 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > A ham sandwich is better than nothing. > Nothing is better than eternal happiness. > Thus, a ham sandwich is better than eternal happiness. > > bill w I first saw a different version of that pattern many years ago: Nothing is better than fucking. Masturbation is better than nothing. Ergo, masturbation is better than fucking. Hope this doesn't offend anyone. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 19:41:07 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:41:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] political truisms Message-ID: Irrefutable logic: The Left is right. The Right is wrong. And for the Brits: Labour isn't working bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 19:51:50 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 15:51:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 2:11 PM, spike wrote: > *>?>??*I get impatient when people talk about trivialities like the pay >> grade of assistants? In contrast Donald won't let us see his tax records >> and his business relationships are a confusing tangled mess that he makes >> no effort to untangle for us. And yet it's Clinton who is opaque not Trump. >> ? >> John K Clark ? > > > > ?> ? > Ah, OK I see the disconnect, and how two things are being compared which > are so dissimilar: Trump was playing with his money. Mrs. Clinton was > playing with ours. > ?Exactly, so if President Trump gives preferential treatment to his business interests he will personally benefit from it but Mrs. Clinton won't because she has no skin in the game. ? ?> ? > Trump isn?t breaking any laws: ?I just Googled "Trump" and "broke the law" and got 368,000 results.? > ?> ? > the IRS already has his tax returns. ?But we the voters do not have his tax returns. And because of that and because they are so secret and convoluted if President Trump does give preferential treatment to his business interests ? we the voters won't know, only he will know, and of course his wife and kids who will continue to run his business as usual.? ?> ? > She has shown contempt for our laws with that very questionable > arrangement with her aide. Unless she can show us a contract with details > on what her aide was doing, that isn?t just questionable, it is illegal. ?I'll be damned if I know why but the probability Trump will win has gone up in recent days, ? ?it's now at about 30%, ?so the danger is approximately the same as putting not one but two bullets into in revolver, spinning the cylinder at random putting the gun to your head and pulling the trigger. Perhaps that's why when I hear details of the work contract of some aid to Hillary that I've never heard of until a few days ago my mind starts to wander. > ?> ? > That arrangement gives the appearance that perhaps other countries (where > governments durn sure are corrupt) might perhaps possibly view a donation > to the Clinton Foundation as a way to get access to the US State > Department. ?Donating money to a political campaign ? ?in the unstated hope of gaining access is not a crime and is not even considered immoral in most circles, and even less donating money to a philanthropic foundation to get access. ? However it is illegal to accept contributions from foreign government officials ? and it's even illegal to ask for it, but that's exactly what Donald Trump did: ? t http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-29/trump-campaign-broke-law-by-soliciting-foreign-donations-complaint-alleges ?> ? > Trump refuses to show us how he was making his money. Mrs. Clinton > refuses to show us how she was spending ours. ?As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump, and I honest to god don't get it.? ? John K Clark > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 21:33:31 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:33:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] political truisms In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <009901d20498$7d1f9e90$775edbb0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?Subject: [ExI] political truisms >?Irrefutable logic: >?The Left is right. >?The Right is wrong. Ja. The fundamental theorem of algebra is that if A = B and B = C, then A = C. >?And for the Brits: Labour isn't working. bill w It?s something I hope will get more air time here: we face a huge problem to which I have yet to see a convincing answer. The value of labor can only decline as technology advances. But there are plenty of brain workers whose value also declines over time. In the USA, the two mainstream parties seem to have opposite views in a sense: one does nothing, the other does the wrong things. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 1 21:51:00 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:51:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> Message-ID: <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ?>?Exactly, so if President Trump gives preferential treatment to his business interests he will personally benefit from it but Mrs. Clinton won't because she has no skin in the game? Are we comparing what Trump will do to what Clinton has already done? >??I just Googled "Trump" and "broke the law" and got 368,000 results.? Did you read any of them? ?>?I'll be damned if I know why but the probability Trump will win has gone up in recent days, ?it's now at about 30%... The press is talking about the upcoming email dump from Julian Assange. They have noticed he isn?t a bullshitter and hasn?t ever been caught bluffing. >? when I hear details of the work contract of some aid to Hillary that I've never heard of until a few days ago my mind starts to wander? It demonstrates contempt for law. We need elected officials who respect law. Government officials must follow the laws they swear to uphold, to the letter and beyond. ?>? it is illegal to accept contributions from foreign government officials ? and it's even illegal to ask for it, but that's exactly what Donald Trump did... The article doesn?t say what public office he was holding at the time, or whether it was an elected office or an appointed one. John, do you know? ?>?As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump.?..John K Clark Eh, probably about the same. Easy solution: don?t vote for them. Hear the approaching footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 22:39:08 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:39:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:51 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > We need elected officials who respect law. ? What ?? we ? ? need ? ? is that ? ? the elected official who will control the nuclear football not to be crazy or stupid ?. ? Donald Trump is both and Hillary Clinton is neither. ? ? That's all I need to know for her to get my vote, after that ? ? I don't care if she's John Dillinger's illegitimate love child. John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 22:54:35 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:54:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:51 PM, spike wrote: ?> >> ?> ? >> ?As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump > > ?> ? > Eh, probably about the same. Easy solution: don?t vote for them. > > ?Spike, we both know that if there were only 2 candidates on the ballot most people on this list would vote for Trump even though he would be the most anti-free market president in a century, and I'm sincerely trying to figure out why. It's just so asymmetrical, we've got existential issues on the one side and obscure aids who may or may not have filed the proper government paperwork on the other. And the paperwork wins! I just don't get it. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 23:17:16 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:17:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] labor and management was Re: political truisms Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 4:33 PM, spike wrote: > > > It?s something I hope will get more air time here: we face a huge problem > to which I have yet to see a convincing answer. The value of labor can > only decline as technology advances. But there are plenty of brain workers > whose value also declines over time. In the USA, the two mainstream > parties seem to have opposite views in a sense: one does nothing, the other > does the wrong things.spike > > ?Well, I just dunno about labor unions, but I do see that the decline of them parallels the lowering or stagnation of wages. My very humble opinion (me? economics? labor? management?) is that we need a better balance of the two for optimum functioning. Now what do you call this in math? Team A beats B, team B beats C, and team C beats A bill w? > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 1 23:25:18 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 18:25:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> Message-ID: As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump, and I honest to god don't get it.? ? John K Clark My sense is the group is that only Rafal is for Trump. The rest think that Hillary's negatives outweigh the positives (no hate necessarily involved) and for Trump the negatives FAR outweigh the positives. Me - I can't see any intelligent person voting for Trump unless it's a Repub party effect. Or the effect of maybe more taxes on income from the upper end if Clinton is elected. In other words, a person voting for himself rather than the country. Shame on all of you! Cowards! Wimps! Nobody responded to my depiction of women as female bower birds. Of course the women were too smart to respond (and maybe you were too). bill w bill w On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:54 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:51 PM, spike wrote: > > ?> >>> ?> ? >>> ?As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump >> >> > > ?> ? >> Eh, probably about the same. Easy solution: don?t vote for them. >> >> > ?Spike, we both know that if there were only 2 candidates on the ballot > most people on this list would vote for Trump even though he would be the > most anti-free market president in a century, and I'm sincerely trying to > figure out why. It's just so asymmetrical, we've got existential issues on > the one side and obscure aids who may or may not have filed the proper > government paperwork on the other. And the paperwork wins! I just don't get > it. > > John K Clark ? > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From natasha at natasha.cc Thu Sep 1 23:56:18 2016 From: natasha at natasha.cc (natasha at natasha.cc) Date: Thu, 01 Sep 2016 16:56:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation Message-ID: <20160901165618.d116f5e08926a7036dd11a0a743afc19.11d74ad2ae.wbe@email17.godaddy.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 2 00:02:13 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:02:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> Message-ID: <019b01d204ad$42aaaa60$c7ffff20$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2016 3:55 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 5:51 PM, spike > wrote: ?> ?> ? ?As I said the list hates Hillary far more than it hates Trump ?> ? Eh, probably about the same. Easy solution: don?t vote for them. ?Spike, we both know that if there were only 2 candidates on the ballot most people on this list would vote for Trump even though he would be the most anti-free market president in a century? There was a really good interview with Gary Johnson recently that might answer this question. The press queried on his views on taxes. He related that in his view, we should replace the income tax with a value-added tax (and so forth) but then added a key phrase that was music to my ears: US presidents don?t do that, the House does. Naturally the press had no idea what he was talking about (imagine that (because USians tend to think that everything the government does is on the orders of the president (it really really doesn?t work that way (not at all, not even close (by careful design (by guys who knew firsthand what happens when we concentrate power.)))))) The interviewer then inserted a snarky comment that Johnson is really saying: don?t worry about my promises, they won?t pass anyway. Johnson patiently explained that we have a constitution that defines what various branches of government actually do. He isn?t making any claim that he has any significant influence on tax structure; he is the first candidate in a long time to explicitly state that he is running for president, not king, not emperor. Presidents do not make the call on that. Astonishing! The truth! As I have said repeatedly, presidents shouldn?t make the call on nukes either. It was set up that way so that we can respond quickly in an attack. But? we now have early warning systems and instant communications. The reason we originally set up that system has passed. John, you have made the case that this system will not change, but I argue that it can and probably will: the next president will likely be one that noooobody trusts. If the congress passes a bill to take back that football (and I hope they do) the president has the option of vetoing that bill. However? a determined senate can do it anyway. It requires a 2/3 vote to override a veto. If we wind up with either a crazy or criminal president, the senate will perhaps realize they better take action forthwith. The world becomes a safer place if no one can trigger nuclear war by merely getting pissed off or indicted. >?and I'm sincerely trying to figure out why. It's just so asymmetrical, we've got existential issues on the one side and obscure aids who may or may not have filed the proper government paperwork on the other. And the paperwork wins! I just don't get it?John K Clark ? It is more than improper or incomplete paperwork. In contract law. If a SoS enters a contract and does not have everything carefully documented, it is automatic contract fraud. There are no exceptions to government contract law as the rank gets higher: in fact it gets more strict as you go up, because the amounts get bigger. An independent organization had Freedom of Information Act demand that contract, and it comes due in a couple weeks. If the State Department can?t produce that contract, everything changes. Does that explain those numbers John? Note that the contract has nothing to do with Trump (who has never issued a government contract) nor any particular party, not asking about impact on elections, they are not asking that. It has to do with existing contract law and the question of whether or not it was violated, and if not, hand over the contract, and if so, then what? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Sep 2 01:56:17 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 21:56:17 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:25 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > My sense is the group is that only Rafal is for Trump. > ### Please do not insult me. As I mentioned multiple times here, I do not vote. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 2 03:21:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 20:21:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The who? Foundation Message-ID: <006201d204c9$18154370$483fca50$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of natasha at natasha.cc Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation Spike, Right. Don't vote for them. And don't tell list members what they think. And stop using terms such as "hate". what happened to extropy>?? Natasha Vita-More, Ph.D. http://www.natasha.cc Greetings Extropians, Especially in extremely sensitive topics, please be very careful about attributions. I think I was scolded for something John Clark wrote, a comment with which I disagree in any case. {8-\ No worries, life goes on. I am bowing out of political discussions for the time being however, and will watch and listen carefully in the next few weeks. I do encourage all to do likewise. We have beaten the topic to death and beyond all recognition. It is out of our hands now I fear. Onward! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rahmans at me.com Fri Sep 2 09:48:49 2016 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2016 11:48:49 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Nothing to worry about? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > From: Rafal Smigrodzki > > To: ExI chat list > > Subject: Re: [ExI] Nothing to worry about? > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:33 PM, BillK > wrote: > > PERC appears to be linked to the Koch brothers. >> >> ### If it's linked to the Koch brothers, I am ready to trust them. > > Koch brothers are true American heroes, who rose against the Behemoth and > gave it poke in the eye, earning themselves the undying hatred of leftoids > everywhere. It?s nice that such a Mom-n-Pop operation like the Koch brothers had the guts to hire an army of lobbyists to begin poking Washington. Unfortunately, the lobbyists seem to have their aim considerably lower, specifically the area from whence Rafal derives his facts. Interestingly, because Rafal has his head so firmly lodged in his fact generator, and its online analog Breitbart, I?m sure that by timing flow and echo we have a new metric for gauging the convergence of the physical and the digital and thereby the approach of the Singularity. Well done Rafal! Back to the lobbyists, unfortunately instead of the traditional sticks they used something else for their poking. Oh well, at least it rhymes with ?stick?. This wouldn?t have been so bad if the Koch brothers hadn?t made one more error; corporations are people under US law. Koch Industries is composed of many thousands of hectares of land, processing plants, approximately 100 000 workers, a network of contracts, intellectual property, bank accounts, lawyers and lobbyists. Koch Industries is the Behemoth. And as a perfect Ayn Rand Libertarian behemoth it feels no altruistic impulse so it couldn?t comply with the poking directive and go poke itself. Unfortunately, as a perfect Ayn Rand libertarian behemoth, it found its enlightened self-interest by poking the public and our environmental laws. Let?s me be clear, something like Koch Industries is as close to an AI as we have. It exists on a scale and time frame beyond human. It doesn?t have its own moral sense/faculty/psychology. For some this may be an ideal but for me it is the clearest explanation why corporations need to be regulated by our citizen?s AI, the government. > > Hail the Koch brothers! Seig? > > Rafa? Omar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 2 15:05:57 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 11:05:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation In-Reply-To: <019b01d204ad$42aaaa60$c7ffff20$@att.net> References: <017301d202d7$fa369130$eea3b390$@att.net> <01c301d202ea$63462570$29d27050$@att.net> <019401d203c9$fd13f8a0$f73be9e0$@att.net> <035801d20404$c3490ad0$49db2070$@att.net> <002501d2047c$3356d470$9a047d50$@att.net> <00bf01d2049a$ee3ee660$cabcb320$@att.net> <019b01d204ad$42aaaa60$c7ffff20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:02 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > As I have said repeatedly, presidents shouldn?t make the call on nukes ?And as I have said more than once it makes not one bit of difference if they should or shouldn't because presidents *DO* make the call on nukes and they will continue to do so. > ?> ? > It was set up that way so that we can respond quickly in an attack. But? > we now have early warning systems and instant communications. The reason > we originally set up that system has passed. John, you have made the case > that this system will not change, but I argue that it can and probably will: ?Probably? Well OK, the possibility that will happen is not zero, it's greater than that, it's about the same as the possibility that all the air molecules in the room you're in right now through random motion will suddenly end up on the other side of the room and you suffocate in a vacuum. It could happen but probably won't. > ?> ? > If the congress passes a bill to take back that football (and I hope they > do) the president has the option of vetoing that bill. However? a > determined senate can do it anyway. It requires a 2/3 vote to override a > veto. ?Spike, if you're willing to stake your life on the possibility of that happening in the next 4 years then you are one fearless man and should consider a career change to jumping cars on motorcycles. ?>? > He > ?[Johnson] ? > related that in his view, we should replace the income tax with a > value-added tax (and so forth) but then added a key phrase that was music > to my ears: US presidents don?t do that, the House does. > But US presidents can veto a tax bill the House passes, and in the real world we live in a US presidents also has considerable political power to pressure House members to vote the way he wants, not total power but quite considerable. ? > >> ?>? >> It's just so asymmetrical, we've got existential issues on the one side >> and obscure aids who may or may not have filed the proper government >> paperwork on the other. And the paperwork wins! I just don't get it. > > > > It is more than improper or incomplete paperwork. In contract law. I still don't consider a contract dispute between an obscure government employee and her employer to be an existential issue, but never mind, it you want to talk about contract law lets talk about it. Trump is being sued in hundreds of separate lawsuits for violating the construction contract he signed and not paying people what he promised them he would pay: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/09/donald-trump-unpaid-bills-republican-president-laswuits/85297274/ Trump is being sued for not living up to the contract he made with thousands of poor students signed up at his ridiculous Trump "University" and bilking them out of $40,000,000: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/02/nyregion/new-york-attorney-generals-suit-against-trump-university-may-proceed-court-rules.html?_r=0 Trump's modeling agency is being sued for violating work contracts and ?fraudulent misrepresentation and violations of U.S. immigration and labor laws": http://www.politicususa.com/2016/03/09/fate-lawsuit-brought-trump-model-decided-month.html John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 2 16:00:55 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 09:00:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire Message-ID: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] The Clinton Foundation On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 8:02 PM, spike > wrote: ?> >?? presidents shouldn?t make the call on nukes ?>? it makes not one bit of difference if they should or shouldn't because presidents DO make the call on nukes and they will continue to do so? John K Clark John suppose the person who wins the election (we are told he or she won) is distrusted by the current administration (and congress (and most of the rest of us (not mentioning any names (don?t need to.)))) Then the lame-duck congress drafts a bill like the old stadium cheer: Hey hey whaddya say, let?s go take that ball away? Lame duck congress passes it, lame duck president signs it, it?s not just a suggestion, it?s the law. Football is passed by current lame-duck president over to where it should have been to start with, a couple months, weeks, days, hours or even minutes before inauguration, new suspect is sworn into office without ever getting the launch codes. Risk of nuclear single-point failure averted, done. The commies follow suit. Then we can officially declare that the cold war is over, the entire planet breathes a long-delayed sigh of relief. John there is no need to be a nattering nabob of negativism. The above is an easily-imagined scenario. There is plenty of light at the end of this dark tunnel. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 2 18:57:47 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 14:57:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:00 PM, spike wrote: > >it makes not one bit of difference if they should or shouldn't because >> presidents DO make the call on nukes and they will continue to do so? John >> K Clark > > > ?> ? > John suppose the person who wins the election (we are told he or she won) > is distrusted by the current administration (and congress (and most of the > rest of us (not mentioning any names (don?t need to.)))) > Then the lame-duck congress drafts a bill like the old stadium cheer: Hey > hey whaddya say, let?s go take that ball away? Lame duck congress passes > it, > ?Passed by a congress where both houses are controlled by Republicans who endorse Trump and where each one is trying to convince voters that they are tougher on defence issues than anyone else in government? Pigs will fly first. Even Republicans who are now lukewarm to him (because they don't think he will win) ?will change their tune and sing his praises if the unexpected happens and voters go for his bullshit and he becomes President. > ?> ? > There is plenty of light at the end of this dark tunnel. > ?Yes but it turns out the light is coming from the headlight ?of a diesel locomotive heading straight for you .? On a separate matter, I looked at the title of your post and wondered if you too were an Isaac Asimov fan. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Sep 2 19:31:51 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 12:31:51 -0700 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> Message-ID: As John points out, the odds of Congress doing what you propose are laughably tiny... On Sep 2, 2016 9:16 AM, "spike" wrote: > The commies follow suit. ...but this is even more so. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 2 20:17:53 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:17:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> Message-ID: <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Friday, September 02, 2016 11:58 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] foundation and empire On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:00 PM, spike > wrote: >it makes not one bit of difference if they should or shouldn't because presidents DO make the call on nukes and they will continue to do so? John K Clark ?> ?>?John suppose the person who wins the election (we are told he or she won) is distrusted by the current administration (and congress (and most of the rest of us (not mentioning any names (don?t need to.)))) Then the lame-duck congress drafts a bill like the old stadium cheer: Hey hey whaddya say, let?s go take that ball away? Lame duck congress passes it, ?>?Passed by a congress where both houses?and where each one is trying to convince voters that they are tougher on defence issues than anyone else in government? Pigs will fly first? Keep in mind that this might be our ooooonnne and only chance, our one chance to solve a problem which has been there since the whole notion of the executive branch controlling the nukes first evolved. We know we have a single-point failure there, and we know the results would be catastrophic. We can estimate the risk with each new administration, but risk accumulates. Unless this is fixed, eventually nukes will fly for reasons such as someone lost their temper, or were being threatened (with something more mundane than missiles.) If congress realizes that this is an opportunity that may never be seen again, ever, and realize that the whole world becomes safer if about five guys in congress must authorize any attack, and this might be the one time when a new president goes in with the level of distrust, bipartisan distrust as the next one will have? If congress will recognize this is our oooonnnne chaaaance to make safe a very dangerous situation, then acts on it, this will fly before pigs do. It?s our one chance, this year. This is the year when both major parties pretty much distrust their own candidate, and durn sure distrust the other one. One chance, one. >?On a separate matter, I looked at the title of your post and wondered if you too were an Isaac Asimov fan? John K Clark? Of course. Asimov was brilliant. We think of him as a terrific Sci-fi writer, but in my view his most brilliant work was the non-fiction essays he wrote as a monthly column for Fact and Science Fiction magazine, which I read in my misspent youth after I finished with the latest National Geographic (for the articles you know, only the articles.) That science non-fiction stuff was terrific. I bought the bound copies and read all of them after college was finished. Brilliant stuff. Were Asimov among us today, he would relate to my One Chance argument I make above. Congress has nothing to lose, and Obama has everything to gain if he signs off on that deal. Reason: it would be a real and lasting legacy. Without that, he has a goose egg as soon as that system fails, that bill we had to hurry up and pass to find out what is in it. When that eventually collapses, he has no legacy at all that I can tell. But if he managed to solve that huge problem, that single point failure which threatens the planet, he would be remembered for that. Historians will look kindly on it. Consider Asimov?s history non-fiction approach. That was brilliant too, but because he didn?t interpret history as this army defeated that army and the other thing. He recognized that it was all about technology, how this technology defeated that technology, not which band of apes defeated which other. Brilliant stuff, simple enough for a child to understand, and I can give you a good example of one who does. Mental exercise in the spirit of Asimov: list all the presidential administrations you know (no looking up anything, put your OK Google phone away) and give a legacy in one or two words if possible, or a short phrase. Doesn?t have to be something good, just the most memorable with the most lasting repercussions or most well-known. Examples, Eisenhower: interstate highway system. Nixon: Watergate. WJClinton: Monica. Ja we know these guys did other things, but these are what they are remembered for. Repeat for the current administration please. Doesn?t want it to be Benghazi or a health system that eventually went away. But if he had instead: prevented nuclear war, well that?s a pretty damn good lasting legacy, ja? That?s what I would be doing right now in that seat, and try to get it through before the election if possible. Then we really don?t need to tie ourselves in knots like we have been and have a virtual civil war over a job that really isn?t all that powerful; it wouldn?t much matter. We wouldn?t have billions of dollars spent on getting a job that pays a couple hundred thousand. It wouldn?t matter all that much who had that office. This is our one chance John, one. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rex at nosyntax.net Fri Sep 2 20:17:07 2016 From: rex at nosyntax.net (rex) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 13:17:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] political truisms In-Reply-To: <009901d20498$7d1f9e90$775edbb0$@att.net> References: <009901d20498$7d1f9e90$775edbb0$@att.net> Message-ID: <20160902201707.GB8087@nosyntax.net> spike [2016-09-01 14:48]: > ? > > ? > > >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace > > >?Subject: [ExI] political truisms > > ? > > >?Irrefutable logic: > > ? > > >?The Left is right. > > ? > > >?The Right is wrong. > > ? > > Ja.? The fundamental theorem of algebra is that if A = B and B = C, then A > = C. No. That's the transitive property of equality. If we choose "beats" for "=", then we know it's not always true for sports teams. The fundamental theorem of algebra is a very different thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_theorem_of_algebra From atymes at gmail.com Fri Sep 2 21:35:11 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 14:35:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 2, 2016 1:19 PM, "spike" wrote: > If congress will recognize this is our oooonnnne chaaaance to make safe a very dangerous situation, then acts on it, this will fly before pigs do. They won't. Likewise, water will remain wet. Wishing is irrelevant here: there are fundamental problems that would need to be addressed before Congress would even consider such a thing. (For example, getting them to actually care, as opposed to just paying lip service. For another, getting them to realize that an American nuclear first strike really is something that Trump might actually attempt, even with the evidence Trump has provided. And then there are the ones who assume Clinton has basically already won and won't first strike.) Your proposal fails to acknowledge that said barriers even exist, let alone how to solve them. Can we please keep discussion to things that are even remotely possible? For instance, given the things Clinton is expected to do in office, how might we take advantage of those to boost public adoption technologies to render certain forms of corruption impossible? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 2 23:06:53 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 19:06:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:17 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > Were Asimov among us today, he would relate to my One Chance argument I > make above. ? I'm sure he would because Asimov was logical ?.? I relate to it too because betting civilization and perhaps the entire human species on the sanity of just one person is scary, but the trouble is logical people are rare ?. ?I t's even rarer for one of them to become an American politician; he'd certainly have to carefully hide his disreputable logical tendencies from the voters to have any hope of being elected. There is a 0% chance congress doing what you suggest. And if there were such a thing as a negative probability that's the chance I'd give to Vladimir Putin ? ?deciding to give ? up control of his nuclear weapons. It won't happen. So all a logical voter can do is vote for the least crazy candidate that has a chance of winning, and this year it's obvious which one that is. Like you I want a better choice but as the Rolling Stones said in their song used without permission at the Republican convention, ? ? you can't always get what you want. Trump keeps ?using? the song ? ?in his nuremberg rallies ? ? despite the Stones protests ;? ? Mick Jagger ? ? commented "I can't get no satisfaction". ?John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 3 00:06:32 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 17:06:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> Message-ID: <005b01d20577$07c60230$17520690$@att.net> >? Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] foundation and empire On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 4:17 PM, spike > wrote: ?> ?>?.Were Asimov among us today, he would relate to my One Chance argument I make above. ? >?I'm sure he would because Asimov was logical? Understatement. He was logical and creative at the same time while being mind-blowing smart. Such a combination, so seldom seen. Oh that humanity could have a thousand like him, a million. >? betting civilization and perhaps the entire human species on the sanity of just one person is scary? Way beyond scary, it feels like collective insanity to keep that system in place when we don?t need to anymore. We can make the system reliable enough and fire in response to an attack if we have about five people with veto power over any launch, one from each house from each of the mainstream parties and the supreme court chief justice. It could be set to where if any of the five are unresponsive or already perished such as from having been slain or nuked, it is still possible to fire rockets (so we wouldn?t introduce any risk of inability to respond to attack.) If a sitting president tried to fire a first strike illegitimately, he or she would need to slay all five of those with a finger on the safety switch. I would think congress would want to have the option of stopping a first strike. Why would they not want that? And if an outgoing president was a pacifist and wanted an actual legacy, why would not he sign that? >?There is a 0% chance congress doing what you suggest? No I don?t want to bet, but the probability is non-zero. I don?t see why this isn?t a common bumper sticker in the one election year when noooobody will display either of the mainstream parties: Secure the Nukes! This weird cycle I have seen a full order of magnitude more Sanders stickers and a full order of magnitude more Johnson/Weld stickers than I have seen for the two mainstream candidates combined. That is very very odd. The people apparently hold the two mainstreamers in disdain and distrust (imagine that) and yet the real negative campaigning hasn?t even started yet. We haven?t seen either of Assange?s planned releases. The debates haven?t been held yet, and we can just imagine what those two are going to say to each other. I do look forward to that with eager anticipation. This is a great window of opportunity to secure the nukes, a window which will likely close forever if we pass up this one golden chance to get that done once and for all. This is such a rare combination: a pacifist termed-out lame duck president with no apparent legacy, coupled with a choice of hawkish successors, both widely distrusted with power. Has that ever happened before? >?And if there were such a thing as a negative probability that's the chance I'd give to Vladimir Putin ?deciding to give up control of his nuclear weapons? John K Clark? I come from the point of view of one who watched in absolute astonishment as a bunch of commies battered down the Berlin Wall from their side. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 00:36:44 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 17:36:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: <005b01d20577$07c60230$17520690$@att.net> References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> <005b01d20577$07c60230$17520690$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 2, 2016 5:23 PM, "spike" wrote: > >? Behalf Of John Clark > >?There is a 0% chance congress doing what you suggest? > > No I don?t want to bet, but the probability is non-zero. It is as close to zero as can be measured. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 01:19:40 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 21:19:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nothing to worry about? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 5:48 AM, Omar Rahman wrote: > > > Seig? > ### For your convenience, the correct spelling of the party greeting is "Sieg heil!". I know I must be doing something right when my minor remarks trigger formless left-winger ire punctuated by NSDAP references. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 01:35:51 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 21:35:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] foundation and empire In-Reply-To: References: <009e01d20533$30935a80$91ba0f80$@att.net> <002c01d20557$16889870$4399c950$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > > Can we please keep discussion to things that are even remotely possible? > For instance, given the things Clinton is expected to do in office, how > might we take advantage of those to boost public adoption technologies to > render certain forms of corruption impossible? > ### If the stupid party loses control of the congress, there is a significant risk of many forms of corruption becoming possible, terminally entrenched and widespread, given one-party control of two of the three branches. If the stupids keep the congress, there may be a stalemate, which is the best we can hope for. Will the public wake up and achieve some feats of self-defense against the Behemoth? Dunno, maybe. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 16:36:49 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 12:36:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? Message-ID: ?Add quantum computers to the list of things that could create a singularity. Google now thinks that as early as the end of next year they will have a working 50 Qubit quantum computer that can achieves something they call "quantum supremacy", it means solving a problem that no existing conventional computer can. This is much earlier than anybody thought just 5 years ago. The problem they're focusing on is calculating how a network of quantum circuits behaves. The difficulty of solving the network problem increases exponentially with the number of circuits, a smartphone can calculate what a 6 x 4 grid will do, to figure out a 6 x 7 grid Google needed one of the world's largest supercomputers with 10,000 times the power of a high end PC. To calculate what a 7 x 7 grid will do is beyond existing technology, you'd need a conventional computer with twice the memory of the world's largest supercomputer, but a 50 Qubit quantum computer could solve it easily. And the technique Google is using seems to be scalable, no need to stop at 50 Qubits. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg23130894-000-revealed-googles-plan-for-quantum-computer-supremacy/ ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 16:58:37 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 11:58:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities Message-ID: I know that if you view things a certain way, nearly everything is a combination of many things and is improbable. But I am looking for things that have happened to you that were really memorable for improbability, like mine: We were sitting in the end zone in Birmingham, Alabama, watching the local semipro team play Hawaii. It was cold and raining and we were all under a plastic sheet, rather miserable, and the home team hadn't done much. Our team was at the other end of the field at the 5 yard line coming out way. For the first and only time I ever stood up and yelled something; I said "What we need right now is a 95 yard touchdown pass." It happened on the next play. The whole end zone looked at me, and later in the game called to me to call for another one. Not only do 95 yard plays happen very seldomly, how about just after I called it? I, who never stood up and said anything. Have you had any type of highly improbable event happen to you where you were involved in some way, not just a spectator? (Yeah, kinda Reader's Digest kind of thing.) One more: as my wife and I were driving along a back road I saw a group of vultures up ahead and slowed down as the group flew off to the right. Only one bird flew left but that was enough to bust my windshield, sending glass all the way to the back window. Not improbable? One year later in another car my wife was driving along the same road with me and a vulture hit her windshield in the same place. The first time I learned not to put a used windshield in a car by myself. Got it in, but it took all day and I never got the trim in. Once, not improbable. Twice? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 3 17:49:49 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 10:49:49 -0700 Subject: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003f01d2060b$9206ece0$b614c6a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 9:59 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities >? I said "What we need right now is a 95 yard touchdown pass." It happened on the next play. The whole end zone looked at me, and later in the game called to me to call for another one? He?s GOD! they shouted in unison, as they fell before him in humble adoration. Alternative: you have the FORCE BillW. You are the droid we are looking for. >?Have you had any type of highly improbable event happen to you where you were involved in some way, not just a spectator? (Yeah, kinda Reader's Digest kind of thing.)? If this doesn?t generate some welcome fun lighthearted discussion, I don?t know what will. >?One more: as my wife and I were driving along a back road I saw a group of vultures up ahead and slowed down as the group flew off to the right. Only one bird flew left but that was enough to bust my windshield, sending glass all the way to the back window?Not improbable? One year later in another car my wife was driving along the same road with me and a vulture hit her windshield in the same place?bill w Turn in the road, driver and beast have a difficult time seeing each other, driver smites and slays beast with Detroit, vultures come in for lunch regularly in that spot. Notice how vultures feed: they surround their lunch, give each other space if possible. They get startled by suddenly approaching growling thing which by their instinct matches a hungry lion, they fly away, but vultures and big cumbersome things and require some runway with a relatively low climb rate and low turning ability. Result: that spot is a frequent meeting place between Detroits and the hapless local fauna, the feathered scavengers? grow big and strong devouring slain beasts at that spot. Then, any time a Detroit comes suddenly into view, the vultures fly away from their meal, at least one of which needs to come in your general direction to have sufficient clear runway, Detroit smites scavenger, broken windshield, revolting vulture guts spewed upon driver and passenger. If you continue to drive that road, eventually good chance you will sacrifice a third windshield. Coincidental indeed, but not so astonishing. Suggest slowing and honking as you approach Bend in the Road vulture restaurant henceforth. Back to calling upon your team to hurl a winning pass sir. That was impressive. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 3 19:33:36 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 12:33:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] lighthearted banter for a long weekend on becoming jeeves. was RE: for fun - statistical improbabilities Message-ID: <009901d2061a$12209fd0$3661df70$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 10:50 AM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: Re: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 9:59 AM To: ExI chat list > Subject: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities >>? I said "What we need right now is a 95 yard touchdown pass." It happened on the next play. The whole end zone looked at me, and later in the game called to me to call for another one? >?He?s GOD! they shouted in unison, as they fell before him in humble adoration. Alternative: you have the FORCE BillW. You are the droid we are looking for? spike I retract my earlier comment BillW; you are the football Moses. When the Israelis went out to fight the Amalekites (Palestinians) the uncircumcised savages were scoring repeatedly until Moses stood and held up his hands, at which time the Israelis scored. Read it for yourself, Exodus Chapter 17: 10 So Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek: and Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. 11 And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. 12 But Moses hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady until the going down of the sun. 13 And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword. That whole British understated ?discomfited?with the edge of the sword? comment, heh, the bible translators 400 yrs ago had to know that was funny. I wouldn?t be at all surprised if Shakespeare wrote that (he is thought to have perhaps been an uncredited contributor to the King James version (a contention I find plausible (evidence supplied on request.))) A kind offlist interlocutor complimented me on my newfound loquacious erudition, compelling me to offer an explanation. >From a person?s favorite movies, books and TV, much can be ascertained about that personality. The very best television I have ever seen is the Laurie and Fry version of PG Wodehouse? Jeeves and Wooster, a British comedy made in 1990 thru 1993, a mere 23 episodes, priceless jewels all, the very best comedy I have ever seen on TV without exception. My bride and I viewed them when they were being made and loved them. We bought the series and have viewed them and enjoyed them repeatedly over the years. It isn?t Monty Python slapstick style humor, but rather concepty social commentaryey parodyey humor. One must concentrate for a full 40 minutes to get it, but it is multi-level humor with a message, paradoxical jokes within jokes. Brilliant stuff! If you see what Laurie and Fry do with it, also notice the craftsmanship in the acting, the elaborate sets (clearly they spend skerjillions of dollars on these episodes, getting all those flawless 1930s cars, the costumes, those stately English castles and vast estates, all of it.) They managed to stay very true to the message and humor of Wodehouse, Britain?s answer to our Mark Twain. I can anticipate newcomers commenting that it is a show about nothing, but if you consider the message beneath the surface Drone?s Club silliness, you understand why England changed so much, why it works the way it does today, and perhaps even gain insight into why the Iranian Revolution happened (for they had a similarly structured society at that time to England only worse, and suffered similar consequences, only worse.) I think you can find the episodes on YouTube, or your local library probably has them. If you haven?t viewed those, it is worth your 40 minutes to enjoy one or more. Or all of them, if you are a Jeeves and Wooster virgin. My bride and I are viewing that series for about the fifth time and rolling in laughter, and marveling anew at the impeccable craftsmanship in the creation of these episodes. Watch for obvious mistakes, or poor acting anywhere: I haven?t found it, not a single stray modern car or passing aircraft in the background, not even the shadow of a microphone boom or poor sound quality. Jeeves and Wooster veteran commentary welcome here. Every time I view these masterpieces I have a renewed aspiration: to one day grow up to be Jeeves. For now, I must content myself with the futile struggle to merely be like Jeeves while perhaps more resembling Wooster. But my utmost ambition is to become Jeeves. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 20:39:30 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 16:39:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] A room temperature quantum computer? Message-ID: ?To make a quantum computer using spin up and and spin down electrons they'd have to remain in a state of quantum entanglement, for at least 100 nanoseconds, in the July 18 2016 Nature Communications Balint Nafradi et al report they have achieved 175 nanoseconds, and they did it at 300K, room temperature. This is 100 times better than the previous record using exotic graphene, and the material used was pretty cheap and mundane, the ash from burned mothballs. if you need to cool things down to 1/1000 of a degree above absolute zero you're probably never going to have a quantum computer at home, but if you could make one that would work at room temperature.... http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12232 John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 21:19:42 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 17:19:42 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm very surprised nobody (such as Spike ;) ) has posted about yesterday's release on Hillary. I've been planning to vote for her and still probably will but unless you think she's completely inept (she's not,) then this is incontrovertible that she lied a lot and committed perjury. The legalese she's using is only used when someone needs to hide the truth--it's straight out of a lawyer's mouth, one who I'm sure is very well paid. Trump is going to get a huge poll bump and I guarantee you that the Russians are holding the very worst stuff for right before the election. This is really bad stuff and now it's really undeniable. I'd like to vote for Johnson just because he's like a normal sensible presidential candidate we'd have in any other election year that wasn't an apocalyptic clusterfuck. But I'll still probably vote for Hillary...at least until worse revelations come out..... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 3 22:00:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 15:00:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 2:20 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? I'm very surprised nobody (such as Spike ;) ) has posted about yesterday's release on Hillary? Will, I saw little need for my commenting on it. There is no law against senility. I don?t mind if we elect a senile president. We had at least one before, nothing went seriously wrong. I can even see an advantage: it would motivate those who know about it to take the football before the inauguration. Your comment suggests I have something personal against any particular candidate. It isn?t that. I do have a big lotta heartburn against electing someone to high office who disregards law: that?s just too dangerous. If that person did it from senility or concussion, well OK fine, let?s elect a senile president. Not one which disregards law, but senility is legal, moral and ethical. If we go down that road, we get what we deserve. But first, let?s get that football back where it belongs, shall we? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 22:52:33 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 17:52:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] lighthearted banter for a long weekend on becoming jeeves. was RE: for fun - statistical improbabilities In-Reply-To: <009901d2061a$12209fd0$3661df70$@att.net> References: <009901d2061a$12209fd0$3661df70$@att.net> Message-ID: The very best television I have ever seen is the Laurie and Fry version of PG Wodehouse? Jeeves and Wooster, a British comedy made in 1990 thru 1993, a mere 23 episodes, priceless jewels all spike Now as long as we are into TV, here's my all time favorite comedy series (actually I will say the best thing ever on TV); Northern Exposure. Every character gets a plot now and then - only two or three real stars (none of which had a great career afterwards - strange). I won't give commentary like Spike but here's a few adjectives: quirky, satirical, intelligent!, laugh out loud funny - great writing, great characters, great plots. One example suffices for a quirky plot: people having other people's dreams and everyone at the bar trying to figure out whose it was. Available at Amazon - (expensive compared to Jeeves and Wooster which is under $30 for 8 dvds on eBay.) Maybe I do look a bit like Charlton Heston. bill w On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 2:33 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *spike > *Sent:* Saturday, September 03, 2016 10:50 AM > *To:* 'ExI chat list' > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities > > > > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > ] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn > Wallace > *Sent:* Saturday, September 03, 2016 9:59 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities > > > > >>? I said "What we need right now is a 95 yard touchdown pass." It > happened on the next play. The whole end zone looked at me, and later in > the game called to me to call for another one? > > > > >?He?s GOD! they shouted in unison, as they fell before him in humble > adoration. Alternative: you have the FORCE BillW. You are the droid we > are looking for? spike > > > > > > I retract my earlier comment BillW; you are the football Moses. When the > Israelis went out to fight the Amalekites (Palestinians) the uncircumcised > savages were scoring repeatedly until Moses stood and held up his hands, at > which time the Israelis scored. Read it for yourself, Exodus Chapter 17: > > > > *10 *So Joshua did as Moses had said to him, and fought with Amalek: and > Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. > > *11 *And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel > prevailed: and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. > > *12 *But Moses hands were heavy; and they took a stone, and put it under > him, and he sat thereon; and Aaron and Hur stayed up his hands, the one on > the one side, and the other on the other side; and his hands were steady > until the going down of the sun. > > *13 *And Joshua discomfited Amalek and his people with the edge of the > sword. > > > > That whole British understated ?discomfited?with the edge of the sword? > comment, heh, the bible translators 400 yrs ago had to know that was > funny. I wouldn?t be at all surprised if Shakespeare wrote that (he is > thought to have perhaps been an uncredited contributor to the King James > version (a contention I find plausible (evidence supplied on request.))) > > > > A kind offlist interlocutor complimented me on my newfound loquacious > erudition, compelling me to offer an explanation. > > > > From a person?s favorite movies, books and TV, much can be ascertained > about that personality. The very best television I have ever seen is the > Laurie and Fry version of PG Wodehouse? Jeeves and Wooster, a British > comedy made in 1990 thru 1993, a mere 23 episodes, priceless jewels all, > the very best comedy I have ever seen on TV without exception. My bride > and I viewed them when they were being made and loved them. We bought the > series and have viewed them and enjoyed them repeatedly over the years. It > isn?t Monty Python slapstick style humor, but rather concepty social > commentaryey parodyey humor. > > > > One must concentrate for a full 40 minutes to get it, but it is > multi-level humor with a message, paradoxical jokes within jokes. > Brilliant stuff! If you see what Laurie and Fry do with it, also notice > the craftsmanship in the acting, the elaborate sets (clearly they spend > skerjillions of dollars on these episodes, getting all those flawless 1930s > cars, the costumes, those stately English castles and vast estates, all of > it.) They managed to stay very true to the message and humor of > Wodehouse, Britain?s answer to our Mark Twain. I can anticipate newcomers > commenting that it is a show about nothing, but if you consider the message > beneath the surface Drone?s Club silliness, you understand why England > changed so much, why it works the way it does today, and perhaps even gain > insight into why the Iranian Revolution happened (for they had a similarly > structured society at that time to England only worse, and suffered similar > consequences, only worse.) > > > > I think you can find the episodes on YouTube, or your local library > probably has them. If you haven?t viewed those, it is worth your 40 > minutes to enjoy one or more. Or all of them, if you are a Jeeves and > Wooster virgin. > > > > My bride and I are viewing that series for about the fifth time and > rolling in laughter, and marveling anew at the impeccable craftsmanship in > the creation of these episodes. Watch for obvious mistakes, or poor acting > anywhere: I haven?t found it, not a single stray modern car or passing > aircraft in the background, not even the shadow of a microphone boom or > poor sound quality. > > > > Jeeves and Wooster veteran commentary welcome here. > > > > Every time I view these masterpieces I have a renewed aspiration: to one > day grow up to be Jeeves. For now, I must content myself with the futile > struggle to merely be like Jeeves while perhaps more resembling Wooster. > But my utmost ambition is to become Jeeves. > > > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 23:01:47 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 19:01:47 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> References: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> Message-ID: I just assumed you'd make the clear and sensible proposition that she is definitely shown to be lying now. Hillary is NOT senile. Bill is now. Someone who was first lady, secretary of state, senator on senate armed forces committee, and a Yale lawyer, KNOWS ABSOLUTELY how document classification is to be understood. She "doesn't recall"--hallmark legal plausible deniability. My working theory is that people at the CIA, State Dept., and Executive Branch in general told her "You have to delete those emails; if they got out it would be worse than the press nightmare you'll incur by the deletion. We will protect you so you don't go to jail. If you don't accept the blame for deleting them, we will pin everything on you when they're released and you'll go to jail for a long time." I think Hillary was forced to either take on this situation and have nearly guaranteed protection from indictment and incarceration, or, if she balked, have nearly guaranteed indictment and incarceration. I sort of hope she gets disqualified and Biden can run. He would utterly destroy Trump. Definitely would be a landslide. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sat Sep 3 23:37:03 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 16:37:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting? Message-ID: I understand all too well from evolutionary psychology why certain segments of the US population supports Trump. It's a case where the viewpoint of genes diverges from that of the individual. However, we don't live in the stone age now. John Clark seems to think most of the exi list is going to vote for Trump. I don't think so, but I would like to know. Personally, I voted for Bernie in the primary, but am voting Hillery on the principle of anyone but Trump. If you are a US voter, how are you voting? Consider this thread a poll. Best wishes, Keith From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 00:00:24 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 20:00:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 Keith Henson wrote: > ?> ? > If you are a US voter, how are you voting? > Consider this thread a poll. > I'm voting for ?Clinton? because I don't care ?for? ? Trump very much. I may have ?mentioned that before.? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 00:16:43 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 20:16:43 -0400 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm the same as you two, depressingly... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dsunley at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 00:20:13 2016 From: dsunley at gmail.com (Darin Sunley) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 18:20:13 -0600 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Johnson. Because I live in Utah, which will go Republican unless a literal miracle occurs, and I'd rather use my voter power to loudly signal a preference for a Libertarian government than to futilely spit Blue against a Red tidal wave. On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 6:00 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 Keith Henson wrote: > >> > ?> ? >> If you are a US voter, how are you voting? >> Consider this thread a poll. >> > > I'm voting for > ?Clinton? > because I don't care > ?for? > ? > Trump very much. I may have > ?mentioned that before.? > > > John K Clark > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 00:32:01 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 17:32:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5035EFB7-0E04-4404-95E2-4490A5C46ACB@gmail.com> On Sep 3, 2016, at 4:37 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > I understand all too well from evolutionary psychology why certain > segments of the US population supports Trump. It's a case where the > viewpoint of genes diverges from that of the individual. > > However, we don't live in the stone age now. > > John Clark seems to think most of the exi list is going to vote for > Trump. I don't think so, but I would like to know. Personally, I > voted for Bernie in the primary, but am voting Hillery on the > principle of anyone but Trump. > > If you are a US voter, how are you voting? > > Consider this thread a poll. I'm a non-voter. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 00:45:48 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 20:45:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Non voter, vociferously so. On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > I understand all too well from evolutionary psychology why certain > segments of the US population supports Trump. It's a case where the > viewpoint of genes diverges from that of the individual. > > However, we don't live in the stone age now. > > John Clark seems to think most of the exi list is going to vote for > Trump. I don't think so, but I would like to know. Personally, I > voted for Bernie in the primary, but am voting Hillery on the > principle of anyone but Trump. > > If you are a US voter, how are you voting? > > Consider this thread a poll. > > Best wishes, > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -- 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: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 01:05:04 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 20:05:04 -0500 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A vote for Hillary in MS is wasted so I won't vote. If Clinton loses MS by one vote I'll shoot myself. A Red vote is a vote for plutocracy - or is it oligarchy? - about as far from libertarian as you can get. bill w On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 7:45 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > Non voter, vociferously so. > > On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 7:37 PM, Keith Henson > wrote: > >> I understand all too well from evolutionary psychology why certain >> segments of the US population supports Trump. It's a case where the >> viewpoint of genes diverges from that of the individual. >> >> However, we don't live in the stone age now. >> >> John Clark seems to think most of the exi list is going to vote for >> Trump. I don't think so, but I would like to know. Personally, I >> voted for Bernie in the primary, but am voting Hillery on the >> principle of anyone but Trump. >> >> If you are a US voter, how are you voting? >> >> Consider this thread a poll. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Keith >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> > > > > -- > 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. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 01:15:04 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 18:15:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7FA5F0C3-40C1-4323-87B6-1FB4B3CA3A5F@gmail.com> On Sep 3, 2016, at 6:05 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > A vote for Hillary in MS is wasted so I won't vote. If Clinton loses MS by one vote I'll shoot myself. It's not worth dying over. It's just an election. > A Red vote is a vote for plutocracy - or is it oligarchy? - about as far from libertarian as you can get. Both major parties are oligarchic -- just different factions in the oligarchy or the ruling class. See Roderick Long's analysis of this here: http://praxeology.net/libertariannation/a/f21l2.html The two major parties today are extremely far from libertarian. We'd have to go back a century to find when one party was fairly close -- and that would've been the Democrats NOT the GOP. With the exception of its stance on slavery (a big exception, yes), the GOP has always been (and remains even now despite its rhetoric) a party of big, intrusive central government. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 01:16:01 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 20:16:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities In-Reply-To: <003f01d2060b$9206ece0$b614c6a0$@att.net> References: <003f01d2060b$9206ece0$b614c6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: If you continue to drive that road, eventually good chance you will sacrifice a third windshield. Coincidental indeed, but not so astonishing. Suggest slowing and honking as you approach Bend in the Road vulture restaurant henceforth. Back to calling upon your team to hurl a winning pass sir. That was impressive. spike Not bad, not bad at all - good job. But the chances of getting hit in the rear are greatly elevated when I see vultures as likely I will slam on the brakes. Impressive implies accomplishment, so no, it's not that. Extremely coincidental, yes. bill w On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 12:49 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Saturday, September 03, 2016 9:59 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* [ExI] for fun - statistical improbabilities > > > > >? I said "What we need right now is a 95 yard touchdown pass." It > happened on the next play. The whole end zone looked at me, and later in > the game called to me to call for another one? > > > > He?s GOD! they shouted in unison, as they fell before him in humble > adoration. > > > > Alternative: you have the FORCE BillW. You are the droid we are looking > for. > > > > > > > > >?Have you had any type of highly improbable event happen to you where > you were involved in some way, not just a spectator? (Yeah, kinda Reader's > Digest kind of thing.)? > > > > If this doesn?t generate some welcome fun lighthearted discussion, I don?t > know what will. > > > > > > >?One more: as my wife and I were driving along a back road I saw a group > of vultures up ahead and slowed down as the group flew off to the right. > Only one bird flew left but that was enough to bust my windshield, sending > glass all the way to the back window?Not improbable? One year later in > another car my wife was driving along the same road with me and a vulture > hit her windshield in the same place?bill w > > > > > > Turn in the road, driver and beast have a difficult time seeing each > other, driver smites and slays beast with Detroit, vultures come in for > lunch regularly in that spot. Notice how vultures feed: they surround > their lunch, give each other space if possible. They get startled by > suddenly approaching growling thing which by their instinct matches a > hungry lion, they fly away, but vultures and big cumbersome things and > require some runway with a relatively low climb rate and low turning > ability. > > > > Result: that spot is a frequent meeting place between Detroits and the > hapless local fauna, the feathered scavengers? grow big and strong > devouring slain beasts at that spot. Then, any time a Detroit comes > suddenly into view, the vultures fly away from their meal, at least one of > which needs to come in your general direction to have sufficient clear > runway, Detroit smites scavenger, broken windshield, revolting vulture guts > spewed upon driver and passenger. If you continue to drive that road, > eventually good chance you will sacrifice a third windshield. Coincidental > indeed, but not so astonishing. Suggest slowing and honking as you > approach Bend in the Road vulture restaurant henceforth. > > > > Back to calling upon your team to hurl a winning pass sir. That was > impressive. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 02:11:54 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 19:11:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > I sort of hope she gets disqualified and Biden can run. He would utterly > destroy Trump. Definitely would be a landslide. > If she does get disqualified, Sanders would replace her, not Biden. But Sanders would achieve that particular goal too. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 4 05:44:24 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 22:44:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <011a01d2066f$64bf2270$2e3d6750$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2016 4:02 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? >?I just assumed you'd make the clear and sensible proposition that she is definitely shown to be lying now. >?Hillary is NOT senile? Will how can we prove that? Mrs. Clinton definitely did know the levels of classification in 2003, since she was on the committee that reviewed the evidence which led to the invasion of Iraq. She couldn?t have gotten that level of clearance without being able to pass the tests on these kinds of fundamentals. So if the senility or stroke-induced amnesia occurred by 2008 and lasted until late 2013 (when the ?123 deal? memo was sent), then that would explain a lot of things, ja? If she demonstrates this senility in the upcoming debates, I don?t see how she can be convicted. We will have to assume it true. The level of impairment she must demonstrate in those debates will need to be severe. If on the other hand, she does not appear significantly impaired in the debates, well, she has still more explaining to do with regard to the impossible task of reconciling what she told congress with what she told the FBI. I don?t see how that can possibly be done without a senility plea. We will need a doctor?s note on that notion of temporary senility, five years, then miraculous recovery. >?I sort of hope she gets disqualified and Biden can run. He would utterly destroy Trump. Definitely would be a landslide? Will Why wouldn?t Bernie Sanders get to be the nominee? We know the scales were tipped against him; we cannot even be sure he wouldn?t have won that nomination had it been a fair competition. How can we consider it legitimate if Biden is selected as the replacement nominee? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 4 05:56:31 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 22:56:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <011f01d20671$16a726d0$43f57470$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Keith Henson If you are a US voter, how are you voting? Consider this thread a poll. Best wishes, Keith _______________________________________________ Johnson and Weld. No need to even ask. If it ends up Trump vs Bernie vs Johnson, I will still vote Johnson, and he does have a fighting chance in that race. Keith, parting shot please: my burden has been about that nuke football. Of these candidates, he is the one most likely to just hand it over without a struggle. Johnson doesn't want to control that, for he is a rare case of a politician who is not a power grabber. He is a constitutional literalist (oh what a breath of fresh air is this) so he would recognize this ball should have been handed back to congress at the earliest opportunity, which was about 30 years ago. Once we get that ball back in the hands of congress, plenty of things change. Consider a city model. Ideally if we look at the USA as a really big city, the Supreme Court is the court system, the legislature is the City Council, the president is the Chief of Police, and we are the mayor, because they serve us. Over the decades, we have left the court the court and the legislature the City Council, but we have somehow made the president into the mayor and the voters have become the hapless blighters serving 4 years in the jail for the crime of electing the silly buffoons. Hear the footsteps. spike From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 11:14:05 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 07:14:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: <011a01d2066f$64bf2270$2e3d6750$@att.net> References: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> <011a01d2066f$64bf2270$2e3d6750$@att.net> Message-ID: Yeah I know it'd go to Bernie, I just wish it'd go to Biden. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat Sep 3 20:16:22 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 21:16:22 +0100 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> On 2016-09-03 17:36, John Clark wrote: > ?Add quantum computers to the list of things that could create a > singularity. Google now thinks that as early as the end of next year > they will have a working 50 Qubit quantum computer that can achieves > something they call "quantum supremacy", it means solving a problem > that no existing conventional computer can. Ahem. People always get confused about this. Quantum computers give exponential speedups for problems that have quantum algorithms, but not all practically important problems have quantum algorithms or can be run with a small number of qubits. Grover's search algorithm for example finds an element in an unsorted list in O(sqrt(N)) time, as opposed to O(N) time - great, except that the list needs to be in a quantum state, so 50 or even 5000 qubits will not change much. Same thing for quantum sorting - better than classical, but you need to have a quantum array. Quantum computing really beats classical in problems where the memory demands are tiny but the search space big, like some simulations, optimization or decryption algorithms. > This is much earlier than anybody thought just 5 years ago. Yup, progress is faster than expected. Still, I had a senior computer scientist tell me to my face *this week* that he doubted there will ever be a quantum computer that is usable for anything. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rahmans at me.com Sun Sep 4 14:10:23 2016 From: rahmans at me.com (Omar Rahman) Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2016 16:10:23 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Nothing to worry about? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2016 21:19:40 -0400 > From: Rafal Smigrodzki > > Oops, you left out this bit Rafal. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > > Hail the Koch brothers! XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX > On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 5:48 AM, Omar Rahman > wrote: >> >> >> Seig? >> > > ### For your convenience, the correct spelling of the party greeting is > "Sieg heil!?. Ewe isa reel Enternet speeling Nzia? > > I know I must be doing something right when my minor remarks trigger > formless left-winger ire punctuated by NSDAP references. You conveniently leave out my comments on the nature and identity of the ?behemoth? as well. So, maybe, if you leave out the things I said it might seem a bit ?formless'. There are at least two things that the list actually needs to worry about. A) The use of the term ?libertarian? to provide intellectual cover for blatantly fascist ideas. There is a fair bit of cognitive dissonance in play. B) The importance of government, laws, diplomacy, and even spying and war in interactions with post/?whateverlabel'/super-human entities. Only by joining together do we have any hope of securing the continuity of environmental conditions favourable to our existence and success. Koch Industries has its own interests, it doesn?t need to breath clean air or drink unpolluted water so these things are unacceptable costs from its viewpoint. In another thread Rafal says in response to Kieth Henson: > Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2016 20:45:48 -0400 > From: Rafal Smigrodzki > > Subject: Re: [ExI] voting? > > Non voter, vociferously so. You exist in a country with a voting system without mandatory voting. Staying at home IS one of the choices. If you think your political opinions and speech are enough influence then you are just voting indirectly. The rhetoric coming out of the Trump/Breitbart/Koch/Ailes side of things with talk of ?rigged elections?, ?second amendment solutions' to Hillary and/or her SCOTUS picks, the proposed targeting of many minorities for mass deportation and religious discrimination, the proposal of war crimes as standard military procedure, etc. etc. etc. are all far too close to actual historical Nazis. We are just a toothbrush moustache away from horror... To the people on the list who are horrified by Trump and worried about Hillary: 1) Vote. 2) Split your ballot. 3) Top of ticket: Hillary (Vote your conscience: effectively it is a binary choice and the Trump side is monstrous.) 4) Rest of ticket: Vote your conscience. (Vote your conscience: there is a broad plurality of choices here. I would suggest voting in third party candidates so that actual politics can take place in Congress. The simple 'tyranny of the majority? that Plato worried about must end in Congress.) Please just vote your conscience in the most pragmatic manner possible. Even you Rafal. Regards, Omar -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 14:18:48 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 10:18:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: <011f01d20671$16a726d0$43f57470$@att.net> Message-ID: Bill: It's not about that one vote, it's about the statistics of people with your particular demographic information also choosing to abstain, which IS significant. Unfortunately, you technically do not control (any more than your statistical share of) that. Spike: Again, the reason for the ability to launch immediately and with little oversight is based on nuclear deterrence game theory scenarios. If we had to go to Congress, it could very likely--blame the environment, not pure logic--lead to greater chances of nuclear conflict or ground war. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 4 15:33:15 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 08:33:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: <011f01d20671$16a726d0$43f57470$@att.net> Message-ID: <00bc01d206c1$a80e9b30$f82bd190$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg ? >?Spike: Again, the reason for the ability to launch immediately and with little oversight is based on nuclear deterrence game theory scenarios? Thanks, Will, ja I get that. That was the way it was designed, but there have been some very important changes since that time. I hope those of you following this will read my post and think out it. It?s important in this critical time, this one chance we have this one time. We once had terrifying visions of attacks on land-based missiles, disabling our response capability from a surprise first strike. Since then we have built submarines which cannot be taken out in a first strike because the bad guys don?t know where they are. These can be fired at our leisure as retaliation for a first strike. Second: we have nuke-proof facilities to make sure if the commies fire on Washington we can still command counterstrikes. Third: we have early-warning systems which were not in place when the executive branch was given control of the nukes. Fourth: the commies aren?t the only ones with nuclear missiles now. So our early warning systems tell us who is firing at us so we know where to aim the counterattack, we have about 35 minutes to get the key players to where they will survive. Considering those factors, keeping the nuke launch button in the hands of the executive branch introduces far more risk than it retires, for it makes it hard to stop a person who orders a nuclear launch because of being pissed off. That was the important stuff. You may now return to the picnic. Regarding your comment on nuclear deterrence game theory: the ability to launch a counterstrike forms the foundation of deterrence. We risk electing a person who is now claiming she did not remember the very most basic aspects of security training which she would have mastered in 2003 to get the clearance needed to review the evidence upon which she recommended the invasion of Iraq. Mrs Clinton was a senator at that time of that Iraq invasion (2003), so no special considerations for security training, no royal road; she would need to get all the training, pass all the tests, sign all the papers (I have a theory on that.) Friday?s garbage dump (always watch closely on Fridays, for recall it was 42 who invented the notion of taking out the garbage on Friday, to deal with his Monica problems) reveals that Mrs. Clinton is now saying she doesn?t remember any of it, and didn?t recall any of it for a span of time over five years (from briefings she would get in 2008 through at least the time the 123 Deal memo was sent in 2013 after having left that post. She had to have forgotten everything from her 2003 security training needed to be cleared for the Iraq invasion. There is no law against senility. But? what happens to our theory on nuclear deterrence if the person with the trigger cannot remember the launch codes? >? If we had to go to Congress, it could very likely--blame the environment, not pure logic--lead to greater chances of nuclear conflict or ground war? Precisely sir. If we had a president who was already incapacitated on her way in, we diminish nuclear deterrence, we have nuclear invitation. This comes at a time when Russia is fighting on the opposite side in Syria, with regard to what some think might have been in those yoga routines which were deleted with industrial strength BleachBit, in order to keep that yoga out of the hands of US voters, when hackers may already have that yoga, which when revealed damn well could lead to war if the originator of that yoga is elected. My theory on the apparent sea-change on Friday, regarding that FBI report which resulted in Mrs. Clinton going for the desperate-looking can?t remember strategy. I will perhaps extend the benefit of doubt that she doesn?t remember anything. I don?t know personally what she remembers: I haven?t heard her speak in public in months, I was camping during the conventions (did she seem senile there?) and she isn?t doing press conferences since the disaster where she made the now-infamous comment ?What, with a cloth or something?? I don?t recall any press contact since the catastrophic cloth-or-something conference. Theory: the story given to the FBI disagreed with the story given to congress. FBI releases report to congress, congress demands reconciliation, no reconciliation is possible between those two accounts, so she gives yet another story about relying on aids, about not knowing what that (c) was for, about not knowing about different levels of classification, of not knowing anything about proper handling of classified material and classified documents, not knowing this and not knowing that, for the entire span of 2008 to 2013. Never mind for the moment how that strategy places a number of her aids in serious legal jeopardy, for they will have a much harder time pleading a concussion caused them to forget all their security training for several critical years. Never mind the inherent contradictions in the argument itself: that her concussion caused her to forget the security training for a five-year span, but not the details of the 123 Deal in 2013, which were somehow stored elsewhere in her brain. Having those details stored in her brain is necessitated by her not having clearance for that 123 deal at the time the 123 Deal memo was written. My theory is the DoD went into the files and pulled out the signed records showing Mrs. Clinton did know all this back in 2003, knew it well, all of it, passed the tests, signed the papers, got the clearance, authorized the invasion. Since that clearance would have likely been handled outside the State Department, that agency is being indirectly accused of giving a clearance without the requisite training by Mrs. Clinton claiming she didn?t know this and that. So? they produce the evidence that she was trained and did know, to cover themselves. Those agencies would have records on every training session needed and every test taken to get that level of clearance. Theory: those records have been found, and they provide clear evidence that even if Mrs. Clinton didn?t know any of the proper security procedures in 2008 through 2013, she knew all of it in 2003. There is no law against senility. But if we have a president who cannot remember even the basics of training on which she had demonstrated mastery 5 years previously, the notion of nuclear deterrence is gone, for we cannot trust she would remember the launch codes. Keeping that football in place simultaneously introduces risk that one mainstream competitor will launch a first strike and that the other will invite a first strike by being unable to respond. Nuclear deterrence takes on a new importance with the activity of North Korea. We don?t want to create the appearance we have a president who cannot remember things, unless we have some alternative means both to launch and to stop a launch. My notion on transferring that football is based on the belief that the US has the right to nuclear deterrence, but does not have the moral right to introduce the risk of nuclear war to the rest of the world, most of which have no nukes. This is what we are doing if we elect either of these front-runners and keep that football in his or her office. Secure the nukes, hear the footsteps. Back to the picnic, all of yas. spike If we had to go to Congress, it could very likely--blame the environment, not pure logic--lead to greater chances of nuclear conflict or ground war. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 17:16:49 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 13:16:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 3, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Anders wrote: > ?> ? > Yup, progress is faster than expected. Still, I had a senior computer > scientist tell me to my face *this week* that he doubted there will ever be > a quantum computer that is usable for anything. > ? Maybe, but not every computer scientist would agree. The people at Microsoft's ? ? Quantum Architectures and Computation ? ? Group ? ?think a 100 Qubit quantum computer could ? ? simulate nitrogen fixation, something of enormous industrial and agricultural importance. Some bacteria can fix nitrogen and we learned how to do it too about 100 years ago with the Haber process, but the bacteria can do it with vastly less energy than we can and nobody has a clear understanding of how they manage to do it. Quantum computers could help. https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.03590 ?I don't think Google and Microsoft would be spending millions of dollars on it if they thought quantum computers would never have a practical application.? If they end up being able to do nothing but factor large numbers that alone would be enough to make them be of great interest to the NSA, but I have a hunch they can do much more. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 18:16:36 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 13:16:36 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: Will someone in the group far more advanced than I am on this issue, refute this woman's opinion? (I do notice that the article is from Forbes - an obvious industry arm)\ bill w ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mary Van Antwerp Date: Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:09 PM Subject: 98% hoax To: foozler83 at gmail.com This article describes how they came to the conclusion that "98%" of scientists agree that man causes global warming. A two question, on line survey was sent to more than 10,000 scientist. The group that sent the survey then only used 77 of those scientists responses to the second question of which 75 answered "yes" and then "concluded" that 98% of scientists agree that man causes global warming. That's the number that was then used and still is to hold up the fear mongering arguments. The fact is that there is no scientific way to conclude whether humans can possibly be the primary contributing factor. And given the actual history of warming periods before the industrial revolution there are clearly many reasons for the alternating patterns of warming and cooling. People are entitled to their opinions, but when the scientists who say it's manmade get all the money from the government and the UN and those who dispute that are not only left out of the money but are vilified as nutcases (California is trying to introduce legislation to criminalize those who disagree with the idea...what does that say!!! Can you say "1984" a few years late?), it's fairly evident to me that there is a big game going on. A game that has made people like Al Gore very wealthy while nothing that he predicted has come to pass. All the ice was supposed to be gone by now according to that non-scientist politician who continues to own numerous homes that have been judged to be far from "green" and who jets around the world leaving his carbon footprint in his hypocritical wake wherever he goes. Meanwhile, the government gives all kinds of money not only to just certain scientists (the ones that will say what the government wants) but to companies claiming to have answers for renewable energy but that end up going bankrupt while their founders make off with taxpayer money in their pockets. The planet warms. It's warmed a tiny bit (less than a degree) and suddenly there's money to be made and power to be grabbed by claiming it's all our fault. And nothing sensible is done, like planting trees, stopping wholesale deforestation, etc. Just throw money at those who will support the government's agenda. http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that- scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/#14d1c7db1690 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 18:37:17 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 13:37:17 -0500 Subject: [ExI] article Message-ID: I don't know this woman but she makes a lot of sense for an economist. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/04/upshot/the-formula-for-a-richer-world-equality-liberty-justice.html?_r=0 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 19:05:10 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 20:05:10 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On 4 September 2016 at 19:16, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Will someone in the group far more advanced than I am on this issue, refute > this woman's opinion? (I do notice that the article is from Forbes - an > obvious industry arm)\ > bill w Refuting personal beliefs - especially with contrary facts - is a waste of time. It just strengthens their belief as they see it as an attack on themselves. In case you haven't noticed, Trump and Clinton don't use facts to persuade the people. They use emotion and fear. Works much better! BillK From jasonresch at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 19:16:35 2016 From: jasonresch at gmail.com (Jason Resch) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 14:16:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: Here are some good sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gDErDwXqhc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTTaXqVEGkU Jason On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:16 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Will someone in the group far more advanced than I am on this issue, > refute this woman's opinion? (I do notice that the article is from Forbes > - an obvious industry arm)\ > bill w > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Mary Van Antwerp > Date: Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:09 PM > Subject: 98% hoax > To: foozler83 at gmail.com > > > This article describes how they came to the conclusion that "98%" of > scientists agree that man causes global warming. A two question, on line > survey was sent to more than 10,000 scientist. The group that sent the > survey then only used 77 of those scientists responses to the second > question of which 75 answered "yes" and then "concluded" that 98% of > scientists agree that man causes global warming. That's the number that was > then used and still is to hold up the fear mongering arguments. The fact is > that there is no scientific way to conclude whether humans can possibly be > the primary contributing factor. And given the actual history of warming > periods before the industrial revolution there are clearly many reasons for > the alternating patterns of warming and cooling. People are entitled to > their opinions, but when the scientists who say it's manmade get all the > money from the government and the UN and those who dispute that are not > only left out of the money but are vilified as nutcases (California is > trying to introduce legislation to criminalize those who disagree with the > idea...what does that say!!! Can you say "1984" a few years late?), it's > fairly evident to me that there is a big game going on. A game that has > made people like Al Gore very wealthy while nothing that he predicted has > come to pass. All the ice was supposed to be gone by now according to that > non-scientist politician who continues to own numerous homes that have been > judged to be far from "green" and who jets around the world leaving his > carbon footprint in his hypocritical wake wherever he goes. Meanwhile, the > government gives all kinds of money not only to just certain scientists > (the ones that will say what the government wants) but to companies > claiming to have answers for renewable energy but that end up going > bankrupt while their founders make off with taxpayer money in their > pockets. The planet warms. It's warmed a tiny bit (less than a degree) and > suddenly there's money to be made and power to be grabbed by claiming it's > all our fault. And nothing sensible is done, like planting trees, stopping > wholesale deforestation, etc. Just throw money at those who will support > the government's agenda. > > > http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scient > ific-global-warming-consensus-not/#14d1c7db1690 > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 4 20:37:59 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 13:37:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2016 11:17 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax Will someone in the group far more advanced than I am on this issue, refute this woman's opinion? (I do notice that the article is from Forbes - an obvious industry arm)\ bill w ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Mary Van Antwerp > Date: Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:09 PM Subject: 98% hoax To: foozler83 at gmail.com >?This article describes how they came to the conclusion that "98%" of scientists agree that man causes global warming. A two question, on line survey was sent to more than 10,000 scientist. The group that sent the survey then only used 77 of those scientists responses to the second question of which 75 answered "yes" and then "concluded" that 98% of scientists agree that man causes global warming. ? http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/#14d1c7db1690 BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global warming. What we don?t know is how much of the observed global warming is man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is unknown. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Sep 4 22:10:16 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 23:10:16 +0100 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> Message-ID: <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> On 2016-09-04 18:16, John Clark wrote: > ? > Maybe, but not every computer scientist would agree. The people at > Microsoft's > ? ? > Quantum Architectures and Computation > ? ? > Group > ? ?think > a 100 Qubit quantum computer could > ? ? > simulate nitrogen fixation, something of enormous industrial and > agricultural importance. Nice paper. Also manages to show a real problem that is a low-hanging fruit if we get quantum computers. > ?I don't think Google and Microsoft would be spending millions of > dollars on it if they thought quantum computers would never have a > practical application.? If they end up being able to do nothing but > factor large numbers that alone would be enough to make them be of > great interest to the NSA, but I have a hunch they can do much more. I never said that they were useless (if they work), just that the problem class they solve is a more specific one than what we solve (slowly) using our current computers. Most computations done today are likely sorting, matrix operations and searching. But the ones we care most about tend to be simulations, and this is where quantum computers could shine. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 23:06:08 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 18:06:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: But the ones we care most about tend to be simulations, and this is where quantum computers could shine. anders This may be too complicated to answer: what, if any, ways are there to validate simulations? Well, let the world go by and see what really happens, I suppose. What else? Do real world experiments? In short, why trust simulations? We should primie facie distrust them (like the null hypothesis). At least two problems arise: GIGO for one. Not putting in crucial variables (because you don't know that they are crucial) is another. bill w bill w On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Anders wrote: > On 2016-09-04 18:16, John Clark wrote: > > ? > Maybe, but not every computer scientist would agree. The people at > Microsoft's > ? ? > Quantum Architectures and Computation > ? ? > Group > ? ?think > a 100 Qubit quantum computer could > ? ? > simulate nitrogen fixation, something of enormous industrial and > agricultural importance. > > > Nice paper. Also manages to show a real problem that is a low-hanging > fruit if we get quantum computers. > > ?I don't think Google and Microsoft would be spending millions of dollars > on it if they thought quantum computers would never have a practical > application.? If they end up being able to do nothing but factor large > numbers that alone would be enough to make them be of great interest to the > NSA, but I have a hunch they can do much more. > > > I never said that they were useless (if they work), just that the problem > class they solve is a more specific one than what we solve (slowly) using > our current computers. > > Most computations done today are likely sorting, matrix operations and > searching. But the ones we care most about tend to be simulations, and this > is where quantum computers could shine. > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 23:07:29 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 18:07:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> Message-ID: BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global warming. What we don?t know is how much of the observed global warming is man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is unknown. spike Yes, well, it's being done by my friend. What can convince her? bill w On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 3:37 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Sunday, September 04, 2016 11:17 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax > > > > Will someone in the group far more advanced than I am on this issue, > refute this woman's opinion? (I do notice that the article is from Forbes > - an obvious industry arm)\ > > bill w > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Mary Van Antwerp* > Date: Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:09 PM > Subject: 98% hoax > To: foozler83 at gmail.com > > >?This article describes how they came to the conclusion that "98%" of > scientists agree that man causes global warming. A two question, on line > survey was sent to more than 10,000 scientist. The group that sent the > survey then only used 77 of those scientists responses to the second > question of which 75 answered "yes" and then "concluded" that 98% of > scientists agree that man causes global warming. ? > > http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that- > scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/#14d1c7db1690 > > > > > > > > > > > > BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global warming. > What we don?t know is how much of the observed global warming is > man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is unknown. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 23:18:10 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 19:18:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:07 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global warming. > What we don?t know is how much of the observed global warming is > man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is unknown. > > > > spike > > > Yes, well, it's being done by my friend. What can convince her? bill w > > ### Do you want to convince her that there is anthropogenic catastrophic global warming? If yes, why would you try to convert a friend to a position, even if you are by your own admission not very familiar with its justification? Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 23:45:50 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 19:45:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > This may be too complicated to answer: what, if any, ways are there to > validate simulations? Well, let the world go by and see what really > happens, I suppose. What else? Do real world experiments? In short, why > trust simulations? > ### In the case of searches through molecular configuration spaces, it's easy - you synthesize the molecules in question and directly observe their behavior. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Sep 4 23:58:39 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 19:58:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nothing to worry about? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Omar Rahman wrote: > blatantly fascist ideas. > > ### If I see somebody parroting this kind of hyperbolic agitprop, I have no reason to engage. Why bother? Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 00:18:33 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 19:18:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> Message-ID: Do you want to convince her that there is anthropogenic catastrophic global warming? If yes, why would you try to convert a friend to a position, even if you are by your own admission not very familiar with its justification? Rafa? You are correct - I used the wrong word - 'convince'. What I want to know is just how the question stands now. If Forbes is correct, that poll showing 97% agreeing with manmade warming is not valid. Well, what IS the consensus of scientists on this point? bill w On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 6:18 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:07 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global warming. >> What we don?t know is how much of the observed global warming is >> man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is unknown. >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> Yes, well, it's being done by my friend. What can convince her? bill w >> >> > ### Do you want to convince her that there is anthropogenic catastrophic > global warming? > > If yes, why would you try to convert a friend to a position, even if you > are by your own admission not very familiar with its justification? > > Rafa? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 00:38:28 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 19:38:28 -0500 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: In the case of searches through molecular configuration spaces, it's easy - you synthesize the molecules in question and directly observe their behavior. Rafa? Clearly a type of simulation with which I am unfamiliar. I was referring to computer simulations (which I have only read about, not done), perhaps like war games. bill w On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 6:45 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: >> >> >> This may be too complicated to answer: what, if any, ways are there to >> validate simulations? Well, let the world go by and see what really >> happens, I suppose. What else? Do real world experiments? In short, why >> trust simulations? >> > > ### In the case of searches through molecular configuration spaces, it's > easy - you synthesize the molecules in question and directly observe their > behavior. > > Rafa? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 5 00:24:24 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 17:24:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: <00af01d2070b$db691f60$923b5e20$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2016 4:06 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? But the ones we care most about tend to be simulations, and this is where quantum computers could shine. anders >? what, if any, ways are there to validate simulations? Well, let the world go by and see what really happens, I suppose. What else? Do real world experiments? In short, why trust simulations? ?bill w BillW, the way I saw sims develop in real world engineering is that it guided design. We used Matlab and Simulink, worked a configuration on the computer, got it working where we wanted by swapping in and out components we had at our disposal, found out the combinations of stuff that would do what we wanted. Then, we went into the lab and built what we had simulated. Those sims were seldom off by much. A more startling example happened in the earlier days, in about 1993. We had a missile with a two-piece aero-shroud that would peel away like a clamshell and fall away at about 70 kft where the air was thin. It was instrumented and we wanted to recover the two pieces but couldn?t have it transmit and couldn?t have much of a power source for a pinger. We didn?t want the shroud to fall anywhere off the range (White Sands) where we wouldn?t necessarily have access to it, and of couse we didn?t want it coming down and conking some local prole or his cow. So? we calculated where we expected them to fall and created a classic circle of equal probability (in this case an ellipse (actually two of them because the two pieces were slightly different shapes and masses)) using only closed-form equations and no computers at all. We formed two teams: our team was two PhDs in aerodynamics and I was the junior guy who ground through the equations by hand (they wrote em, I solved them, then they checked the result (I was the one who went home smelling like sweat at the end of the day.)) The other team were these two guys even younger than I, in their 20s, didn?t even have engineering degrees (they were technologist who knew sims) The two were contractors with their own company. They came in, created wire-frame digital models, ran a jillion sims, drew an ellipse that enclosed half their simulated landing spots, done. The docs and I took about three weeks. The two younger fellers finished a good couple days before us with smaller ellipses, inside ours. Eeeeverybody was quietly watching this whole experiment, because I had to report there was some risk of one of the shroud pieces landing off the range, but the other guys suggested the risk was much smaller. The test firing happened, both pieces fell within their ellipse. That was a wakeup call. I took up Simulink and Matlab with renewed vigor. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 00:42:28 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 20:42:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To vote or not to vote In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 5:09 AM, Anders wrote: > > > The key problem is that doing politics is nontrivial in big societies. It > requires professional skills most people lack and cannot even accurately > judge; they can at best evaluate charisma, apparent sincerity, and possibly > past track records. So if you do not want a political class you need some > other way of supplying political skill, evaluation, and selection (plus, of > course, various ethical desiderata as legitimacy and representativeness). ### Indeed, politics is nontrivial but is it necessary? Or rather, how much politics (defined as the art of gaining and maintaining power over the lives of others) is really necessary for a thriving big society? The classical liberal ideal involves minimizing the amount of politics in the society. The night watchman state does not check the salt content of school lunches. A precious few capable of self-reflection seem willing to restrain their urge to power, neither willingly entering power struggles, nor delegating their thirst for power to professional power-mongers through elections and mass movements. But the majority clamors for more control of every aspect of our life, often claiming the Other Side is "monstrous". The political class may oft be corrupt and vile but their vileness is usually but a derivative of the hatreds and base urges of the common men who empower them. The Em society might offer an interesting area for experimentation. Minds, carefully selected, vetted to the last synapse, completely transparent and therefore inhumanly trustworthy, could form societies of different, yet stable levels of average desire for power. These innate differences at the individual level could lead to differences in the level of political participation at the societal level, well in excess of what we see among humans. My guess, or perhaps wishful thinking, is that there is a sweet spot of the ratio of political vs. consensual control of resources in highly selected Em societies, that is well-below what we see in human societies today, and that provides for the highest economic efficiency. If yes, then it is possible to build Utopia and make it survive the inevitable confrontation with the Leviathan, without becoming Leviathan itself. > > Isn't that a bit like saying the president is not your fault since you did > not vote? Shouldn't you be working harder on making people or society what > they should be? ### One needs to develop good BMI, like neural dust. The coolest idea of the millennium, so far! I'll get to working on it one of these days :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 5 00:48:43 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 17:48:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> Message-ID: <00d901d2070f$40c609b0$c2521d10$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Sunday, September 04, 2016 4:07 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global warming. What we don?t know is how much of the observed global warming is man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is unknown. spike Yes, well, it's being done by my friend. What can convince her? bill w Why do you need to? Do you know the answer to the question of how much? Do any of us? Here?s one idea: we know the input from the sun, we know the greenhouse value of CO2, we can estimate if all else is equal, how much the increasing CO2 level should be increasing temperature. But all else is unequal, for the observed warming is lower than would be expected if we use only that one term. So we start to refine our model. We can add in a term for increasing surface temperature causing increased evaporation from the sea, which absorbs energy and increases clouds which scatters incoming solar energy into space and traps heat down at the surface. That term is net negative (would cause global cooling.) Then we work in a term for reduced albedo from increased plant growth (from higher CO2 levels and calculate a theoretical impact of that. Then add in the impact on albedo of increased rainfall or decreased rainfall (in some cases) add in a term for increased alpha T^4 from Stefan-Boltzmann?s law, and estimate the impact of increased wind, which seems to me like would increase evaporation off the surface of the sea, and increased albedo from higher snowfall from increased evaporation in some places and lower snowfall in other places from higher temperatures, increased this and decreased that and unknown effect of the other. Pretty soon you come to the same conclusion I did: human activity does cause global warming, but we don?t know what fraction of global warming is human caused. Estimates vary wildly and can even go negative in some models (human activity causes global cooling or slows natural global warming) and can go over 100 percent (the planet would be cooling naturally but human activity is causing it to warm.) With that, we get the odd situation we now see: denial of any impact by human activity is one simple extreme. The other is assuming all observed global warming is human caused, which is a perennial political favorite (perhaps because it is simple.) But that assumes the planet?s climate never changes without human activity, which we know is not the case, and invites comparison to Mars which is currently thought to be warming presumably without human intervention. So what happens if we generally agree that human activity causes global warming but no really one knows how much? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 01:06:56 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 21:06:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 8:18 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Do you want to convince her that there is anthropogenic catastrophic > global warming? > > If yes, why would you try to convert a friend to a position, even if you > are by your own admission not very familiar with its justification? > > Rafa? > > You are correct - I used the wrong word - 'convince'. What I want to know > is just how the question stands now. If Forbes is correct, that poll > showing 97% agreeing with manmade warming is not valid. Well, what IS the > consensus of scientists on this point? bill w > ### I do not know that. The whole field of climate science is now so thoroughly poisoned by politics that it I find it impossible to trust much of what is being written. You would need to very critically read primary sources and ask yourself what is the meaning of "manmade warming". Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 01:15:58 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 21:15:58 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Transparent mice and brain scanning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 7:42 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > *Researchers have developed a way to make a mouse transparent ? by > removing the liquids and fats from its tissue.* > ### This and other similar methods are the second coolest thing happening this millennium so far. Chemopreservation of the human brain, followed by staining, clearing and thick-slice optic scanning might produce an upload file much easier than electron microscopy based methods, if the neural dust idea does not pan out. Alternatively, neural dust interface analysis could be done first, followed by destructive scanning. The two sources of information would mutually constrain the space of solutions in the resulting model of the mind, thus significantly reducing information loss and computational overhead. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 01:50:10 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 21:50:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] book In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > > > The "statin hypothesis" is that treating cholesterol above a certain level > with statins is medically recommended. > ### No, this is not the statin hypothesis. --------------------- > That level has been consistently lowered over the years. The fact that > statins lower all-cause mortality in specified populations doesn't "prove" > the statin hypothesis unless the specified population is "everyone with > cholesterol level over N", which doesn't seem to be the case. > >From a quick google, it appears the population helped is those with non-obstructive > coronary artery disease. > ### Statins lower all-cause mortality in primary prevention, which pretty much means "everyone with cholesterol level over N", the exact level depending on the study: PMID 27043432 PMID 26864092 --------------- > Lowering mortality is great, but how much is it lowered and at what cost? > ### See references above. Pennies a day. --------------- > Statins aren't without side effects. > ### For most users they are. If you have myalgia or liver damage, obviously don't use statins. Otherwise, use statins according to guidelines. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 02:52:18 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 22:52:18 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: <00d901d2070f$40c609b0$c2521d10$@att.net> References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> <00d901d2070f$40c609b0$c2521d10$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 8:48 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > Here?s one idea: we know the input from the sun, we know the greenhouse > value of CO2, we can estimate if all else is equal, how much the increasing > CO2 level should be increasing temperature. But all else is unequal, for > the observed warming is lower than would be expected if we use only that > one term. So we start to refine our model. We can add in a term for > increasing surface temperature causing increased evaporation from the sea, > which absorbs energy and increases clouds which scatters incoming solar > energy into space and traps heat down at the surface. That term is net > negative (would cause global cooling.) Then we work in a term for reduced > albedo from increased plantgrowth (from higher CO2 levels and calculate a > theoretical impact of that. Then add in the impact on albedo of increased > rainfall or decreased rainfall (in some cases) add in a term for increased > alpha T^4 from Stefan-Boltzmann?s law, and estimate the impact of increased > wind, which seems to me like would increase evaporation off the surface of > the sea, and increased albedo from higher snowfall from increased > evaporation in some places and lower snowfall in other places from higher > temperatures, increased this and decreased that and unknown effect of the > other. > > ?It's even more complicated than that because ?w ater vapor is a far more ?important? greenhouse gas than CO2 ?,? and unlike CO2 it undergoes phase changes at earthly temperatures, it can be a solid a liquid or a ? ? gas which makes it much more complicated than CO2 which is always just a gas, at least on this planet. ?We don't even know if the world's temperature increases it will that c ?ause? more clouds or fewer clouds. It's a very simple question with profound consequences because clouds regulate the amount of solar energy that runs the entire climate show. Increased temperature means more water evaporates from the sea, but it also means the atmosphere can hold more water before it is forced to form clouds. So who wins this tug of war? Nobody knows, its too complicated. And then there is the important issue of global dimming, the world may be getting warmer but it is also getting dimmer. For reasons that are not clearly understood in the daytime at any given temperature it takes longer now for water on the earth's surface to evaporate now than it did 50 years ago. There are 2 important questions that are seldom asked in discussions global warming: 1) On the whole is global warming a bad thing? 2) If it is a bad thing do environmentalists have a cure that isn't worse than the disease? The answers are maybe and no. John K Clark > > > Pretty soon you come to the same conclusion I did: human activity does > cause global warming, but we don?t know what fraction of global warming is > human caused. Estimates vary wildly and can even go negative in some > models (human activity causes global cooling or slows natural global > warming) and can go over 100 percent (the planet would be cooling naturally > but human activity is causing it to warm.) > > > > With that, we get the odd situation we now see: denial of any impact by > human activity is one simple extreme. The other is assuming all observed > global warming is human caused, which is a perennial political favorite > (perhaps because it is simple.) But that assumes the planet?s climate > never changes without human activity, which we know is not the case, and > invites comparison to Mars which is currently thought to be warming > presumably without human intervention. > > > > So what happens if we generally agree that human activity causes global > warming but no really one knows how much? > > > > spike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 06:04:12 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 23:04:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Alzheimer=E2=80=99s?= Message-ID: In its highest dose, the drug was recently shown to annihilate amyloid plaques in the brains of a subset of the study?s 165 participants. It could cost up to $2.5 billion dollars to test it widely, but the investment might be worth the price tag: if it works, aducanumab could treat people for Alzheimer?s before they even show symptoms. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/plaque-pillaging-alzheimers-drug-advances-toward-promising-phase-iii-trial/?utm_medium=N/A&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=nova_next&linkId=28297637&utm_source=twitter&hootPostID=7214100121367f51f30a3f435d378fb6 From danust2012 at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 06:42:17 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 23:42:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Alzheimer=E2=80=99s?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 4, 2016, at 11:04 PM, Keith Henson wrote: > In its highest dose, the drug was recently shown to annihilate amyloid > plaques in the brains of a subset of the study?s 165 participants. > It could cost up to $2.5 billion dollars to test it widely, but the > investment might be worth the price tag: if it works, aducanumab could > treat people for Alzheimer?s before they even show symptoms. > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/plaque-pillaging-alzheimers-drug-advances-toward-promising-phase-iii-trial/?utm_medium=N/A&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=nova_next&linkId=28297637&utm_source=twitter&hootPostID=7214100121367f51f30a3f435d378fb6 This was also reported in Science News. Pretty exciting stuff! Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 11:25:44 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 07:25:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Alzheimer=E2=80=99s?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 2:04 AM, Keith Henson wrote: > In its highest dose, the drug was recently shown to annihilate amyloid > plaques in the brains of a subset of the study?s 165 participants. > It could cost up to $2.5 billion dollars to test it widely, but the > investment might be worth the price tag: if it works, aducanumab could > treat people for Alzheimer?s before they even show symptoms. > http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/plaque-pillaging- > alzheimers-drug-advances-toward-promising-phase-iii- > trial/?utm_medium=N/A&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_ > campaign=nova_next&linkId=28297637&utm_source=twitter&hootPostID= > 7214100121367f51f30a3f435d378fb6 > > ### There was a 41% frequency of ARIA (brain swelling) at the highest dose, which was dose-dependent and lead to discontinuation of treatment in 44% affected patients. There were also many cases of CNS siderosis. So, another amyloid-buster antibody that causes brain swelling like all the others before it, with dose-dependent loss of study participants that can explain the trends towards efficacy. I give you 3:1 odds against it working in phase III. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 5 13:56:22 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 06:56:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] =?utf-8?q?Alzheimer=E2=80=99s?= In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003b01d2077d$4a4c5a70$dee50f50$@att.net> >...It could cost up to $2.5 billion dollars to test it widely, but the investment might be worth the price tag: if it works, aducanumab could treat people for Alzheimer?s before they even show symptoms. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/next/body/plaque-pillaging-alzheimers-drug-advances-toward-promising-phase-iii-trial/?utm_medium=N/A&utm_medium=pbsofficial&utm_campaign=nova_next&linkId=28297637&utm_source=twitter&hootPostID=7214100121367f51f30a3f435d378fb6 Keith Woohooo! Let's hope for the best Keith, thanks for the link. We have nothing in the arsenal now that works very well. Of all the diseases, it seems like Alzheimer's would be the very best one for doing trials that don't cost 2.5 billion clams. Reasoning: we already have a big pool of eager desperate test subjects, they are already being carefully monitored so we know what they are taking, they are already in controlled environments with a lot of available medical equipment and medical professionals and staff around them always, they are already paying a ton of money every day for medications that appear to do little or nothing. For testing new substances or theories, this is the disease with the best available laboratory, the most test subjects, the very best conditions imaginable. Let's hope. spike From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 14:21:34 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 10:21:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To Aaronson Trump Message-ID: John K Clark Says: Comment #71 September 4th, 2016 at 9:32 pm In the 2012 presidential election Nate Silver correctly predicted how every state would go, and as of today he says Trump has a 30.9% chance of taking command of the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet in 137 days. That terrifies me; if I played Russian Roulette I?d only have a 16.6% chance of losing. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#plus -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 14:39:02 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 10:39:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] To Aaronson Trump In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry about that, I meant to send that to somebody else. John On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 10:21 AM, John Clark wrote: > John K Clark Says: > Comment #71 September 4th, 2016 at 9:32 pm > > > In the 2012 presidential election Nate Silver correctly predicted how > every state would go, and as of today he says Trump has a 30.9% chance of > taking command of the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet in 137 > days. That terrifies me; if I played Russian Roulette I?d only have a 16.6% > chance of losing. > > http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid= > rrpromo#plus > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 5 14:32:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 07:32:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] To Aaronson Trump In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <005201d20782$54fc00b0$fef40210$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Monday, September 05, 2016 7:22 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] To Aaronson Trump John K Clark Says: Comment #71 September 4th, 2016 at 9:32 pm In the 2012 presidential election Nate Silver correctly predicted how every state would go, and as of today he says Trump has a 30.9% chance of taking command of the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet in 137 days. That terrifies me; if I played Russian Roulette I?d only have a 16.6% chance of losing. http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/?ex_cid=rrpromo#plus So do we sit around being terrified, or do we influence congress to secure the football, do something which would actually solve the problem rather than choose which flavor of problem we wish to face? Nate Silver uses only polls. He has never done a poll in which one candidate faced a looming email dump, nor is he dealing with Friday?s FBI report, in which one of the candidates is STILL telling a blatantly self-contradictory story, one which gets crazier sounding with each new version. Hear the footsteps John. They are getting louder every day. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 5 15:00:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 08:00:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ethics question: RE: To Aaronson Trump Message-ID: <003201d20786$3dccf4e0$b966dea0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Monday, September 05, 2016 7:39 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] To Aaronson Trump Sorry about that, I meant to send that to somebody else. John No worries John, we are somebody else. Or rather I am. Some commentators prefer to use the non-lifeform-specific term ?thing? as in Spike, you?re something else. That way, they flatter me in a less specific way. John, don?t worry, do something. Anything you can think of. Do the right thing, my friend, do it. But do let me go bounce off a political post into something else (the opposite direction discussions usually bounce) and ask ethics experts please a question about terminology. In a situation where a prole must choose between two bad options, that is called an ethical dilemma. (Ja?) Where she must choose the best of two mutually exclusive good options, we can talk about opportunity cost of one or the other perhaps. Is there a table of terminology in ethics? OK what if? a prole has the option of doing good deed A or good deed B but she does neither? That becomes a bad deed, ja? And what if? a prole discovers some interesting technology that can do a good thing that helps people, but also might harm some people in unknown ways? Then opting to do nothing is a bad deed, ja? Does that have a name or a category? Ethics hipsters, have you a favorite link for the very basic terminology on this? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 15:44:07 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:44:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] ethics question: RE: To Aaronson Trump In-Reply-To: References: <003201d20786$3dccf4e0$b966dea0$@att.net> Message-ID: Here's one for you: Someone is about to push a button that reverses the ethics in your and everyone's minds for murder. If you don't kill them, when they press it you'll have made an unethical decision. If you do kill them, they won't press it and you'll have made an unethical decision. They disappear after pressing it so you can't kill them after. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 16:06:39 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 09:06:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ethics question: RE: To Aaronson Trump In-Reply-To: References: <003201d20786$3dccf4e0$b966dea0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Will Steinberg wrote: > Someone is about to push a button that reverses the ethics in your and > everyone's minds for murder. If you don't kill them, when they press it > you'll have made an unethical decision. If you do kill them, they won't > press it and you'll have made an unethical decision. They disappear after > pressing it so you can't kill them after. > Hack the button so it doesn't actually work. (Impossible? Just as impossible as a button flipping everyone's ethics.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 16:12:40 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 11:12:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: <00af01d2070b$db691f60$923b5e20$@att.net> References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> <00af01d2070b$db691f60$923b5e20$@att.net> Message-ID: ? We used Matlab and Simulink, worked a configuration on the computer, got it working where we wanted by swapping in and out components we had at our disposal, found out the combinations of stuff that would do what we wanted. Then, we went into the lab and built what we had simulated. Those sims were seldom off by much. spike On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 7:24 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Sunday, September 04, 2016 4:06 PM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? > > > > But the ones we care most about tend to be simulations, and this is where > quantum computers could shine. anders > > > > >? what, if any, ways are there to validate simulations? Well, let the > world go by and see what really happens, I suppose. What else? Do real > world experiments? In short, why trust simulations? ?bill w > > > > > > BillW, the way I saw sims develop in real world engineering is that it > guided design. We used Matlab and Simulink, worked a configuration on the > computer, got it working where we wanted by swapping in and out components > we had at our disposal, found out the combinations of stuff that would do > what we wanted. > > > > Then, we went into the lab and built what we had simulated. Those sims > were seldom off by much. > > > > A more startling example happened in the earlier days, in about 1993. We > had a missile with a two-piece aero-shroud that would peel away like a > clamshell and fall away at about 70 kft where the air was thin. It was > instrumented and we wanted to recover the two pieces but couldn?t have it > transmit and couldn?t have much of a power source for a pinger. We didn?t > want the shroud to fall anywhere off the range (White Sands) where we > wouldn?t necessarily have access to it, and of couse we didn?t want it > coming down and conking some local prole or his cow. So? we calculated > where we expected them to fall and created a classic circle of equal > probability (in this case an ellipse (actually two of them because the two > pieces were slightly different shapes and masses)) using only closed-form > equations and no computers at all. > > > > We formed two teams: our team was two PhDs in aerodynamics and I was the > junior guy who ground through the equations by hand (they wrote em, I > solved them, then they checked the result (I was the one who went home > smelling like sweat at the end of the day.)) > > > > The other team were these two guys even younger than I, in their 20s, > didn?t even have engineering degrees (they were technologist who knew > sims) The two were contractors with their own company. They came in, > created wire-frame digital models, ran a jillion sims, drew an ellipse that > enclosed half their simulated landing spots, done. The docs and I took > about three weeks. The two younger fellers finished a good couple days > before us with smaller ellipses, inside ours. Eeeeverybody was quietly > watching this whole experiment, because I had to report there was some risk > of one of the shroud pieces landing off the range, but the other guys > suggested the risk was much smaller. > > > > The test firing happened, both pieces fell within their ellipse. > > > > That was a wakeup call. I took up Simulink and Matlab with renewed vigor. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From legionara at openmailbox.org Mon Sep 5 18:57:49 2016 From: legionara at openmailbox.org (Legionara) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 14:57:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> <011a01d2066f$64bf2270$2e3d6750$@att.net> Message-ID: <20160905145749.00003aa1.legionara@openmailbox.org> I wouldn't be so sure. Sanders ingratiated himself with the DNC by graciously accepting defeat even in the face of evidence he was stonewalled by collusion by party elites. But his anti-establishment rhetoric throughout the primary alienated him from the establishment superdelegates, and he still failed to capture enough "normal" delegates to seriously challenge Mrs. Clinton. On Sun, 4 Sep 2016 07:14:05 -0400 Will Steinberg wrote: > Yeah I know it'd go to Bernie, I just wish it'd go to Biden. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 19:51:22 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 12:51:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: <20160905145749.00003aa1.legionara@openmailbox.org> References: <007c01d2062e$94e762a0$beb627e0$@att.net> <011a01d2066f$64bf2270$2e3d6750$@att.net> <20160905145749.00003aa1.legionara@openmailbox.org> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 11:57 AM, Legionara wrote: > I wouldn't be so sure. Sanders ingratiated himself with the DNC by > graciously accepting defeat even in the face of evidence he was > stonewalled by collusion by party elites. But his anti-establishment > rhetoric throughout the primary alienated him from the establishment > superdelegates, and he still failed to capture enough "normal" > delegates to seriously challenge Mrs. Clinton. > It's been shown that this wasn't his fault: quite a few of the votes and resources, beyond just the superdelegates, were rigged by the DNC toward Clinton. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From legionara at openmailbox.org Mon Sep 5 18:36:21 2016 From: legionara at openmailbox.org (Legionara) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 14:36:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax In-Reply-To: <00d901d2070f$40c609b0$c2521d10$@att.net> References: <156f663bf92-7a53-bf1b@webprd-m16.mail.aol.com> <006d01d206ec$3a05c1b0$ae114510$@att.net> <00d901d2070f$40c609b0$c2521d10$@att.net> Message-ID: <20160905143621.000049e0.legionara@openmailbox.org> >>> BillW, it is extremely difficult to deny that man causes global >>> warming. What we don?t know is how much of the observed global >>> warming is man-caused. 1%? 10% 20%? 80%? 100%? That part is >>> unknown. >>> >>> >>> >>> spike >>> >> >> >> Yes, well, it's being done by my friend. What can convince her? >> bill w >> > > > > > > > > > Why do you need to? Do you know the answer to the question of how > much? Do any of us? > > > > Here?s one idea: we know the input from the sun, we know the > greenhouse value of CO2, we can estimate if all else is equal, how > much the increasing CO2 level should be increasing temperature. But > all else is unequal, for the observed warming is lower than would be > expected if we use only that one term. So we start to refine our > model. We can add in a term for increasing surface temperature > causing increased evaporation from the sea, which absorbs energy and > increases clouds which scatters incoming solar energy into space and > traps heat down at the surface. That term is net negative (would > cause global cooling.) Then we work in a term for reduced albedo > from increased plant growth (from higher CO2 levels and calculate a > theoretical impact of that. Then add in the impact on albedo of > increased rainfall or decreased rainfall (in some cases) add in a > term for increased alpha T^4 from Stefan-Boltzmann?s law, and > estimate the impact of increased wind, which seems to me like would > increase evaporation off the surface of the sea, and increased albedo > from higher snowfall from increased evaporation in some places and > lower snowfall in other places from higher temperatures, increased > this and decreased that and unknown effect of the other. > > > > Pretty soon you come to the same conclusion I did: human activity > does cause global warming, but we don?t know what fraction of global > warming is human caused. Estimates vary wildly and can even go > negative in some models (human activity causes global cooling or > slows natural global warming) and can go over 100 percent (the planet > would be cooling naturally but human activity is causing it to warm.) > Agreed. As per usual, further study is needed. > > > With that, we get the odd situation we now see: denial of any impact > by human activity is one simple extreme. The other is assuming all > observed global warming is human caused, which is a perennial > political favorite (perhaps because it is simple.) But that assumes > the planet?s climate never changes without human activity, which we > know is not the case, and invites comparison to Mars which is > currently thought to be warming presumably without human intervention. > Man-made global climate change is a convenient bogeyman for certain interests, just like governments' response to it is a nice bogeyman for others. The truth is likely somewhere in between. > > So what happens if we generally agree that human activity causes > global warming but no really one knows how much? > > > > spike > Maybe we could focus on issues that we understand better? There are plenty of worthwhile causes within environmentalism. Poor soil management and overuse of pesticides and mineral fertilizers, contamination of water bodies by heavy metals and petrochemicals, widespread deforestation, lazy/cavalier waste management, the massive pile of garbage in the Pacific Gyre, the over-reliance of the world on a highly unstable region for its energy resources, the list goes on and on. Why then, I wonder, do we focus so much on the carbon dioxide bogeyman? As Mr. Clark alluded to, the cure seems to be worse than the disease. The solution to our global warming demons always seems to be more laws, more regulations, and more government involvement in private life, which is something I find hard to stomach. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 473 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 20:13:21 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 16:13:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nate Silver Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 10:32 AM, spike wrote: > Nate Silver uses only polls. I like Nate Silver because he's a number crunching sort of guy and because of all the political pundits he has proven to be by far the most accurate. In the 2008 Presidential election Silver correctly predicted the outcome in 49 of the 50 states, in 2012 he was 51 out of 51, he got every state right and the District of Columbia too. Nobody else came close. And yes he only uses polls in his "polls only" forecast, but not in his more accurate "polls plus" forecast. And Silver doesn't just use one poll but dozens, and he knows that some polls have more scientific protocols than others so he gives some more weight than others, he also knows that some have historically favored the Democrats and some the Republicans and he knows by how much and makes adjustments. Silver changes the probabilities every day as a good Bayesian should because new information becomes available every day. As of today with "polls only" Silver says Trump has a 28.9% chance of winning, close to what the betting odds of Trump winning are, 27.6%. Betting odds have a good record, better than any single poll, but not better than Silver's "polls plus". In "polls plus" he makes further adjustments using economic forecasts, endorsements, short lived convention bounces, and early voting which will start in some states in a week or so. Using "polls plus" Silver says Trump will do better than what "polls only" indicates, Silver says Trump really has a 30.8% chance. > He has never done a poll in which one candidate faced a looming email > dump, nor is he dealing with Friday?s FBI report, The report where the *REPUBLICAN* FBI director said no crime had occurred? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 5 21:16:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 14:16:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nate Silver In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <016101d207ba$bb5691d0$3203b570$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ? >> He has never done a poll in which one candidate faced a looming email dump, nor is he dealing with Friday?s FBI report, >?The report where the REPUBLICAN FBI director said no crime had occurred? John K Clark Ja, that?s the one. Note that isn?t what he said. He said he wasn?t recommending going forward with indictment. But? there is nothing illegal about senility. However? after three minutes of pondering Friday?s report, we realize the story just got more complicated rather than simpler. Reason: the concussion and blood clot Mrs. Clinton cited as perhaps causing memory loss occurred in December 2012. The security training she would have gotten as a senator (to review the evidence used for deciding on the invasion of Iraq) happened in 2003. The DoD and State Department have detailed records of security training from 2003, a time when she and the other senators would have no particular special considerations: they would be trained in all those data-handling requirements. That training, in which the assessments prove the applicant does understand all those markings and requirements happened in 2003, the mishandling of material happened during the span of 2008 and 2012, and the concussion and clot happened in December 2012. The ?123 Deal? memo was written on 28 May 2013, at which time Mrs. Clinton had no government employment and no legal access to the 123 deal, suggesting that anything in that memo had to come from memory, or? somewhere else perhaps. Regarding Nate Silver, to report that probability to three significant digits is analogous to estimating the mass of a cloud to that level of precision. The upcoming Assange email dump makes this the most unpredictable and weird campaign in American history. John if you want to go with your Russian roulette model, this is one of those cases where you play without knowing how many rounds are in that pistol. Secure the football. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Mon Sep 5 23:53:57 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 16:53:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] seti today at microsoft In-Reply-To: <027801d2031a$92224c40$b666e4c0$@att.net> References: <010a01d202c9$bed30c30$3c792490$@att.net> <027801d2031a$92224c40$b666e4c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 4:59 PM, spike wrote: > OK well, I found the talk interesting but frustrating in a way. > > > They had a panel discussion after the pitch in which they discuss the > possibility of sending a probe. But if you do the math on it, that probe > would take a loooong time to get out there, thousands of years by any known > or plausible technology. > > A bit late, but...yeah, I figured this wouldn't be anything to get excited about yet, thus my no show. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 00:49:23 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 20:49:23 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Dark Matter Message-ID: There are 2 recent papers ?about Primordial ?Black Holes and Dark Matter, both are in Physical Review Letters ?. In one ? John Hopkins University ? scientists say the rate that LIGO discovered ?Black Hole mergers is consistent with Dark Matter being made entirely of Primordial Black Holes. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.201301 In the other paper Kyoto University scientists say the discovery rate can account for some but not all of Dark Matter, so there must be something else in addition. http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.061101 The difference between the 2 papers comes from different assumptions about the very early universe less than a second after the Big Bang and the rate Black Holes would be formed in pairs. Both agree that Primordial Black Holes would tend to have more elliptical orbits than astrophysical ones formed from dead stars which would usually be more circular, and LIGO can tell the difference. We need more data and fortunately LIGO should come back online any day now, and VIRGO in Italy too, so before long we should know who is right. Another Dark matter candidate is a hypothetical light particle, the Axion. Recently Maurizio Giannotti suggested that the observed unexpected rapid cooling of white dwarfs and neutron stars could be explained by the stars radiating away energy in the form of Axions. One good thing about Axions is that unlike WIMPS the Axions theory doesn't have a lot of wiggle room, so within a few years the Axion Dark Matter Experiment (ADMX) should be able to find Axions or prove they don't exist. Unlike WIMPS Axions react (weakly) with a magnetic fields and cause a Axion to be converted to a microwave photon which can be detected by ADMX, assuming Axions are not just the figment of a physicist's imagination. In another development that may or may not be related to Dark Matter there is increasing evidence (although not yet proof) of a fifth fundamental force that effects only electrons and neutrons and only at very close range: https://news.uci.edu/research/uci-physicists-confirm-possible-discovery-of-fifth-force-of-natur John K Clark While astrophysical black holes have circular orbits, those of primordial black holes should be elliptical, which would provide a way to distinguish between the two when their shudders of gravitational energy are detected on Earth. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 00:57:11 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 20:57:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nate Silver In-Reply-To: <016101d207ba$bb5691d0$3203b570$@att.net> References: <016101d207ba$bb5691d0$3203b570$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 5:16 PM, spike wrote: ?> ? > He said he wasn?t recommending going forward with indictment. But? there > is nothing illegal about senility. ?Ah Spike, you're not being serious.... are you? ? ?> ? > Secure the football. ?It's just not going to happen.? ? John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 14:08:53 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 10:08:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading Message-ID: Back in 2000 when Ralph Nader was running for president law professor Jamin Raskin had an idea he called ?Nadertrading". The idea was that Nader supporters in swing states like Florida or Pennsylvania would vote for Gore and in return a Gore supporter in a non-swing state like California or Texas would vote for Nader. Hmm. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 15:03:46 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:03:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Philae found Message-ID: <0E8D5B79-B905-4DB1-B33F-1873B8BE0433@gmail.com> http://m.esa.int/Our_Activities/Space_Science/Rosetta/Philae_found This is where an RTG would've been much better. Hindsight bias, of course. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 15:24:59 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 11:24:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think something like this happened in Canada recently to get Trudeau elected. There is also a similar campaign being run now by Johnson and Weld called "balanced rebellion" where they pair a person who would vote for Trump with a person who would vote for Hillary so their votes for the Lib ticket don't give candidate they hate a vote by negligence, though I don't think the statistics work out perfectly. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 15:39:56 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 08:39:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 6, 2016, at 8:24 AM, Will Steinberg wrote: > I think something like this happened in Canada recently to get Trudeau elected. There is also a similar campaign being run now by Johnson and Weld called "balanced rebellion" where they pair a person who would vote for Trump with a person who would vote for Hillary so their votes for the Lib ticket don't give candidate they hate a vote by negligence, though I don't think the statistics work out perfectly. Are there any reliable data on these cases (and others) on this? Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aleksei at iki.fi Tue Sep 6 15:59:10 2016 From: aleksei at iki.fi (Aleksei Riikonen) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 18:59:10 +0300 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 12:19 AM, Will Steinberg wrote: > > he's like a normal sensible presidential candidate we'd have in any other > election year that wasn't an apocalyptic clusterfuck. Sorry, but I think you'll find out that what you have this year is the new normal... This is what democracy looks like in an empire entering it's period of decline. -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei From steinberg.will at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 16:12:23 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 12:12:23 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 6, 2016 11:59 AM, "Aleksei Riikonen" wrote: > > Sorry, but I think you'll find out that what you have this year is the > new normal... > > This is what democracy looks like in an empire entering it's period of decline. Yeah, I know this. It's of course only going to get worse. If we even get to another election, and if it doesn't happen this election, next time I guarantee there will be an abnormality in the election process--candidates will be replaced, election day will be delayed or cancelled, the rules will undergo a forced changed. I'm just trying to figure out where will be safe. An island, probably. The Ryukyu Islands, or Madagascar? Perhaps the steppes of Central Asia, or far northern Canada. Antarctica if we need to. Maybe it'll be tropical by then (even though it will of course never be astronomically tropical, barring some crazy alterations to our planet's precession.) -w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aleksei at iki.fi Tue Sep 6 16:23:54 2016 From: aleksei at iki.fi (Aleksei Riikonen) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 19:23:54 +0300 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > > I'm just trying to figure out where will be safe. An island, probably. The > Ryukyu Islands, or Madagascar? Perhaps the steppes of Central Asia, or far > northern Canada. New Zealand (and Australia) are my top recommendations for people looking for new places to live. But I do expect Canada to do rather ok too, hope I'm not too optimistic on that... -- Aleksei Riikonen - http://www.iki.fi/aleksei From danust2012 at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 16:28:38 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 09:28:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8EB776B6-878C-400E-BE05-663BC1D78D9B@gmail.com> On Sep 6, 2016, at 9:12 AM, Will Steinberg wrote: On Sep 6, 2016 11:59 AM, "Aleksei Riikonen" wrote: > > > > Sorry, but I think you'll find out that what you have this year is the > > new normal... > > > > This is what democracy looks like in an empire entering it's period of decline. > > Yeah, I know this. It's of course only going to get worse. If we even get to another election, and if it doesn't happen this election, next time I guarantee there will be an abnormality in the election process--candidates will be replaced, election day will be delayed or cancelled, the rules will undergo a forced changed. > There were no abnormalities in previous elections? Nothing strange happened in 01968, 01976, or 02000? And the rules didn't change afterward? The US is still using the same election rules as in the Eighteenth Century? > I'm just trying to figure out where will be safe. An island, probably. The Ryukyu Islands, or Madagascar? Perhaps the steppes of Central Asia, or far northern Canada. > Anders mentioned Tasmania. ;) > Antarctica if we need to. Maybe it'll be tropical by then > If by then you mean a few centuries hence, yes. > (even though it will of course never be astronomically tropical, barring some crazy alterations to our planet's precession.) > This too shall pass. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 16:32:37 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 11:32:37 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins Message-ID: And there's a book by a physician that deals with nothing but the cognitive decline he says is caused by statins. No, I am not on it or a candidate for it. So I am neutral. bill w http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2016/09/05/doctors-deeply-divided-over-the-value-of-statins/?utm_source=The+People%27s+Pharmacy+Newsletter&utm_campaign=04667e26ff-This-Week-Email+9%2F6%2F16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7300006d3c-04667e26ff-214968749&ct=t(This_Week_9_6_16)&mc_cid=04667e26ff&mc_eid=b9c6f5005a -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 6 16:59:40 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 09:59:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 7:09 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading >?Back in 2000 when Ralph Nader was running for president law professor Jamin Raskin had an idea he called ?Nadertrading". The idea was that Nader supporters in swing states like Florida or Pennsylvania would vote for Gore and in return a Gore supporter in a non-swing state like California or Texas would vote for Nader. Hmm.. John K Clark Ja, this is perfectly legal and right out of Saul Alinsky?s bag of tricks. We have already seen an example of what happens when these techniques are put into action: it?s how we got Trump. If you recall, back in spring 2015 (and if you don?t, references can be found on the internet still) one of the two mainstream parties already had its nominee, there were no serious contenders anywhere, the super-delegates were already bought, everything was in place, no need to waste donations during the primary season. The party urged its loyal followers to cross-register as the other mainstream party and vote for the most easily-beaten candidate and the one most likely to bring scorn and ridicule upon that other scurrilous party. Plenty of them did it, as evidenced by record numbers of new registrations for that other mainstream party. Then two unexpected events happened: a viable competitor for that nomination arose and caused such an uproar, the party had to cheat in order to defeat him. Then scandal was uncovered, not by the people responsible for overseeing and preventing this sort of corruption, the ones we pay to watch for it, but by volunteer hackers from (of all places) RUSSIA! The commies have become our voluntary police force now, oy freaking vey. Result: we don?t know who is going to win this crazy mess, but we do know who will lose: America. If there is any lesson for us, it is this: those Alinsky methods are highly effective but very risky. The cross-dresser might get what they asked for. Secure the football. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon Sep 5 09:35:07 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2016 10:35:07 +0100 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 2016-09-05 00:06, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > This may be too complicated to answer: what, if any, ways are there > to validate simulations? Well, let the world go by and see what > really happens, I suppose. What else? Do real world experiments? In > short, why trust simulations? We should primie facie distrust them > (like the null hypothesis). At least two problems arise: GIGO for > one. Not putting in crucial variables (because you don't know that > they are crucial) is another. This is a big thing in the world of simulating stuff. It depends on what kind of system you are modelling. Many physics problems have conserved quantities like energy, so you can validate your code by checking the energy stays constant. Or you run it for systems with known behavior and compare. But often the right approach is to first write down the maths and figure out an approximation scheme that have guaranteed error bounds: a lot of awesome numerical analysis exist, including stuff like symplectic methods that allows virtually error-free prediction of planetary orbits over very long timespans. You can also empirically change the resolution or stepsize in the simulation to see how it responds: if there is a noticeable change in output, you better increase the resolution or do things another way. Same thing for parameters: if everything changes if you twiddle the knobs of the model slightly, you should be skeptical. In neuroscience things are harder, since the systems are more complex and not everything is known. You can still build a simulation and compare to reality though: if it doesn't fit, your model (either the theory or the code) is not right. You can also validate things by making virtual experiments to get predictions and then check them in the lab - this has produced some very solid results. But many neuroscience models do not aim at perfect fits, but rather to see if our theory produces the right behavior. That can sometimes involve making very simple models rather than complex ones: my rule of thumb is that you better get more results out of the model than you have free parameters, otherwise it is suspect. This is why many computational neuroscientists are somewhat skeptical of large scale computer simulations: we might not learn much from them. Now, in systems like climate you have a bit of the physics side - we know pretty well how air, heat and water move - but also a bit of the neuroscience mess - clouds are hard to model, vegetation changes in complex ways. So there is a fair bit of uncertainty (many climate modellers are *really* good at statistics and the theory of uncertainty). That is not a major problem; one can handle it. The thing that worries me most is that many of the scientific codes are vast, messy systems with subroutines written by a postdoc that left years ago - I think many parts of science ought to have a code review, but nobody will like the answers. This is likely true for the simulations underlying much of our economy too: I know enough about how insurance risk models work to not want to look too much under the hood. Often the bugs and errors get averaged out by the complex dynamics so that they do not matter as much as they would in simple models, which I guess is a kind of relief. Many models are trusted just because they fit what people believe, which is often based on running models. In science people actually do perform comparisons with data, experiments or even mathematical analysis to keep the models in the vicinity of reality. The key thing to remember is that "all models are wrong, but some are useful". You should not select a model because it promises perfect answers (that is frequently dangerous) but rather than it gives you the information that matters with a high probability. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 6 17:59:56 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 10:59:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <018801d20868$7a9ac4f0$6fd04ed0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Subject: Re: [ExI] Nobody's posted about the Hillary interview yet? On Sep 6, 2016 11:59 AM, "Aleksei Riikonen" > wrote: > >>? Sorry, but I think you'll find out that what you have this year is the > new normal... This is what democracy looks like in an empire entering it's period of decline. >?Yeah, I know this. It's of course only going to get worse. ?-w Doesn?t need to be, Will. If people want to engage in Nadertrading, keep in mind there is a risk we might get what they asked for. Simple solution: instead of voting for the other party?s worst candidate, crossdressers could vote for the one most acceptable to their own party if he or she wins. Who would that be in this case? I would guess Jeb Bush. If he had won because of newly-registered crossdressers, he would be shambling about giving boring speeches about nothing, telling us how great Common Core is, and yakkity yak and bla bla, snooze. And he would be waaaaaay ahead now, way ahead. Reason: he wouldn?t have a tiny fraction of the scandal, he isn?t a warhawk, he isn?t any of the really scary stuff. Instead the crossdressers chose this wacky guy who will likely turn the upcoming presidential debates into WWE heavyweight mud rasslin?. But there might be a downside to that: because of circumstances completely beyond his control, he might win. We are told he is pulling even now in some polls, before the debates, before the Assange dump, before the FBI/congressional testimony reconciliation report due in a week, and being outspent 20 to 1. How we would yearn for someone who is just a harmless zero, a dovish bland Jeb Bush, a smart outsider Carly Fiorina, any of the other 17, any. Crossdressers, careful what you ask for; we might get it. We won?t like it. Secure the football. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 19:30:22 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:30:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> References: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> Message-ID: Spike, I'd make one alteration to your statements. The Russians aren't playing police, they are cold fighting us. This whole election is honestly a cold war proxy battle. The executive department did some incredibly bad shit, and there is evidence of it in the "yoga". Bad shit of grave geopolitical implications. Hillary is basically the Fall guy, not to say she does not reek of corruption. The Russians have some or all of the evidence of that bad shit. The only reason they aren't releasing it is because it would likely compromise them too much. Geopolitical actors must choose in a di-lemma the option which causes less damage. I think the Russians will release, through proxy sources, something incredibly damning a short time before the election. Hillary could be made ineligible. The election may then be delayed. It could also come out that Trump is being directly supported by the Russians and that he knows about it. I think this is also plausible, though less plausible than the Hillary situation. Ideally, both candidates are disqualified and replaced with people who have souls and brains. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 19:42:38 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 12:42:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] voting? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 3, 2016 4:39 PM, "Keith Henson" wrote: > If you are a US voter, how are you voting? Johnson, assuming nothing significant changes between now and when I mail in my ballot. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From msd001 at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 21:08:55 2016 From: msd001 at gmail.com (Mike Dougherty) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 17:08:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Will Steinberg wrote: > Ideally, both candidates are disqualified and replaced with people who have > souls and brains. If given a choice, I'd prefer one with brains .. even/especially the dispassionate AI kind. From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 21:49:32 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 17:49:32 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 3:30 PM, Will Steinberg ?> ? > Ideally, both candidates are disqualified and replaced with people who > have souls and brains. > ? > ?This is real life so you don't have the ideal choice because you don't live in an ideal world. The choice you do have is deciding which is more important, torturing people for fun and killing children because you don't like their father, or having an assistant that may or may not have filed the proper government approved paperwork to get a raise. Fantasies about getting rid of the football aside, the fact remains that one of these people will be in charge of the most powerful nuclear arsenal on the planet in 3247 hours, and you have a vote in deciding which one. I've made my choice on which is more important and I found it extraordinarily easy to do so. John K Clark ? ? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 6 22:18:13 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 17:18:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: This is a big thing in the world of simulating stuff. It depends on what kind of system you are modelling. anders Ah yes, landed the big fish. Thought I could lure Anders into this, and I actually understand most of it at my low level. Thanks! So I won't worry - the modelers are on the job. Biggest worry - economic models based on faulty theories of human behavior. Now the question is: are there any other kind? My answer is no. Psych gave up on big models long ago and are content to try to understand small niches of behavior, while often tossing away what was learned from the big models. We're young and sometimes stupid and vain to not let our forefathers teach us something about people. We are a long way from synthesis. Long. bill w On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 4:35 AM, Anders wrote: > On 2016-09-05 00:06, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > This may be too complicated to answer: what, if any, ways are there to > validate simulations? Well, let the world go by and see what really > happens, I suppose. What else? Do real world experiments? In short, why > trust simulations? We should primie facie distrust them (like the null > hypothesis). At least two problems arise: GIGO for one. Not putting in > crucial variables (because you don't know that they are crucial) is another. > > > This is a big thing in the world of simulating stuff. It depends on what > kind of system you are modelling. > > Many physics problems have conserved quantities like energy, so you can > validate your code by checking the energy stays constant. Or you run it for > systems with known behavior and compare. But often the right approach is to > first write down the maths and figure out an approximation scheme that have > guaranteed error bounds: a lot of awesome numerical analysis exist, > including stuff like symplectic methods that allows virtually error-free > prediction of planetary orbits over very long timespans. > > You can also empirically change the resolution or stepsize in the > simulation to see how it responds: if there is a noticeable change in > output, you better increase the resolution or do things another way. Same > thing for parameters: if everything changes if you twiddle the knobs of the > model slightly, you should be skeptical. > > In neuroscience things are harder, since the systems are more complex and > not everything is known. You can still build a simulation and compare to > reality though: if it doesn't fit, your model (either the theory or the > code) is not right. You can also validate things by making virtual > experiments to get predictions and then check them in the lab - this has > produced some very solid results. > > But many neuroscience models do not aim at perfect fits, but rather to see > if our theory produces the right behavior. That can sometimes involve > making very simple models rather than complex ones: my rule of thumb is > that you better get more results out of the model than you have free > parameters, otherwise it is suspect. This is why many computational > neuroscientists are somewhat skeptical of large scale computer simulations: > we might not learn much from them. > > Now, in systems like climate you have a bit of the physics side - we know > pretty well how air, heat and water move - but also a bit of the > neuroscience mess - clouds are hard to model, vegetation changes in complex > ways. So there is a fair bit of uncertainty (many climate modellers are > *really* good at statistics and the theory of uncertainty). That is not a > major problem; one can handle it. The thing that worries me most is that > many of the scientific codes are vast, messy systems with subroutines > written by a postdoc that left years ago - I think many parts of science > ought to have a code review, but nobody will like the answers. This is > likely true for the simulations underlying much of our economy too: I know > enough about how insurance risk models work to not want to look too much > under the hood. Often the bugs and errors get averaged out by the complex > dynamics so that they do not matter as much as they would in simple models, > which I guess is a kind of relief. > > Many models are trusted just because they fit what people believe, which > is often based on running models. In science people actually do perform > comparisons with data, experiments or even mathematical analysis to keep > the models in the vicinity of reality. > > The key thing to remember is that "all models are wrong, but some are > useful". You should not select a model because it promises perfect answers > (that is frequently dangerous) but rather than it gives you the information > that matters with a high probability. > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Sep 6 22:31:05 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 00:31:05 +0200 Subject: [ExI] A Working Quantum Computer by 2017? In-Reply-To: References: <01d17765-ed1f-8d9d-42f5-4ebbba9c408b@aleph.se> <4a832c94-5c95-d9bc-af23-05ba31e1451d@aleph.se> Message-ID: <8e0c5019-2bb0-46b4-d6a3-b6c3b1805cf0@aleph.se> On 2016-09-07 00:18, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > So I won't worry - the modelers are on the job. Biggest worry - > economic models based on faulty theories of human behavior. > Now the question is: are there any other kind? Remember Box's dictum: "all models are wrong, but some are useful". If you demand perfect theories of human behavior you cannot get any information from any social science at all. Babies and bathwater. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 6 22:53:24 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 15:53:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> Message-ID: <024301d20891$7a1e4550$6e5acff0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 12:30 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Nadertrading >?Spike, I'd make one alteration to your statements. ? >?I think the Russians will release, through proxy sources, something incredibly damning a short time before the election. Hillary could be made ineligible. The election may then be delayed? Will Will, I agree with what you wrote but I would make on alteration to your statements too, a really important one. You comment that ?The election may then be delayed.? Oh boy that one is big. That one is a hot potato, because I see no legal mechanism to delay the election, if one or both candidates are dead, having a coughing fit, in prison, under indictment, withdraw on 1 November, etc. The constitution offers no suggestions that an election can be delayed for any circumstance. The election selects not only the executive, but also the legislature. It happens on 8 November, regardless of what else happens. Will, do suggest a scenario which you think could result in a delayed election. Reason I focus on that: plenty of far right talkers are suggesting the current government will attempt to delay this election. I disagree but if they do, it appears to me to be an illegal government. I want to verify there is no legal path to a delayed election. Are there? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 6 23:47:30 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 16:47:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Nadertrading In-Reply-To: References: <013e01d20860$0f54e430$2dfeac90$@att.net> Message-ID: <027f01d20899$08d1c770$1a755650$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 12:30 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Nadertrading Spike, I'd make one alteration to your statements. The Russians aren't playing police, they are cold fighting us. This whole election is honestly a cold war proxy battle? Will, this whole episode brings up a variation on the old Scooby Doo theme, with the classic WHaGAWIT comment: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/YouMeddlingKids Only now the variation on the WHaGAWIT theme is ??Would Have Gotten Away With It Too, if not for those meddling COMMIES! Hmmm, well, OK sure. But? we don?t know for sure it is only the Russians who hacked into that server, and don?t even yet know for sure if they ever did, or if so Vladimir had anything to do with it. How do we know it wasn?t Bernie people who got into the DNC server (possibly even insiders) for instance? How do we know it wasn?t Romanians, or state-independent actors? How do we count those? And what if a bad guy did the detective work and caught another actual bad guy? Does the fact that the bad guy caught another bad guy make either of them the good guy? What if the bad guy had been caught by a neutral guy, such as hackers in say, Bangladesh? Or Switzerland? Would that matter? Would it then still be a cold war proxy battle? Would it matter when we still don?t even know who attacked the US embassy in Libya and why? (And why do you suppose we STILL don?t know that?) The real question to me is not the identity of who caught the bad guy, but rather who didn?t. Where (in the hell) were the State Department Inspectors General? Why isn?t that guy or guys being brought up on charges, or at least brutally fired for gross negligence in not catching this? Who was in that office? Where are all the people who did not have concussions, who damn well DID know what those ( C ) markings meant, who knew well what the levels of classification were, who should have been able to recognize improperly-handled information? Do not Abedin and Mills and plenty of others realize they cannot sell the ?don?t remember? concussion defense and are now in enormous political jeopardy? Why didn?t they spot the violations? There were plenty of others who were in a position to have caught this before it went on several years, including the guy who appointed the SecState. Where were they and what were they doing? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 01:05:09 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 21:05:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 12:32 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > And there's a book by a physician that deals with nothing but the > cognitive decline he says is caused by statins. No, I am not on it or a > candidate for it. So I am neutral. > > bill w > > http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2016/09/05/doctors-deeply- > divided-over-the-value-of-statins/?utm_source=The+People%27s+Pharmacy+ > Newsletter&utm_campaign=04667e26ff-This-Week-Email+9% > 2F6%2F16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7300006d3c-04667e26ff- > 214968749&ct=t(This_Week_9_6_16)&mc_cid=04667e26ff&mc_eid=b9c6f5005a > ### Cognition on statins was investigated, initially it seemed that they were protective against dementia, then in larger studies there seemed to be no impact at all (except for living longer). I don't intend to read the book. I am not "divided". Find references to peer-reviewed primary literature that support your contention, then we can talk some more. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 10:40:03 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:40:03 +0100 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 6 September 2016 at 17:32, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > And there's a book by a physician that deals with nothing but the cognitive > decline he says is caused by statins. No, I am not on it or a candidate > for it. So I am neutral. > > bill w > > http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2016/09/05/doctors-deeply-divided-over-the-value-of-statins/?utm_source=The+People%27s+Pharmacy+Newsletter&utm_campaign=04667e26ff-This-Week-Email+9%2F6%2F16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7300006d3c-04667e26ff-214968749&ct=t(This_Week_9_6_16)&mc_cid=04667e26ff&mc_eid=b9c6f5005a > It is misleading to say that doctors are deeply divided over statins. The vast medical consensus supports statin medication for suitable patients. There is a small group (THINCS) who oppose statins use and publish articles, books, etc. which they claim support their theories. You have to be careful with The People's Pharmacy website. Check their suggestions with reputable websites like: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or WebMD BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 7 14:22:09 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 07:22:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster Message-ID: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Who is the most famous person to have ever posted on ExI? How would you measure it? If we use the person with the most book sales, perhaps Damien Broderick? If we measure it by whose work had the most impact, it might be Hal Finney because he was thought to have been a key player in the development of Bitcoin. If we use public face or name recognition, it is probably Julian Assange, after his bombshell report yesterday on the Hannity show. But it isn't clear how we should count him, because most of what he wrote was on a subgroup set up by Eugen Leitl to debate privacy. Let us define poster as anyone who has ever posted even one post to ExI. Propose an ExI poster who is generally well-known to the public, or some identifiable subgroup of the public. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 7 14:30:50 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 07:30:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] michigan pole-vaults california on self-drivers Message-ID: <006801d20914$6f1f16b0$4d5d4410$@att.net> California is testing this vehicle on the road, but requires that a human be in the car. Michigan is likely to propose a law that would allow testing of self-drivers with no one on board: http://phys.org/news/2016-09-michigan-require-human-self-driving-cars.html Then we can get used to them as delivery vehicles and such. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 14:54:35 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 09:54:35 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The problem withe both of these criticisms is that you are relying on government and top medical sources, which are politically compromised. Just look into the American Heart Association and its history of supporting questionable data about fats, which is just now being overturned. "Use only polyunsaturated fats." Problem is, they lower HDL too. People's Pharmacy is not without its problems but at least it's an independent source. Read everybody, trust no one. Medical people try to stick together so that an decision they make can be supported by other medical people in court as standard practice. And they are very conservative, which has both good and bad features. So I will find nothing at the sources you mention that contradicts standard practice, until standard practice changes. See the paradox? How many times has the medical profession been wrong? See all the ads in the paper by lawyers yearning to sue for this pill and that practice? Books have been written about the stupid backward practices of physicians and this modern age has no lack of them. How many times has the tiny minority or even one person been right and the whole profession been wrong? Every standard practice probably came into being because somebody stood up and said what we are doing is wrong, like drawing blood until the patient dies of dehydration. Or denying the effect of microbes, which is still going on. Do you detect any personal animus here? You should. If I gave you my history with physicians you'd wince at the incompetence and unnecessary operations I've been through. If there weren't a statute of limitations I'd be rich. And the smug SOBs would be taken down a notch or two. Now I take any pill prescribed or anything else they have to say and go home and Google it. I don't trust physicians any more than y'all trust Hillary. If we had the kind of government libertarians say we want, all drugs would be OTC, and we'd get our recommendations from the pharmacists, who know far more about them than physicians. Of course I am not qualified to judge primary sources, so I won't waste my time. bill w On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 5:40 AM, BillK wrote: > On 6 September 2016 at 17:32, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > And there's a book by a physician that deals with nothing but the > cognitive > > decline he says is caused by statins. No, I am not on it or a candidate > > for it. So I am neutral. > > > > bill w > > > > http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2016/09/05/doctors-deeply- > divided-over-the-value-of-statins/?utm_source=The+People%27s+Pharmacy+ > Newsletter&utm_campaign=04667e26ff-This-Week-Email+9% > 2F6%2F16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7300006d3c-04667e26ff- > 214968749&ct=t(This_Week_9_6_16)&mc_cid=04667e26ff&mc_eid=b9c6f5005a > > > > It is misleading to say that doctors are deeply divided over statins. > The vast medical consensus supports statin medication for suitable > patients. > > There is a small group (THINCS) who oppose statins use and publish > articles, books, etc. which they claim support their theories. > Skeptics> > > You have to be careful with The People's Pharmacy website. Check their > suggestions with reputable websites like: > Centers for Disease Control and Prevention > > or > WebMD > > > > 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: From pharos at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 15:18:38 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 16:18:38 +0100 Subject: [ExI] michigan pole-vaults california on self-drivers In-Reply-To: <006801d20914$6f1f16b0$4d5d4410$@att.net> References: <006801d20914$6f1f16b0$4d5d4410$@att.net> Message-ID: On 7 September 2016 at 15:30, spike wrote: > California is testing this vehicle on the road, but requires that a human be > in the car. Michigan is likely to propose a law that would allow testing of > self-drivers with no one on board: > > http://phys.org/news/2016-09-michigan-require-human-self-driving-cars.html > > Then we can get used to them as delivery vehicles and such. > If they are going to use them for deliveries in Detroit they may not need drivers, but armed guards would be a good idea! BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 16:10:57 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 12:10:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: Marvin Minsky ? ? has posted on this list, ? ? he was one of the leaders in AI and, in a completely different field, invented the Confocal Scanning Microscope ? ? which today is a workhorse in biological research. ? ? Isaac ? ? Asimov was not a modest man and he said in his entire life he only met 2 people that were smarter than he was, one was ? ? Carl Sagan ? ? and the other was ? ? Marvin Minsky ?.? Nick Szabo ? ? was once pretty active on the list and many people say if Hal Finney wasn't ? ? Satoshi Nakamoto ? ? (the inventor of Bitcoin) then Nick Szabo was. Others think Nakamoto was really Wei Dai, and he was also quite active on the list. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 7 15:59:04 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 08:59:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] michigan pole-vaults california on self-drivers In-Reply-To: References: <006801d20914$6f1f16b0$4d5d4410$@att.net> Message-ID: <00ad01d20920$c2d57c20$48807460$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] michigan pole-vaults california on self-drivers On 7 September 2016 at 15:30, spike wrote: . > >>... http://phys.org/news/2016-09-michigan-require-human-self-driving-cars. http://phys.org/news/2016-09-michigan-require-human-self-driving-cars/ >>... Then we can get used to them as delivery vehicles and such. >...If they are going to use them for deliveries in Detroit they may not need drivers, but armed guards would be a good idea! BillK _______________________________________________ What if... we came against that problem. If we have a version of this which is intended as a delivery truck, we don't need windows, we don't need pneumatic tires (a rougher-riding no-air tires would work if it is delivering groceries and packages.) It would be easy to stop any self-driver: bad guy just stands in its way. It stops in the middle of the road, bad guy two stands behind it, bad guy three bashes the windows with a crowbar and takes the packages. So imagine a version of this which is a rolling bank vault: heavy plate steel, no glass, no door handles, no clear way to get to the goods. Breaking into the thing would be like robbing an ATM. We can accept the weight penalty, since they don't need to accelerate quickly and handling doesn't matter. Something like this would be too heavy to surround by a dozen homies, hoist and carry it off the road, break into it at their leisure with a cutting torch or jaws of life. That would work perhaps but would be an expensive delivery vehicle. One ready market for this thing is bar-hoppers. They know the cost of visiting half a dozen oases in the same evening and know the risks of operating their own Detroits. The local constabulary can spot that kind from 100 meters. In the Google cars which have been motoring about Mountain View for several years, the occupant has the legal status of operator. In this experimental version (which I have only seen once) there is no steering wheel and the occupant has the legal status of a passenger. So he or she may be drunk, stoned, underage, unlicensed, blind, stupid, any or all of the above. But in the man-rated version, I would think you would need windows, and possibly all the usual comforts provided by current Detroits. Now I can see a bunch of things that can go terribly wrong. For instance... human operator knows to go around certain neighborhoods. If you tell your rolling computer to go to a certain destination, will it know? And if it doesn't know, it goes thru by most direct route as identified by Google Maps (a company which doesn't know the area and doesn't understand the entire scenario, being up there in toney Mountain View.) Cuts thru, car stops, bad guy in front, bad guy in back, third bad guy with a goddam crowbar, you're dead. Who is at fault there? spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 16:13:07 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:13:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] offending people Message-ID: I read today a quote said to be libertarian and never heard of it: Offense cannot be given, only taken. Y'all heard of that one? Not sure what makes it libertarian, except possibly that it leaves people to say what they want and blame being offended on the victim. I endorse it, though. Some are constantly offended, revealing weak egos and self-regard. If I get cussed out, I just ignore it. If I get criticized I examine my positions and possibly thank the person for pointing out my deficiency. You have seen me do that here. Just think of it: for thousands of years, people had gripes but did not have Facebook, Twitter, etc. to post them to and so just had to develop ulcers and stress health problems. Poor things. I keep telling my black friends to stop being offended - it's a choice. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 16:20:48 2016 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 18:20:48 +0200 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: Didn't Julian Assange post to the list a few times in the 90s? On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 6:10 PM, John Clark wrote: > Marvin Minsky > has posted on this list, > he was one of the leaders in AI and, in a completely different field, > invented the Confocal Scanning Microscope > which today is a workhorse in biological research. > Isaac > Asimov was not a modest man and he said in his entire life he only met 2 > people that were smarter than he was, one was > Carl Sagan > and the other was > Marvin Minsky > . > > > Nick Szabo > was once pretty active on the list and many people say if Hal Finney wasn't > Satoshi Nakamoto > (the inventor of Bitcoin) then Nick Szabo was. Others think Nakamoto was > really Wei Dai, and he was also quite active on the list. > > John K Clark > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From sjv2006 at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 17:10:57 2016 From: sjv2006 at gmail.com (Stephen Van Sickle) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 10:10:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 7, 2016 07:37, "spike" wrote: >>>>If we use the person with the most book sales, perhaps Damien Broderick? <<<< If fiction sales count, that would probably be Charlie Stross. His new novel "The Laundry Files" was just released. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 17:27:04 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 13:27:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] offending people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You can't tell somebody what doesn't offend them. Seems like the point of the quote might be that taking offense gives those who would use it a weapon with which to easily offend. By not taking offense you render that weapon powerless against you. -Dave On Sep 7, 2016 12:14 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > I read today a quote said to be libertarian and never heard of it: > > Offense cannot be given, only taken. > > Y'all heard of that one? Not sure what makes it libertarian, except > possibly that it leaves people to say what they want and blame being > offended on the victim. I endorse it, though. Some are constantly > offended, revealing weak egos and self-regard. > > If I get cussed out, I just ignore it. If I get criticized I examine my > positions and possibly thank the person for pointing out my deficiency. > You have seen me do that here. > > Just think of it: for thousands of years, people had gripes but did not > have Facebook, Twitter, etc. to post them to and so just had to develop > ulcers and stress health problems. Poor things. > > I keep telling my black friends to stop being offended - it's a choice. > > bill w > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjv2006 at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 17:54:42 2016 From: sjv2006 at gmail.com (Stephen Van Sickle) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 10:54:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: Sorry, it's "The Nightmare Stacks", part of "The Laundry Files" series. On Sep 7, 2016 10:10, "Stephen Van Sickle" wrote: > On Sep 7, 2016 07:37, "spike" wrote: > > >>>>If we use the person with the most book sales, perhaps Damien > Broderick? <<<< > > If fiction sales count, that would probably be Charlie Stross. His new > novel "The Laundry Files" was just released. > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 18:15:19 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 11:15:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: <9434A502-4AD9-4D5E-83E0-DEF949FBE490@gmail.com> On Sep 7, 2016, at 10:54 AM, Stephen Van Sickle wrote: > Sorry, it's "The Nightmare Stacks", part of "The Laundry Files" series. > > >> On Sep 7, 2016 10:10, "Stephen Van Sickle" wrote: >> On Sep 7, 2016 07:37, "spike" wrote: >> >> >>>>If we use the person with the most book sales, perhaps Damien Broderick? <<<< >> >> If fiction sales count, that would probably be Charlie Stross. His new novel "The Laundry Files" was just released. >> The series title reminds me of Allen's brilliant 'The Metterling Lists.' Anyone here read that one? Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 18:30:00 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 13:30:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] offending people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: You can't tell somebody what doesn't offend them. Seems like the point of the quote might be that taking offense gives those who would use it a weapon with which to easily offend. By not taking offense you render that weapon powerless against you. -Dave exactly what I think bill w On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > You can't tell somebody what doesn't offend them. Seems like the point of > the quote might be that taking offense gives those who would use it a > weapon with which to easily offend. By not taking offense you render that > weapon powerless against you. > > -Dave > > On Sep 7, 2016 12:14 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" > wrote: > >> I read today a quote said to be libertarian and never heard of it: >> >> Offense cannot be given, only taken. >> >> Y'all heard of that one? Not sure what makes it libertarian, except >> possibly that it leaves people to say what they want and blame being >> offended on the victim. I endorse it, though. Some are constantly >> offended, revealing weak egos and self-regard. >> >> If I get cussed out, I just ignore it. If I get criticized I examine my >> positions and possibly thank the person for pointing out my deficiency. >> You have seen me do that here. >> >> Just think of it: for thousands of years, people had gripes but did not >> have Facebook, Twitter, etc. to post them to and so just had to develop >> ulcers and stress health problems. Poor things. >> >> I keep telling my black friends to stop being offended - it's a choice. >> >> bill w >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 19:39:47 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 12:39:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: I was delighted that Charles Stross turned a cryonics related discussion between Hans Moravec and me into a plot element in Accelerando. Hans said he didn't need cryonics because he could be revived from his written works. I pointed out the search through potential versions to get one that would write "Mind Children" would be computationally intensive and involve discarding vast numbers who came close but missed a few words and that I hoped the discard process wasn't painful. Charles turned this into part of the story when the Field Circus gets back to the solar system. If you have not read it, you don't have an excuse because it's up for free on his web site. Best wishes, Keith On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Stephen Van Sickle wrote: > Sorry, it's "The Nightmare Stacks", part of "The Laundry Files" series. > > > On Sep 7, 2016 10:10, "Stephen Van Sickle" wrote: >> >> On Sep 7, 2016 07:37, "spike" wrote: >> >> >>>>If we use the person with the most book sales, perhaps Damien >> >>>> Broderick? <<<< >> >> If fiction sales count, that would probably be Charlie Stross. His new >> novel "The Laundry Files" was just released. >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 7 19:28:19 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 12:28:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: <001b01d2093d$fe215ca0$fa6415e0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?Others think Nakamoto was really Wei Dai, and he was also quite active on the list. John K Clark Whatever happened to Wei Dai? Anyone here buddies with him? Have him swing by por favor. He will see that nothing has changed much in twenty years. {8^D spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 7 19:38:30 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 12:38:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: <002201d2093f$6a4a0070$3ede0150$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of Giulio Prisco Subject: Re: [ExI] most famous exi poster >...Didn't Julian Assange post to the list a few times in the 90s? Ja. He got in a big quarrel with a guy and the moderator at the time asked them to take it offlist, so Eugen did his magic and about a dozen of us went and pummeled each other privately. Wei Dai was part of that I think, but mostly it was Julian and this other guy who I intentionally didn't name, hasn't been on the list in a long time but he is still around. The offlist discussion went to the US constitution, where the American guy fighting with Julian argued that bit in Amendment IV about secure in persons, houses, PAPERS... etc meant that we have inherent right to privacy in email. I disagreed with Julian's adversary at the time, reasoning that with email we have no reasonable expectation of privacy unless we encrypt the messages. I expect anything posted on email to be hackable. Turns out that was right. Chaos ensued, but the comment that Julian made is burned into my retinas: he wanted to bring America's first amendment to the whole world. spike From anders at aleph.se Wed Sep 7 20:15:56 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 21:15:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: I was part of the thread (that Eliezer started) that led to the first story in Accelerando, "Lobsters". Wei Dai is moving in the effective altruism and AI safety world AFAIK. On 2016-09-07 20:39, Keith Henson wrote: > I was delighted that Charles Stross turned a cryonics related > discussion between Hans Moravec and me into a plot element in > Accelerando. Hans said he didn't need cryonics because he could be > revived from his written works. I pointed out the search through > potential versions to get one that would write "Mind Children" would > be computationally intensive and involve discarding vast numbers who > came close but missed a few words and that I hoped the discard process > wasn't painful. Charles turned this into part of the story when the > Field Circus gets back to the solar system. > > If you have not read it, you don't have an excuse because it's up for > free on his web site. > Best wishes, > > Keith > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Stephen Van Sickle wrote: >> Sorry, it's "The Nightmare Stacks", part of "The Laundry Files" series. >> >> >> On Sep 7, 2016 10:10, "Stephen Van Sickle" wrote: >>> On Sep 7, 2016 07:37, "spike" wrote: >>> >>>>>>> If we use the person with the most book sales, perhaps Damien >>>>>>> Broderick? <<<< >>> If fiction sales count, that would probably be Charlie Stross. His new >>> novel "The Laundry Files" was just released. >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 7 23:11:47 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 16:11:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: <002201d2093f$6a4a0070$3ede0150$@att.net> References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> <002201d2093f$6a4a0070$3ede0150$@att.net> Message-ID: <009201d2095d$35baaa80$a12fff80$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike Sent: Wednesday, September 07, 2016 12:39 PM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: Re: [ExI] most famous exi poster >... On Behalf Of Giulio Prisco Subject: Re: [ExI] most famous exi poster >>...Didn't Julian Assange post to the list a few times in the 90s? >...Ja. He got in a big quarrel with a guy and the moderator at the time asked them to take it offlist, so Eugen did his magic and about a dozen of us went and pummeled each other privately. Wei Dai was part of that I think...spike _______________________________________________ I really got to pondering this, and now I think this discussion wasn't 20 yrs ago but more like about 15. Reasoning: we talked about this at Extro3 and Extro4, but I think the main discussion was after Extro4, which was in summer of 1999, and the discussions started there went on for a couple years. I now think most of that offlist discussion happened between summer 1999 and about sometime in 2001. At Extro4 Harvey Newstrom gave a most interesting talk on data security (that man foresaw everything that is happening today.) We had a big party over at my house afterwards the next day (all day.) Harvey and some others came over and we were debating privacy rights vs data security and all that, a big debate on whether steganography can be detected, one rare debate in which eventually we figured out the answer: it may or may not be detectable, but isn't if you settle for low bandwidth communications, and cannot be broken if you use one-time pads. In retrospect with regard to what we have learned in the last 17 years, a stunning irony is just now slapping me across the face. Harvey Newstrom (who is the real expert on these matters) explained to us that it is legal to use encryption in email. But if you do it, you start getting attention from the authorities, who want to know what you are up to. You can convince them of course that you are in with a bunch of data geeks and you do this sorta thing for fun, but likely they will watch you. The irony of it all is that allll Mrs. Clinton needed to do if she wanted to have a private server, aaaaallll she needed to do, since she had a computer geek working for her, all she needed to do... is encrypt her messages! That's all! Then we wouldn't have had to worry about hackers this and that, because all the hackers could get would be a haystack of bits. Use Public Key Encryption, boom, everything safe, no risk of compromising national security, no risk of yoga routines falling into government hands, done. However... had she done that... the feds would have spotted it. Harvey explained why, using the computer science version of the thermal engineer's entropy. The feds have ways of detecting high-entropy bitstreams. They find out who is sending out white noise, and why. Had Mrs. Clinton arranged to encrypt the yoga, the feds would have detected it. They would have found out about the server arrangement back in 2008, asked the obvious question: if you want to keep these messages secure, why don't you just use your dot gov account? That one already uses strong encryption. The contents of the email would be safe there. However... had she used that account, it would be automatically archived and she would not have the option of BleachBitting the yoga to where even god can't read it. Had she used strong encryption on her server, the feds would come snooping and asking why. So... she not only put information marked classified when sent and received on a private unsecured server, but left it unencrypted. And this is all those evil commies fault? Sheesh. spike From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 23:30:25 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 19:30:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] offending people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:13 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I read today a quote said to be libertarian and never heard of it: > > Offense cannot be given, only taken. > > Y'all heard of that one? Not sure what makes it libertarian, except > possibly that it leaves people to say what they want and blame being > offended on the victim. I endorse it, though. Some are constantly > offended, revealing weak egos and self-regard. > ### This statement is open to diverse interpretations. A more clearly libertarian statement in this vein would be "Feeling offended does not confer new rights". Today the claim that somebody offended you is used as a justification for violent action, including state action, or in other words, claiming victim status has been weaponized. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Sep 7 23:41:02 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 19:41:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: <009201d2095d$35baaa80$a12fff80$@att.net> References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> <002201d2093f$6a4a0070$3ede0150$@att.net> <009201d2095d$35baaa80$a12fff80$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 7:11 PM, spike wrote: > > > However... had she done that... the feds would have spotted it. ### At the risk of spoiling a pleasant remembrance thread, I would venture that she is just too ignorant to have thought about this angle. She avoided encryption not to double-cross the feds but rather out of sheer sloppy stupidity. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ddraig at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 12:08:13 2016 From: ddraig at gmail.com (ddraig) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 22:08:13 +1000 Subject: [ExI] most famous exi poster In-Reply-To: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> References: <006301d20913$389fc8b0$a9df5a10$@att.net> Message-ID: On 8 September 2016 at 00:22, spike wrote: > > > Who is the most famous person to have ever posted on ExI? > I wrote something on the list a long time ago - 1993 0r 1994 - and got an offlist reply to my inbox from Marvin Minsky. I'm not sure if he ever posted to the list, but I was totally blown away by the fact that he was on the list Dwayne back then I'd have been hiscdcj at lux.latrobe.edu.au -- ddraig at pobox.com irc.bluesphereweb.com #dna ...r.e.t.u.r.n....t.o....t.h.e....s.o.u.r.c.e... http://tinyurl.com/he-is-right-you-know-jpg our aim is wakefulness, our enemy is dreamless sleep -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 13:47:00 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 08:47:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] microbes Message-ID: Out of ten stars, 10. Superior writing. I Contain Multitudes You can believe the cover: the book will change the way you think about the world and about yourself. I was fascinated by a book I read in the 70s - Life On Man. This is light years beyond that. Easily the most adaptable creatures on our planet and once we truly figure out how to use microbes, they will do anything for us. What they already do is amazing. Can you believe microbe-implanted walls in hospitals? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 14:09:38 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 10:09:38 -0400 Subject: [ExI] microbes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:47 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Out of ten stars, 10. Superior writing. > > I Contain Multitudes > Does it talk about the viruses living in those bacteria, too? -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 16:16:05 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 11:16:05 -0500 Subject: [ExI] microbes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yes! More than once. Also, bacteria living in bacteria. Bacteria becoming part of the individual's genome. More bill w On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:09 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:47 AM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> Out of ten stars, 10. Superior writing. >> >> I Contain Multitudes >> > > Does it talk about the viruses living in those bacteria, too? > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 17:21:30 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 12:21:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] offending people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Today the claim that somebody offended you is used as a justification for violent action, including state action, or in other words, claiming victim status has been weaponized. Rafa? That's an interesting way of putting it. It does seem that many want a new right - not to be offended. The pc speech Ivy League thing for instance, which interestingly enough was today refuted by the U of Chicago, which says that there will be no safety places or warnings, etc. Good for them! Maybe people feel hemmed in, closed in on, being pushed out. Christians, blacks, Hispanics, LGBT,and so on. Some are valid and maybe some are not. I hear people warning against being taken over by Hispanics or atheists. Well, people, the world changes and your group may indeed be left behind if you don't move with it. Or, gulp, learn tolerance. To me the main problem is that for many, the threshold for being offended is so low that one would have to tiptoe around them for fear of offending, especially if that person has a paranoid streak, which seems all too common is what I read in the news. Do keep in mind that many who get the public eye and ear and Facebook Likes are radicals and Chicken Littles: neurotic, borderline, paranoid, alarmist........ bill w On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 6:30 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 12:13 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> I read today a quote said to be libertarian and never heard of it: >> >> Offense cannot be given, only taken. >> >> Y'all heard of that one? Not sure what makes it libertarian, except >> possibly that it leaves people to say what they want and blame being >> offended on the victim. I endorse it, though. Some are constantly >> offended, revealing weak egos and self-regard. >> > > ### This statement is open to diverse interpretations. A more clearly > libertarian statement in this vein would be "Feeling offended does not > confer new rights". Today the claim that somebody offended you is used as a > justification for violent action, including state action, or in other > words, claiming victim status has been weaponized. > > Rafa? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 8 17:55:14 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 10:55:14 -0700 Subject: [ExI] offending people In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <007201d209fa$27262150$757263f0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2016 10:22 AM To: rafal at smigrodzki.org; ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] offending people Today the claim that somebody offended you is used as a justification for violent action, including state action, or in other words, claiming victim status has been weaponized. Rafa? Heh, understatement, doctor. You can be out with the office people, negotiating on what toppings to put on the veggie pizza. Someone will ask ?What difference at this point does it make?? Then some clowny yahoo will say ?Olives matter.? This simple pun is now so offensive, it is considered nearly worthy of career capital punishment for both. This is the kind of thing which is making Trump so popular. Well, that and this latest Powell bombshell, but I think it is all the hypersensitivity contributing to the current absurdity. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 18:36:25 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 14:36:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate Message-ID: http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 8 19:09:15 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 12:09:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo/ On the contrary sir. We can?t fix Allepo, contrary to what both of the libertarian candidate?s mainstream warhawk competitors think. We can?t fix Aleppo, but we durn sure can help break it, as demonstrated by? well? parties whose identities are still not known, who apparently were somehow arming two or more factions at war with the government of Syria but simultaneously at war with each other, in contradiction to our own government?s position, which may have been a contributing cause of the tragic outcome, perhaps in exchange for generous donations to? we don?t know. A charity perhaps? We don?t yet know the whole truth on that, for the evidence appears to have been accidently deleted with such careful vigor that god can?t read them, after being subpoenaed by congress. Hate it when that happens. Extremely careless it is. Inexcusable carelessness, that accidental whacking of blackberries with hammers and the accidental use of industrial-strength BleachBit. Johnson is the one who knows that poking our noses into other peoples? business often makes a bad situation worse. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 21:39:43 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 22:39:43 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Many people now on security watch list Message-ID: This Hilariously Cruel Hoax Tweet Just Put Lots Of People On NSA's Radar An act of next-level trolling genius yesterday made many a gullible Googler ask the main question one shouldn't ask about ISIS. --------------- Don't Google it! You know you want to, but don't! Just don't! BillK From atymes at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 21:43:12 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 14:43:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 8, 2016 11:37 AM, "John Clark" wrote: > http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo/ Eh. I can see a lot of people not caring about specific Syrian cities, and he did recover quickly once he knew it was a Syrian city. Besides, now he's got more mention by the mainstream press, which helps by itself. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu Thu Sep 8 21:51:20 2016 From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 17:51:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Extropy in pop culture Message-ID: <60999FBD-6295-41A5-B7EB-F47755D31B41@alumni.virginia.edu> Hi, I thought some of you would be interested to know that Nick Bostrom is interviewed in the latest episode of Through the Wormhole (s7ep02). The episode is on the loss of privacy in the Information Age. I haven't finished it yet, so there may be more of our friends interviewed for all I know. -Henry From pharos at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 23:14:52 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 00:14:52 +0100 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 7 September 2016 at 15:54, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > The problem withe both of these criticisms is that you are relying on > government and top medical sources, which are politically compromised. Just > look into the American Heart Association and its history of supporting > questionable data about fats, which is just now being overturned. "Use only > polyunsaturated fats." Problem is, they lower HDL too. > > People's Pharmacy is not without its problems but at least it's an > independent source. Read everybody, trust no one. > Of course I am not qualified to judge primary sources, so I won't waste my > time. > You have to rely on some medical sources. Try to choose reliable sources. It's your life at stake. News just in: Quote: Statins review says benefits 'underestimated' The benefits of the cholesterol-reducing drug statins are underestimated and the harms exaggerated, a major review suggests. Published in the Lancet and backed by a number of major health organisations, it says statins lower heart attack and stroke risk. The review also suggests side effects such as muscle pain do occur, although in relatively few people. The Lancet review, led by Prof Rory Collins from the Clinical Trial Service Unit at the University of Oxford, looked at the available evidence for the effects of taking an average 40mg daily dose of statins in 10,000 patients over five years. It suggested cholesterol levels would be lowered enough to prevent 1,000 "major cardiovascular events" such as heart attacks, strokes and coronary artery bypasses in people who had existing vascular disease - and 500 in people who were at risk due to age or other illnesses such as high blood pressure or diabetes. ------------- BillK From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 8 23:26:06 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 16:26:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008f01d20a28$5fbbf9d0$1f33ed70$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2016 2:43 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate On Sep 8, 2016 11:37 AM, "John Clark" > wrote: >>? http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo/ >?Eh. I can see a lot of people not caring about specific Syrian cities, and he did recover quickly once he knew it was a Syrian city. Besides, now he's got more mention by the mainstream press, which helps by itself. Proof that negative headlines are better than no headlines. Trump takes it further by arguing that negative headlines are better than positive headlines: they get more press. But most Americans have no idea where or what Aleppo is. As for geography, it is irrelevant. If you want to go there, you need to go the same airport, and we know how to get there, right up US101. The pilot knows how to get there. Furthermore, it demonstrates that US presidents should have their eyes on not Aleppo but rather Chicago. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 8 23:51:11 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 19:51:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 3:09 PM, spike wrote: > > ?? >> http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/08/politics/gary-johnson-aleppo/ > > > ?> ? > On the contrary sir. We can?t fix Allepo, contrary to what both of the > libertarian candidate?s mainstream warhawk competitors think. > > ?But Spike, if Johnson doesn't know the first thing about Syria or even what Allepo is how could he know we can't fix it? Listening to a one hour talk about world events should have been enough but apparently Johnson couldn't be bothered; even a Libertarian President would need to know something about what goes on beyond the borders of the USA. There is no question this is going to hurt him with the voters, and it will certainly provide fodder for the late night comedians and increase the impression that he's not a serious candidate John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 00:15:20 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 17:15:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 8, 2016 4:52 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > Listening to a one hour talk about world events should have been enough Well, that's the thing. Is Aleppo - not Syria in general, but specifically Aleppo - notable enough that it would even have been mentioned in a one or even two hour talk summarizing all the important things in world affairs right now? It feels like most Americans would say no. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 00:28:36 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 17:28:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <736200E5-347F-4864-A0EA-EA72FDC6C673@gmail.com> On Sep 8, 2016, at 5:15 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Sep 8, 2016 4:52 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > > Listening to a one hour talk about world events should have been enough > > Well, that's the thing. Is Aleppo - not Syria in general, but specifically Aleppo - notable enough that it would even have been mentioned in a one or even two hour talk summarizing all the important things in world affairs right now? It feels like most Americans would say no. > I'm not a Johnson supporter, but I think his ignorance of Syrian geography would be far more important if he were more interventionist. In other words, if he were advocating the US get even more involved in Syria, then his ignorance about Aleppo might signal something very relevant: that he wants to get involved without even knowing much about the problems there. Let me put it this way, if Johnson were a doctor and someone asked him about a certain rare disorder involving, say, something really specialized that most doctors don't know about, I'd be far more comfortable if he told me he asked more about this signaling his ignorance rather than pretended he knew merely to sound more like a doctor. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 9 01:08:10 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 18:08:10 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00f401d20a36$a20d7b70$e6287250$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes >?Is Aleppo - not Syria in general, but specifically Aleppo - notable enough that it would even have been mentioned in a one or even two hour talk summarizing all the important things in world affairs right now? It feels like most Americans would say no. Adrian I would say no; in the current situation definitely not. I know there is a chaotic civil war and a lot of the action is in Aleppo, but we face a lot of risk here with our upcoming elections. We have a warhawk candidate who systematically disregarded law, another warhawk candidate who systematically says scary stuff, and the peaceful candidate who didn?t know what is Aleppo. US presidents are not running for president of the world; they really aren?t. That whole mindset of USA as world policeman has attracted corrupt power grabbers. Now we suffer. Paradoxically, not knowing Aleppo has put Johnson on the map, which is a better outcome than he could have expected, had he turned out to be a whiz on Aleppo. Bad headlines are better than no headlines. Let us take a lesson from American history, shall we? At the outbreak of the American Civil War, representatives from England and France (the two superpowers of the day) sent observers, who were officially neutral but generally sided with the Confederacy, since both countries were heavily dependent on cotton and tobacco grown in the south. They may have seen the north as industrial competitors. They assessed the order of battle, and went back to Europe to report that the Union had a big advantage with the industrial base, a fierce navy which was already powerful and growing, and the open ports for immigration. This in itself was a good reason to stay out of this conflict, but an item which turned up in both reports, and not widely known in the States, was that both superpowers viewed the Confederacy as potentially several separate powers. There were individual state governments, and there were groups unaligned with either the Union or the Confederacy or any state government. I am not speaking of the Kentucky Wildcats, who had their own agenda, but for example the Kanawhans, who wished to form their own nation along the Kanawha River in what is now West Virginia. I know a lot about that, for my own great^4 grandfather was a leading voice in the Kanawhans, and was a fiery anti-slavery orator. At the run-up to the elections of 1860, the Kanawhans had little interest in slavery either way, since they didn?t have or need slaves up that way. My own G^4G made the agonizing decision to go with the anti-slavery Republicans and join forces with the union, voting to disband the Kanawhans, rather than risk helping the pro-slavery Democrat south. The outcome was the formation of the anti-slavery state of West Virginia. He became a representative to the state legislature, then served a term as state senator. Maine was another case where they saw little difference between the two warring capitals, but grudgingly went with the Union for its anti-slavery stance, popular in Maine because of its heavily Republican population. There were more than two sides in the US Civil War. The Kentucky Wildcats and plenty of other what we could call third parties disliked both sides and had little interest in the question of slavery. Europe (France and England) decided that allying with the south would put them at enmity with several smaller groups, which were numerous and dangerous, although American history mostly downplays their significance and strength. Today, there is the government of Syria being supported by Russia, and this is a bad thing. But the rebel factions are many and mutually hostile. Arming one is fighting the other (rebel faction.) Arming both leading rebel factions is fighting both leading rebel factions, in addition to fighting Putin and Syria. Selling arms to Syrian rebels is the most hawkish act the US could do. Secretly selling arms to Syrian rebels still creates plenty of enmity everywhere. Does that view explain some of what we have seen and what we are now seeing? I would welcome a president who does not know what Aleppo is and has no intentions of intervening. We need to get out of that mess and stay out, as Britain and France decided a century and a half ago with regard to our domestic troubles. We cannot take their refugees, because we have taken up arms against them, and we have guns here. It?s too dangerous. We cannot take sides, because we don?t even understand what the sides are or even how many there are; we have nothing to gain and much to lose. It?s too dangerous. Remind me again, why should Johnson know anything about Aleppo for the job he wants? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 9 05:11:39 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2016 22:11:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: <00f401d20a36$a20d7b70$e6287250$@att.net> References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> <00f401d20a36$a20d7b70$e6287250$@att.net> Message-ID: <015701d20a58$a5cb4e50$f161eaf0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of spike Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2016 6:08 PM To: 'ExI chat list' Subject: Re: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes >?Is Aleppo - not Syria in general, but specifically Aleppo - notable enough that it would even have been mentioned ?Adrian ?heeeeeeeehehehehehehehheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeheheheheheheheheheheheeeeeeeeeeheheheheheeeee? That crazy libertarian Gary Johnson, he?s so dumb, doesn?t even know what Aleppo is. The New York freaking Times, with the INTERNET right there in front of them and nothing else to do, stumbled over that same question TWICE while making fun of Johnson. Instant karma, the best kind: Jenan Moussa ? @jenanmoussa Now @nytimes correction has another mistake. Syria capital not #Aleppo but Damascus. Let's wait for next correction pic.twitter.com/s8YnUX4e8f Follow Jenan Moussa ? @jenanmoussa The correction of the correction. pic.twitter.com/jqXWhDiAip 9:24 AM - 8 Sep 2016 * Silly goofballs. These are the people we rely on for accurate news? With the new Powell bombshell, Julian Assange?s anticipated dump will be very hard pressed to top it. Meanwhile, at least now Johnson is getting *some* media coverage, even if it is ridicule for not knowing something from memory that they missed twice with no time pressure and the internet in front of them. When I look at the current scoreboard I am reminded of my old cross country coach, who commented: If you think you can, you might be right. If you think you cannot, you are right. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 929 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image003.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 38879 bytes Desc: not available URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Sep 9 09:12:00 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 11:12:00 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Many people now on security watch list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: This is of course by why naive keyword-based watch lists are total failures. And I would be shocked if any serious intelligence agency actually used them for real. Given that people's Facebook likes give pretty good predictions of who they are (indeed, better than many friends) http://www.pnas.org/content/110/15/5802.short http://www.pnas.org/content/112/4/1036.abstract there are better methods if you happen to be a big intelligence agency. Still, while text and other online behavior signal a lot about a person, it might not be a great tool for making proper watchlists since there is a lot of noise. For example, this paper extracts personality dimensions from online texts and looks at civilian mass murderers: http://comjnl.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2015/11/30/comjnl.bxv109.full They state: > Using this ranking procedure, it was found that all of the murderers' > texts were located within the highest ranked 33 places. It means that > using only two simple measures for screening these texts, we can > reduce the size of the population under inquiry to 0.013% of its > original size, in order to manually identify all of the murderers' texts. At first, this sounds great. But for the US, that means the watchlist for being a mass murderer would currently have 41,000 entries. Given that over the past 150 years there has been about 150 mass murders in the US, this suggests that the precision is not going to be that great - most of those people are just normal people. The deep problem is that there is not enough positive data points (the above paper used seven people) to make a reliable algorithm. The same issue cropped up with NSAs SKYNET program, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKYNET_(surveillance_program) - they also had seven positive examples and hundreds of thousands of negatives, and hence had massive overfitting (suggesting the Islamabad Al Jazeera bureau chief was a prime Al Qaeda suspect). As for myself, I better be on a watchlist. If not, we are in deep trouble. On 2016-09-08 23:39, BillK wrote: > This Hilariously Cruel Hoax Tweet Just Put Lots Of People On NSA's Radar > > An act of next-level trolling genius yesterday made many a gullible > Googler ask the main question one shouldn't ask about ISIS. > > > > --------------- > > Don't Google it! You know you want to, but don't! Just don't! > > > BillK > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 12:29:05 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 08:29:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 7:51 PM, John Clark wrote: > But Spike, if Johnson doesn't know the first thing about Syria or even > what Allepo is how could he know we can't fix it? He knows it's outside the US so it's not the US government's job to fix it. Doesn't matter whether or not we can fix it: we have no right to try. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 14:11:39 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 10:11:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > Listening to a one hour talk about world events should have been enough > > Well, that's the thing. Is Aleppo - not Syria in general, but > specifically Aleppo - notable enough that it would even have been mentioned > in a one or even two hour talk summarizing all the important things in > world affairs right now? > ? Aleppo has 2 million residents and is the most populous and commercially important city in Syria, or at least it was until many thousands of its citizens were killed in the war. Right now 275,000 ?people ? in the eastern part of the city (and once the richest part) are completely surrounded and cut off from the rest of the world and are slowly starving to death, the 1.5 million people still alive in the western part are doing a little better but not much. The UN said Aleppo was the "apex of horror" in the modern ? ?world. ? ? Even if a president decides not to do anything about it he should at least know about it. To Mr. Johnson's credit he admitted ?it? ? ? was a stupid remark and said "I have to get smarter" and as president he would surround himself with experts who were presumably smarter than he was, but those experts are sometimes going to be giving diametrically opposite advice on what should be done and at the end of the day it's the President who must decide and it's the President ?not the experts ? who will be held accountable if things go wrong. > > ?>? > It feels like most Americans would say no. > > ?Most Americans are not running for president. ?Johnson didn't need a top secret briefing by the CIA to know about Aleppo, just reading the front page of the New York Times for a few days would have been enough. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 14:26:46 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 10:26:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 8:29 AM, Dave Sill wrote: ?>> ? >> But Spike, if Johnson doesn't know the first thing about Syria or even >> what Allepo is how could he know we can't fix it? > > > ?> ? > He knows it's outside the US so it's not the US government's job to fix > it. Doesn't matter whether or not we can fix it: we have no right to try. > ?Come on Dave, there is simply no excuse for ignorance of that magnitude, and certainly not from somebody who wants to be Commander In Chief of the armed forces of the USA; even Johnson himself knows that, after his blunder he said "I'm incredibly frustrated with myself. I have to get smarter and that's just part of the process". It's a cliche to say the presidency is no place for on the job training but like most cliches it's true. ? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 15:02:20 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 11:02:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: <015701d20a58$a5cb4e50$f161eaf0$@att.net> References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> <00f401d20a36$a20d7b70$e6287250$@att.net> <015701d20a58$a5cb4e50$f161eaf0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:11 AM, spike wrote: ?> > With the new Powell bombshell, Julian Assange?s anticipated dump will be > very hard pressed to top it. Powell bombshell? Do you mean the one where it turned out that Hillary Clinton was being completely truthful when she said former Secretary of State General Powell ? advised her to set up a private email account ?? In a just released Email Powell explained to Clinton 2 days after she took office ?what he did when he worked for President Bush: * ?* *?"?What I did do was have a personal computer that was hooked up to a private phone line (sounds ancient.)? ?so I could communicate with a wide range of friends directly without it going through the State Department servers.? ?I even used it to do business with some foreign leaders and some of the senior folks in the Department on their personal email accounts. I did the same thing on the road in hotels?.?"* ?By the way, if Trump and Clinton are equally bad as many on this list claim why does every political discussion no matter the topic somehow always evolve into criticism of Clinton and never of Trump? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 15:20:34 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 08:20:34 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 9, 2016, at 5:29 AM, Dave Sill wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 7:51 PM, John Clark wrote: >> But Spike, if Johnson doesn't know the first thing about Syria or even what Allepo is how could he know we can't fix it? > > He knows it's outside the US so it's not the US government's job to fix it. Doesn't matter whether or not we can fix it: we have no right to try. A big problem for me is believing any government fixes things. By the way, I agree that it won't help Johnson. But that's more the pity in this case: http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/08/what-the-response-to-johnsons-slip-up-says-about-american-politics/ Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 9 15:09:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 08:09:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00d601d20aac$23d10800$6b731800$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark ? ?>?>?It feels like most Americans would say no. ? >? Johnson didn't need a top secret briefing by the CIA to know about Aleppo, just reading the front page of the New York Times for a few days would have been enough. John K Clark? Had Johnson been reading the New York Times, instead having no information, the information he did have would be wrong. The situation in Aleppo is appalling. It isn?t clear we can fix it. We may have helped break it (depending on what your definition of ?we? is.) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 9 15:33:00 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 08:33:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> <00f401d20a36$a20d7b70$e6287250$@att.net> <015701d20a58$a5cb4e50$f161eaf0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00f501d20aaf$733cba80$59b62f80$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:11 AM, spike > wrote: ?> >?With the new Powell bombshell, Julian Assange?s anticipated dump will be very hard pressed to top it. >?Powell bombshell? Do you mean the one where it turned out that Hillary Clinton was being completely truthful when she said former Secretary of State General Powell advised her to set up a private email account? That?s the one. Looks like we caught two Secretaries of State intentionally breaking the law, knowing they were breaking the law, taking actions to avoid getting caught. The senate should impeach both of them forthwith. The bombshell isn?t that two SoSs are now impeachable, but that a comment by Clinton may well have implicated Barack. I can imagine the senate will want some details on what she meant with that ?struck a blow? comment in the Powell memo. John how do you interpret that? >?By the way, if Trump and Clinton are equally bad as many on this list claim why does every political discussion no matter the topic somehow always evolve into criticism of Clinton and never of Trump? John K Clark That one is easy: because we keep uncovering new sleaze with Clinton every other day. With Trump it is so easy: if you want dirt on him, you just ask him, he hands you all the dirt you want, free. With that guy we know what we are getting: we just ask. And we don?t like what he tells us. With Clinton, the deeper we dig the more dirt we find. Amazing part we would never have believed had we been told 2 years ago: the final stretch it would be Trump vs. anyone and Trump would be the relatively boring side. Oy, evolution help us. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 15:47:36 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 08:47:36 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: <00d601d20aac$23d10800$6b731800$@att.net> References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> <00d601d20aac$23d10800$6b731800$@att.net> Message-ID: <2FF13AF9-A054-4599-A163-F186C5C71226@gmail.com> On Sep 9, 2016, at 8:09 AM, spike wrote: > >? On Behalf Of John Clark > ? > ?>?>?It feels like most Americans would say no. > ? > >? Johnson didn't need a top secret briefing by the CIA to know about Aleppo, just reading the front page of the New York Times for a few days would have been enough. John K Clark? > > Had Johnson been reading the New York Times, instead having no information, the information he did have would be wrong. > > The situation in Aleppo is appalling. It isn?t clear we can fix it. We may have helped break it (depending on what your definition of ?we? is.) My guess is out the four candidates, Johnson and Stein are less likely to commit war crimes or get involved in foreign civil wars. (For Clinton, there's little reason to suspect she'll suddenly become a peacenik. For Trump, ditto.) Still, I don't recommend voting for the least of four evils. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 16:04:00 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 09:04:00 -0700 Subject: [ExI] This will not help the Libertarian candidate In-Reply-To: <00d601d20aac$23d10800$6b731800$@att.net> References: <00e501d20a04$7e5a9be0$7b0fd3a0$@att.net> <00d601d20aac$23d10800$6b731800$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 8:09 AM, spike wrote: > The situation in Aleppo is appalling. It isn?t clear we can fix it. We may > have helped break it (depending on what your definition of ?we? is.) It is exactly what you should expect from evolutionary psychology. Rising population, economy that does not keep up, then glitch in weather. Once the fighting starts, the effects of fighting on the economy makes it worse. Eventually the population falls to the point the economy/ecosystem to population improves and that shuts off wars till the population grown again. It's been this way since humans got more organized than the big cats that previously kept our numbers down. From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 18:42:02 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 13:42:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: And London cardiologist Dr Assem Malhotra said: "There are serious question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. "And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were involved in this review. It is not an independent review." This is a quote from the BBC article that Bill K sent to me. It confirms what I think: you can't trust industry, which is making billions from the drugs, to do unquestioned research. bill w On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 6:14 PM, BillK wrote: > On 7 September 2016 at 15:54, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > The problem withe both of these criticisms is that you are relying on > > government and top medical sources, which are politically compromised. > Just > > look into the American Heart Association and its history of supporting > > questionable data about fats, which is just now being overturned. "Use > only > > polyunsaturated fats." Problem is, they lower HDL too. > > > > People's Pharmacy is not without its problems but at least it's an > > independent source. Read everybody, trust no one. > > > Of course I am not qualified to judge primary sources, so I won't waste > my > > time. > > > > > You have to rely on some medical sources. Try to choose reliable > sources. It's your life at stake. > > News just in: > > Quote: > Statins review says benefits 'underestimated' > The benefits of the cholesterol-reducing drug statins are > underestimated and the harms exaggerated, a major review suggests. > Published in the Lancet and backed by a number of major health > organisations, it says statins lower heart attack and stroke risk. > The review also suggests side effects such as muscle pain do occur, > although in relatively few people. > > The Lancet review, led by Prof Rory Collins from the Clinical Trial > Service Unit at the University of Oxford, looked at the available > evidence for the effects of taking an average 40mg daily dose of > statins in 10,000 patients over five years. > > It suggested cholesterol levels would be lowered enough to prevent > 1,000 "major cardiovascular events" such as heart attacks, strokes and > coronary artery bypasses in people who had existing vascular disease - > and 500 in people who were at risk due to age or other illnesses such > as high blood pressure or diabetes. > ------------- > > > 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: From sparge at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 19:02:36 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 15:02:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > And London cardiologist Dr Assem Malhotra said: "There are serious > question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the > side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. > > "And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were > involved in this review. It is not an independent review." > > This is a quote from the BBC article that Bill K sent to me. It confirms > what I think: you can't trust industry, which is making billions from the > drugs, to do unquestioned research. > Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of exercise. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 19:17:47 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 20:17:47 +0100 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 9 September 2016 at 20:02, Dave Sill wrote: > Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and > effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of > exercise. > So what would you propose to stop heart attacks for the majority of the population that have a poor diet and don't exercise? Tell them to have a complete lifestyle change? As if they would listen. Most of the time doctors can't even get their patients to take medicine. BillK From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 19:39:55 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 12:39:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <468945AB-ABF8-4E1E-9CB6-04E6AAE17985@gmail.com> On Sep 9, 2016, at 12:17 PM, BillK wrote: >> On 9 September 2016 at 20:02, Dave Sill wrote: >> Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and >> effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of >> exercise. > > > So what would you propose to stop heart attacks for the majority of > the population that have a poor diet and don't exercise? > > Tell them to have a complete lifestyle change? As if they would > listen. Most of the time doctors can't even get their patients to take > medicine. I took David to mean not so much that these folks can only change their diet and lack of activity and never have access to statins, but, rather, that statins might have some serious health issues... that avoiding a change of lifestyle might come at a high cost. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 19:11:49 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 15:11:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: While I'm not a statin evangelist or even completely sold on the cholesterol hypothesis in terms of cardiovascular disease, there is a large component of cholesterol production and makeup that is genetic. While exercise can certainly help raising the HDL fraction, diet has relatively little impact on overall cholesterol levels in most cases. On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> And London cardiologist Dr Assem Malhotra said: "There are serious >> question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the >> side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. >> >> "And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were >> involved in this review. It is not an independent review." >> >> This is a quote from the BBC article that Bill K sent to me. It confirms >> what I think: you can't trust industry, which is making billions from the >> drugs, to do unquestioned research. >> > > Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and > effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of > exercise. > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 21:26:58 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 16:26:58 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So what would you propose to stop heart attacks for the majority of the population that have a poor diet and don't exercise? Tell them to have a complete lifestyle change? As if they would listen. Most of the time doctors can't even get their patients to take medicine. --------------------- The answer according to some, is to have a nanny state. For ex., warning labels may be required on Big Macs. But if people are going to be stubborn, continue smoking, drinking too much, eating poorly, watching too much TV (lack of exercise) then they will have to pay the price for their shortsightedness. Or will they? What if we put things in the water that they are nearly forced to use? Quick question for libertarians: is fluoridating the water a nanny state solution, to be resisted? Will we put anti-obesity pills, once developed, into the water? How much forced medication is too much? bill w On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:11 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: > While I'm not a statin evangelist or even completely sold on the > cholesterol hypothesis in terms of cardiovascular disease, there is a large > component of cholesterol production and makeup that is genetic. While > exercise can certainly help raising the HDL fraction, diet has relatively > little impact on overall cholesterol levels in most cases. > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:02 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace < >> foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> And London cardiologist Dr Assem Malhotra said: "There are serious >>> question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the >>> side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. >>> >>> "And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were >>> involved in this review. It is not an independent review." >>> >>> This is a quote from the BBC article that Bill K sent to me. It >>> confirms what I think: you can't trust industry, which is making billions >>> from the drugs, to do unquestioned research. >>> >> >> Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and >> effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of >> exercise. >> >> -Dave >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 23:12:46 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 19:12:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: <468945AB-ABF8-4E1E-9CB6-04E6AAE17985@gmail.com> References: <468945AB-ABF8-4E1E-9CB6-04E6AAE17985@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:39 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > > I took David to mean not so much that these folks can only change their > diet and lack of activity and never have access to statins, but, rather, > that statins might have some serious health issues... that avoiding a > change of lifestyle might come at a high cost. > Yes, exactly. Unfortunately, there aren't huge sums of money to be had by providers of healthy lifestyles, so they're not giving doctors free vacations or whatever to promote their products. And on top of that, doctors don't seem to be well informed about what constitutes a healthy lifestyle. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 23:19:44 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 19:19:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 5:26 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Quick question for libertarians: is fluoridating the water a nanny state > solution, to be resisted? Will we put anti-obesity pills, once developed, > into the water? How much forced medication is too much? > > Municipal water should be as unadulterated as possible. Chlorination is probably justifiable. No medication should be forced. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 9 23:46:18 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 18:46:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Municipal water should be as unadulterated as possible. Chlorination is probably justifiable. No medication should be forced. ? Dave So how about a vote? Go with the majority? You did not mention fluorine. Here's one view of the future: vaccines will be enhanced to cover more illnesses. Strains of beneficial bacteria or even viruses will be administered by pediatricians at appropriate times just like vaccines and probably mandatory for public schools. Skeptics will pull their kids out and so we will have, like India, an Untouchable class who have the wrong microbiome, with shouts of 'unclean, unclean!'. And generic Cialis will be covered by Medicare. God only knows what will be in our water. ?? Bottom line: it will become harder and harder to be a practicing libertarian. The theme will be 'The greatest good for the greatest number'. (which probably quotes someone - I dunno) ?bill w? On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 6:19 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 5:26 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> Quick question for libertarians: is fluoridating the water a nanny state >> solution, to be resisted? Will we put anti-obesity pills, once developed, >> into the water? How much forced medication is too much? >> >> Municipal water should be as unadulterated as possible. Chlorination is > probably justifiable. No medication should be forced. > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Sep 9 15:20:07 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 17:20:07 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Many people now on security watch list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <47a9b972-f92d-34ca-263b-73afa6752bf2@aleph.se> An extended version, with more math and pharma R&D: http://aleph.se/andart2/computer-science/what-makes-a-watchable-watchlist/ -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From sparge at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 00:18:45 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 20:18:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:46 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > So how about a vote? Go with the majority? > What's the alternative? Leave? You did not mention fluorine. > The evidence in favor is weak. I don't think it belongs in municipal water supplies. Here's one view of the future: vaccines will be enhanced to cover more > illnesses. Strains of beneficial bacteria or even viruses will be > administered by pediatricians at appropriate times just like vaccines and > probably mandatory for public schools. Skeptics will pull their kids out > and so we will have, like India, an Untouchable class who have the wrong > microbiome, with shouts of 'unclean, unclean!'. And generic Cialis will be > covered by Medicare. > God only knows what will be in our water. > ?? > > Bottom line: it will become harder and harder to be a practicing > libertarian. The theme will be 'The greatest good for the greatest > number'. (which probably quotes someone - I dunno) > I'm all in favor of innovation but personal freedom has to have precedence. Those who want the latest and greatest additives in their water are free to have them, but they're not free to compel those who don't want them to have them. I mean, I can drink bottled water to avoid fluorine, obviously. I'm not sure whenever/wherever it's been easy to be a practicing libertarian. The trend may be toward authoritarianism but I'd like to think that some day there'll be another Enlightment and we can move past that. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jasonresch at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 06:57:47 2016 From: jasonresch at gmail.com (Jason Resch) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 01:57:47 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Another way of measuring their effect (or the effect of any drug) is "Number Needed to Treat" ( detailed in this talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jPQjjsBbIc ). For Statins it is about 300. That is, 300 people need to be put on Statins for every 1 heart attack, stroke, etc. prevented. That's 299 people needlessly suffering whatever side effects the drug may have for each person helped. Jason On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:18 PM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 7:46 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> >> So how about a vote? Go with the majority? >> > > What's the alternative? Leave? > > You did not mention fluorine. >> > > The evidence in favor is weak. I don't think it belongs in municipal water > supplies. > > Here's one view of the future: vaccines will be enhanced to cover more >> illnesses. Strains of beneficial bacteria or even viruses will be >> administered by pediatricians at appropriate times just like vaccines and >> probably mandatory for public schools. Skeptics will pull their kids out >> and so we will have, like India, an Untouchable class who have the wrong >> microbiome, with shouts of 'unclean, unclean!'. And generic Cialis will be >> covered by Medicare. >> God only knows what will be in our water. >> ?? >> >> Bottom line: it will become harder and harder to be a practicing >> libertarian. The theme will be 'The greatest good for the greatest >> number'. (which probably quotes someone - I dunno) >> > > I'm all in favor of innovation but personal freedom has to have > precedence. Those who want the latest and greatest additives in their water > are free to have them, but they're not free to compel those who don't want > them to have them. I mean, I can drink bottled water to avoid fluorine, > obviously. > > I'm not sure whenever/wherever it's been easy to be a practicing > libertarian. The trend may be toward authoritarianism but I'd like to think > that some day there'll be another Enlightment and we can move past that. > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 07:23:36 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 17:23:36 +1000 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 10 September 2016 at 05:02, Dave Sill wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 2:42 PM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > >> And London cardiologist Dr Assem Malhotra said: "There are serious >> question marks about the reliability of industry-sponsored studies on the >> side effects of statins, and essentially that's what this review is. >> >> "And a lot of the scientists involved in the original studies were >> involved in this review. It is not an independent review." >> >> This is a quote from the BBC article that Bill K sent to me. It confirms >> what I think: you can't trust industry, which is making billions from the >> drugs, to do unquestioned research. >> > > Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and > effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of > exercise. > Why would you be sceptical for that reason? Would you be more likely to accept, for example, that drugs could be helpful for a problem that has a genetic basis? -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 08:36:37 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:36:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 10 September 2016 at 01:18, Dave Sill wrote: > I'm all in favor of innovation but personal freedom has to have precedence. > Those who want the latest and greatest additives in their water are free to > have them, but they're not free to compel those who don't want them to have > them. I mean, I can drink bottled water to avoid fluorine, obviously. > Well, *you* can, but poorer people find bottled water expensive. Then you have the problem of communicable diseases. (And there are a lot of them!). How do you stop people wandering about spreading disease? Society has to restrict their personal freedom in order to protect everyone else. Compulsory individual medical treatment and mass medication / spraying is becoming more common as the threat of antibiotic-resistant infections grows. BillK From sparge at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 12:13:13 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 08:13:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > On 10 September 2016 at 05:02, Dave Sill wrote: > >> >> Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and >> effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of >> exercise. >> > > Why would you be sceptical for that reason? Would you be more likely to > accept, for example, that drugs could be helpful for a problem that has a > genetic basis? > Because problems due to poor lifestyle choices should first be treated by correcting the cause of the problem. "Just take this pill" is too easy for doctors to prescribe and patients to believe. Statins aren't the equivalent of a healthy lifestyle in a pill. For people for whom lifestyle changes have failed, sure, they're better than nothing. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 14:39:52 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:39:52 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins Message-ID: I'm not sure whenever/wherever it's been easy to be a practicing libertarian. The trend may be toward authoritarianism but I'd like to think that some day there'll be another Enlightment and we can move past that. Dave I have often wondered why the world doesn't follow us. Most of the world has authoritarian govs. and are way behind us and Western Europe in every category. Why can't they see that our way is the way to go? Is it religion? The Chinese, at least, have adopted our way of doing business and many of their people are clamoring for democracy. Africa is clearly held back by tyrants who disrupt their economy. I don't know what more can be added to what the original Enlightenment believed. People in the Western world are, I think, freer than they have ever been and better at feeding the population than any time in history. That should be enough to change the whole world, eh? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jasonresch at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 16:13:46 2016 From: jasonresch at gmail.com (Jason Resch) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 11:13:46 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Rojava is an interesting libertarian experiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rojava#Politics Jason On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:39 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > I'm not sure whenever/wherever it's been easy to be a practicing > libertarian. The trend may be toward authoritarianism but I'd like to think > that some day there'll be another Enlightment and we can move past that. > Dave > > I have often wondered why the world doesn't follow us. Most of the world > has authoritarian govs. and are way behind us and Western Europe in every > category. Why can't they see that our way is the way to go? Is it > religion? The Chinese, at least, have adopted our way of doing business > and many of their people are clamoring for democracy. Africa is clearly > held back by tyrants who disrupt their economy. > > I don't know what more can be added to what the original Enlightenment > believed. People in the Western world are, I think, freer than they have > ever been and better at feeding the population than any time in history. > > That should be enough to change the whole world, eh? > > bill w > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 10 16:42:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 09:42:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:39 AM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: >>?I'm not sure whenever/wherever it's been easy to be a practicing libertarian. The trend may be toward authoritarianism but I'd like to think that some day there'll be another Enlightment and we can move past that. Dave >?I have often wondered why the world doesn't follow us. Most of the world has authoritarian govs. and are way behind us and Western Europe in every category. Why can't they see that our way is the way to go? ?bill w _______________________________________________ BillW, look at the way we are going please sir. Can we still see that our way is the way to go? Wednesday we saw a clear example of a Secretary of State instructing his successor on how to break law by detailing how he did it himself. Her comments in that same memo may have implicated the president. If that isn?t a conspiracy, I am misunderstanding the definition of the term. Now in yesterday?s speech, a candidate expressed the opinion that those who think the government has let them down are to be tossed into a ?basket of deplorables? along with Trump supporters. Well I don?t feel deplorable. But plenty of us damn sure do think the government has let us down: it intentionally failed to follow its own laws. That is called ?crime.? Our own government has caught two former Secretaries of State, with evidence in their own writing (how often does THAT happen?) Where is the rush to impeach both of them? What more do we need than evidence in their own words of contempt for law? People who suffer under authoritarian regimes have governments who grab power using false promises and true threats. Now? we have a candidate who identified those who demand the US government be legal, moral, ethical and accountable as ?deplorable.? BillW, remind me please why you are wondering why the world doesn?t follow us? It is entirely clear that we are following us? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 17:39:18 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 10:39:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:42 AM, spike wrote: > BillW, look at the way we are going please sir. Can we still see that our > way is the way to go? > Yes, relatively speaking. The trivial-in-comparison flaws - and yes, everything you listed is trivial in comparison to the problems most of the tyrant-driven governments in Africa and the Middle East inflict on themselves routinely - are why it is said, "democracy is the worst system of government in the world, except for all the others." This should be obvious to everyone on the list already. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 18:20:16 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 13:20:16 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> Message-ID: BillW, remind me please why you are wondering why the world doesn?t follow us? It is entirely clear that we are following us? (I think you mean 'Is it') spike What I have failed to do: find out the particulars of the polls. Since some time back polls show that our citizens are highly critical of Congress, and until lately, Obama. So those citizens know that what is happening in DC stinks and is not just business as usual, or doesn't need to be. These candidates are an unfortunate coincidence: two bad at one time. I am sure a historian could point to other matchups that were bad or maybe worse, and we survived every time. Yes, we have gotten away from our core principles, just like any system you can name and need redemption, revitalization, repenting and other re- that you can think of. We need a tuneup. I am optimistic. As long as we don't get into a big war, we can survive anything these morons and criminals do. If they perform as expected, that is to say, poorly, it might just revitalize and redo the party system and split it into three parts (or even four: Repubs split in two, Dems remain, Libertarians get strong) A good thing, I think. Libertarians seem more interested in ideas than in action. Why not start a Libertarian party where you are and put your time where your mouth is? The NYT article I posted a few days ago boils gov. down to: give the people equality, fraternity, and liberty and leave them alone! bill w On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:42 AM, spike wrote: > >> BillW, look at the way we are going please sir. Can we still see that >> our way is the way to go? >> > > Yes, relatively speaking. The trivial-in-comparison flaws - and yes, > everything you listed is trivial in comparison to the problems most of the > tyrant-driven governments in Africa and the Middle East inflict on > themselves routinely - are why it is said, "democracy is the worst system > of government in the world, except for all the others." > > This should be obvious to everyone on the list already. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 10 21:55:04 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 14:55:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <018901d20bad$fd4263c0$f7c72b40$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins >>?BillW, remind me please why you are wondering why the world doesn?t follow us? It is entirely clear that we are following us? >?(I think you mean 'Is it') spike Ja thanks. >? some time back polls show that our citizens are highly critical of Congress, and until lately, Obama. So those citizens know that what is happening in DC stinks and is not just business as usual, or doesn't need to be?bill w Ja BillW, note that for the head of the executive branch, half or nearly half the people voted for the winner (we are told anyway (while being carefully prevented from verifying.)) For congress, each voter only votes for 2% of the senate (two of 100 senators) and less than a quarter of a percent of the house (one of 435 representatives.) So, regardless of what happens, approval ratings calculated in this manner for a president stay somewhere around half and usually in the teens for congress. Regardless of what happens, that pattern stays, and will always. Presidents try to pretend that these poll results mean they are more popular than the legislature, but if viewed another way, the opposite is true. Note the few polls which ask not the public?s opinion of the senate and the public?s opinion of the house, but rather ask their opinion of their own senators and their opinion of their own representative. Take those numbers then calculate the approval rate of the legislature by averaging the approval ratings of the ones they could vote for, the ones in which they had actual say in the matter. Then we find that only one modern president has ever scored a higher approval rating than congress, and then only briefly. That president was? George W. Bush for a few weeks, starting on 11 September 2001. If calculated in that more logical way, congressional approval ratings hover in the 60s and 70s, depending on how well the economy is doing and how one filters the fraction of the voters who do not know their state?s senators and have no clue who is their representative in the house. Do those count? Should they? Or can we come up with some kind of three-fifths compromise for those who cannot name their representative in congress? Can you? (I?m not meaning that as a criticism BillW, for I can name my senators but cannot name my representative either.) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Sep 10 22:17:16 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 18:17:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:42 PM, spike wrote: > ?one ?candidate expressed the opinion that those who think the government > has let them down are to be tossed into a ?basket of deplorables? along > with Trump supporters. ?That's not what she said, she said half of Trump supporters should be tossed into a basket of ?deplorables,and if anything I think she was being too kind when she said only half. Among Trump supporters 50% think Bill Clinton murdered Vince Foster and 37% aren't sure, 65% think Obama is Muslim and 22% aren't sure, 59% think Obama wan't born in the USA and so is not the legitimate president and 18% aren't sure, 31% think the USA should ban gay people from entering the country and 14% aren't sure, 48% think it was a great idea to put American citizens born in the USA in concentration camps during WW2 because they were of Japanese decent ? ?while 31% weren't sure if it was a good idea or not, 24% think Antonin Scalia was murdered by liberals and 34% aren't sure if he was or not. And a whopping 67% think free trade is a bad thing! ?>? > Well I don?t feel deplorable. ?She wan't talking about you because you're not a Trump supporter.? ?John K Clark? > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 00:27:14 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 10:27:14 +1000 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Saturday, 10 September 2016, Dave Sill wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 3:23 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > >> >> On 10 September 2016 at 05:02, Dave Sill > > wrote: >> >>> >>> Yes, I'm extremely skeptical of claims that a man-made drug is safe and >>> effective for a problem that is basically due to poor diet and lack of >>> exercise. >>> >> >> Why would you be sceptical for that reason? Would you be more likely to >> accept, for example, that drugs could be helpful for a problem that has a >> genetic basis? >> > > Because problems due to poor lifestyle choices should first be treated by > correcting the cause of the problem. "Just take this pill" is too easy for > doctors to prescribe and patients to believe. Statins aren't the equivalent > of a healthy lifestyle in a pill. For people for whom lifestyle changes > have failed, sure, they're better than nothing. > Lifestyle changes are difficult for many people, otherwise they wouldn't risk an early death. But your response raises an interesting point: if there were a pill available that could easily rectify negative consequences of enjoyable but harmful behaviour, what would be wrong with that? -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 00:29:42 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 19:29:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> Message-ID: Do those count? Should they? Or can we come up with some kind of three-fifths compromise for those who cannot name their representative in congress? Can you? (I?m not meaning that as a criticism BillW, for I can name my senators but cannot name my representative either.) spike It appears that you know polls, so let me ask and tell: do the polls you know of ask specific questions or go for an overall rating? In the polls of my classes using an instrument made by me rather than the administration, I scored highly on doing my job according to specific questions (which I can furnish). But the overall rating was below the specific rating according to a general question. So it appears that they could not disapprove of my actual inclass behavior or requirements or tests, etc. but wanted a way to express some displeasure with the class, possibly because I was harder than the other two teaching 101. So it matters a great deal whether the poll just asks for a general opinion, or a rating on specific behaviors of Congress. I can see where a person might not know his Congressmen but is expressing displeasure with Congress as a whole. He might even know what they are doing without knowing his own people. Or he might be just expressing a dissatisfaction with his own life and blames it on Congress, the President, the phases of the moon and so on. Suppose we do a poll. Ask if they are satisfied with their life in various categories, and then ask for ratings of various gov. depts. Now reverse that order with the other half of the Ss. I would bet it'll make a big difference. (order effects were part of my dissertation) Good polling is hard to do. I have to say that I don't follow the logic of your reversal of who is ahead Pres or Congress. If you follow the polls, can you tell me if they supply you with the actual questions asked? Cal. has 53 reps, so you can be forgiven for not knowing yours. bill w On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 5:17 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:42 PM, spike wrote: > > > ?one ?candidate expressed the opinion that those who think the >> government has let them down are to be tossed into a ?basket of >> deplorables? along with Trump supporters. > > > ?That's not what she said, she said half of Trump supporters should be > tossed into a basket of ?deplorables,and if anything I think she was > being too kind when she said only half. > > Among Trump supporters 50% think Bill Clinton murdered Vince Foster and > 37% aren't sure, 65% think Obama is Muslim and 22% aren't sure, 59% think > Obama wan't born in the USA and so is not the legitimate president and 18% > aren't sure, 31% think the USA should ban gay people from entering the > country and 14% aren't sure, 48% think it was a great idea to put American > citizens born in the USA in concentration camps during WW2 because they > were of Japanese decent > ? > ?while > 31% weren't sure if it was a good idea or not, 24% think Antonin Scalia > was murdered by liberals and 34% aren't sure if he was or not. And a > whopping 67% think free trade is a bad thing! > > ?>? >> Well I don?t feel deplorable. > > > ?She wan't talking about you because you're not a Trump supporter.? > > > ?John K Clark? > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 11 01:18:21 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 18:18:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uncle spike's history lesson: clinton laboratories Message-ID: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> HAH fooled ya. You thought the title referred to some current politician, but the one you may have been thinking of was not yet born when this history lesson took place and the setting for a flight of fancy in the spirit of Asimov. Richard Feynman talks about it in his book. When the Los Alamos group was doing its calculations, the physics realized they could do uranium bombs, but they were already thinking plutonium for plenty of practical reasons. They realized they could react enriched uranium and form plutonium in the spent fuel, which could then be extracted by chemical means, rather than the much more difficult and impractical method of extracting U235 from chemically-indistinguishable U238. So they set up what we would now call a breeder reactor at the Clinton Laboratories near the town of Oak Ridge Tennessee. The army?s experimental mission at the Clinton lab had to be protected with utmost secrecy, even from the commander assigned to manage the project, but it was difficult to hide that there was metal involved. 1943 was before anyone far outside Los Alamos knew of radiation, nuclear power, any of it, but the US Army was clearly serious about this project for reasons they couldn?t talk about and determined to see it go. As the plutonium was extracted, Feynman (who was a 25 yr old physics PhD) went to the Oak Ridge commander, Major General Wilhelm Styer, to explain safe handling of the material, but without revealing anything about nuclear bombs, which were classified way beyond where even MGen Styer was cleared. I needn?t explain to this crowd why the plutonium couldn?t be stored all in the same place or in too close proximity, but Feynman needed to communicate that to the base commander without revealing anything. Think about that: it must have been a crazy difficult job for a young PhD talking to a Major General who already had led troops into battle in WW1 by the time Feynman was born. In wartime, there is often the need to have cover stories that sound plausible enough and are usually technically true, but deflect inquiry. For Oak Ridge, they told the local press that they were doing metallurgy research (which is technically true, for creating plutonium from uranium was in the general bucket of metallurgy.) With General Styer, they chose to give him the technically correct briefing even if they didn?t tell him what they had in mind for the plutonium (dropping a supercritical wad of it on Herr Hitler head.) General Styer likely interpreted their briefing as a cover story, but Feynman tells it as their best attempt at making sure the soldiers didn?t accidentally assemble a critical mass and nuke Knoxville. Had they done that, you know the neighbors would still be gossiping about it. That part was all non-fiction, but we are allowed a flight of fancy in the spirit of Asimov and ask, what if? General Styer had decided that whole briefing was nonsense? It would have been pretty easy to do, for he was not trained in the sciences, having graduated with a civil engineering degree in 1922, several years before the neutron was discovered. In accordance with young Dr. Feynman?s scientific cover-story-free briefing, Major General Styer kept the plutonium carefully separated and all was well. But what if he had decided that whole thing was a cover story, or was part of a deflection, or for whatever reason decided the whole notion was a bunch of nonsense? He knew well that the material was extremely valuable, that it needed to be carefully guarded, that there was danger involved (war stuff is that way.) But he could have decided that the big walk-in bank vault they had on base right behind his desk there was the right place to store that stuff until the next phase was ready. So, he might have decided after Feynman left that the egghead scientist gave him a bunch of nonsense, based on clear observations. Feynman said something about making the general?s radio active, but the seasoned veteran already knew something about radios having used them in actual battle, and knew that his radio never went active until he turned it on. The scientist had talked about fallout, but the general already knew his troops did not fall out until given the command to do so. The scientist talked about poisoning, but the general faced poison gas and survived, so he knew a thing or two about poison. The scientist talked about critical mass and explosions, but the general knew of explosives, handled them all the time in the first war, knew what happened when they detonated a crate of old dynamite so big his strongest guy couldn?t hoist it (now THAT?S critical mass! (They couldn?t even find pieces of the truck afterwards, heeeeeheheheheee.)) General Styer could have concluded that his science briefing was all a cover story or a bunch of nonsense and that the danger was grossly exaggerated, that he knew danger, had faced danger and never blinked. He could have disregarded the whole briefing and just done his job: keep this special metal safe, regardless of what the army had in mind for it. He could have had his men load it all into his private bank vault. He could have decided that even if the stuff exploded somehow, that bank vault had solid steel walls half an inch thick and could contain any explosion up to and including dynamite, of which he knew a thing or two, and besides, there is no way that bank vault could catch fire to detonate anything, no way. That bank vault was the safest place around for storing metal. Had that happened we might have a huge smoking still-radioactive hole in the ground ten miles west (upwind most of the time) of Knoxville Tennessee, today a metropolis of nearly a million people. Had Major General Styer been an arrogant bastard and done it his own way, Knoxville would be likely a most eerie ghost town to this day, perhaps not all that different from Chernobyl Ukraine today. Fortunately for Knoxville, General Styer was not an arrogant know-it-all. He accepted the briefing even if he didn?t believe it or understand why he was being asked to do such an odd thing. He kept the plutonium separated, never lost a gram of the stuff and didn?t have any radiation sickness reported on his watch. He delivered the metal on time, safely to Los Alamos. That is today?s history lesson. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 02:19:54 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 22:19:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] uncle spike's history lesson: clinton laboratories In-Reply-To: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> References: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 9:18 PM, spike wrote: ?I think Feynman was more worried about U-235 than Plutonium when he was sent out to Oak Ridge. The huge gas diffusion plant out there had separated appreciable amounts of U-235 from the much more common U-238, enough that it could be very dangerous if you didn't know how to handle it. The big breeder reactors that made Plutonium were in the state of Washington near the town of ?Hanford. Feynman wrote a article about his wartime bomb making experiences that I found very interesting and entertaining. http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/34/3/FeynmanLosAlamos.htm John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 11 03:45:39 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 20:45:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] solution to teenage pregnancy Message-ID: <02aa01d20bde$f77bb2d0$e6731870$@att.net> Why didn't we think of this before? https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1751537/teen-pregnancy-rates-plunge-as-youngst ers-are-too-busy-sexting-to-get-together-in-person/ I knew it was a possible solution. The pregnancy rate in my own household plunged as soon as I realized how much fun it was to view videos of Dr. Jill Stein's speeches with the mute button on. My bride is beginning to get suspicious. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Sep 11 07:20:30 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 09:20:30 +0200 Subject: [ExI] uncle spike's history lesson: clinton laboratories In-Reply-To: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> References: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> Message-ID: <2e4092b4-08e2-bdca-617e-e4fdc4024561@aleph.se> The US had way better nuclear safety than other countries, in my view partially because of the interest in stuff that goes boom. Here is a little story from the other side, that started with this email from Stuart Armstrong: > I have a new expression: ?a lump of cadmium?. > > Background: in WW2, Heisenberg was working on the German atomic > reactor project (was he bad? see the fascinating play ?Copenhagen? to > find out!). His team almost finished a nuclear reactor. He thought > that a reaction with natural uranium would be self-limiting (spoiler: > it wouldn?t), so had no cadmium control rods or other means of > stopping a chain reaction. > > But, no worries: his team has ?a lump of cadmium? that they could toss > into the reactor if things got out of hand. So, now, if someone has a > level of precaution woefully inadequate to the risk at hand, I will > call it a lump of cadmium. (Based on German Nuclear Program Before and During World War II by Andrew Wendorff) It reminds me of the story that SCRAM (emergency nuclear reactor shutdowns) stands for ?Safety Control Rod Axe Man?, a guy standing next to the rope suspending the control rods with an axe, ready to cut it. It has been argued it was liquid cadmium solution instead. Still, in the US project they did not assume the reaction was self stabilizing. Going back to the primary citation, we read: > > To understand it we must say something about Heisenberg?s concept of > reactor design. He persuaded himself that a reactor designed with > natural uranium and, say, a heavy water moderator would be > self-stabilizing and could not run away. He noted that U(238) has > absorption resonances in the 1-eV region, which means that a neutron > with this kind of energy has a good chance of being absorbed and thus > removed from the chain reaction. This is one of the challenges in > reactor design?slowing the neutrons with the moderator without losing > them all to absorption. Conversely, if the reactor begins to run away > (become supercritical) , these resonances would broaden and neutrons > would be more readily absorbed. Moreover, the expanding material would > lengthen the mean free paths by decreasing the density and this > expansion would also stop the chain reaction. In short, we might > experience a nasty chemical explosion but not a nuclear holocaust. > Whether Heisenberg realized the consequences of such a chemical > explosion is not clear. In any event, no safety elements like cadmium > rods were built into Heisenberg?s reactors. At best, a lump of cadmium > was kepton hand in case things threatened to get out of control. He > also never considered delayed neutrons, which, as we know, play an > essential role in reactor safety. Because none of Heisenberg?s > reactors went critical, this dubious strategy was never put to the test. (Jeremy Bernstein, Heisenberg and the critical mass. Am. J. Phys. 70, 911 (2002); http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1495409) This reminds me a lot of the modelling errors we discuss in the ?Probing the improbable? paper https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.5515 , especially of course the (ahem) energetic error giving Castle Bravo 15 megatons of yield instead of the predicted 4-8 megatons. Leaving out Li(7) from the calculations turned out to leave out the major contributor of energy. Note that Heisenberg did have an argument for his safety, in fact two independent ones! The problem might have been that he was thinking in terms of mostly U(238) and then getting any kind of chain reaction going would be hard, so he was biased against the model of explosive chain reactions (but as the Bernstein paper notes, /somebody /in the project had correct calculations for explosive critical masses). Both arguments were flawed when dealing with reactors enriched in U(235). Coming at nuclear power from the perspective of nuclear explosions on the other hand makes it natural to consider how to keep things from blowing up. We may hence end up with lumps of cadmium because we approach a risk from the wrong perspective. The antidote should always be to consider the risks from multiple angles, ideally a few adversarial ones. The more energy, speed or transformative power we expect something to produce, the more we should scrutinize existing safeguards for them being lumps of cadmium. If we think our project does not have that kind of power, we should both question why we are even doing it, and whether it might actually have some hidden critical mass. (I want to get a lump of cadmium to have in my office.) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 07:40:46 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 00:40:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uncle spike's history lesson: clinton laboratories In-Reply-To: <2e4092b4-08e2-bdca-617e-e4fdc4024561@aleph.se> References: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> <2e4092b4-08e2-bdca-617e-e4fdc4024561@aleph.se> Message-ID: <82C53A8B-53F1-4511-8113-A63DE44CE3E1@gmail.com> For a second there, I thought it was a lump of Cadbury... That might cause someone to jump in after it. ;) Neat story! Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst > On Sep 11, 2016, at 12:20 AM, Anders wrote: > > The US had way better nuclear safety than other countries, in my view partially because of the interest in stuff that goes boom. Here is a little story from the other side, that started with this email from Stuart Armstrong: > >> I have a new expression: ?a lump of cadmium?. >> >> Background: in WW2, Heisenberg was working on the German atomic reactor project (was he bad? see the fascinating play ?Copenhagen? to find out!). His team almost finished a nuclear reactor. He thought that a reaction with natural uranium would be self-limiting (spoiler: it wouldn?t), so had no cadmium control rods or other means of stopping a chain reaction. >> >> But, no worries: his team has ?a lump of cadmium? that they could toss into the reactor if things got out of hand. So, now, if someone has a level of precaution woefully inadequate to the risk at hand, I will call it a lump of cadmium. > (Based on German Nuclear Program Before and During World War II by Andrew Wendorff) > > It reminds me of the story that SCRAM (emergency nuclear reactor shutdowns) stands for ?Safety Control Rod Axe Man?, a guy standing next to the rope suspending the control rods with an axe, ready to cut it. It has been argued it was liquid cadmium solution instead. Still, in the US project they did not assume the reaction was self stabilizing. > > Going back to the primary citation, we read: >> >> To understand it we must say something about Heisenberg?s concept of reactor design. He persuaded himself that a reactor designed with natural uranium and, say, a heavy water moderator would be self-stabilizing and could not run away. He noted that U(238) has absorption resonances in the 1-eV region, which means that a neutron with this kind of energy has a good chance of being absorbed and thus removed from the chain reaction. This is one of the challenges in reactor design?slowing the neutrons with the moderator without losing them all to absorption. Conversely, if the reactor begins to run away (become supercritical) , these resonances would broaden and neutrons would be more readily absorbed. Moreover, the expanding material would lengthen the mean free paths by decreasing the density and this expansion would also stop the chain reaction. In short, we might experience a nasty chemical explosion but not a nuclear holocaust. Whether Heisenberg realized the consequences of such a chemical explosion is not clear. In any event, no safety elements like cadmium rods were built into Heisenberg?s reactors. At best, a lump of cadmium was kepton hand in case things threatened to get out of control. He also never considered delayed neutrons, which, as we know, play an essential role in reactor safety. Because none of Heisenberg?s reactors went critical, this dubious strategy was never put to the test. > (Jeremy Bernstein, Heisenberg and the critical mass. Am. J. Phys. 70, 911 (2002); http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1495409) > This reminds me a lot of the modelling errors we discuss in the ?Probing the improbable? paper https://arxiv.org/abs/0810.5515 , especially of course the (ahem) energetic error giving Castle Bravo 15 megatons of yield instead of the predicted 4-8 megatons. Leaving out Li(7) from the calculations turned out to leave out the major contributor of energy. > > Note that Heisenberg did have an argument for his safety, in fact two independent ones! The problem might have been that he was thinking in terms of mostly U(238) and then getting any kind of chain reaction going would be hard, so he was biased against the model of explosive chain reactions (but as the Bernstein paper notes, somebody in the project had correct calculations for explosive critical masses). Both arguments were flawed when dealing with reactors enriched in U(235). Coming at nuclear power from the perspective of nuclear explosions on the other hand makes it natural to consider how to keep things from blowing up. > > We may hence end up with lumps of cadmium because we approach a risk from the wrong perspective. The antidote should always be to consider the risks from multiple angles, ideally a few adversarial ones. The more energy, speed or transformative power we expect something to produce, the more we should scrutinize existing safeguards for them being lumps of cadmium. If we think our project does not have that kind of power, we should both question why we are even doing it, and whether it might actually have some hidden critical mass. > > (I want to get a lump of cadmium to have in my office.) > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 14:38:52 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 10:38:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <018901d20bad$fd4263c0$f7c72b40$@att.net> References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> <018901d20bad$fd4263c0$f7c72b40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:42 PM, spike wrote: > ?one ?candidate expressed the opinion that those who think the government > has let them down are to be tossed into a ?basket of deplorables? along > with Trump supporters. ?That's not what she said, she said half of Trump supporters should be tossed into a basket of ?deplorables,and if anything I think she was being too kind when she said only half. Among Trump supporters 50% think Bill Clinton murdered Vince Foster and 37% aren't sure, 65% think Obama is Muslim and 22% aren't sure, 59% think Obama wan't born in the USA and so is not the legitimate president and 18% aren't sure, 31% think the USA should ban gay people from entering the country and 14% aren't sure, 48% think it was a great idea to put American citizens born in the USA in concentration camps during WW2 because they were of Japanese decent ? ?while 31% weren't sure if it was a good idea or not, 24% think Antonin Scalia was murdered by liberals and 34% aren't sure if he was or not. And a whopping 67% think free trade is a bad thing! ?>? > Well I don?t feel deplorable. ?She wan't talking about you because you're not a Trump supporter.? ?John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 11 15:09:47 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 08:09:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> <018901d20bad$fd4263c0$f7c72b40$@att.net> Message-ID: <009301d20c3e$89b91700$9d2b4500$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2016 7:39 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 12:42 PM, spike > wrote: > ?one ?candidate expressed the opinion that those who think the government has let them down are to be tossed into a ?basket of deplorables? along with Trump supporters. ?That's not what she said, she said half of Trump supporters should be tossed into a basket of ?deplorables,and if anything I think she was being too kind when she said only half. ? ?John K Clark? John the problem with that line of reasoning is that we have no way of knowing what percentage of those who are being tossed in the basket as Trump supporters really support Trump, as opposed to those who are in the huge and growing basket of Clinton deplorers. These are two different things, but our system which crams everyone into one of only two camps creates these kinds of problems. Wednesday we learned that Mrs. Clinton?s predecessor wrote a memo in which he openly expressed contempt for law. He explained how they struggled to help him understand why the rule was that way. It wasn?t just an arbitrary rule, there is a damn good reason for doing things the way they do. In his memo now public, he expressed the opinion that it was nonsense and disregarded all of it. He then explained how he violated the State Department rules, which led to violating law (having to do with records retention.) He knew the State Department rules, he knew the law, he violated both intentionally and expressed it in writing. I see no other logical alternative than immediate impeachment of Secretary Powell. That same message has comments by Powell?s successor which expresses deplorable contempt and disregard for law. It might have even implicated the president, depending on how it is interpreted and if there is an alternative plausible explanation for the ?struck a blow? comment. We still don?t know what that means. Had General Powell rather than General Styer been in charge of Oak Ridge in 1943, the outcome of the effort there and the outcome of the war might have been very different. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 15:49:59 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 11:49:59 -0400 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > Lifestyle changes are difficult for many people, otherwise they wouldn't > risk an early death. But your response raises an interesting point: if > there were a pill available that could easily rectify negative consequences > of enjoyable but harmful behaviour, what would be wrong with that? > Nothing. The so-called morning-after abortion pill is pretty much in that category. But there's a real risk of drug companies and doctors pushing something as "health in a pill" when the reality is that it doesn't provide health and has negative side effects and various interactions with drugs. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 16:03:36 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:03:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <009301d20c3e$89b91700$9d2b4500$@att.net> References: <00d701d20b82$480de590$d829b0b0$@att.net> <018901d20bad$fd4263c0$f7c72b40$@att.net> <009301d20c3e$89b91700$9d2b4500$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 11:09 AM, spike wrote: ?> ? > Had General Powell rather than General Styer been in charge of Oak Ridge > in 1943, the outcome of the effort there and the outcome of the war might > have been very different. ?If they had followed the letter of the law the entire Oak Ridge plant would have blown up. The law said it was top secret and the individual workers at the plant were supposed to be kept completely in the dark and have absolutely no idea of what they were dealing with. Feynman insisted that following the letter of the law just wouldn't work and the plant would never be safe if the workers literally didn't know what they were doing. Feynman told the Generals: *?In my opinion it is impossible for them to obey a bunch of rules unless they understand how it works. So it's my opinion that it's only going to work if I tell them, and Los Alamos cannot accept the responsibility for the safety of the Oak Ridge plant unless they are fully informed as to how it works!"* ?The bigwigs thought about it for a few minutes and then saw that Feynman was right and gave him permission to ?inform the workers about what was really going on. Feynman wrote: > > *"?So I sat down and I told them all about neutrons, how they worked, da da, ta ta ta, there are too many neutrons together, you've got to keep the material apart, cadmium absorbs, and slow neutrons are more effective than fast neutrons, and yak yak - all of which was elementary stuff at Los Alamos, but they had never heard of any of it.? ?The result was that they decided to set up little groups to make their own calculations to learn how to do it. They started to re-design plants, and the designers of the plants were there, the construction designers, and engineers, and chemical engineers for the new plant that was going to handle the separated material.?"* So the Oak Ridge plant ended up with a excellent safety record because they didn't follow the USA's laws but did follow the laws of physics. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 11 16:45:12 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 09:45:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bikinis, was: RE: Enlightenment - was Re: statins Message-ID: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> >?From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] >?Subject: Re: [ExI] Enlightenment - was Re: statins On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 11:09 AM, spike > wrote: ?> ?>?Had General Powell rather than General Styer been in charge of Oak Ridge in 1943, the outcome of the effort there and the outcome of the war might have been very different. ?>?If they had followed the letter of the law the entire Oak Ridge plant would have blown up? On the contrary John. The rules said they had to separate the material. Had they followed the rules without understanding why, everything would be fine. But they had to follow the rules. Then Feynman injected: ?In my opinion it is impossible for them to obey a bunch of rules unless they understand how it works. So it's my opinion that it's only going to work if I tell them? Feynman Feynman had never been in the military. He injected his opinion that soldiers, (including the commander) wouldn?t follow rules unless they know why they are in place. It is possible Feynman was right, but we don?t know. I wouldn?t assume it. Rather than Feynman?s approach, the right answer would have been to assign an inspector to make sure the rules were being followed, then assign a second inspector to inspect the first one. >?So the Oak Ridge plant ended up with a excellent safety record because they didn't follow the USA's laws but did follow the laws of physics?.John K Clark The plant followed the rules, Feynman didn?t. He assumed they would break the rules if he didn?t tell. Inspector and second inspector, done. Trained soldiers know to follow orders even if they don?t understand them, and they know why sometimes they get orders they don?t understand. Secretary Powell didn?t understand the rules, the technical staff went to extraordinary lengths to explain to him why you can?t use Blackberries in a SCIF, he still didn?t understand and probably wouldn?t have even if they set up instruments and demonstrated that Blackberries damn sure do emit signals which can be intercepted and spoofed, which means they cannot be taken into a SCIF because an EM-shielded building is the perfect electro-quiet environment in which to collect those signals, which can then be used to command the server to disgorge its contents. Powell put all the evidence needed to impeach him right there in his own words in the 23 Jan 2009 memo. It showed lack of understanding, contempt for the law and a description of how he broke it. Only later did it come out why he broke the rules, which we only found out because a hacker was bragging about it to his hacker buddies. We were so focused on Guccifer?s having gotten in to Clinton?s email that we ignored that the he DID get into Powell?s email. He was really looking for bikini photos of smoking hot Romanian diplomat Corina Cretu. Guccifer didn?t care about a bunch of government stuff, spy biz and such as that; he wanted to gaze upon that bathing beauty Corina Cretu. I freely admit, she is more interesting to me too, hotter than Dr. Jill Stein. But the point is, there is a good reason for seemingly arbitrary rules. Powell apparently compromised national security in order to cover the reason why Cretu was sending him bikini photos. When the SecState does things like enter a relationship which results in bikini photos, then breaks the law to cover it, that makes that SecState subject to blackmail. Impeach. We don?t yet know what bikini photos might yet be found on his successor?s communications or the meaning of that ?struck a blow? comment, or what was compromised to keep all that quiet. Yet we are being told shut up and vote, and that there are only two real candidates. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 17:52:10 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:52:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: But there's a real risk of drug companies and doctors pushing something as "health in a pill" when the reality is that it doesn't provide health and has negative side effects and various interactions with drugs. -Dave ?You have described the entire otc pill industry, or at least part of it. And it's unregulated. One can get addicted to some of them - drugs for constipation, for one.? A few have been taken off the market: phenylpropanolamine, for one - the ingredient in the diet pill Dexatrim - legal speed. ?bill w? On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Sat, Sep 10, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > >> Lifestyle changes are difficult for many people, otherwise they wouldn't >> risk an early death. But your response raises an interesting point: if >> there were a pill available that could easily rectify negative consequences >> of enjoyable but harmful behaviour, what would be wrong with that? >> > > Nothing. The so-called morning-after abortion pill is pretty much in that > category. But there's a real risk of drug companies and doctors pushing > something as "health in a pill" when the reality is that it doesn't provide > health and has negative side effects and various interactions with drugs. > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 19:37:41 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 12:37:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bikinis, was: RE: Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> References: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 9:45 AM, spike wrote: > *?In my opinion it is impossible for them to obey a bunch of rules unless > they understand how it works. So it's my opinion that it's only going to > work if I tell them? Feynman* > > > > Feynman had never been in the military. He injected his opinion that > soldiers, (including the commander) wouldn?t follow rules unless they know > why they are in place. > Err...there is a critical distinction that misses, that you as an engineer should have picked up on. This distinction completely breaks application of this analogy to the email server issue you discuss. That quote does not say "wouldn't". It says "impossible for them to" - as in "can't". The former implies willing disobedience (which is what Hillary and company are accused of). The latter claims impossibility regardless of intent (which does not appear to be the case for email servers, since most of the classified portion of the government has been using secure servers - unless exceptions like this are far more widespread than has been reported). It's like an order to fly (absent any airplanes, jetpacks, or the like): it doesn't matter whether the ordered person wants to or not, nor if they make a best effort, they will fail to comply. In this case, the quote states an opinion that the subject matter is sufficiently complex that, without knowing how it works, orders for safe preservation, no matter how detailed would fail in practice - which is quite believable, especially since how to safely handle nuclear material was less well understood back then. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 19:43:00 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:43:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] diabetes Message-ID: Please send to people you know with diabetes. Notice cachet of authors. Also ?please notice that yet another national organization (the other - American Heart Assoc.) is denying the latest research in favor of options based on old and refuted science. Is a basic Atkins diet the answer to everything? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/opinion/sunday/before-you-spend-26000-on-weight-loss-surgery-do-this.html?_r=0 ? ?bill w? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 20:08:20 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 21:08:20 +0100 Subject: [ExI] diabetes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 11 September 2016 at 20:43, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Please send to people you know with diabetes. Notice cachet of authors. > > Also please notice that yet another national organization (the other - > American Heart Assoc.) is denying the latest research in favor of options > based on old and refuted science. Is a basic Atkins diet the answer to > everything? > > http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/opinion/sunday/before-you-spend-26000-on-weight-loss-surgery-do-this.html?_r=0 > This diabetes and statins discussion makes me wonder why we bother to consult doctors. If the doc diagnoses a problem and recommends a treatment our reaction appears to be to immediately question both the diagnosis and the treatment and start frantically googling to see what this week's internet opinion is. If our trust in doctors is so poor, why do we believe them when they tell us that the tests are OK and no health problems were highlighted. Surely we should treat an 'All clear' with just as much suspicion? BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 20:16:09 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 16:16:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] bikinis, was: RE: Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> References: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> Message-ID: http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/34/3/FeynmanLosAlamos.htm I found out that the situation was even worse than Segre reported because he noticed certain boxes in big lots in a room, but he didn't notice a lot of boxes in another room on the other side of the same wall - and things like that. Now, if you have too much stuff together, it goes up, you see. So I went through the entire plant. I have a very bad memory, but when I work intensively I have a good short-term memory, and so I could remember all kinds of crazy things like building 90-207, vat number so and so, and so forth. I went home that night, and I went through the whole thing, explained where all the dangers were, and what you would have to do to fix this. It's rather easy. You put cadmium in solutions to absorb the neutrons in the water, and you separate the boxes so they are not too dense, according to certain rules. On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 12:45 PM, spike wrote: > > >> ?> ? >> If they had followed the letter of the law the entire Oak Ridge plant >> would have blown up? > > > ?>? > On the contrary John. The rules said they had to separate the material. > Had they followed the rules without understanding why, everything would be > fine. > ?No, things wouldn't have been fine because they wouldn't have known what "separate" means. ? ?For example, Feynman found that they put U-235 in "separate" rooms and they thought they were following orders and everything was fine, but ?that wasn't fine because the U-235 was just on the other side of plywood walls, and plywood is made of light elements that don't absorb neutrons but just slow them down. And that makes things more dangerous not less because slow neutrons are more likely to cause a nuclear reaction than fast ones. Nuclear physics is a complex thing and so was that huge plant, no set of rules of manageable length that the workers would or could follow could keep things safe if they didn't know what they were doing or even why it was important to follow such seemingly pointless rules. > ?> > Feynman had never been in the military. ?And the vast majority of the workers in the plant were not in the military either, and even the minority that were had only been in the army for a few months or even weeks. ?> ? He injected his opinion that soldiers, (including the commander) wouldn?t follow rules unless they know why they are in place. It is possible Feynman was right, but we don?t know. > If Richard Feynman had an opinion on nuclear physics and a military flunky who didn't know the difference between a neutron ?and? a moron had the opposite opinion which one would you put your money on? > > Trained soldiers know to follow orders even if they don?t understand them Trained soldiers ? didn't work at the plant either civilians did?, and nobody can follow orders if they don't understand them. If you didn't know that fast neutrons and slow neutrons behave very differently and in the exact opposite way you'd intuitively think they would, or if you didn't even know what a neutron is then you don't know what the order "keep the stuff separate" means or why such a silly sounding order is a matter of life or death. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 11 20:12:21 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 13:12:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bikinis, was: RE: Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: References: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> Message-ID: <004101d20c68$ce77b750$6b6725f0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2016 12:38 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] bikinis, was: RE: Enlightenment - was Re: statins On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 9:45 AM, spike > wrote: >>>??In my opinion it is impossible for them to obey a bunch of rules unless they understand how it works. So it's my opinion that it's only going to work if I tell them? Feynman >>?Feynman had never been in the military. He injected his opinion that soldiers, (including the commander) wouldn?t follow rules unless they know why they are in place. >?That quote does not say "wouldn't". It says "impossible for them to" - as in "can't"? I saw that Feynman had said this was impossible and thought it an overstatement. Certainly it was possible to just write out the orders and verify the commander would comply, then posted a couple of inspectors. The excellent book where Feynman relates this story was a transcript of his sitting around telling stories orally. Some of the video is still around of him telling his memoirs. Where I think he went wrong is in knowing the way the military really works. If there is a competent commander, that base is the definition of law and order. If they get legal orders signed by his superiors, procedures developed by the scientists, in detail, even with no explanation, but with explicit orders to put this component somewhere safe, put this other component somewhere else at least yakkity yak feet from this first component, the next component bla bla feet from the first two (and so on) a commander worth his star would carry out those orders as written and Adrian please note sir: that commander would not decide it was nonsense and disobey. Just in case, we could station a couple of inspectors who report to someone who is cleared. Even the inspectors need not be cleared themselves. Their only task is to make sure the procedures are being followed. Feynman projected his own opinion that they would not comply (his stronger position was that they could not) and made some dangerous assumptions. I disagree with Feynman from every contact I have had with military people: if the orders are legal, the commander will carry them out. Secretary Powell was an exception. Even after the State Department went to extraordinary lengths to explain to him why the rules are in place the way they are, he intentionally defeated that for personal reasons: he had some yoga going on with a Romanian official, and he wanted to hide that. The legal way to do it is for him to go to security, have them on the bcc for every note to and from the bikini, done. They are not his priest, but they could tell him if this somehow leaks, such as by a hacker, he must go public with it immediately to protect his country from his being blackmailed. There is no law against a high official schmoozing with a foreign bikini. There damn well is law against trying to cover it up, especially if it involves failure to comply with law put in place to support Freedom of Information Act requirements, which the State Department nor the Executive branch controls (congress does that.) >?It's like an order to fly (absent any airplanes, jetpacks, or the like): it doesn't matter whether the ordered person wants to or not, nor if they make a best effort, they will fail to comply? Ja. For a Blackberry to be a legal device in this context, the State Department would need to register it, set up a means to collect any and all signals to and from the device, archive everything, then when it was time to retire the device for any reason, they would need to dump the memory, compare what they received from both the inbox and outbox, confirm they had everything, including any personal business that might be on that device, if there was any chance there was any state department business on there. Whacking that device with a hammer fails to create the required archives. In this case, it creates a vague suspicion that the destroyed evidence (it became evidence as soon as the congressional subpoena went into effect in August of 2013. I am beginning to think Mr. Nixon?s 18 minutes of erased audio may have contained something more than yoga. >?In this case, the quote states an opinion that the subject matter is sufficiently complex that, without knowing how it works, orders for safe preservation, no matter how detailed would fail in practice - which is quite believable, especially since how to safely handle nuclear material was less well understood back then? Ja, and I still disagree with Feynman. But had I needed to improvise an explanation, I would have gone with something like this stuff emits a kind of poison gas (which is damn sure does if you get too much of it in close proximity.) If too much of it is stored together, there is a risk that everyone who handles the stuff will perish. He could have explained what radiation poisoning is like: hair falling out, destroying any cell in the body in the process of meiosis, etc. Perhaps the commander would conclude that the US was studying some kind of new poison gas, but no matter. Teaching uncleared people about neutron capture and the rest of it was a dangerous mistake, when a better path existed. The object lesson here is to auto-archive everything any official is doing, including personal email, both incoming and outgoing. Had we done that, we would not still be in the dark on who attacked the embassy in Libya and why. A competent commander will follow legal orders. Sec. Powell did not. Impeach. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 21:07:32 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 14:07:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] bikinis, was: RE: Enlightenment - was Re: statins In-Reply-To: <004101d20c68$ce77b750$6b6725f0$@att.net> References: <010501d20c4b$de479780$9ad6c680$@att.net> <004101d20c68$ce77b750$6b6725f0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 1:12 PM, spike wrote: > If they get legal orders signed by his superiors, procedures developed by > the scientists, in detail, even with no explanation, but with explicit > orders to put this component somewhere safe, put this other component > somewhere else at least yakkity yak feet from this first component > As an engineer, you should know that this couldn't have been the case. The procedures weren't that detailed. There were lots of unanticipated corner cases (such as the "separate rooms but back to back with only plywood between them" that John mentioned) - and it could not be otherwise, because no one had yet thought through those cases. The procedures are never detailed enough, for anything truly new and recently developed, as in this case. (If there are detailed procedures, that's a good sign that whatever it is isn't that new.) So those following them needed to know the details so they could think through the corner cases they encountered. This is one of the headaches most professional engineers constantly face in their careers - at least, those working on new designs which aren't developed to the point that it could readily be automated. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 11 21:14:30 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 16:14:30 -0500 Subject: [ExI] diabetes In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: If our trust in doctors is so poor, why do we believe them when they tell us that the tests are OK and no health problems were highlighted. Surely we should treat an 'All clear' with just as much suspicion? bill k I agree completely and think I have the answer, which I posted a short time ago: the medical profession is conservative - first, do no harm. Next, follow standard practice unless you want a lot of law suits. My take is that legal problems, or the anticipation of them, are driving a lot of modern medicine. My wife was booted out of her physician's practice and put in a pain management clinic where they are treating her as a drug addict and are not 'managing' her pain. She is now in a practice that does not prescribe opiates at all: one million dollars a year in insurance if they do. So while being conservative has likely kept quacks out of the profession it also fails to adopt new technologies and drugs (often available in Germany, btw, or in clinical trials, if you can beg your way into one). The other problem is that they are afraid to admit that they have bought ideas that weren't fully tested and in effect have lied to the public about what works and what doesn't. They are being forced to accept that a low fat diet is a poor choice for the treatment of anything. So, Bill K, you are correct: a diagnosis of nothing wrong can kill you. If you have symptoms that they dismiss, get a second opinion and maybe a third. Plenty of people have died because of not getting these. Medical mistakes, according to one source (?) I read lately, kill 100,000 people a year, which includes those who got their illness while in the hospital, as mentioned earlier. bill w On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 3:08 PM, BillK wrote: > On 11 September 2016 at 20:43, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Please send to people you know with diabetes. Notice cachet of authors. > > > > Also please notice that yet another national organization (the other - > > American Heart Assoc.) is denying the latest research in favor of > options > > based on old and refuted science. Is a basic Atkins diet the answer to > > everything? > > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/11/opinion/sunday/before- > you-spend-26000-on-weight-loss-surgery-do-this.html?_r=0 > > > > > This diabetes and statins discussion makes me wonder why we bother to > consult doctors. > > If the doc diagnoses a problem and recommends a treatment our reaction > appears to be to immediately question both the diagnosis and the > treatment and start frantically googling to see what this week's > internet opinion is. > > If our trust in doctors is so poor, why do we believe them when they > tell us that the tests are OK and no health problems were highlighted. > Surely we should treat an 'All clear' with just as much suspicion? > > 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: From jasonresch at gmail.com Mon Sep 12 04:02:53 2016 From: jasonresch at gmail.com (Jason Resch) Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2016 23:02:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] statins In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: A 2013 study on dangers and inefficacy of statins: http://file.scirp.org/pdf/OJEMD_2013070813293534.pdf *ABSTRACT* Cardio-vascular specialists have witnessed and actively participated in the revolutionary developments that have occurred in their field of specialization over the last few years. Cutting-edge technologies have led to dramatic improvements in life-expectancy and quality of life. An open-mind and pioneering attitude are necessary when exploring new frontiers to improve our patients? health. However, na?ve indiscriminate acceptance of novel mainstream therapies is not always advisable and prudence is required in unearthing harmful, covert side effects. An objective review of contemporary vascular research was performed and industrial bias was sifted out for a fresh prospective on how to promote primary cardiovascular prevention with attainable lifestyle adjustments [1]. A comprehensive review of Pubmed, EMBASE and Cochrane review databases was undertaken for articles relating to cardiovascular primary prevention and statin side effects with the aim of harmonising their roles within contemporary clinic practice. Particular attention was paid to large-scale randomised controlled trials on contemporary cardiovascular pharmacotherapies and their specific adverse effects on metabolic pathways which feature prominently in cardiovascular primary prevention and regenerative programmes. *There is a categorical lack of clinical evidence to support the use of statin therapy in primary prevention. Not only is there a dearth of evidence for primary cardiovascular protection, there is ample evidence to show that statins actually augment cardiovascular risk in women, patients with Diabetes Mellitus and in the young. Furthermore statins are associated with triple the risk of coronary artery and aortic artery calcification.* Cardiovascular primary prevention and regeneration programmes, through life style changes and abstaining from tobacco use have enhanced clinical efficacy and quality of life over any pharmaceutical or other conventional intervention. (emphasis added) Jason On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 11:32 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > And there's a book by a physician that deals with nothing but the > cognitive decline he says is caused by statins. No, I am not on it or a > candidate for it. So I am neutral. > > bill w > > http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2016/09/05/doctors-deeply- > divided-over-the-value-of-statins/?utm_source=The+People%27s+Pharmacy+ > Newsletter&utm_campaign=04667e26ff-This-Week-Email+9% > 2F6%2F16&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7300006d3c-04667e26ff- > 214968749&ct=t(This_Week_9_6_16)&mc_cid=04667e26ff&mc_eid=b9c6f5005a > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjv2006 at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 02:43:52 2016 From: sjv2006 at gmail.com (Stephen Van Sickle) Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 19:43:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] uncle spike's history lesson: clinton laboratories In-Reply-To: <2e4092b4-08e2-bdca-617e-e4fdc4024561@aleph.se> References: <020e01d20bca$632c4270$2984c750$@att.net> <2e4092b4-08e2-bdca-617e-e4fdc4024561@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sep 11, 2016 00:22, "Anders" wrote: > > (I want to get a lump of cadmium to have in my office.) > Seems easy enough: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/CADMIUM-metal-Purity-99-99-bundle-285g-per-lot-/381709741366?hash=item58dfac6d36:g:kEkAAOSwQNRXML~A http://www.ebay.com/itm/122028207794 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 13 16:02:31 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:02:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] can you do this? i can't Message-ID: <00ba01d20dd8$3cf79040$b6e6b0c0$@att.net> Remember where these things were as recently as a year ago at the Robot Olympiad? https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/11/humanoid-robot-balances-on-one-foot/ Clearly they have managed to recruit some top notch controls guys. My hat is off to Boston Dynamics crowd. See that, Stanford? Boston is spanking your butts! You are up next. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 17:12:33 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 12:12:33 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption Message-ID: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/well/eat/how-the-sugar-industry-shifted-blame-to-fat.html?utm_source=pocket&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=pockethits&_r=0 It's all hitting the fan now. We know who will get the blame - read the article. But who will pay the price for it? Nobody, except those whole lives were lost or damaged by believing what physicians told them (who believed what their national organizations told them, who were paid off!). Less regulation on industry, you say? Get real. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 13 16:59:43 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 09:59:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold Message-ID: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> Team USA racked up a historical gold medal in the 42nd World Chess Olympiad today. Yet there is not a trace of mention of it in any of our news majors, nothing, nada. A tragically benighted people we are, primitive savages, red in tooth and claw. With nukes. Sigh. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 17:23:34 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 12:23:34 -0500 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold In-Reply-To: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> References: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:59 AM, spike wrote: > > > Team USA racked up a historical gold medal in the 42nd World Chess > Olympiad today. Yet there is not a trace of mention of it in any of our > news majors, nothing, nada. > > > > A tragically benighted people we are, primitive savages, red in tooth and > claw. With nukes. > > > > Sigh. > > > > spike > ?Yes, now after naming the members of the Supreme Court, the Speaker of the House, your reps in Congress, make a list of all the USA Nobel Prize winners, who get a page 3 for one day and then forgotten. Examine K-12 books for Nobel Prize winners. Name a best seller written about a Nobel Prize winner, name a song................... and so on. Andy Warhol was right about famous scientists. I think people are a bit afraid of scientists. bill w? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 13 17:40:25 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 10:40:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold In-Reply-To: References: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: <01b501d20de5$e99e1910$bcda4b30$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 10:24 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] usa takes gold On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:59 AM, spike > wrote: >>?Team USA racked up a historical gold medal in the 42nd World Chess Olympiad today. Yet there is not a trace of mention of it in any of our news majors, nothing, nada?A tragically benighted people we are, primitive savages, red in tooth and claw. With nukes?spike ?>? Name a best seller written about a Nobel Prize winner, name a song...and so on? bill w? Point taken, although I can from memory say that James Glieck wrote a fairly good book on Nobel laureate Richard Feynman. It wasn?t as good as Feynman?s own memoirs, but I would give that volume a solid B, possibly a B+. Chess doesn?t make great sports-drama and doesn?t lend itself well to product endorsement. There is no special pricy equipment needed to play, and now it doesn?t even sell books. This might help explain why it plays better in some places than others. It isn?t well suited to the capitalist west. I am astonished that we now have three guys in the world top 10. No one can figure out how they got so good way out here in the chess wilderness, but I have a theory: we are seeing the results of computer training. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 18:02:26 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 11:02:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> Message-ID: I try to understand the evolutionary psychology that lies under the politics. It's worth remembering how they sorted out the fraction of the population to be killed in Cambodia, they were the ones who wore glasses. Best wishes, Keith ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: The Economist News Desk Date: Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:15 AM Subject: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? To: Keith Henson The best of The Economist in the past 24 hours View in browser | E-mail a friend THE BEST OF THE ECONOMIST IN THE PAST 24 HOURS Daily Dispatch | Tuesday | September 13th 2016 Donald Trump?s supporters: Easy targets Hillary Clinton was criticised last week for saying that half of Mr Trump?s supporters belong in a ?basket of deplorables?. But how deplorable are they? YouGov places 58% of Trump fans in the top quartile for ?racial resentment?, an indirect proxy for racism. And 51.8% would support a constitutional amendment allowing states to ban gay marriage. But caution is needed before declaring Mrs Clinton?s claim vindicated, writes our data team Drug prices: A record high European governments control drug prices in various ways. In America firms charge exorbitant amounts simply because they can. American companies set whatever official price they like, and their biggest customer, Medicare, is required to buy their products but prohibited from negotiating the cost. It is unlikely that the system will change much, regardless of who becomes the next president, writes our consumer goods correspondent Advertisement China?s live-streamers: Watch it Live-streaming, or *zhibo*, is the latest internet craze to sweep China. Hundreds of millions look on as young women film themselves flirting, singing or dancing. But the connectivity that streamers enjoy unnerves officials, who have scolded hosts for vulgar language. Officials have also forced platforms to monitor and record content, ostensibly to prevent the broadcast of porn. More probably, the state wants to discourage political discussion Central Europe: Shadowy mediators Until September 2015, TV Prima, a Czech television station, had been presenting a mix of stories on the migrants. But then the station?s management brazenly overrode editorial staff to dictate the coverage, ordering journalists to portray the refugees as a danger. The tale is a window into how public opinion in central Europe is shaped by politicians, rich businessmen and the media groups they control, writes our central Europe correspondent *~6.10pm London* [image: US banner] Keep updated This e-mail has been sent to: hkeithhenson at gmail.com if you?d like to update your details please click here (you may need to log in). Questions? Comments? Please contact us . Replies to this email will not reach us. If you no longer wish to receive this newsletter, unsubscribe here . Copyright ? The Economist Group 2016. All rights reserved. Advertising Info | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Help Registered in England and Wales. No.236383 Registered office: 25 St James?s Street. London, SW1A 1HG -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjv2006 at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 20:00:56 2016 From: sjv2006 at gmail.com (Stephen Van Sickle) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:00:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold In-Reply-To: <01b501d20de5$e99e1910$bcda4b30$@att.net> References: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> <01b501d20de5$e99e1910$bcda4b30$@att.net> Message-ID: > > > ?>? Name a best seller written about a Nobel Prize winner, name a > song...and so on? bill w? > > > If you include autobiographical works: The Double Helix-James Watson Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman-Richard Feynman -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 13 19:58:30 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 12:58:30 -0700 Subject: [ExI] parallax on tabby's star tomorrow Message-ID: <023b01d20df9$33b25a30$9b170e90$@att.net> Cool, the Gaia data will be released tomorrow on a parallax measurement of the distance to Tabby's star. We have inferred its distance by its brightness, but if there was already something dimming the star by the time we started observing it a century ago, our estimates would be off (overestimated the distance.) If there is some unknown something that can cause a temporary brightening (can't imagine it but science discoveries are all about can't-imagine-it observations) we can know we underestimated the distance: https://disownedsky.blogspot.com/2016/08/the-gaia-data-release-and-tabbys-st ar.html This could be exciting stuff. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 20:43:51 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:43:51 -0500 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold In-Reply-To: References: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> <01b501d20de5$e99e1910$bcda4b30$@att.net> Message-ID: > > Name a best seller written about a Nobel Prize winner, name a song...and > so on? bill w? > > > If you include autobiographical works: The Double Helix-James Watson Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman-Richard Feynman ?Yes. Good. Now name one that wasn't written by the Nobelist. Point being that highly important people, as considered by the public, get many books written about them and sell very well. VIPs get on Facebook, Youtube, Twitter with virtually millions of followers. I think Spike is certainly vindicated: the public hears little and cares little about scientific people? and other geniuses playing games. bill w On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 3:00 PM, Stephen Van Sickle wrote: > >> ?>? Name a best seller written about a Nobel Prize winner, name a >> song...and so on? bill w? >> >> >> > > If you include autobiographical works: > > The Double Helix-James Watson > Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman-Richard Feynman > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 21:11:33 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:11:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> Message-ID: It was probably a mistake for Hillary to say half of Trump's supporters were deplorable, not because it was untrue but because it's rarely good politics to tell the truth, the voters will punish you for it if you do. Among Trump supporters 38% wish the south had won the Civil War, 20% think Abraham Lincoln should not have signed the emancipation proclamation freeing the slaves and another 20% aren't sure if it was a good idea or not. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 13 21:58:43 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 14:58:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> Message-ID: <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? It was probably a mistake for Hillary to say half of Trump's supporters were deplorable, not because it was untrue but because it's rarely good politics to tell the truth, the voters will punish you for it if you do. Among Trump supporters 38% wish the south had won the Civil War, 20% think Abraham Lincoln should not have signed the emancipation proclamation freeing the slaves and another 20% aren't sure if it was a good idea or not. John K Clark Ja, I have noticed how that basket of deplorables comment has taken a life of its own. I see how it was worded. But it vaguely feels like anyone who can identify with any of those characteristics are being tossed into that basket. One of those was those who feel the government has let us down. Well now. Our government damn sure has let us down. It has borrowed and spent all this money with no credible means of repaying it, borrowed and spent the forced retirement plan Social Security, never even came close to explaining how that will work or what will happen when that fund is out of money. Our head of the IRS is being impeached for systematic deception, we have aids to a major party pleading the fifth and we can?t even find one of them now, we have two secretaries of state who conspired to break the law, we have the most corrupt administration in American history. Ja, the government has damn sure let us down. So those who see it this way are asked to listen to a major party candidate spewing contempt on us, when she was one of the biggest players in that. So? not too surprising is the result. We have the Team Deplorable T-shirts, the counterpunch where Team Deplorable consists of those who demand honesty and accountability in government. It isn?t racist, homophobic, any of that vile stuff. Plenty of Team Deplorable are those who demand an honest and accountable government. Every day that uncovers yet more government sleaze (which is to say every day) is a day this team is considered more deplorable. This may result in a big change in the definition of the term. I will never use it the same way again. It is now too ambiguous. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 22:30:42 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 15:30:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 13, 2016 3:13 PM, "spike" wrote: > We have the Team Deplorable T-shirts, the counterpunch where Team Deplorable consists of those who demand honesty and accountability in government. It isn?t racist, homophobic, any of that vile stuff. Plenty of Team Deplorable are those who demand an honest and accountable government. And when lumped in with those are demands that Obama release his "true" Kenyan birth certificate, that Clinton come clean about coddling gays and Muslims who want to take over our government, and so on? Let those who demand honesty not associate themselves with the most demonstrably dishonest. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Tue Sep 13 23:12:19 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 19:12:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> Message-ID: Very well said, Spike. I could not have said explained it more eloquently myself. On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 5:58 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? > > > > It was probably a mistake for Hillary to say half of Trump's supporters > were deplorable, not because it was untrue but because it's rarely good > politics to tell the truth, the voters will punish you for it if you do. > Among Trump supporters 38% wish the south had won the Civil War, 20% think > Abraham Lincoln should not have signed the emancipation proclamation > freeing the slaves and another 20% aren't sure if it was a good idea or not. > > > > > > John K Clark > > > > > > > > Ja, I have noticed how that basket of deplorables comment has taken a life > of its own. I see how it was worded. But it vaguely feels like anyone who > can identify with any of those characteristics are being tossed into that > basket. One of those was those who feel the government has let us down. > Well now. Our government damn sure has let us down. It has borrowed and > spent all this money with no credible means of repaying it, borrowed and > spent the forced retirement plan Social Security, never even came close to > explaining how that will work or what will happen when that fund is out of > money. Our head of the IRS is being impeached for systematic deception, we > have aids to a major party pleading the fifth and we can?t even find one of > them now, we have two secretaries of state who conspired to break the law, > we have the most corrupt administration in American history. Ja, the > government has damn sure let us down. So those who see it this way are > asked to listen to a major party candidate spewing contempt on us, when she > was one of the biggest players in that. > > > > So? not too surprising is the result. We have the Team Deplorable > T-shirts, the counterpunch where Team Deplorable consists of those who > demand honesty and accountability in government. It isn?t racist, > homophobic, any of that vile stuff. Plenty of Team Deplorable are those > who demand an honest and accountable government. Every day that uncovers > yet more government sleaze (which is to say every day) is a day this team > is considered more deplorable. > > > > This may result in a big change in the definition of the term. I will > never use it the same way again. It is now too ambiguous. > > > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 13 23:10:12 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 16:10:12 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00aa01d20e13$fb8f5d90$f2ae18b0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? On Sep 13, 2016 3:13 PM, "spike" > wrote: >> ?Plenty of Team Deplorable are those who demand an honest and accountable government. spike >?And when lumped in with those are demands that Obama release his "true" Kenyan birth certificate, that Clinton come clean about coddling gays and Muslims who want to take over our government, and so on? Let those who demand honesty not associate themselves with the most demonstrably dishonest. Adrian Agreed. This is one of those situations where one candidate has already let us down, the other we have good reasons to think will let us down if elected. And yet we are told third parties are irrelevant. Sheesh. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 00:04:50 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:04:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 5:58 PM, spike wrote: > ?>? > I have noticed how that basket of deplorables comment has taken a life of > its own. I see how it was worded. But it vaguely feels like anyone who > can identify with any of those characteristics are being tossed into that > basket. > > ?In Trump's? ?latest attack ad he was kind enough to actually show the video where Hillary specifies exactly who she would put in that deplorable basket, people who were " racist, ? ? sexist, homophobic ? and? xenophobic ?", and then the ad ends with a grim sounding narrator saying over scary music, see SEE she's insulting people just like you. As for me, if somebody says racists sexists homophobics and xenophobs are deplorable I don't feel personally insulted because I don't identify with people like that, but Trump supporters do. > ?> ? > Our government damn sure has let us down. It has borrowed and spent all > this money with no credible means of repaying it, ?Just as we've done every year since 1835, except for the years when Hillary's husband was president. ? > ?> ? > we have the most corrupt administration in American history. ?Spike, not everything you hear on Fox news is true.? ? > ?> ? > we have two secretaries of state who conspired to break the law ?It's weird, both ? Nate Silver ? and the betting odds agree that there are now 2 bullets in the revolver we are all being forced to play Russian Roulette with, we're all facing an existential threat from a ignorant amoral unstable man who wants to command a nuclear arsenal, and yet all anybody wants to talk about is Hillary's stupid Email server and her unforgivable political error of actually telling the truth. ? ?If time travel into the past ever proves ? possible ? now is the time to keep a lookout for a time traveler ?from the future in a desperate mission to prevent the election of Donald J Trump. And I'm being dead serious, this man is dangerous. John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 14 00:09:48 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:09:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? In-Reply-To: References: <20160913131518.7612964.934885@sailthru.com> <005901d20e09$ff7e5690$fe7b03b0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00e801d20e1c$4f36cbb0$eda46310$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dylan Distasio Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 4:12 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Fwd: Just how deplorable are Trump supporters? >?Very well said, Spike. I could not have said explained it more eloquently myself? You are too kind sir. On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 5:58 PM, spike > wrote: >>?. Every day that uncovers yet more government sleaze (which is to say every day) is a day this team is considered more deplorable. spike Sheesh, as if on cue? today we find out that just as SecState Powell coached his successor on how to evade accountability by setting up private communications, we now learn that his successor apparently coached her successor on how to work through a charity do things other than what Secretaries of State are supposed to do. SecState John Kerry funneled taxpayer funds with non-competitive contracts to a charity which employed his own daughter. So much for eschewing the creation of the appearance of conflict of interest. Team Deplorable pleads: where does this end? So now we are asked to weigh the risks of a candidate we fear will do what he has already said he wants to do, vs the risk that the other candidate will somehow reform in her old age and not do the things she has been doing for some time. Deplorable. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 00:44:39 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:44:39 -0400 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold In-Reply-To: References: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 William Flynn Wallace wrote: > ?> ? > Name a best seller written about a Nobel Prize winner, name a song > Well, there's ? ?S? teppenwolf ?'s song "Born To Be ?Wild" which obviously is all about the Nobel winning physicists Max Born who discovered one of the key ideas in Quantum Mechanics the "Born Rule", and even more importantly was the grandfather of Olivia Newton John who sang the 80s hit "physical". ?John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sjv2006 at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 01:27:15 2016 From: sjv2006 at gmail.com (Stephen Van Sickle) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 18:27:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] usa takes gold In-Reply-To: References: <012401d20de0$3a5b8f00$af12ad00$@att.net> <01b501d20de5$e99e1910$bcda4b30$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 13, 2016 13:45, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > ?Yes. Good. Now name one that wasn't written by the Nobelist. A Beautiful Mind by Silvia Nasar- John Nash Einstein: His Life and Universe by William Isaacson - Albert Einstein -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 03:39:07 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 20:39:07 -0700 Subject: [ExI] can you do this? i can't In-Reply-To: <00ba01d20dd8$3cf79040$b6e6b0c0$@att.net> References: <00ba01d20dd8$3cf79040$b6e6b0c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:02 AM, spike wrote: > https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/11/humanoid-robot-balances-on-one-foot/ > Yeah, I used to do that all the time. (Swapping from foot to foot as I moved along the beam, though.) Good to see they're getting kinematics figured out for robots, though. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 14 04:55:04 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 21:55:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] can you do this? i can't In-Reply-To: References: <00ba01d20dd8$3cf79040$b6e6b0c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <016901d20e44$28eea860$7acbf920$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes Subject: Re: [ExI] can you do this? i can't On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 9:02 AM, spike > wrote: https://www.engadget.com/2016/09/11/humanoid-robot-balances-on-one-foot/ Yeah, I used to do that all the time. (Swapping from foot to foot as I moved along the beam, though.) Good to see they're getting kinematics figured out for robots, though. Adrian, I am in awe of this accomplishment. They are solving what I would have thought as nearly intractable controls problems steadily. What I thought of today is that it is almost like watching humans age in reverse. Many of us watched the Robot Olympiads in 2013, 2014, and this year, none of which was all that impressive, but clearly there was improvement. Then we saw that Boston Dynamics video of the biped walking through the woods. It kinda reminded me of an older guy walking, a little unsteady here and there. But this robot balancing reminded me of a younger guy, perhaps even a particularly nimble younger guy. So we have a clear goal, we have ever growing high school and college teams building these things, we have better and better instrumentation, computer languages, accelerometers, solid state gyros, a growing awareness of how all this stuff can work together. After watching this, I am more confident we will get to see in our lifetimes robots doing all the regular Olympic sports, the tumbling, the running, the pole vault (wouldn?t THAT be cool?) the various sports, don?t know about springboard diving or the swimming events. Skiing perhaps. We know there are inherent advantages to having robots in human form, so they can compete in human sports and use human-designed tools, keep us company, make conversation. I know it is a small thing, but just seeing the balance-on-one-foot bot encourages me that we will get to see practical sex bots, companion bots, all of it. This old world might turn into a much more pleasant place in which to be lonely. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 13:11:02 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:11:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Election information we need to think about...... In-Reply-To: <82451D0F-264F-4EFF-93CC-D24E28FD3C19@bellsouth.net> References: <82451D0F-264F-4EFF-93CC-D24E28FD3C19@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: Who says history isn't interesting? ? ? Only in the USA . Regardless of who wins the presidential election this November, we will witness history being made. If Hillary Clinton wins the U.S. presidential election, it will be the first time in history that two U.S. presidents have slept with each other! If Donald Trump wins the U.S. presidential election, it will be the first time in history that a billionaire moves into public housing vacated by a black family. Is this a great country or what? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nicoalcala at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 14:16:16 2016 From: nicoalcala at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?Tmljb2zDoXMgQWxjYWzDoQ==?=) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 07:16:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Election information we need to think about...... In-Reply-To: References: <82451D0F-264F-4EFF-93CC-D24E28FD3C19@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: The first statement is too much of an assumption... On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:11 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Who says history isn't interesting? > ? ? > Only in the USA . > > Regardless of who wins the presidential election this November, we will > witness history being made. > > If Hillary Clinton wins the U.S. presidential election, it will be > the first time in history that two U.S. presidents have slept with each > other! > > > If Donald Trump wins the U.S. presidential election, it will be the first > time in history that a billionaire moves into public housing vacated by a > black family. > > Is this a great country or what? > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- *Nicol?s Alcal? - *Storyhacker Extraordinaire * Nicolasalcala.com * * Futurelighthouse.com * * mobile:* +34616453784 * twitter: *@cosmonauta -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 14:25:10 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 10:25:10 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Fwd: Election information we need to think about...... In-Reply-To: References: <82451D0F-264F-4EFF-93CC-D24E28FD3C19@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Nicol?s Alcal? wrote: > The first statement is too much of an assumption... > > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 6:11 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> If Hillary Clinton wins the U.S. presidential election, it will be >> the first time in history that two U.S. presidents have slept with each >> other! >> >> Yeah, should be: If Hillary Clinton wins the U.S. presidential election, it will probably be the first time in history that two U.S. presidents have slept with each other. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 21:27:30 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 17:27:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server Message-ID: ? On September 7 North Korea set off a ? 10 kiloton ? nuclear bomb, by far its most powerful so far, but few noticed because they were more interested in the Email server Hillary had 5 years ago and the almost unprecedented occurrence of a politician ? telling the truth ? and saying half of Trump's supporters are deplorable. Most experts say North Korea now has the capacity to make about 6 bombs a year, and the only thing that prevents South Korea ? and ? Japan from developing their own nuclear weapons to counter that threat is the assurance ?the? USA will abide with the treaties it ? has ? signed and will not stand ideally by if ? the barbarians in ? North Korea ? invade. ? But Trump has made it clear he wants to renege on those promises ? and let them fend for themselves. Likewise Bulgaria, Croatia, Czechoslovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Germany ?, Hungary, Poland, Romania ? , ? ? Slovakia ? , ? Slovenia ? and Turkey ? are all terrified of Putin's Russia; they all have the capacity to develop H-bombs and the only reason they haven't is they're all NATO members and so is the USA which has by far the most powerful military in the world. But because he buttered him up with compliments ? Trump thinks Vladimir Putin ? is ?his? best friend ?,? so Trump says NATO is obsolete and the USA will get out of ?thw? ? organization which has kept the peace ?in Europe ? for 70 years when he becomes ??Commander I n ?Chief . Of course that means there would be far more potential flash points where World War 3 could start, but Trump has no problem with lots more countries having the Bomb; people say he's anti ?-? Muslim ? but he doesn't even care if the ? Imam ? s in Saudi Arabia get their hands on a H-bomb. But enough with trivialities like global thermonuclear war, ? Hillary ?'? s ? E-mail server is more important.? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 14 21:40:47 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 14:40:47 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server ? >?On September 7 North Korea set off a 10 kiloton nuclear bomb, by far its most powerful so far, but few noticed because they were more interested in the Email server Hillary had 5 years ago and the almost unprecedented occurrence? ?of Mrs. Clinton telling the truth, ja. And yet, after all this, we keep being told by our handlers that the two mainstream parties have permanent ownership of American government. Where in the constitution does it say we have only those two parties, even after one of them has already imploded, and the other one looks like it is going to if their candidate wins? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 22:16:55 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:16:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: Has anyone here, aside from me, read Bertrand Lemmencier's essay 'Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation or Monopoly?'? As one might guess, he argues in favor of proliferation as lowering the likelihood of war. One can imagine this working, but what about when proliferation reaches the subnational level? Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 14 22:12:22 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:12:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] don't know much biology... Message-ID: <008c01d20ed5$119cb030$34d61090$@att.net> .but I do know that this hasta be bad: http://abcnews.go.com/International/heavy-rains-eid-animal-sacrifices-create -rivers-blood/story?id=42086087 Epidemiology hipsters please: wouldn't this be a huge potential for. I don't even know what, but it sure looks bad to have all these people splashing around in bloody rainwater. Is there some kind of beast which could make it's living on this stuff? Flies? Some kind of pathogen? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 22:27:38 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:27:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . Message-ID: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.03505v1.pdf This is fairly good. Best wishes, Keith From ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 22:17:17 2016 From: ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com (Gina Miller) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:17:17 -0600 Subject: [ExI] My new nanotechnology infographic Message-ID: I just created a nanotechnology infographic which is attached. Enjoy! [image: Inline image 2] Gina "Nanogirl" Miller millermarketing.co nanoindustries.com nanogirl.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: NanoinfographicSML.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 913831 bytes Desc: not available URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 22:59:29 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 15:59:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 14, 2016 2:56 PM, "spike" wrote: > And yet, after all this, we keep being told by our handlers that the two mainstream parties have permanent ownership of American government. Where in the constitution does it say we have only those two parties, even after one of them has already imploded, and the other one looks like it is going to if their candidate wins? Are you volunteering to help guide one of the larger third parties through the things it must do in the off years - such as recruit Congressional candidates who will actually run, and enough that the party will be on the ballot a majority of districts in the US - to have a decent chance in the Presidential elections? Note that this requires caring in the off years. Is anyone willing, who has the ability to rally such a force? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 23:46:21 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 16:46:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > Has anyone here, aside from me, read Bertrand Lemmencier's essay 'Nuclear > Weapons: Proliferation or Monopoly?'? As one might guess, he argues in favor > of proliferation as lowering the likelihood of war. One can imagine this > working, but what about when proliferation reaches the subnational level? Luxembourg is next to go, And (who knows?) maybe Monaco. We'll try to stay serene and calm When Alabama gets the bomb. > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 14 23:56:55 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:56:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:40 PM, spike wrote: ? > > >> ?> ? >> On September 7 North Korea set off a 10 kiloton nuclear bomb, by far its >> most powerful so far, but few noticed because they were more interested in >> the Email server Hillary had 5 years ago > > > ?> ? > of Mrs. Clinton telling the truth, ja. > All politicians are liars, they have to be because voters will punish them if they tell the truth as Hillary discovered when she said half of Trump's supporters were disreputable. But not all politicians are ignorant thin skinned unstable megalomaniacs ?,? and no president in the nuclear age has been, but voters hate hearing the truth even more than they love life, they hate it so much they're willing to give a man like Donald Trump the power to incinerate them in a nuclear fireball. As of today Trump has a 37.1% chance of become the next Commander In Chief of the USA, and that's near his all time high and the highest its been in months. Momentum is clearly on Trump's side, I just wish it was on the side of the human species. ?> ? And yet, after all this, we keep being told by our handlers that the two mainstream parties have permanent ownership of American government. Where in the constitution does it say we have only those two parties ?In my opinion a pointless symbolic vote for a third party ?candidate who obviously has a 0% chance of winning does not resolve oneself of the responsibility of helping put a lunatic in the White House. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 00:45:48 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 20:45:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: > Tom Lehrer ?sang: > Luxembourg is next to go, > And (who knows?) maybe Monaco. > We'll try to stay serene and calm > When Alabama gets the bomb. But why stop with Alabama? Both flint lock pistols and nuclear bombs are arms and we all know what the Second Amendment says about arms. Every good old boy in the state of Alabama should have their own personal H-bomb installed in their pickup truck just in case somebody cuts them off in traffic; I'm surprised Trump hasn't ? already ? thought of this and put it in his platform. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 00:54:02 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:54:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] biology book - post humans Message-ID: Just finished The Gene, by Siddhartha Mukerjee. First 140 pages get to 1950. Includes CRISPR and a study from January 2016. Good discussion of ethics. Last chapter is named Post-Humans. Place it in my top ten. The last one, I Contain Multitudes, is top three all-time. BTW - I am sometimes reluctant to suggest a new topic being a newcomer, but this one is really relevant: If you are interested, please list your top ten nonfiction books of all time (or updates if the old one is dated). I will do mine if others will. The books above are on it. Of course I am selfishly looking for new books to read, but then so aren't you? Who better to ask? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 00:57:00 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:57:00 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: But why stop with Alabama? john Yes, why indeed? MS, TENN, LA, TX, even Fairfield OH, redneck capital of the North. bill w On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:45 PM, John Clark wrote: > > Tom Lehrer ?sang: >> > > > Luxembourg is next to go, >> And (who knows?) maybe Monaco. >> We'll try to stay serene and calm >> When Alabama gets the bomb. > > > But why stop with Alabama? Both flint lock pistols and nuclear bombs are > arms and we all know what the Second Amendment says about arms. Every good > old boy in the state of Alabama should have their own personal H-bomb > installed in their pickup truck just in case somebody cuts them off in > traffic; I'm surprised Trump hasn't > ? > already > ? > thought of this and put it in his platform. > > John K Clark > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 01:07:15 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 21:07:15 -0400 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 1:12 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Less regulation on industry, you say? Get real. > > ### Bill, you quote a situation where government officials and professional organizations enacted laws or propagandized on behalf of Harvard professors paid off by industry, and harmed millions of people in the whole world. And all you can do is suggest more government regulation of industry? Get real. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Thu Sep 15 00:42:55 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 20:42:55 -0400 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> We just need to learn to call it Boyajian's star; I agree with footnote 2. Just doing a mini-paper on the Kardashev scale, calculating the levels from fundamental physical constants. Very entertaining if you like dimensionless numbers to weird fractional powers (a K2 civilization has a power between (c^5/G) alpha_G^1/2 alpha^5/2 beta^1/4 and (c^5/G) alpha_G^1/2 alpha^-2 beta^-2 - anybody recognize what the c^5/G term is?). On 2016-09-14 18:27, Keith Henson wrote: > http://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.03505v1.pdf > > This is fairly good. > > Best wishes, > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 15 01:10:17 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 18:10:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] biology book - post humans In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <015b01d20eed$ec2ce950$c486bbf0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?BTW - I am sometimes reluctant to suggest a new topic being a newcomer? bill w BillW, on the contrary sir. Newcomers here are in a sense offer a most enlightening and relevant viewpoint in suggesting worthwhile reading. Reasoning: we old-timers already know each other well; many of us have been friends for over half our lives, even if we have never met in person. Most of us have already read the works that brought here to start with, the classics, such as Drexler?s Engines of Creation, Hofstadter?s GEB, the speculative fiction, all that hardcore stuff. The new kids on the block bring a much-needed fresh perspective. Suggest away, sir. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 15 01:24:50 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 18:24:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> Message-ID: <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> This is what is being reported today: 391.4 parsecs 1276 light years Parallax error: 0.307 mas Distance range: 349.4 to 444.8 parsecs Distance range: 1139.0 to 1450.0 light years This is puzzling indeed. Before this measurement, the distance was being reported as 454 pc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KIC_8462852 Now that estimate is above the high end of the parallax measurement. Help us John Clark and Anders wan Kenobi! That means Boyajian's star (I still prefer Tabby's star, but I will get over it) is closer than we thought, so there is more dimming than we thought, and the dimming by mere dust becomes less likely. Reasoning: if dust around Tabby caused the dimming, it would have more IR signature, ja? Cool! spike -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 5:43 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . We just need to learn to call it Boyajian's star; I agree with footnote 2. Just doing a mini-paper on the Kardashev scale, calculating the levels from fundamental physical constants. Very entertaining if you like dimensionless numbers to weird fractional powers (a K2 civilization has a power between (c^5/G) alpha_G^1/2 alpha^5/2 beta^1/4 and (c^5/G) alpha_G^1/2 alpha^-2 beta^-2 - anybody recognize what the c^5/G term is?). On 2016-09-14 18:27, Keith Henson wrote: > http://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.03505v1.pdf > > This is fairly good. > > Best wishes, > > Keith > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School 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 Thu Sep 15 01:46:31 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 18:46:31 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Closer tabby Message-ID: Way no, that would suggest a dimmer less obscured tabby which favors polar sunspot models ja? ?s Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE smartphone -------- Original message -------- From: William Flynn Wallace Date: 9/14/16 5:57 PM (GMT-08:00) To: ExI chat list Subject: [Bulk] Re: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server ? _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Thu Sep 15 03:06:57 2016 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 20:06:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] My new nanotechnology infographic,> Message-ID: Message-ID: <0f9407c5-cf6c-05e5-9bbc-57bd3fd6ef3b@mydruthers.com> > From: Gina Miller > Subject: [ExI] My new nanotechnology infographic > > I just created a nanotechnology infographic which is attached. Enjoy! Nice! Thanks for sending that. Chris -- All sensory cells [in all animals] have in common the presence of ... cilia [with a constant] structure. It provides a strong argument for common ancestry. The common ancestor ... was a spirochete bacterium. --Lynn Margulis (http://edge.org/q2005/q05_7.html#margulis) Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://www.pancrit.org http://mydruthers.com From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 04:44:50 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 21:44:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: Some years ago I wrote about how to get the cost of a bomb down to where a street gang could afford one. The story used to be up on http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2007/10/30/18253/301 It involved using flash powder and an elliptical reflector to set off a spherical implosion. But it's gone. Anyone hang on to a copy? Keith On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 5:45 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> Tom Lehrer sang: >> >> >> >> Luxembourg is next to go, >> And (who knows?) maybe Monaco. >> We'll try to stay serene and calm >> When Alabama gets the bomb. > > > But why stop with Alabama? Both flint lock pistols and nuclear bombs are > arms and we all know what the Second Amendment says about arms. Every good > old boy in the state of Alabama should have their own personal H-bomb > installed in their pickup truck just in case somebody cuts them off in > traffic; I'm surprised Trump hasn't > > already > > thought of this and put it in his platform. > > John K Clark > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From atymes at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 06:00:16 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 23:00:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] My new nanotechnology infographic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The center circle could've been better with pie slices scaled to demonstrate things, IMO, but overall nice job. Where will you be using it? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 13:46:12 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:46:12 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 1:12 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Less regulation on industry, you say? Get real. >> >> ### Bill, you quote a situation where government officials and > professional organizations enacted laws or propagandized on behalf of > Harvard professors paid off by industry, and harmed millions of people in > the whole world. > > And all you can do is suggest more government regulation of industry? > > Get real. > > Rafa? > > ?You are likely right about gov. fixing anything. The good things that have come out have been done by investigative journalists and whistle blowers. The big reward one of the latter got has to spur more of the same. As everyone here has noticed, the first thing a shaky gov. does is try to shut down the press - Venezuela, Turkey, lots more. Maybe our greatest freedom after free speech. bill w bill w? > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 15:55:46 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 11:55:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates Message-ID: I'm worried about the presidential debates that will happen in less than 2 weeks. I'm worried because Hillary has to be absolutely perfect while as long as Donald doesn't defecate on the stage he will be perceived as having exceeded expectations. Over the last few months Trump has committed dozens of gaffs, any one of which would have torpedoed Clinton or just about anybody else, but Trump is held to a far more forgiving standard than anybody else and I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's because he's such a rapid fire gaff machine that it's hard to concentrate on any one blunder, before you can think about the ridiculous thing he just said he says something even more ridiculous. And I have hard numbers to back up what I say. A recent poll found that 15% more people believed Trump was "more honest and trustworthy" than Hillary Clinton. And yet we know that people are just dead wrong about that, PolitiFact found that 56% of Hillary's statements were flat out true and another 15% were mostly true; but with Trump only 10% of his statements were flat out true and another 18% mostly true. And 46% of Trump's statements were not just false but "pants on fire" false, while only 6% of Hillary's were. If Trump makes a flub in the debate, or even if he makes 10, people will chuckle and say that's just Trump being Trump and decide to vote for him anyway, but if Hillary makes just one mistake, or just makes an uncomfortable statement even if it's true (especially if it's true actually) then her campaign is dead. And so are we. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 16:31:35 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 12:31:35 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: John- There are a confluence of factors at work here. The first one is that I think the majority of centrist democrats do not like their own candidate; she is lucky she is up against Trump or she would be abandoned by many of her own party's voters at this point. She comes off as a completely aloof, untrustworthy, cold candidate that is part of a dynasty that many are sick of hearing about. There are also now major questions about her health even within her own party after she got caught in the typical HRC lying pattern instead of just stepping up and letting the light shine in. Personally, I think Biden would have been better off running. I am not a Dem but would strongly consider voting for him in this election. The only way I might have swallowed the bitter pill of voting for HRC was if she was up against someone like Cruz, and it looked like he was going to win. There is also a large portion of the US population (that you gleefully are lumping into the basket) that is sick of business as usual around here, and would like to see the stranglehold of global elites broken. They are tired of Presidents like GWB, then Obama, and an endless series of bailouts, an endless war machine, and elites like everyone's favorite Palindrome who seek to use their wealth and power to drive their own agendas that also correspond to a decline in liberty. Trump has survived his gaffes despite an endless barrage from the mainstream media. A media which the DNC leaks revealed is clearly in the pocket of the DNC which has also appointed itself a party kingmaker. A media that endlessly bangs Hillary's drum and attempts without success to find something to throw at Trump that will stick. It is not for lack of trying that they have not succeeded. HRC is so despised by many that they are willing to take a chance on Trump for change. You clearly don't agree, but many of us think she is a perennial liar at the least, and something much more nefarious at the most. So, yes, I would expect the debates are going to go as you predicted as long as Trump can show the slightest restraint. I am also in the basket that does not believe he is going to start a nuclear conflagration as Cheeto-in-Chief. I would be a Johnson supporter if I thought he could actually win despite his disturbing Aleppo flub. I believe this republic will survive either candidate. That said, I am not going to willingly put HRC into office as I don't buy your odds on WW III. I am surprised you are not buying Pascal's wager on believing in a higher power when you are also proposing the same one to us with Trump. I have no love for Trump, but my disdain for HRC (who arguable should be in jail for what you consider a little email server issue amongst a host of other potential issues like pay for play) far exceeds any concern I have with him in office. That's without even getting into a policy discussion on the two of them. If that puts me in the basket, so be it. On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 11:55 AM, John Clark wrote: > I'm worried about the presidential debates that will happen in less than 2 > weeks. I'm worried because Hillary has to be absolutely perfect while as > long as Donald doesn't defecate on the stage he will be perceived as having > exceeded expectations. Over the last few months Trump has committed dozens > of gaffs, any one of which would have torpedoed Clinton or just about > anybody else, but Trump is held to a far more forgiving standard than > anybody else and I'm not sure why. Perhaps it's because he's such a rapid > fire gaff machine that it's hard to concentrate on any one blunder, before > you can think about the ridiculous thing he just said he says something > even more ridiculous. And I have hard numbers to back up what I say. > > A recent poll found that 15% more people believed Trump was "more honest > and trustworthy" than Hillary Clinton. And yet we know that people are just > dead wrong about that, PolitiFact found that 56% of Hillary's statements > were flat out true and another 15% were mostly true; but with Trump only > 10% of his statements were flat out true and another 18% mostly true. And > 46% of Trump's statements were not just false but "pants on fire" false, > while only 6% of Hillary's were. > > If Trump makes a flub in the debate, or even if he makes 10, people will > chuckle and say that's just Trump being Trump and decide to vote for him > anyway, but if Hillary makes just one mistake, or just makes an > uncomfortable statement even if it's true (especially if it's true > actually) then her campaign is dead. And so are we. > > John K Clark > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 15 16:34:42 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 09:34:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003701d20f6f$105702d0$31050870$@att.net> > Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] The Debates >?I'm worried about the presidential debates that will happen in less than 2 weeks? John K Clark No need to worry John, none of this is anything more than entertainment for the masses at this point. We have everything we really need to know. We have a former secretary of state who has just been caught in hacked email referring to the law of the land as ??frigging rules?? which is clear evidence of intent to evade and keep his communications private and unaccountable. This is clear evidence that he held the law, which he took an oath to uphold, in contempt. One does not put the adjective ?frigging? before anything one respects. We already know that this deplorable (original definition) SecState instructed his predecessor on evading the law which she took an oath to uphold. That predecessor took corruption to a whole new level, stunning in its utter contempt for the law of our land, the brazen disregard for ethics, legality and the American public. We already know about both of these candidates, their attitudes toward the little people (us) and their attitude towards our law (they think it doesn?t apply to them.) We already know that voting machines can be hacked, and that they probably already have been, yet we still have states refusing to give them up. This in spite of the opportunity to sell tickets for proles to smash them to flinders with sledge hammers, the way they used to do with Toyotas at the Detroit county fair in the early 70s. Hell I would give them a dollar for a whack at one of those. Understatement, I would buy enough tickets to help fund the printing of auditable paper ballots to replace the cursed devices. We know now that unknown hackers are creating chaos. We know that our own government officials played right into their hands by refusing to use encrypted dot gov accounts, and we know why: to cover up the yoga. Had they used dot gov accounts, the state business would stay secret, we would know who attacked the embassy and why (and it does make a difference) however? the yoga would all be accountable. Concentrated power is scary and leads to corruption, but unaccountable power is far more scary and leads to far greater corruption. I am greatly encouraged by what I am seeing: the light of day, shining brightly on the filthy corruption, putrid, detestible, deplorable (original definition) slime pit which may have been there all along, but now, we can CATCH IT and destroy it, with the bright shining ultraviolet light of the noonday sun! Come on, let?s listen to those debates, and treat them for what they really are: entertainment for the masses John. Whoever controls those machines will not be swayed by those debates. The participants will rip each other to shreds, destroy whatever tattered threads remain for the credibility of the office they seek and the parties who put them in this position to start with. I can end this canardic screed on a note of hope for both of us. An offlist poster and I (well, three different ones actually) have been discussing the problem of one untrustworthy person having the authority to launch nukes on a whim or in exchange for silence, or for any other reason besides response to an incoming attack. All of us independently came to a similar conclusion: the military isn?t stupid. People who make it into positions of high rank are not stupid and are not blindly obedient robots. We think there is some kind of system in place to prevent something like a senile president having a bad dream and nuking the commies, or a president having some kind of seizure and whacking the launch button on her desk. We aren?t told exactly the process to command launch, but it really just can?t be that easy. That?s more dangerous than not having the nukes at all. The military people have probably thought about this and have some fail-safes in place to protect the planet and deal with the kind of mess we have created. These safety switches will likely come into play soon, as we are likely to elect either a guy who apparently thinks nukes can be uses as tactical weapons or an alternative candidate whose corruption, dishonesty, greed, gross incompetence and dangerous ambition know no bounds. Once we make safe those nukes, the rest of this is just reality TV. I would like to see these two rip each other to shreds, then the voters retort with a hearty YOU?RE FIRED. This response is a plaintive cry of Americans for honest, ethical, transparent, law-abiding government. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 16:52:19 2016 From: ginakathleenmiller at gmail.com (Gina Miller) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 10:52:19 -0600 Subject: [ExI] My new nanotechnology infographic In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am redesigning my nanoindustries website and restructuring it as a nanotech media house so it will be there along with some others. -- Gina "Nanogirl" Miller millermarketing.co nanoindustries.com nanogirl.com On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Adrian Tymes wrote: > The center circle could've been better with pie slices scaled to > demonstrate things, IMO, but overall nice job. > > Where will you be using it? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Sep 14 23:38:45 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:38:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> Message-ID: <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> On 2016-09-14 18:16, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > Has anyone here, aside from me, read Bertrand Lemmencier's essay > 'Nuclear Weapons: Proliferation or Monopoly?'? As one might guess, he > argues in favor of proliferation as lowering the likelihood of war. > One can imagine this working, but what about when proliferation > reaches the subnational level? http://ejpp.eu/index.php/ejpp/article/viewFile/143/125 I took a glance, and was not super-impressed. There is a fun game-theoretic argument that things turn nice with many players, but this all assumes rational and error-free players. It also assumes attributability. It also seems to underestimate the number of possible conflict surfaces: among N players, there are N(N-1)/2 possible conflicts and if the probability of war between two players is p, then the probability of at least one war is P=1-(1-p)^(N(N-1)/2). If p is a function of N, to keep this probability below 1/2 p must decline as p(n)<1-exp(-2ln(2)/(N(N-1))) = O(N^-2). Right now N=9, so if there is one new nuclear state the p better become 23% safer or the new state will reduce global safety. The "more guns make society more polite" argument has never been very convincing with bombs. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Wed Sep 14 23:14:48 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 19:14:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] don't know much biology... In-Reply-To: <008c01d20ed5$119cb030$34d61090$@att.net> References: <008c01d20ed5$119cb030$34d61090$@att.net> Message-ID: Fresh blood is not unhygienic, just yucky (like many bodily fluids it should be sterile). But it is full of nutrients that will allow microorganisms to grow quickly if it is a warm environment. Mix it with mud and the present organisms will have a great feast - both pathogens and non-pathogens. Most microorganisms are easily destroyed by the immune system, since they lack the adaptations that make them survive in a human environment. In the Bangladesh case I suspect the blood is not much of an issue compared to bad sanitation: I would rather be splashed with blood-mixed water than sewage-mixed water, since the later will be full of organisms adapted to humans. So the damage is mostly aesthetic. On 2016-09-14 18:12, spike wrote: > > ?but I do know that this hasta be bad: > > http://abcnews.go.com/International/heavy-rains-eid-animal-sacrifices-create-rivers-blood/story?id=42086087 > > Epidemiology hipsters please: wouldn?t this be a huge potential for? I > don?t even know what, but it sure looks bad to have all these people > splashing around in bloody rainwater. Is there some kind of beast > which could make it?s living on this stuff? Flies? Some kind of > pathogen? > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 15 22:24:41 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 18:24:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 12:31 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: ?> ? > She comes off as a completely aloof, untrustworthy, cold candidate > ?So on the one side Trump thinks we should torture people for fun and order the army to murder children if the government ?doesn't like their father even though the military says they will mutiny if they do, and on the other side you don't like the gleam in Hillary's eye. And the gleam wins! The gleam is more important! I just don't get it. ?> ? > They are tired of Presidents like GWB, then Obama, > ?They're not tired of Obama, he has a 58% approval rating which is about as high as these things get for a 2 term president 4 months before his final term ends. > ?> ? > many of us think she is a perennial liar at the least, and something much > more nefarious at the most. > ?George Orwell called it "doublethink", Stephen Colbert called it "truthiness". An example : "i*t's true that 46% of Trump's statements are "pants on fire" level lies while only 6% of Hillary's comments reach that level of mendacity, but I prefer to believe that Trump is more honest and trustworthy than Clinton, so all I have to do is add a pinch of magical thinking and voila, Trump really is more honest and trustworthy than Hillary." * > ?> ? > I am also in the basket that does not believe he is going to start a > nuclear conflagration as Cheeto-in-Chief. > ? Why? You tell me how many countries in ? ? Asia ? ? will have the H-bomb 4 years after President Trump tells our former allies he will not help them if North Korea invades. You tell me how many countries in Eastern Europe will have nuclear arsenals 4 years after President Trump tells our former Nato allies he will not lift a finger to help them if his good buddy and business partner ? ? Vladimir Putin ? ? invades. You tell me what you expect if something like the Cuban Missile Crisis happens in the next 4 years and a man with the temperament and emotional stability ?of Donald Trump ? has his finger on the nuclear trigger .? ?A? nd you tell me how radioactive you expect to become. > ?> ? > I would be a Johnson supporter if I thought he could actually win despite > his disturbing Aleppo flub. > ?If you have a single libertarian bone in your body ?how on earth could you even consider voting for the most anti-free market president in a century who tried to organize a boycott to pressure Apple into putting a backdoor into all its products so the NSA could get in whenever it wants and see what you're doing, and thinks the law should punish women for having abortions? How is it libertarian to want to change the libel laws so it's the way it is in most countries and you can be put in jail for making fun of a public figure, a public figure such as President Trump? ?> ? > I have no love for Trump, but my disdain for HRC (who arguable should be > in jail for what you consider a little email server issue ?I'm not the only one who thinks the entire Email server business is ridiculously ? ?overblown, the REPUBLICAN FBI director does too. ?> ? > amongst a host of other potential issues like pay for play) far exceeds > any concern I have with him in office. So I guess it doesn't bother you that the ?Donald J ? Trump Foundation gave the Florida Attorney General a illegal $25,000 campaign contribution 4 days after she said she was considering a investigation of the Trump University scam, and then shortly after receiving the money decided ? ? they weren't going to investigate it after all ?. I guess it does bother you that the Clinton Foundation ? ?spends money on vaccine research but it doesn't bother you that the ? Donald J ? Trump Foundation ?spent $20,000 for a life sized oil painting of ? ?Donald J ? Trump ?. ? > ?> ? > I believe this republic will survive either candidate. > ?Fuck the republic ?, you're quite literally ?betting your life that Donald J Trump won't kill you in the next 4 years, and I think that's a suckers bet. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 00:08:54 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 17:08:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ? ?>?So on the one side Trump thinks we should torture people for fun and order the army to murder? Trump has never been in government and does not know what one cannot do. Clinton and Powell have been in government and do know what one cannot do; they did it anyway. >?I'm not the only one who thinks the entire Email server business is ridiculously ? ?overblown, the REPUBLICAN FBI director does too? John K Clark The FBI is part of the executive branch. The director chose to not refer the matter to a person who has been offered a job by the defendant, should the defendant beat the charges. The matter now goes to the legislative branch, which thinks the email server business is ridiculously underblown. That same legislative branch is finding the other examples of the executive branch disregarding their laws as ridiculously underblown as well. Stand by, this should get interesting. Regardless of how the betting is going we do not know how this will turn out. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 02:01:26 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 22:01:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 8:08 PM, spike wrote: ?> >> ?> ? >> So on the one side Trump thinks we should torture people for fun and >> order the army to murder >> ? ? >> children >> ? ? >> if the government doesn't like their father even though the military says >> they will mutiny if they do > > ?> ? > Trump has never been in government and does not know what one cannot do. > ?I would have thought a presidential candidate, or just somebody who was member of the human race, would know that murdering children and torturing for fun is something one shouldn't do. But Trump does not know this because Trump is inhuman, nevertheless you are willing to trust this creature with your life. I don't get it. > ?> ? > Clinton and Powell have been in government and do know what one cannot do; > they did it anyway. ?Failing to follow government guidelines concerning Email servers on the one side, and ?torturing people for fun and murdering children for their father's crimes on the other are both against the rules, so I guess they're both equally reprehensible. Or have I perhaps made an error in my moral calculus? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 02:09:45 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 22:09:45 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Anders wrote: > ?> ? > this all assumes rational and error-free players. ?And that is just about as far from a real life situation as it is possible to get. John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 02:26:19 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 19:26:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> Message-ID: <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?nevertheless you are willing to trust this creature with your life. I don't get it? I don?t trust Trump. He and Clinton are the reason why our government is built with checks and balances. ?> ?>?Clinton and Powell have been in government and do know what one cannot do; they did it anyway. ?>?Failing to follow government guidelines concerning Email servers on the one side? Government guidelines? Suggestions? No John. It is law, not guidelines or suggestions. Powell demonstrated he knew he was breaking the law, but he needed to do so in order to cover his affair with the Romanian bureaucrat. This intentional lawbreaking (not skirting guidelines or disregarding friendly suggestions, lawbreaking) resulted in a hacker creating all manner of chaos we are now seeing. This is the kind of thing which can result in blackmail. His instruction of his successor resulted in her lawbreaking, which resulted in the chaos we are seeing and the chaos we are yet to see. She had to do it however, because she had to cover up the yoga. We get that. She had to cover up whatever it was Stevens was doing in Benghazi. She couldn?t use the encrypted dot gov account that was actually set up for this sort of thing, because she would be accountable. That cannot be blotted out by the user, regardless of how much BleachBit is used. Powell had to cover the sexting, Mrs. Clinton had to cover the yoga. Both caused incalculable harm. Both cases, the law is not just a suggestion, it?s the law. It is there for a good reason; they had no immunity to it. Impeach the both of them. >? Or have I perhaps made an error in my moral calculus? John K Clark? John I think so, man. I am not excusing Trump for his craziness. If he gets elected, we need to watch every move he makes and have the Senate ready to go with impeachment at a moment?s notice, make sure he cannot do any of the illegal things he thinks he can command the military to do. We continue to watch him until he resigns out of boredom. Neither am I excusing Colin ?Frigging Rules? Powell or Hilliary ?What with a cloth? Clinton. Impeach both, then vote against Trump. Hear the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 04:58:51 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 00:58:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:26 PM, spike wrote: Mrs. Clinton > ### Many who agitate in Ms Clinton's favor actually hope that her presidency would involve Bill as the gray eminence making all the important calls. Bill is full of vim and vigor, if getting fuzzy on the details of his lies (Flu? Pneumonia? Same thing). To quote Gen. Powell, via hacked emails, Bill is "still dicking bimbos at home". As they say around these parts, some dogs you can't keep on the porch :) It made me laugh out loud. Imagine, Bill coming (heh) for a reunion with Mrs. Lewinsky, in the Oval Office! Except this time Hillary wouldn't just throw vases at him, she would tell the Secret Service to just shoot'm and dump the body in the Potomac. To quote Karl Marx, "History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce". -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 05:02:52 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 01:02:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:46 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > > As everyone here has noticed, the first thing a shaky gov. does is try to > shut down the press - Venezuela, Turkey, lots more. Maybe our greatest > freedom after free speech. > ### Amen to that. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Sep 16 02:22:28 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 22:22:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> Message-ID: <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> On 2016-09-15 22:09, John Clark wrote: > On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Anders >wrote: > > ?> ? > this all assumes rational and error-free players. > > > ?And that is just about as far from a real life situation as it is > possible to get. Nah. 70 years of no nuclear war gives apparent evidence that things are not too bad. Correcting for anthropic bias and including the numerous near misses still seems to lead to the conclusion that the system is not super-bad. On the other hand, it does suggest that a less conscientious or sane country very quickly could mess things up. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 13:53:24 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 08:53:24 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:02 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:46 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> As everyone here has noticed, the first thing a shaky gov. does is try to >> shut down the press - Venezuela, Turkey, lots more. Maybe our greatest >> freedom after free speech. >> > > ### Amen to that. > > Rafa? > ?George Washington is reputed to have said to Thomas Paine that he maybe had more to do with winning the war than the army did. bill w? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From csaucier at sovacs.com Fri Sep 16 13:40:36 2016 From: csaucier at sovacs.com (Christian Saucier) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:40:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. https://rsf.org/en/ranking C. On September 16, 2016 1:02:52 AM EDT, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: >On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:46 AM, William Flynn Wallace > >wrote: >> >> >> As everyone here has noticed, the first thing a shaky gov. does is >try to >> shut down the press - Venezuela, Turkey, lots more. Maybe our >greatest >> freedom after free speech. >> > >### Amen to that. > >Rafa? > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >_______________________________________________ >extropy-chat mailing list >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 14:10:48 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 07:10:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Christian Saucier Subject: Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. https://rsf.org/en/ranking C. Julian Assange?s mission was to bring the US Constitution?s first amendment to the world. He recently commented that the hardest place he has found to sell that notion was in the USA. On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:46 AM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: >? Maybe our greatest freedom after free speech. ### Amen to that. Rafa? >?Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity? Brevity is next to godliness. Assuming a highly abridged dictionary that knows the meaning of brevity. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 14:48:48 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:48:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> Message-ID: >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. https://rsf.org/en/ranking C. Well, if 40 countries have greater freedom than we do (highly doubtful) I think that's a great thing, I have heard no complaints from our press about their freedoms, with the exception of providing secrecy for their sources - with some journalists jailed - rare. So I think we cannot be much freer, but I have not looked into it. Group? bill w On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 9:10 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *Christian Saucier > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption > > > > >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. > > https://rsf.org/en/ranking > > C. > > > > Julian Assange?s mission was to bring the US Constitution?s first > amendment to the world. He recently commented that the hardest place he > has found to sell that notion was in the USA. > > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 9:46 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >? Maybe our greatest freedom after free speech. > > > > ### Amen to that. > > > > Rafa? > > > > > > > > >?Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity? > > > > > > Brevity is next to godliness. Assuming a highly abridged dictionary that > knows the meaning of brevity. > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 14:49:16 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 07:49:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> Message-ID: <47D81205-9E9D-46C9-A5EA-6DBD74F69714@gmail.com> On Sep 16, 2016, at 7:10 AM, spike wrote: > > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Christian Saucier > Subject: Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption > > >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. > > https://rsf.org/en/ranking > > C. > > Julian Assange?s mission was to bring the US Constitution?s first amendment to the world. He recently commented that the hardest place he has found to sell that notion was in the USA. > Another proof of how well the COTUS works, no? Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 15:00:34 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:00:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:26 PM, spike wrote: ?? > ?> ? > Powell demonstrated he knew he was breaking the law > > I knew I was breaking the law when I gave an account of a baseball game without the express written consent of Major League Baseball ?, and a pedaphyle ? ?knew he was breaking the law when he murdered a child. Do you see a moral equivalence there? ? > She couldn?t use the encrypted dot gov account that was actually set up > for this sort of thing, because she would be accountable. She could have set up a Gmail account using a phony name in about 45 seconds, but instead she instructed her ISIS friends to Email their sinister plans on how to destroy America to clintonemail.com. What is wrong with this picture? > ?> ? > I am not excusing Trump for his craziness. > > ? I don't think so Spike, if you vote for Johnson ?I think ? you are ? ? excusing Trump for his craziness ?, you are helping to give the keys to a Trident Nuclear Submarine to a madman. ? > ?> ? > Hear the footsteps. > ?Look at the mushroom clouds. John K Clark ? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 15:05:24 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:05:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:58 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: ?> ? > ### Many who agitate in Ms Clinton's favor actually hope that her > presidency would involve Bill as the gray eminence making all the important > calls. > ?That would be fine by me, Bill Clinton was the second best president in my lifetime after John Kennedy. Kennedy is in the #1 spot because of what he did for 13 days in October of 1962. John K Clark ? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 16:10:25 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:10:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> Message-ID: <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 7:49 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. https://rsf.org/en/ranking C. >?Well, if 40 countries have greater freedom than we do (highly doubtful) I think that's a great thing? Ja! But we have it explicitly ensured in our own constitution, so why aren?t we big number 1 on that? >?I have heard no complaints from our press about their freedoms? Indeed sir? Have you not heard of James Rosen and his run-ins with the Department of ?Justice?? >? So I think we cannot be much freer, but I have not looked into it. bill w Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 16:48:29 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:48:29 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> Message-ID: <019901d2103a$27ca1b70$775e5250$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] The Debates On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:26 PM, spike > wrote: ?? ?> ?>?Powell demonstrated he knew he was breaking the law? >?I knew I was breaking the law when I gave an account of a baseball game without the express written consent of Major League Baseball? I see, and did you ever take an oath of office to uphold the law? Neither did I. Neither did Trump. Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Powell did. >? Do you see a moral equivalence there? No, sure don?t. If you had taken an oath of office and defied the law, then you, Sec. Powell and Sec. Clinton should be impeached forthwith. >>? She couldn?t use the encrypted dot gov account that was actually set up for this sort of thing, because she would be accountable. >?She could have set up a Gmail account using a phony name in about 45 seconds, but instead she instructed her ISIS friends to Email their sinister plans on how to destroy America to clintonemail.com . What is wrong with this picture? What is wrong with this picture is that this account would fail to follow the law on retention of records in about 45 seconds, which is needed to comply with Freedom of Information Act in about 45 seconds. Note that it isn?t called Freedom of Information Suggestion, or Freedom of Information If Convenient. There is no ?please? or ?thank you? anywhere in that law, the term ?frigging? is nowhere to be found in that act. It?s the law. High office holders take an oath and sign agreements on that. They have no option to ?frigging? them away. It?s the law. Had Mrs. Clinton put the State Department on bcc on everything into auto-archive, every sneaky account, every communication from every electronic device accidently smashed to shards with a hammer, every email including the actual literal yoga (if there is any of that) then we would never have needed any of this huge taxpayer expense and utter chaos that has already happened, is happening, and is yet to come, chaos which threatens to destabilize a nuclear-enabled government. Had our own Secretary of State followed the law she took an oath to uphold, we would know who attacked the embassy and why; we would deal with the problem instead of blaming some hapless schmendrick who had nothing to do with it, resulting in the US government apologizing to the Middle East for something it did not do and cannot control. John do you need more things wrong with this picture? I have a list, but it is tedious. I am working towards brevity. ?> ?>?I am not excusing Trump for his craziness. >?I don't think so Spike, if you vote for Johnson I think ?you are excusing Trump for his craziness, you are helping to give the keys to a Trident Nuclear Submarine to a madman? Using that line of reasoning, voting for Johnson is excusing Mrs. Clinton for criminality and helping give the submarine keys to a lying criminal. The logic is strained, even disregarding the free states where we vote for whoever we want without risk of influencing who gets those keys. If the election is even close in California, New York or Texas, the other candidate has already won by a nearly historic landslide. Most of the US population is in free states. I have heard that a vote for Johnson is equivalent to a half a vote for Trump, but the same argument would hold it is also half a vote for Clinton. I rather think of it as a full vote against the both of them. ?> ?>?Hear the footsteps. ?>?Look at the mushroom clouds. John K Clark ? Note the previous time that argument was used, we got the Vietnam war out of the deal. Johnson doesn?t wish to nuke anyone. He is our best shot at securing those nukes. He seems like the type who would not only hand over the keys, but would read the constitution and argue this authority never should have been in the executive branch to start with. Hear the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 17:17:23 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 10:17:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 16, 2016, at 9:10 AM, spike wrote: > > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace > Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 7:49 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption > > > >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. > > https://rsf.org/en/ranking > > C. > > >?Well, if 40 countries have greater freedom than we do (highly doubtful) I think that's a great thing? > > Ja! But we have it explicitly ensured in our own constitution, so why aren?t we big number 1 on that? Recall, it was an amendment. And this should also lead you to question the efficacy of constitutions. > > >?I have heard no complaints from our press about their freedoms? > > Indeed sir? Have you not heard of James Rosen and his run-ins with the Department of ?Justice?? Not just him. The RSF site also lists other examples. The US government has a long history of talking freedom, but when it comes to actually respecting it there's a mixed record. And the respect is usually in the breach here. > >? So I think we cannot be much freer, but I have not looked into it. bill w > > Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. lol Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 17:47:01 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:47:01 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. spike Let's get our issue straight here. Take the Freedom of Information Act Lyndon Johnson signed. I see big problems with it re the press. If the public, including the press, cannot access gov. actions then what good is the freedom of the press? Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem: the Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on sensitive information by declaring it a secret (just researching secrecy would take all my time for weeks, likely). The press howled about the abuse but I never saw anything further about it (following such things is not exactly a hobby of mine, and some of you may know about it). Clearly, subsequent administrations of different political party, could reclassify such things as would embarrass former gov. officials, and maybe that has been done. What other freedoms is the press missing? What can we do about it? bill w On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > On Sep 16, 2016, at 9:10 AM, spike wrote: > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > ] *On Behalf Of *William Flynn > Wallace > *Sent:* Friday, September 16, 2016 7:49 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption > > > > > > >?So much for the United States supposed freedom of the press. > > https://rsf.org/en/ranking > > C. > > >?Well, if 40 countries have greater freedom than we do (highly doubtful) > I think that's a great thing? > > > > Ja! But we have it explicitly ensured in our own constitution, so why > aren?t we big number 1 on that? > > > Recall, it was an amendment. And this should also lead you to question the > efficacy of constitutions. > > > >?I have heard no complaints from our press about their freedoms? > > > > Indeed sir? Have you not heard of James Rosen and his run-ins with the > Department of ?Justice?? > > > Not just him. The RSF site also lists other examples. The US government > has a long history of talking freedom, but when it comes to actually > respecting it there's a mixed record. And the respect is usually in the > breach here. > > >? So I think we cannot be much freer, but I have not looked into it. bill > w > > > > Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. > > > lol > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 18:16:15 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:16:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <7FF62EDA-C858-4FF5-8594-41DE5273E87B@gmail.com> On Sep 16, 2016, at 10:47 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. > > spike > > Let's get our issue straight here. Take the Freedom of Information Act Lyndon Johnson signed. I see big problems with it re the press. If the public, including the press, cannot access gov. actions then what good is the freedom of the press? > > Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem: the Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on sensitive information by declaring it a secret (just researching secrecy would take all my time for weeks, likely). The press howled about the abuse but I never saw anything further about it (following such things is not exactly a hobby of mine, and some of you may know about it). > > Clearly, subsequent administrations of different political party, could reclassify such things as would embarrass former gov. officials, and maybe that has been done. > > What other freedoms is the press missing? What can we do about it? So you basically view everything in this area as fine, maybe with a few exceptions -- minor ones that can easily be seen as sort of accounting errors? Reporters being threatened, fined, or jailed is a tiny problem for freedom of the press? The fact that tv stations can lose their license is a minor matter, too, I guess. When one reporter is punished, what do think happens to the rest? Will they all be eager to go to court (you ever been to court? not a fun way to spend your day, is it?), pay a fine, or end up in a cage? Unlikely. It can have a chilling effect on others, especially when much of the public might side with the government. And government control of information -- not only classified stuff, but the press pooling* done with the first Persian Gulf War (under Bush the Elder) -- is nothing, right? It could be that RSF's evaluation method is questionable, that maybe the US doesn't rank as low as they believe. I like to believe some of this stuff overreports US malfeasance and underreports foreign ditto. That still wouldn't erase the very real issues -- issues actual libertarians should care about. Also, government classifying stuff as national security started long before Bush. It's a means of avoiding scrutiny. And this stuff goes on in similar fashion in other parts of government. I recall a municipal council meeting where the council went into 'executive session' to clear the public and reporter from the room. Who knows what they discussed, but the point seemed clear: they didn't want the public or the press to know about it. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst * The Pentagon learned one lesson from the Vietnam War: Don't give the press a free hand to report on a conflict or you lose the ability to shape the narrative. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 18:31:22 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:31:22 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Anders wrote: ?>>> ? >>> this all assumes rational and error-free players. >> >> > > ? >> ?>> ? >> And that is just about as far from a real life situation as it is >> possible to get. > > > ?> ? > Nah. 70 years of no nuclear war gives apparent evidence that things are > not too bad. > ?I admit there is some truth in that, if you had predicted the day after Nagasaki ?that as of 2016 ?no other nuclear bomb would have been used in anger I would have said you were crazy.? ?>? > Correcting for anthropic bias and including the numerous near misses still > seems to lead to the conclusion that the system is not super-bad. > ?T he system was also super lucky, ? ? the human race came very close to extinction in 1962. During the ?Cuban Missile Crisis all ? the president's advisers ? ? (except for his brother Robert) ?,? including all the military ones ?,? were urging the President not to wait and to take action immediately. Chief of the US Air Force, General Curtis LeMay (a VERY scary man) and the head of the Strategic Air Command Thomas Powers ? ? (even LeMay called him a sadist) told the president if we didn't order the missile sites in Cuba bombed within the hour it would be ? ? a blot on the honor of the USA ?. ? Kennedy asked LeMay what he thought the Soviets would do if he did that. LeMay said he understood how the soviets think and because such an attack would be bound to kill lots of Russians manning the site they couldn't let it pass, he said they would probably retaliate by bombing our ? ? medium range nuclear missiles in Turkey. Kennedy asked what we should do then, LeMay said such an attack would kill American soldiers and that would have to be avenged by bombing nuclear missile sites in the USSR itself. Kennedy asked what the Soviets would do then, LeMay said he hoped at that point cooler heads would prevail. Actually it was even worse than that. We now know from recently declassified USSR archives that the nuclear missiles in Cuba were fully operational in October 1962 and that the Russian field commanders were authorized to fire them on their own authority if it looked like the missiles were about to be ? ? destroyed or captured. The field commanders had the launch codes! Castro ? ? knew this, Kennedy did not. ? The USA thought incorrectly that the missiles were not yet operational and they never dreamed they could be fired without a direct order from Moscow. And the USA didn't know until decades after the crises that ?there were also 98 tactical nuclear weapons ?i?n Cuba ? that had no need for launch codes for them to be used: there were 80 nuclear-armed ?"Front" ? cruise missiles ?,? 12 nuclear warheads ?in Luna short-range rockets, and 6 nuclear bombs ?that any airplane could drop. ? If John Kennedy had done what the overwhelming consensus of his advisors said he should do, or if Kennedy had the temperament intelligence and emotional stability of Donald Trump then we would not be having this conversation right now. > ?> ? > On the other hand, it does suggest that a less conscientious or sane > country very quickly could mess things up. > ?If Trump wins then in 4 years there will be a dozen more nuclear armed nations in the world, a dozen times more chances that some world leader will make a mistake. And even if we survive the 4 disastrous years of a Trump administration and a sane president is elected after him the damage will be permanent, that nuclear proliferation bell can not be un-rung and we will just have to live, or die, in a far more dangerous world. ? ?And people still want to talk about Hillary's 5 year old E-mail server. I don't get it.? I honestly don't get it. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 18:50:06 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:50:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <7FF62EDA-C858-4FF5-8594-41DE5273E87B@gmail.com> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <7FF62EDA-C858-4FF5-8594-41DE5273E87B@gmail.com> Message-ID: All of what you said concerns me, especially the unnecessary sarcasm. bill w On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > On Sep 16, 2016, at 10:47 AM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > > Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. > > > > spike > > > Let's get our issue straight here. Take the Freedom of Information Act > Lyndon Johnson signed. I see big problems with it re the press. If the > public, including the press, cannot access gov. actions then what good is > the freedom of the press? > > > Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem: the > Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on > sensitive information by declaring it a secret (just researching secrecy > would take all my time for weeks, likely). The press howled about the > abuse but I never saw anything further about it (following such things is > not exactly a hobby of mine, and some of you may know about it). > > > Clearly, subsequent administrations of different political party, could > reclassify such things as would embarrass former gov. officials, and maybe > that has been done. > > > What other freedoms is the press missing? What can we do about it? > > > So you basically view everything in this area as fine, maybe with a few > exceptions -- minor ones that can easily be seen as sort of accounting > errors? Reporters being threatened, fined, or jailed is a tiny problem for > freedom of the press? The fact that tv stations can lose their license is a > minor matter, too, I guess. When one reporter is punished, what do think > happens to the rest? Will they all be eager to go to court (you ever been > to court? not a fun way to spend your day, is it?), pay a fine, or end up > in a cage? Unlikely. It can have a chilling effect on others, especially > when much of the public might side with the government. > > And government control of information -- not only classified stuff, but > the press pooling* done with the first Persian Gulf War (under Bush the > Elder) -- is nothing, right? > > It could be that RSF's evaluation method is questionable, that maybe the > US doesn't rank as low as they believe. I like to believe some of this > stuff overreports US malfeasance and underreports foreign ditto. That still > wouldn't erase the very real issues -- issues actual libertarians should > care about. > > Also, government classifying stuff as national security started long > before Bush. It's a means of avoiding scrutiny. And this stuff goes on in > similar fashion in other parts of government. I recall a municipal council > meeting where the council went into 'executive session' to clear the public > and reporter from the room. Who knows what they discussed, but the point > seemed clear: they didn't want the public or the press to know about it. > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > * The Pentagon learned one lesson from the Vietnam War: Don't give the > press a free hand to report on a conflict or you lose the ability to shape > the narrative. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 18:55:56 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:55:56 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <7FF62EDA-C858-4FF5-8594-41DE5273E87B@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1BBCCA69-69D1-44A1-88E8-5DE2A817D725@gmail.com> On Sep 16, 2016, at 11:50 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > All of what you said concerns me, especially the unnecessary sarcasm. bill w Unnecessary in your view, of course. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:00:48 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:00:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 16 September 2016 at 19:31, John Clark wrote: > > And people still want to talk about Hillary's 5 year old E-mail server. I > don't get it. I honestly don't get it. > If you *really* don't get it, then you are part of the problem. About half the population of USA have had their lives ruined by the present system and they are not going to stand for it any longer. They feel that their future looks so bleak that they want to destroy the political establishment. Voting for Trump is one way, and they don't care about the possible consequences. They *know* their prospects are terrible if the politicians just carry on 'business as usual'. If you live in a bubble where these deplorables don't exist or must be ignored, then you are in for a rude awakening. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:06:21 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:06:21 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <1BBCCA69-69D1-44A1-88E8-5DE2A817D725@gmail.com> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <7FF62EDA-C858-4FF5-8594-41DE5273E87B@gmail.com> <1BBCCA69-69D1-44A1-88E8-5DE2A817D725@gmail.com> Message-ID: All of what you said concerns me, especially the unnecessary sarcasm. bill w Unnecessary in your view, of course. Regards, Dan It also concerns me, as it did before, that a member of the list essentially ignores and is dismissive of being offensive to another member, even after being informed of the offense. bill w On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 1:55 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > On Sep 16, 2016, at 11:50 AM, William Flynn Wallace > wrote: > > All of what you said concerns me, especially the unnecessary sarcasm. > bill w > > > Unnecessary in your view, of course. > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:08:49 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:08:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: <019901d2103a$27ca1b70$775e5250$@att.net> References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> <019901d2103a$27ca1b70$775e5250$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:48 PM, spike wrote: > >> ?> ? >> ?She could have set up a Gmail account using a phony name in about 45 >> seconds, but instead she instructed her ISIS friends to Email their >> sinister plans on how to destroy America to clintonemail.com. What is >> wrong with this picture? > > > ?> ? > What is wrong with this picture is that this account would fail to follow > the law on retention of records in about 45 seconds, > ?My point was if she wanted to conduct nefarious business why on earth would she instruct her evil cronies to contact her at clintonemail.com ? rather than a Gmail acount under a phony name? It makes no sense! On the other hand if she set up a private E-mail server because it would be less hassle than going through the clumsy state department server it does make sense. Yes it turned out to be a bad idea but I can at least follow her line of reasoning, however if she did it to protect her illegal activities from the light of day it just makes no sense. That's the way I do it. W henever somebody puts in a bid for one of my black market H-bombs ? or ISIS wants to buy some of the human organs I have stockpiled from aborted fetuses? or one of my bitches wants to know which street corner she should work tonight they send ?all? correspondence to a Gmail account with a phony name, and NOT to johnkclarkmail.com. ? ?John K Clark? which is needed to comply with Freedom of Information Act in about 45 seconds. > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] The Debates > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:26 PM, spike wrote: > ?? > > ?> ?>?Powell demonstrated he knew he was breaking the law? > > > > >?I knew I was breaking the law when I gave an account of a baseball game > without the express written consent of Major League Baseball? > > > > I see, and did you ever take an oath of office to uphold the law? Neither > did I. Neither did Trump. Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Powell did. > > > > >? Do you see a moral equivalence there? > > > > No, sure don?t. If you had taken an oath of office and defied the law, > then you, Sec. Powell and Sec. Clinton should be impeached forthwith. > > > > >>? She couldn?t use the encrypted dot gov account that was actually set > up for this sort of thing, because she would be accountable. > > > > >?She could have set up a Gmail account using a phony name in about 45 > seconds, but instead she instructed her ISIS friends to Email their > sinister plans on how to destroy America to clintonemail.com. What is > wrong with this picture? > > > > What is wrong with this picture is that this account would fail to follow > the law on retention of records in about 45 seconds, which is needed to > comply with Freedom of Information Act in about 45 seconds. > > > > Note that it isn?t called Freedom of Information Suggestion, or Freedom of > Information If Convenient. There is no ?please? or ?thank you? anywhere in > that law, the term ?frigging? is nowhere to be found in that act. It?s the > law. High office holders take an oath and sign agreements on that. They > have no option to ?frigging? them away. It?s the law. > > > > Had Mrs. Clinton put the State Department on bcc on everything into > auto-archive, every sneaky account, every communication from every > electronic device accidently smashed to shards with a hammer, every email > including the actual literal yoga (if there is any of that) then we would > never have needed any of this huge taxpayer expense and utter chaos that > has already happened, is happening, and is yet to come, chaos which > threatens to destabilize a nuclear-enabled government. > > > > Had our own Secretary of State followed the law she took an oath to > uphold, we would know who attacked the embassy and why; we would deal with > the problem instead of blaming some hapless schmendrick who had nothing to > do with it, resulting in the US government apologizing to the Middle East > for something it did not do and cannot control. > > > > John do you need more things wrong with this picture? I have a list, but > it is tedious. I am working towards brevity. > > > > ?> ?>?I am not excusing Trump for his craziness. > > > > >?I don't think so Spike, if you vote for Johnson I think ?you are > excusing Trump for his craziness, you are helping to give the keys to a > Trident Nuclear Submarine to a madman? > > > > Using that line of reasoning, voting for Johnson is excusing Mrs. Clinton > for criminality and helping give the submarine keys to a lying criminal. > The logic is strained, even disregarding the free states where we vote for > whoever we want without risk of influencing who gets those keys. If the > election is even close in California, New York or Texas, the other > candidate has already won by a nearly historic landslide. Most of the US > population is in free states. > > > > I have heard that a vote for Johnson is equivalent to a half a vote for > Trump, but the same argument would hold it is also half a vote for > Clinton. I rather think of it as a full vote against the both of them. > > > > ?> ?>?Hear the footsteps. > > > > ?>?Look at the mushroom clouds. John K Clark ? > > > > Note the previous time that argument was used, we got the Vietnam war out > of the deal. > > > > Johnson doesn?t wish to nuke anyone. He is our best shot at securing > those nukes. He seems like the type who would not only hand over the keys, > but would read the constitution and argue this authority never should have > been in the executive branch to start with. > > > > Hear the footsteps. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:13:13 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:13:13 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sep 16, 2016, at 12:00 PM, BillK wrote: >> On 16 September 2016 at 19:31, John Clark wrote: >> >> >> And people still want to talk about Hillary's 5 year old E-mail server. I >> don't get it. I honestly don't get it. > > If you *really* don't get it, then you are part of the problem. > > About half the population of USA have had their lives ruined by the > present system and they are not going to stand for it any longer. They > feel that their future looks so bleak that they want to destroy the > political establishment. > Voting for Trump is one way, and they don't care about the possible > consequences. They *know* their prospects are terrible if the > politicians just carry on 'business as usual'. > > If you live in a bubble where these deplorables don't exist or must be > ignored, then you are in for a rude awakening. Sounds about right. I think the problem here is admitting there are, if you believe playing the election game matters, two really really bad choices this time around. (And two more bad choices.) Someone here seems to think it's one really really bad choice -- and I can't think of much worse than global nuclear war, though it's still probably unlikely and won't be a showstopper for humanity IMO -- and one so so choice. Instead of just admitting they're both really really bad, he's ignoring valid reasonable concerns others have. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Sep 16 19:01:25 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:01:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: <0d353c52-f068-3733-fdb7-bcaa3c4164b1@aleph.se> On 2016-09-16 14:31, John Clark wrote: > > Actually it was even worse than that. Actually, it was even worse than /that/. A bear could have destroyed the world. Here is some entries from my nuclear near miss document: 1962 August-Oct +++ Action U2 Flights into soviety airspace Accidental incursion of a U2 Oct 26 near the Chukotski Peninsula, Soviet MIG interceptors took off with orders to shoot down the plane. Trying to reach Alaska the plane ran out of fuel; IS F102-A fighters launched to escort him, armed with nuclear missiles and usable at the pilot?s own direcretion. http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962, October 24 + Alert Soviet satellite explodes ?On October 24, a Soviet satellite entered its own parking orbit, and shortly afterward exploded. Sir Bernard Lovell, director of the Jodrell Bank observatory wrote in 1968: "the explosion of a Russian spacecraft in orbit during the Cuban missile crisis... led the U.S. to believe that the USSR was launching a massive ICBM attack." The NORAD Command Post logs of the dates in question remain classified, possibly to conceal reaction to the event. Its occurrence is recorded, and U.S. space tracking stations were informed on October 31 of debris resulting from the breakup of "62 BETA IOTA."? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962 15?28 October +++ Tension, Alert, Action TheCuban missile crisis The crisis peaked on 27 October, when aU-2 was shot down over Cuba and another almost intercepted over Siberia, afterCurtis LeMay (USAir Force Chief of Staff ) had neglected to enforce Presidential orders to suspend all overflights, and a Soviet submarine nearly launched a nuclear-tipped torpedo in response to depth charges (with the launch being prevented by an officer namedVasili Arkhipov ). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_III JohnF.Kennedylaterestimatingthe oddsofwarduringtheCuban MissileCrisisatsomewherebetween ?one-in-threeandeven?(Sorenson, 1965:705). ?It wasn?t until January 1992 in a meeting chaired by Castro in Havana, Cuba that I learned 162 nuclear warheads, including 90 tactical warheads, were on the island at the time of this critical moment of the crisis. I couldn?t believe what I was hearing and Castro got very angry with me because I said: ?Mr President let?s stop this meeting. This is totally new to me. I?m not sure I got the translation right. Mr President I have three questions for you: Number 1 ? Did you know the nuclear warheads were there? Number 2 ? If you did, would you have recommended to Khrushchev in the face of a US attack that he used them. Number 3 ? If he had used them, what would have happened to Cuba?? He said: ?Number 1 ? I knew they were there. Number 2 ? I would not *have* recommended to Khrushchev; I *did* recommend to Khrushchev that they be used. Number 3 ? What would have happened to Cuba? It would have been totally destroyed.? ? McNamara, /The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara/, 2003. (Secretary of Defense during the Cuban Missile Crisis) ?We had to send a U-2 over to gain reconnaissance information on whether the Soviet missiles were becoming operational. We believed that if the U-2 was shot down that?the Cubans didn't have capabilities to shoot it down, the Soviets did?we believed if it was shot down, it would be shot down by a Soviet surface-to-air-missile unit, and that it would represent a decision by the Soviets to escalate the conflict. And therefore, before we sent the U-2 out, we agreed that if it was shot down we wouldn't meet, we'd simply attack. It was shot down on Friday. ... Fortunately, we changed our mind, we thought "Well, it might have been an accident, we won't attack.?? ? McNamara, 1964 interview (Secretary of Defense during the Cuban Missile Crisis) - The local Soviet commander in Cuba had the power to launch the tactical nuclear weapons without approval from Moscow 1962 October 25,: ++ Action Duluth incident http://mentalfloss.com/article/25685/7-close-calls-nuclear-age ?At around midnight on October 25, a guard at the Duluth Sector Direction Center saw a figure climbing the security fence. He shot at it, and activated the "sabotage alarm." This automatically set off sabotage alarms at all bases in the area. At Volk Field, Wisconsin, the alarm was wrongly wired, and the Klaxon sounded which ordered nuclear armed F?106A interceptors to take off. The pilots knew there would be no practice alert drills while DEFCON 3 was in force, and they believed World War III had started. Immediate communication with Duluth showed there was an error. By this time aircraft were starting down the runway. A car raced from command center and successfully signaled the aircraft to stop. The original intruder was a bear? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962 October 28 +++ Alert, Action? Okinawa Launch Order http://thebulletin.org/okinawa-missiles-october8826 ?- During the crisis, while at DEFCON 2, a launch order was accidentally sent to a missile base in Okinawa - All three parts of the coded order matched the codes the base had, signalling a launch of their nuclear weapons - These were 4 sites on the island, with 2 launch centres on each, which each had 4 1.1 megaton warheads - (making a total of 32 missiles) - The launch orders included targets in Russia and in other communist countries - The senior field officer who was also in charge of one of the sites, Capt William Bassett, took command of the situation. - He became suspicious that a launch order was given without DEFCON 1 being declared (which should be impossible). - Bassett?s crew suggested that the DEFCON 1 order may have been jammed and a launch officer at another site suggested a Soviet preemptive attack may be underway, giving no time to upgrade to DEFCON 1. - Bassett?s crew quickly calculated that a pre-emptive strike should have already hit them - Bassett order them to check the missiles? readiness and noticed that three of their targets were not in Russia, which seemed unlikely given the current crisis. A launch officer from another site phoned with a similar concern. - Bassett radioed to the Missile Operations Center to confirm the coded order but the same code was radioed back - Bassett was still suspicious, but a lieutenant in charge of another site all of whose targets were in the USSR argued that Bassett had no right to stop the launch given that the order was repeated - This other officer ordered the missiles at his site be launched. - Bassett ordered a launch officer to send two airmen through the 30m tunnel to the site where the missiles were being launched with orders to shoot the lieutenant if he continued with the launch without Bassett?s agreement or DEFCON 1 being declared. - John Bordne (the airman who leaked this account) realised that it was unusual for such an order to be given at the end of a routine weather report and for the major to repeat the order without stress in his voice. - Bassett agreed and telephoned the Missile Operations Center to either give the DEFCON 1 order or issue a stand down order. - A stand down order was quickly given and the danger was over. [This was reported in 2015 by a serviceman who saw the Bassett?s actions and phone call first hand, but has not yet been confirmed by the Air Force.] ? (Toby) 1962 October 26 + Action ICBM test launch ?At Vandenburg Air Force Base, California, there was a program of routine ICBM test flights. When DEFCON 3 was ordered all the ICBM's were fitted with nuclear warhead except one Titan missile that was scheduled for a test launch later that week. That one was launched for its test, without further orders from Washington, at 4a.m. on the 26th. It must be assumed that Russian observers were monitoring U.S. missile activities as closely as U.S. observers were monitoring Russian and Cuban activities. They would have known of the general changeover to nuclear warheads, but not that this was only a test launch.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962, October 26 + Alert Unanonounced Titan missile launch ?During the Cuba crisis, some radar warning stations that were under construction and near completion were brought into full operation as fast as possible. The planned overlap of coverage was thus not always available. A normal test launch of a Titan?II ICBM took place in the afternoon of October 26, from Florida to the South Pacific. It caused temporary concern at Moorestown Radar site until its course could be plotted and showed no predicted impact within the United States. It was not until after this event that the potential for a serious false alarm was realized, and orders were given that radar warning sites must be notified in advance of test launches, and the countdown be relayed to them.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962, October 26 ++ Malstrom Air force base ?When DEFCON 2 was declared on October 24, solid fuel Minuteman?1 missiles at Malmstrom Air Force Base were being prepared for full deployment. The work was accelerated to ready the missiles for operation, without waiting for the normal handover procedures and safety checks. When one silo and missile were ready on October 26 no armed guards were available to cover transport from the normal separate storage, so the launch enabling equipment and codes were all placed in the silo. It was thus physically possible for a single operator to launch a fully armed missile at a SIOP target. During the remaining period of the Crisis the several missiles at Malstrom were repeatedly put on and off alert as errors and defects were found and corrected. Fortunately no combination of errors caused or threatened an unauthorized launch, but in the extreme tension of the period the danger can be well imagined.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962, October 27 +++ U2 Shot down ?We had to send a U-2 over to gain reconnaissance information on whether the Soviet missiles were becoming operational. We believed that if the U-2 was shot down that?the Cubans didn't have capabilities to shoot it down, the Soviets did?we believed if it was shot down, it would be shot down by a Soviet surface-to-air-missile unit, and that it would represent a decision by the Soviets to escalate the conflict. And therefore, before we sent the U-2 out, we agreed that if it was shot down we wouldn't meet, we'd simply attack. It was shot down on Friday. ... Fortunately, we changed our mind, we thought "Well, it might have been an accident, we won't attack.?? ? McNamara, 1964 interview (Secretary of Defense during the Cuban Missile Crisis) Later it was discovered that Khrushchev had followed similar reasoning and had ordered his commander in Cuba not to shoot the planes. - The choice to shoot it down had been from a more junior Soviet commander acting on his own authority. 1962, October 27 +++ Submarine B-59 ?- During the crisis, a flotilla of four nuclear submarines were sent by the USSR to escort nuclear materials to Cuba - A group of blockading US ships detected submarine B-59 and tried to make it surface for identification by dropping low-explosive depth charges as warning shots. - The US ships did not know that as well as conventional weapons, the subs were armed with (tactical) nuclear torpedoes which could destroy many ships at once (15 kiloton warhead = Hiroshima) - Because it was deep underwater, trying to evade detection, submarine B-59 had been out of radio contact for days and did not know whether war had broken out - The commander, Captain Savitsky, believed the depth charges were of the usual high-explosive type and that war had already broken out. - He therefore wanted to use the nuclear torpedo against the aircraft carrier leading the US ships. - This required agreement from the political officer, which was granted. - Luckily, because this particular submarine was carrying the flotilla commander, Vasili Arkhipov, on board, it also required his agreement and he did not agree. - Arkhipov convinced the the commander to surface the submarine and await orders from Moscow [There is some disagreement about how serious the commander was in his order, with some suggestion that Arkhipov?s intervention wasn?t really required.] ? (Toby) 1962, October + NATO readiness ?It is recorded on October 22, that British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan and NATO Supreme Commander, General Lauris Norstad agreed not to put NATO on alert in order to avoid provocation of the U.S.S.R. When the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff ordered DEFCON 3 Norstad was authorized to use his discretion in complying. Norstad did not order a NATO alert. However, several NATO subordinate commanders did order alerts to DEFCON 3 or equivalent levels of readiness at bases in West Germany, Italy, Turkey, and United Kingdom. This seems largely due to the action of General Truman Landon, CINC U.S. Air Forces Europe, who had already started alert procedures on October 17 in anticipation of a serious crisis over Cuba.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962 October British alerts ?When the U.S. SAC went to DEFCON 2, on October 24, Bomber Command (the U.K.) was carrying out an unrelated readiness exercise. On October 26, Air Marshall Cross, CINC of Bomber Command, decided to prolong the exercise because of the Cuba crisis, and later increased the alert status of British nuclear forces, so that they could launch in 15 minutes. It seems likely that Soviet intelligence would perceive these moves as part of a coordinated plan in preparation for immediate war. They could not be expected to know that neither the British Minister of Defense nor Prime Minister Macmillian had authorized them.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962, October 28 + Alert Moorestown false alarm ?Just before 9 a.m., on October 28, the Moorestown, New Jersey, radar operators informed the national command post that a nuclear attack was under way. A test tape simulating a missile launch from Cuba was being run, and simultaneously a satellite came over the horizon. Operators became confused and reported by voice line to NORAD HQ that impact was expected 18 miles west of Tampa at 9:02 a.m. The whole of NORAD was reported, but before irrevocable action had taken place it was reported that no detonation had taken place at the predicted time, and Moorestown operators reported the reason for the false alarm.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962 October 28 + Alert False warning due to satellite ?At 5:26 p.m. on October 28, the Laredo radar warning site had just become operational. Operators misidentified a satellite in orbit as two possible missiles over Georgia and reported by voice line to NORAD HQ. NORAD was unable to identify that the warning came from the new station at Laredo and believed it to be from Moorestown, and therefore more reliable. Moorestown failed to intervene and contradict the false warning. By the time the CINC, NORAD had been informed, no impact had been reported and the warning was "given low credence."? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf 1962, November 2 + Penkovsky false warning ?In the fall of 1962, Colonel Oleg Penkovsky was working with the Soviets as a double agent for the (U.S.) C.I.A. He had been given a code by which to warn the CIA if he was convinced that a Soviet attack on the United States was imminent. He was to call twice, one minute apart, and only blow into the receiver. Further information was then to be left at a "dead drop" in Moscow. The pre?arranged code message was received by the CIA on November 2, 1962. It was known at the CIA that Penkovsky had been arrested on October 22. Penkovsky knew he was going to be executed. It is not known whether he had told the KGB the meaning of the code signal or only how it would be given, nor is it known exactly why or with what authorization the KGB staff used it. When another CIA agent checked the dead drop he was arrested.? http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/1025/20mishaps.pdf -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Sep 16 19:17:57 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:17:57 -0400 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> On 2016-09-14 21:24, spike wrote: > Help us John Clark and Anders wan Kenobi! Obi-Wan: [Pointing to a spot in the star hologram] This is where it ought to be, but it isn't. Gravity is pulling all the stars in this area inward to this spot. There should be a star here, but there isn't. Yoda: Most interesting. Gravity's silhouette remains, but the star and all its planets have disappeared. How can this be? OK, in this case we don't have gravity measurements - if we had microlensing things would be way clearer. And I doubt anybody has seen anything using the radial velocity method. > That means Boyajian's star (I still prefer Tabby's star, but I will get over > it) is closer than we thought, so there is more dimming than we thought, and > the dimming by mere dust becomes less likely. Reasoning: if dust around > Tabby caused the dimming, it would have more IR signature, ja? Yes. This is the strongest argument against a Dyson shell too - far too little IR. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:23:50 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:23:50 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:00 PM, BillK wrote: ?> ? > If you *really* don't get it, ?I promise you ?I **REALLY** don't get it. > ?> ? > then you are part of the problem. > Maybe but ?I couldn't say because I don't get it.? > ?> ? > Voting for Trump is one way, and they don't care about the possible > ? ? > consequences. ?It's not exactly that they don't care about the possible ? ? consequences ?, it's that they haven't given the consequences one second of thought. Or to say the same thing with slightly different language, Trump supporters are ?as dumb as a sack of rocks. > ?> ? > you are in for a rude awakening. > ?True, H-bombs are loud. John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:26:39 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:26:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sep 16, 2016, at 12:17 PM, Anders wrote: >> On 2016-09-14 21:24, spike wrote: >> Help us John Clark and Anders wan Kenobi! > > Obi-Wan: [Pointing to a spot in the star hologram] This is where it ought to be, but it isn't. Gravity is pulling all the stars in this area inward to this spot. There should be a star here, but there isn't. > Yoda: Most interesting. Gravity's silhouette remains, but the star and all its planets have disappeared. How can this be? > > OK, in this case we don't have gravity measurements - if we had microlensing things would be way clearer. And I doubt anybody has seen anything using the radial velocity method. Might it be possible to do some stuff with data-driven methods? I mean something like sample a lot of sky and then look for anomalous star positions from what the overall picture looks like, then do another pass on each one found. This could involve just positions alone -- not radial velocities. Someone's probably already thought of this or why it can't work. I'm sure it would give many false positives. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:34:38 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:34:38 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:17 PM, Anders wrote: > Yes. This is the strongest argument against a Dyson shell too - far too > little IR. However, it doesn't rule out alien megastructures. Thermal power satellites for some designs radiate waste heat solar north and south. If we are on the ecliptic, then we would not see the IR. It's not likely we found aliens. But it may be hard to come up with a naturally anisotropic IR radiation. Keith From interzone at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:38:51 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:38:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: John- I've found your outbursts on religion very similar to your ones attacking Trump and his supporters. Putting aside the fact that I find both of them very judgmental and incredibly intolerant, I remain curious why if you are asking us to believe that because you think there is a higher than usual probability of a catastrophic outcome (global thermonuclear war), you are not a buyer of Pascal's wager and going to church every Sunday as a result. What could be worse than an eternity of hellfire, a Donald Trump presidency?! Wouldn't you be better off believing on the slightest chance that the believers are right? You are making the same wager here on list with those who don't agree with your "reasoning" or your odds. On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:23 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:00 PM, BillK wrote: > > >> > >> ?> ? >> then you are part of the problem. >> > > Maybe but ?I couldn't say because I don't get it.? > > > >> ?> ? >> Voting for Trump is one way, and they don't care about the possible >> ? ? >> consequences. > > > ?It's not exactly that they > don't care about the possible > ? ? > consequences > ?, it's that they haven't given the consequences one second of thought. Or > to say the same thing with slightly different language, Trump supporters > are ?as dumb as a sack of rocks. > > >> >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:39:46 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:39:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > ?> ? > he's ignoring valid reasonable concerns others have. ?I'm not ignoring them I'm laughing at them.? ?When one tries to compare the horrors of a global thermonuclear ?war with the horrors of a bad Email server what can one do but laugh? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:40:40 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 12:40:40 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <7FF62EDA-C858-4FF5-8594-41DE5273E87B@gmail.com> <1BBCCA69-69D1-44A1-88E8-5DE2A817D725@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sep 16, 2016, at 12:06 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > >> All of what you said concerns me, especially the unnecessary sarcasm. bill w > > Unnecessary in your view, of course. > > Regards, > > Dan > > It also concerns me, as it did before, that a member of the list essentially > ignores and is dismissive of being offensive to another member, even after being informed of the offense. > Fair enough. Let me express that I'm offended every time you dismissively mentioned libertarians here, including your recent comment about it being hard to be a libertarian in a glib manner. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:58:19 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 15:58:19 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: I've found your outbursts on religion very similar to your ones attacking > Trump and his supporters. Putting aside the fact that I find both of them > very judgmental and incredibly intolerant, Judgmental ? certainly but intolerant? You have the right to say both God and Donald Trump are great, and I have the right to say you're a jackass for saying so. ? ?> ? > I remain curious why if you are asking us to believe that because you > think there is a higher than usual probability of a catastrophic outcome > (global thermonuclear war), you are not a buyer of Pascal's wager and going > to church every Sunday as a result. > ?I have no idea what the relation to Trump is but I don't buy into Pascal's wager because even if there is a God I can see absolutely no ? ?reason He would consider faith to be a virtue and not a vice. Perhaps God values logic and knows He did not provide nearly enough evidence for a logical person to conclude He exists, so disbelievers go to heaven and believers go to hell. Nor do I think it likely that an omnipotent being would be addicted to flattery, especially the insincere Sunday sort coming from puny beings like us. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 19:59:37 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:59:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 16 September 2016 at 20:17, Anders wrote: > OK, in this case we don't have gravity measurements - if we had microlensing > things would be way clearer. And I doubt anybody has seen anything using the > radial velocity method. > This blog post models an accretion disk to match the dimming. Quote: I have proposed a type of model that is mathematically simple and, with slight variations, is able to produce excellent fits for all the major brightness drops observed in Tabby's star. If this is the correct type of model ? its goodness of fit is highly encouraging ? the following hypotheses should be considered: 1) Tabby's star has one ore more partially constructed Niven Rings. All partial rings are likely in the same orbital plane and possibly the same orbit. 2) Tabby's star hosts a Dyson Swarm, and some objects in the swarm cluster alongside shared orbits, with an object distribution given by an approximation of a Monod equation. Perhaps the distribution is intentional in D800, and meant to be a beacon. 3) We might be looking at the birth of an accretion disk, or a partial accretion disk. Perhaps Tabby's star is being slowly swallowed by another star or a black hole. Perhaps there's a natural reason why disk material would approximate a Monod distribution, quite perfectly sometimes, and chaotically on different occasions. -------- BillK From interzone at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 20:14:26 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 16:14:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:58 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:38 PM, Dylan Distasio > wrote: > > >> Judgmental > ? certainly but intolerant? You have the right to say both God and Donald > Trump are great, and I have the right to say you're a jackass for saying > so. ? > The generally accepted definition of the word intolerance is "unwillingness to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own." For the record, I don't believe in God and don't think Trump is great, just wanted to get that off my chest. > > ?> ? >> I remain curious why if you are asking us to believe that because you >> think there is a higher than usual probability of a catastrophic outcome >> (global thermonuclear war), you are not a buyer of Pascal's wager and going >> to church every Sunday as a result. >> > > ?I have no idea what the relation to Trump is but I don't buy into > Pascal's wager because even if there is a God I can see absolutely no ? > > ?reason He would consider faith to be a virtue and not a vice. Perhaps God > values logic and knows He did not provide nearly enough evidence for a > logical person to conclude He exists, so disbelievers go to heaven and > believers go to hell. Nor do I think it likely that an omnipotent being > would be addicted to flattery, especially the insincere Sunday sort coming > from puny beings like us. > The relation in my feeble mind is that you are asking us to buy into the same wager, you're playing the Pascal role. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 20:19:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:19:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption >>?Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So do we. spike >?Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem: the Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on sensitive information by declaring it a secret ? bill w Ja, well done sir. The critical distinction is that for information to be declared secret, the classifying agencies need to have it on a dot gov secure server which is encrypted so the bad guys cannot get to it. Secret information cannot legally be passed around on unsecured servers because it is not reliably encrypted (if at all) and is not properly archived, in a format searchable from all accounts, sender and all recipients (has to be in all places, so they can verify the documents were not modified.) If you hear someone comment that the State Department?s server was hacked but the Clinton server was not, the person who made that comment doesn?t understand the State Department server capable of handling classified information has not been hacked and there is no reason to even attempt to hack it, since the information on that is encrypted. Their unclassified server was hacked, but that contains nothing that cannot be made public. When you hear someone say they sent or received this or that and they assumed (assumed? Indeed?) that it was being archived by the account of the sender or receiver, that isn?t good enough. The ?frigging rules? (the law) requires proper archiving on both (on all) ends. The frigging rules make that very clear. The ones briefed on the frigging rules sign under oath that they understand and will comply under penalty of law. If those frigging rules are flouted, the law is broken by someone who has sworn to uphold the law, which is an impeachable offense. If those frigging rules are followed, there is still concentrated power, but it is accountable power, which is the kind we grant to government. If those frigging rules are intentionally defeated (not that it has happened, recently) we have unaccountable concentrated power, which leads to yoga and subsequent profits from the yoga being funneled to Canadian charities and on to US charities for instance, and inestimable damage done to the victims of that yoga and our country. Those frigging rules are the law of our land. Our leaders are obligated to follow them. You are right: Colin ?Frigging Rules? Powell served under W, and committed impeachable offense, as he specified in his own words in the 23 Jan 2009 memo: http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000157-0719-d31b-a7df-e71dbfe80001 Is there a hint of impropriety there? So? impeach him. BillW well done, sir! spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 20:39:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:39:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Debates In-Reply-To: References: <004b01d20fae$838e4170$8aaac450$@att.net> <004f01d20fc1$b63420a0$229c61e0$@att.net> <019901d2103a$27ca1b70$775e5250$@att.net> Message-ID: <033601d2105a$61b3f390$251bdab0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ?>?My point was if she wanted to conduct nefarious business why on earth would she instruct her evil cronies to contact her at clintonemail.com ? So she would be able to control who had access to the records, rather than that clumsy US Government with all its frigging rules, also knowns as law. >? rather than a Gmail acount under a phony name? How do we know she didn?t? We don?t. Why? When this stuff can?t all be retrieved, the first question we ask is: What are you trying to hide? Followed by: OK prove it. Mrs. Clinton knew she went into that position under a dark billowing cloud of suspicion, so why did she do something that was sure to attract suspicion if found out? Why the BleachBit? Why the defying of the subpoenas? Why were the inspectors missing? Who did that? Why did she defy congressional orders and say things sure to provoke, such as: My personal email server will remain private! Why the insulting and shifting stories on motive? Why that insulting and dismissive ?What with a cloth? comment? By the time the NYT article in March 2015 told the whole world that Mrs. Clinton used a private server for State business and even that she had no legal way to send or receive digital State Department business for the whole time she served, she should have immediately handed over everything, stepped aside and invited the Feds in there to look through and verify that it was all just yoga. Easy, right? Problem: she couldn?t do that, because then they would find out the profits from those yoga routines were being funneled to ?charity? and that the consequences were catastrophic, and that we paid the price for that yoga, that we are still making payments on that yoga to this day, and will continue paying for that yoga into the future. Now the question before us is will we make it worse? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 16 20:47:42 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:47:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> Message-ID: <035801d2105b$9299ff80$b7cdfe80$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders > That means Boyajian's star (I still prefer Tabby's star, but I will > get over it) is closer than we thought, so there is more dimming than we > thought, and the dimming by mere dust becomes less likely. Reasoning: > if dust around Tabby caused the dimming, it would have more IR signature, ja? Yes. This is the strongest argument against a Dyson shell too - far too little IR. -- Dr Anders Sandberg _______________________________________________ Ja. But if we look deeper into an argument I discovered shortly after Robert Bradbury perished (oy vey over five years that man has been gone, yet I miss his demanding presence as if he left us yesterday) that a Dyson swarm might need to direct its energy for a perfectly well-understood reason: it would overheat otherwise. That Boyajian's star is closer than we thought argues for a more complete but entropy-hip Dyson swarm. Anders do you have buddies or contacts who are up to speed on this? Do feel free to post them this meme sir, and feel free to take ownership of the idea, same goes for the rest here: A Dyson swarm might neeeeeed to direct that energy in a low-ish entropy state; otherwise it would cook eventually in its own IR band waste heat. But by my calcs, it could do that and still extract pleeeeenty of energy to do what Dyson swarms do best: think. Post it forward: the new Tabby's Star Gaia results support a directed-energy Dyson Swarm. Go Anders! You have the science contacts and creds, I don't. Go Anders! Davai Davai Davai! spike From natasha at natasha.cc Fri Sep 16 20:54:25 2016 From: natasha at natasha.cc (Natasha Vita-More) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:54:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ANNOUNCEMENT: Transhuman National Committee - Conference Oct 22 - San Francisco Message-ID: <00ea01d2105c$823fca60$86bf5f20$@natasha.cc> Greetings! TNC Fundraising Event Oct 22nd San Francisco - Extreme Futures Technology and Forecasting Conference Partnership The TNC (Transhuman National Committee) is doing its initial fund raising through a partnership with EFTF (Extreme Futures Technology and Forecasting Conference) coming to San Francisco on Saturday Oct 22nd. Proceeds from the event will help fund an office in DC and formal 527 Organization of the PAC to move a transhumanist agenda. David (TNC Chairmen) says: "Getting a formal PAC in DC getting politicians to be at least aware of the Transhumanist Movement and our Agenda politically is the first step in a better future for humanity." * Tickets are available now! Donate or register as a TNC founding member here: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/extreme-futures-and-technology-forecasting-conf erence-fall-2016-tickets-26857481450 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 22:21:54 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 17:21:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> Message-ID: Is there a hint of impropriety there? So? impeach him. BillW well done, sir! spike A problem that occurs at every level: "I am now a big and important person and don't have to obey the rules." This may occur in a person who is in charge of a team of janitors or a team of generals. Maybe it can't be helped but when they go very far they need to be slapped down. No one at any level can be trusted to do any job without scrutiny. Egotism and selfishness are part of all of us; we are fond of oneupmanship and schadenfreude. We are also a race of thieves. Going into executive session because the issue is personal is excusable, but is routinely abused just to hide something or somebody. No system is perfect. If I were in charge of something, a department or company and a person who was a whistleblower elsewhere applied for a job, I'd hire them right away and ask for more. I'd want to know the problems in my area. ---------------------------------- When I joined this group I noticed right away that flaming was absent; that discussions were on a high level. If I had seen sarky, snarky, posts full of ad hominem arguments, I would have left asap. So - discussions and disputes are carried on by gentlemen. I hope it stays that way. I am a libertarian liberal and proud of it. If I have offended anyone in any way, all they need to do is inform me and I will apologize forthwith and avoid the offending content in the future. It doesn't matter to me if the offense is unintentional or inadvertent; offense has occurred and needs to be fixed. It doesn't even matter if I think they are just being silly and should not be offended. Just let me know. bill w On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:19 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption > > > > >>?Well BillW, you know the cure for having not looked into it, ja? So > do we. > > > > spike > > > > > > >?Again, I have not looked into it in detail, but here is a problem: the > Bush administration, as have numerous others, I suppose, put the lid on > sensitive information by declaring it a secret ? bill w > > > > > > Ja, well done sir. The critical distinction is that for information to be > declared secret, the classifying agencies need to have it on a dot gov > secure server which is encrypted so the bad guys cannot get to it. Secret > information cannot legally be passed around on unsecured servers because it > is not reliably encrypted (if at all) and is not properly archived, in a > format searchable from all accounts, sender and all recipients (has to be > in all places, so they can verify the documents were not modified.) > > > > If you hear someone comment that the State Department?s server was hacked > but the Clinton server was not, the person who made that comment doesn?t > understand the State Department server capable of handling classified > information has not been hacked and there is no reason to even attempt to > hack it, since the information on that is encrypted. Their unclassified > server was hacked, but that contains nothing that cannot be made public. > > > > When you hear someone say they sent or received this or that and they > assumed (assumed? Indeed?) that it was being archived by the account of > the sender or receiver, that isn?t good enough. The ?frigging rules? (the > law) requires proper archiving on both (on all) ends. The frigging rules > make that very clear. The ones briefed on the frigging rules sign under > oath that they understand and will comply under penalty of law. > > > > If those frigging rules are flouted, the law is broken by someone who has > sworn to uphold the law, which is an impeachable offense. > > > > If those frigging rules are followed, there is still concentrated power, > but it is accountable power, which is the kind we grant to government. > > > > If those frigging rules are intentionally defeated (not that it has > happened, recently) we have unaccountable concentrated power, which leads > to yoga and subsequent profits from the yoga being funneled to Canadian > charities and on to US charities for instance, and inestimable damage done > to the victims of that yoga and our country. > > > > Those frigging rules are the law of our land. Our leaders are obligated > to follow them. > > > > You are right: Colin ?Frigging Rules? Powell served under W, and committed > impeachable offense, as he specified in his own words in the 23 Jan 2009 > memo: > > > > http://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000157-0719-d31b-a7df-e71dbfe80001 > > > > Is there a hint of impropriety there? > > > > So? impeach him. > > > > BillW well done, sir! > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 22:38:51 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:38:51 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: ?> ? > The generally accepted definition of the word intolerance is "unwillingness > to accept views, beliefs, or behavior that differ from one's own." > ?That is the stupidest definition I have ever heard! Person X tells me they believe Trump is great and so not being an intolerant person I accept the Trump is great, then person Y tells me they believe Trump is not great and so not being an intolerant person I accept the Trump is not great. According to you "tolerance" would be a synonym for "doublethink". You have the right to have any view you like, but you don't have the right to make me respect them. And I don't respect the idea that Donald Trump would make a good president. I have contempt for that idea because it is brain dead dumb. > ?>> ? >> ?I have no idea what the relation to Trump is but I don't buy into >> Pascal's wager because even if there is a God I can see absolutely no ? >> >> ?reason He would consider faith to be a virtue and not a vice. Perhaps >> God values logic and knows He did not provide nearly enough evidence for a >> logical person to conclude He exists, so disbelievers go to heaven and >> believers go to hell. Nor do I think it likely that an omnipotent being >> would be addicted to flattery, especially the insincere Sunday sort coming >> from puny beings like us. >> > > ?> ? > The relation in my feeble mind is that you are asking us to buy into the > same wager, you're playing the Pascal role. > ?What the hell are you talking about?? ?John K Clark? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 23:20:30 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 19:20:30 -0400 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> Message-ID: ?O? n Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:59 PM, BillK wrote: 1) Tabby's star has one or more partially constructed Niven Rings. > ?But what are those ? Niven Rings ? made of?? Yes I know u nobtainium ? but the trouble is the only thing that would have sufficient tensile strength to build such a ring would be the degenerate matter that make up Neutron Stars, and there would be 2 problems with using that: 1) A lump the size of a sugar cube would weigh as much as all 7.1 billion people alive today on planet Earth ?put together. 2) It's only stable in a gravitational field 200 billion times as strong as Earth's, at 1g a Niven Ring would produce an explosion that could be seen from anywhere in the observable universe without a telescope or even binoculars. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 16 23:49:44 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:49:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] judicial silliness of today Message-ID: http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/09/16/arizona_child_sexual_abuse_law_guts_due_process_for_parents_and_caregivers.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat Sep 17 00:18:11 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 20:18:11 -0400 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> Message-ID: On 2016-09-16 19:20, John Clark wrote: > > ?O? > n Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:59 PM, BillK > wrote: > > 1) Tabby's star has one or more partially constructed Niven Rings. > > > ?But what are those ? > Niven Rings > ? made of?? Yes I know u > nobtainium > ? but the trouble is the only thing that would have sufficient tensile > strength to build such a ring would be the degenerate matter that make > up Neutron Stars, and there would be 2 problems with using that: Neutronium may also be be a superfluid (strictly speaking it is different from degenerate matter, which can be solid). The always amusing A.A. Bolonkin has some calculations on nuclear density composites: http://docsdrive.com/pdfs/sciencepublications/ajeassp/2009/501-514.pdf He estimates a tensile Young's modulus of 1.6*10^32 N/m^2. If one could make his composite some serious megascale engineering becomes possible. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 01:03:57 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 18:03:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> Message-ID: <042b01d2107f$5efe49a0$1cfadce0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?A problem that occurs at every level: "I am now a big and important person and don't have to obey the rules." That?s why we have inspectors watching everything. There is a good chance either of these mainstream candidates? administrations will have already failed before they even take the oath of office. They are accustomed to a bit of leeway to do whatever they want. Either will go in under clouds of suspicion. It will hang on them like hair on a Tibetan yak. We will watch every move, remind Trump every day of the things he has said and Mrs. Clinton of the things she has done. This might be the most powerless presidential administration in American history. There might be a downside to that somewhere, but I haven?t yet figured out what it is. >? No one at any level can be trusted to do any job without scrutiny? Truer words are seldom spoken BillW. Where were the Inspectors General during Mrs. Clinton?s tenure at State? How did he or she miss all the wrongdoing? Oh wait, here we go: http://www.wsj.com/articles/state-department-lacked-top-watchdog-during-hillary-clinton-tenure-1427239813 Inspectors are not there to bother people or get in their way; they are there to protect them from breaking the law. It appears Mrs. Clinton intentionally dismissed or otherwise arranged to have no oversight during her term. Walking the tightrope without a net. She fell off. It has been argued that with excessive oversight, the government cannot get anything done. This is almost right. With proper oversight, the government cannot get anything done illegally. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Sat Sep 17 06:02:35 2016 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:02:35 +0200 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> Message-ID: I like WTF, perhaps we should immortalize it in music: Twinkle twinkle f## star, How I wonder what you are... On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Anders wrote: > We just need to learn to call it Boyajian's star; I agree with footnote 2. > > > Just doing a mini-paper on the Kardashev scale, calculating the levels from > fundamental physical constants. Very entertaining if you like dimensionless > numbers to weird fractional powers (a K2 civilization has a power between > (c^5/G) alpha_G^1/2 alpha^5/2 beta^1/4 and (c^5/G) alpha_G^1/2 alpha^-2 > beta^-2 - anybody recognize what the c^5/G term is?). > > > > On 2016-09-14 18:27, Keith Henson wrote: >> >> http://arxiv.org/pdf/1609.03505v1.pdf >> >> This is fairly good. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Keith >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 17 14:56:18 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 09:56:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <042b01d2107f$5efe49a0$1cfadce0$@att.net> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> <042b01d2107f$5efe49a0$1cfadce0$@att.net> Message-ID: It has been argued that with excessive oversight, the government cannot get anything done. This is almost right. With proper oversight, the government cannot get anything done illegally. spike Excessive, by definition, is too much. It makes me wonder such things as : what was so important about the Democrats paperwork that the Repubs set up a burglary at the Watergate? Just knowing campaign strategy is worth a felony? What they don't want us to know is the deals, the quid pro quo. Who won the deal and who lost. Remember the saying about law and sausage. Hillary may be as big a narcissist as the Donald. spike On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 8:03 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > > > > >?A problem that occurs at every level: "I am now a big and important > person and don't have to obey the rules." > > > > That?s why we have inspectors watching everything. > > > > There is a good chance either of these mainstream candidates? > administrations will have already failed before they even take the oath of > office. They are accustomed to a bit of leeway to do whatever they want. > Either will go in under clouds of suspicion. It will hang on them like > hair on a Tibetan yak. We will watch every move, remind Trump every day of > the things he has said and Mrs. Clinton of the things she has done. This > might be the most powerless presidential administration in American > history. There might be a downside to that somewhere, but I haven?t yet > figured out what it is. > > > > >? No one at any level can be trusted to do any job without scrutiny? > > > > Truer words are seldom spoken BillW. > > > > Where were the Inspectors General during Mrs. Clinton?s tenure at State? > How did he or she miss all the wrongdoing? Oh wait, here we go: > > > > http://www.wsj.com/articles/state-department-lacked-top- > watchdog-during-hillary-clinton-tenure-1427239813 > > > > Inspectors are not there to bother people or get in their way; they are > there to protect them from breaking the law. It appears Mrs. Clinton > intentionally dismissed or otherwise arranged to have no oversight during > her term. Walking the tightrope without a net. She fell off. > > > > It has been argued that with excessive oversight, the government cannot > get anything done. This is almost right. With proper oversight, the > government cannot get anything done illegally. > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 15:24:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:24:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> <042b01d2107f$5efe49a0$1cfadce0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00f401d210f7$95538150$bffa83f0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 7:56 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption It has been argued that with excessive oversight, the government cannot get anything done. This is almost right. With proper oversight, the government cannot get anything done illegally. spike Excessive, by definition, is too much. It makes me wonder such things as : what was so important about the Democrats paperwork that the Repubs set up a burglary at the Watergate? Just knowing campaign strategy is worth a felony? What they don't want us to know is the deals, the quid pro quo. Who won the deal and who lost. Remember the saying about law and sausage. Hillary may be as big a narcissist as the Donald. spike Hi BillW, do note carefully the attributions. The above appears to have been written by me. No harm done, and I agree with the sentiment in this case. I have an interesting what-if for you on that Watergate business. What if? the burglars had been successful and bugged the offices, then found some really deep corruption, something that was clearly illegal, explosive. But the evidence was seized illegally. A bad guy caught another bad guy, but caught himself too. The two bad guys make the usual WHaGAWIT comment, in unison, but with a fun twist: ?if it hadn?t been for {each other.} Then what happens? Americans would end up deploring both our mainstream parties. It almost reminds me of something. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 15:31:57 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 08:31:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] reason for hope: progress against parkinson's. was: RE: sugar industry corruption Message-ID: <00f901d210f8$a0ebfdc0$e2c3f940$@att.net> In all our grim discussion during America?s quadrennial virtual civil war, we get a reason for hope, in the progress against Parkinson?s disease. Those of us whose family members have had Alzheimer?s have seen so little progress, but these families also know there are plenty of patients who end up in the same AD care facilities who do not have AD but rather Parkinson?s. It looks similar in some cases, but if you talk to the patients, it is easy to tell which ones are there for the Big P rather than the Big A. Parkinson?s patients end up there but are not demented. Oh that must be a living hell. This is one disease we have had better luck in fighting. https://www.michaeljfox.org/understanding-parkinsons/living-with-pd/topic.php?prognosis Best wishes to actor Michael J. Fox and everything he has done personally to advance the cause. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 17:12:18 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 10:12:18 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia Message-ID: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> I thought of a song today with the word pneumonia, but it wasn?t the 50?s Jerry Lee Lewis with Rockin? Pneumonia and the Boogie Woogie Flu. I am thinking of a different song which has the term but it is the rhyming word at the end of the line. With just those clues, how many here know the song? Hint, some of us who are more experienced would have a shot at knowing this from memory, Keith, BillW, some of you others; I do, I was there when it was new. At least two different artists recorded it. Given that, since it is an easy breezy Saturday morning, you might want a fun little Google challenge: find the song which uses pneumonia as the rhyming word. How long did it take you? How did you do it? Try to figure out what might rhyme with pneumonia and punch that in? {8^D spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 17 17:28:44 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 12:28:44 -0500 Subject: [ExI] sugar industry corruption In-Reply-To: <00f401d210f7$95538150$bffa83f0$@att.net> References: <00aa01d21024$2043b160$60cb1420$@att.net> <015401d21034$d6b81de0$842859a0$@att.net> <032a01d21057$9b2de0c0$d189a240$@att.net> <042b01d2107f$5efe49a0$1cfadce0$@att.net> <00f401d210f7$95538150$bffa83f0$@att.net> Message-ID: What if? the burglars had been successful and bugged the offices, then found some really deep corruption spike One of the biggest things wrong with DC is money - soft money, hard money. It did not start with corporations as people but the surely did not help. No one except multimillionaires can run for office even in a state, without party help or independent donations, and of course the person is now obligated to further the patron's agenda or the money dries up. (Notice how 'agenda' has become a bad word in some contexts? Who doesn't have an agenda?) Very very few of us eggheads get elected, and probably none without party help. I am not really sure I want intellectuals to run things but we should in the mix rather than standing aside and criticizing. Whatever happened to using public funds for campaigns? For TV time? Maybe the standards for accessing public money are too high. I don't know these things. I may not know how to drive some vehicle, fix its engine, etc. but I do think I know where the damn thing should be going. Probably all of us have this frustration to some degree. bill w On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:24 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Sent:* Saturday, September 17, 2016 7:56 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] sugar industry corruption > > > > > > > > > > It has been argued that with excessive oversight, the government cannot > get anything done. This is almost right. With proper oversight, the > government cannot get anything done illegally. spike > > > > Excessive, by definition, is too much. > > > > It makes me wonder such things as : what was so important about the > Democrats paperwork that the Repubs set up a burglary at the Watergate? > Just knowing campaign strategy is worth a felony? > > > > What they don't want us to know is the deals, the quid pro quo. Who won > the deal and who lost. Remember the saying about law and sausage. > > > > Hillary may be as big a narcissist as the Donald. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > Hi BillW, do note carefully the attributions. The above appears to have > been written by me. No harm done, and I agree with the sentiment in this > case. > > > > I have an interesting what-if for you on that Watergate business. What > if? the burglars had been successful and bugged the offices, then found > some really deep corruption, something that was clearly illegal, > explosive. But the evidence was seized illegally. A bad guy caught > another bad guy, but caught himself too. The two bad guys make the usual > WHaGAWIT comment, in unison, but with a fun twist: ?if it hadn?t been for > {each other.} Then what happens? Americans would end up deploring both > our mainstream parties. It almost reminds me of something. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Sat Sep 17 17:47:48 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 10:47:48 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> References: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 10:12 AM, spike wrote: > I thought of a song today with the word pneumonia, but it wasn?t the 50?s > Jerry Lee Lewis with Rockin? Pneumonia and the Boogie Woogie Flu. I am > thinking of a different song which has the term but it is the rhyming word > at the end of the line. > > > > With just those clues, how many here know the song? Hint, some of us who > are more experienced would have a shot at knowing this from memory, Keith, > BillW, some of you others; I do, I was there when it was new. At least two > different artists recorded it. > Unfortunately, I can make up such a song, and so can billions of others, any of whom would count as an "artist" if they recorded it; by definition it would be new, and we would all "be there" (here) at that time (as recently as now). (Perhaps you mean to imply that certain people were not there when it was new?) Therefore, the space of all songs that clue would cover is infeasibly large to search and guess the specific one that you mean. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sat Sep 17 17:51:13 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 13:51:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> References: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> Message-ID: I know Hillary is extremely shady, but doesn't it say something that Trump is so bad that we don't really bring him up because his shittiness is a given? Seriously. I'm appalled at all the stuff surrounding Hillary and I'm sure those bleached emails contain really bad material. And I'm also sure there will be a release I'd really bad material right before the election, masterminded by either Russia or (basically traitorous) insiders. The simple fact of the matter is that, with the developments in North Korea, voting for Hillary is the clear way to assuage existential threat. She is indeed a hawk, but I believe she understands deterrence more than Trump (which is to say more than zero) and would (and most likely will) initiate ground war and drone attacks over even the consideration of nuclear strikes. If, god forbid, NK launches a nuke at Seoul or Tokyo or San Francisco, I don't want a lunatic making decisions in that crisis. I want a calculating, manipulative, underhanded shady bastard--that is to say, Hillary Clinton. That is to say, a fucking politician. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 17:52:55 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 10:52:55 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: References: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> Message-ID: <005101d2110c$5290d970$f7b28c50$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes >?Unfortunately, I can make up such a song, and so can billions of others, any of whom would count as an "artist" if they recorded it; by definition it would be new, and we would all "be there" (here) at that time (as recently as now). (Perhaps you mean to imply that certain people were not there when it was new?) Therefore, the space of all songs that clue would cover is infeasibly large to search and guess the specific one that you mean? Adrian Awww, come on Adrian, it?s just a game, don?t be a grumpy bear. I think you were about preschool when this song was a hit, but it was Casey Kasem American Top 40 stuff back then. You bring up a fun challenge: make up a song lyric with pneumonia as the rhyming lyric. Do feel free to be Weird Al Yankovicish with it, since it is likely to be kinda silly. That opens up the rhyme space. The song I am thinking about kinda makes sense, even if the rhyme is just a bit strained. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 17:56:26 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 10:56:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia, was: RE: rhymes with pneumonia Message-ID: <005601d2110c$d01c48c0$7054da40$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Will Steinberg Subject: Re: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia >?I know Hillary is extremely shady?If, god forbid, NK launches a nuke at Seoul or Tokyo or San Francisco, I don't want a lunatic making decisions in that crisis. I want a calculating, manipulative, underhanded shady bastard--that is to say, Hillary Clinton. That is to say, a fucking politician? Will Hey, none of that rhymes with pneumonia. It?s just a game Will. Take a break, it?s the weekend man. We know all this above, we are drowning in it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Sat Sep 17 18:22:09 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 14:22:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia, was: RE: rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: <005601d2110c$d01c48c0$7054da40$@att.net> References: <005601d2110c$d01c48c0$7054da40$@att.net> Message-ID: Gotcha Spike, my apologies. This election is just a completely surreal clusterfuck that appears divorced from reality. Rhymes with pneumonia, hmm... >Hillary has pneumonia? >This election is giving me anhedonia. >Trump promised charity but he won't pony up. >Hillary will get her cronies on it. >Her testimony was >Full of phony stuff >Everything Trump says is bologna >And Hillary will drone ya >I think I'll move to Patagonia >Maybe I'll phone ya >And ask how's it goin', bruh? > You'll say "a dystopia." >Pigs have flown, uhh.... >Gonna slug some Patr?n. Fuck! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From crw at crw.io Sat Sep 17 18:33:20 2016 From: crw at crw.io (crw) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 11:33:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> References: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> Message-ID: <0b591506-2d0a-b299-c3b6-b60b08a1804a@crw.io> Came up with a rhyming word "ammonia" - Googled: lyrics pneumonia ammonia. First hit was a link about commonly misheard lyrics. Is the song you were referring to Dionne Warwick's "I'll Never Fall in Love Again"? "What do you get when you kiss a guy? You get enough germs to catch pneumonia After you do, he'll never phone ya I'll never fall in love again Don't you know that I'll never fall in love again" -c. On 9/17/16 10:12 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > I thought of a song today with the word pneumonia, but it wasn?t the 50?s Jerry Lee Lewis with Rockin? Pneumonia and the Boogie Woogie Flu. I am thinking of a different song which has the term but it is the rhyming word at the end of the line. > > > > With just those clues, how many here know the song? Hint, some of us who are more experienced would have a shot at knowing this from memory, Keith, BillW, some of you others; I do, I was there when it was new. At least two different artists recorded it. > > > > Given that, since it is an easy breezy Saturday morning, you might want a fun little Google challenge: find the song which uses pneumonia as the rhyming word. How long did it take you? How did you do it? Try to figure out what might rhyme with pneumonia and punch that in? {8^D > > > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 17 19:24:06 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 12:24:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: <0b591506-2d0a-b299-c3b6-b60b08a1804a@crw.io> References: <013f01d21106$a587ebb0$f097c310$@att.net> <0b591506-2d0a-b299-c3b6-b60b08a1804a@crw.io> Message-ID: <00be01d21119$0fc7c290$2f5747b0$@att.net> >...On Behalf Of crw Subject: Re: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia Came up with a rhyming word "ammonia" - Googled: lyrics pneumonia ammonia. First hit was a link about commonly misheard lyrics. Is the song you were referring to Dionne Warwick's "I'll Never Fall in Love Again"? "What do you get when you kiss a guy? You get enough germs to catch pneumonia After you do, he'll never phone ya I'll never fall in love again Don't you know that I'll never fall in love again" -c. That's the one, we have a winner. Of course it is perfectly absurd: anyone woman as beautiful as Dionne would have her phone ringing off the hook. Fun song, 1970. Gentle lilting voice, perfectly in tune always, easy to understand the lyrics. Why don't we have singers like that anymore? spike From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 00:02:02 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 20:02:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:39 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Dan TheBookMan > wrote: > > >> ?> ? >> he's ignoring valid reasonable concerns others have. > > > ?I'm not ignoring them I'm laughing at them.? > > ?When one tries to compare the horrors of a global thermonuclear ?war > with the horrors of a bad Email server what can one do but laugh? > ### This is dumb, John. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 02:25:49 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 22:25:49 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:39 PM, John Clark wrote: > >> >> ?I'm not ignoring them I'm laughing at them.? >> >> ?When one tries to compare the horrors of a global thermonuclear ?war >> with the horrors of a bad Email server what can one do but laugh? >> > > ?>? > ### This is dumb, John. > ?Explain to me why, I really want to ?understand? . I give specifics and facts and figures and ?write? exactly why 4 years after president ? Trump ? takes office ? I expect ? there will be a dozed more nations with nuclear arsenals, ? and I explain why I think that will greatly increase the likelihood of global thermonuclear war ? ; and nobody disputes my facts, nobody even tries to poke holes in my logic; instead all I hear is, yeah but Hillary had a bad Email server. And these otherwise intelligent people who I like and respect say that balances the equation and ?proves ? the 2 are equally bad! It's bizarre and I just don't get it. And the good people on this list are not an anomaly, Trump has gained enormously in the last few days, at this rate of increase we will all be playing Russian Roulette with 3 bullets in the revolver by this time next week. Some say the debates could turn things around but I'm not very hopeful because the two are held to such different standard, Hillary must not only be brilliant but far far more important be charming, have the correct body language, have the correct tone to her voice, and have the correct gleam in her eye, while all Donald Trump has to do is refrain from throwing his feces at the camera. I'm not ashamed to admit it, I'm scared to death. John K Clark ? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 03:22:25 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 20:22:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> Message-ID: <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki > wrote: On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 3:39 PM, John Clark > wrote: ?>>??When one tries to compare the horrors of a global thermonuclear ?war with the horrors of a bad Email server what can one do but laugh? ?>? ### This is dumb, John. ?>?Explain to me why, I really want to understand?? John K Clark OK, here it is John. We don?t know what was on Clinton?s email. We must presume that bad guys do. So she wouldn?t be as effective in preventing nuclear proliferation than Trump would be, for she has to do whatever the holders of that email demand. Reasoning: we saw that they tried to explain to Powell why those ?frigging rules? were there. It wasn?t to make his life inconvenient; there is a very good reason why you cannot take those berries into the SCIF. John you understand EM physics well enough to get why, right? Those SCIFs are EM shielded, so the berries don?t work in there, as noted by Sec. Powell. So he ?frigging rules?ed away the law, and took the devices in there anyway. In that EM quiet environment, if there was even one traitor with the instrument needed, that one traitor could discover how to spoof the system and intercept a copy of everything sent to that berry. If there was even one traitor in the State Department SCIF, that could happen. There is a reason for those frigging rules (also known as law.) He instructed his successor on the frigging rules, and explained that they don?t apply since the berries don?t work in the SCIF anyway, so there is no reason to not carry it in there. (What are they going to do, take your clearance?) So she did. So if there was even one traitor inside the State Department SCIF, then everything on that berry may have been compromised, and if so we would have no way of knowing what was on there. And we know there were at least two traitors in the State Department SCIF. But we aren?t finished. If a traitor received the appropriate signals from those berries in the SCIF, bad actors have that email but we do not. The voters don?t have it, the US Government doesn?t have it, even Mrs. Clinton doesn?t have it, nor does she have any idea what was on there. She fell and hit her head in December 2012, resulting in a concussion and amnesia, which persists to this day according to her testimony to the FBI. She doesn?t remember the security briefings that signed documents showed she had. So? stands to reason she doesn?t remember what was on all those blackberries she doesn?t even remember having, in accordance with her testimony to congress that she had only one device during her tenure as Secretary of State. We now know there were at least 13 of these devices, some of which have never been found, some of which may have accidentally been smashed to bits with hammers, but Mrs. Clinton has no recollection of any of this because of the concussion suffered from a fall in December 2012. So. Now we have the entire archives of two consecutive Secretaries of State covering a period of over ten years which must be presumed compromised. For the period from 2009 to 2012, all state department business involving Sec. Clinton must be presumed compromised, since she had no legal means of sending State Department business other than going thru a presumed-compromised unsecured server. So? the bad guys know what is in those emails, but we do not. BleachBit is very thorough. Mrs. Clinton doesn?t know what is in there either. Concussions are very thorough. So if she is elected and then is reminded of the contents of that email by bad actors, knowing she would face prison for life if they tell, what do you think she will do? When you speak of the horrors of thermonuclear war, you must specify why you think one is more likely than the other to be the cause of it. That isn?t clear to me, because I don?t know what was in that email. The bad guys do. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk Sun Sep 18 12:56:50 2016 From: nebathenemi at yahoo.co.uk (Tom Nowell) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 12:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [ExI] rhymes with pneumonia In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1539144558.848558.1474203410541@mail.yahoo.com> I tried google with "songs with pneumonia lyric" and mostly got the rockin' pneumonia boogie woogie song I'd never heard of.? I then added "-boogie" in the google search bar and the list shortened to Woody Guthrie's "Dust pneumonia blues", Bjork's "pneumonia" (probably my love of scandinavian pop music influencing the search ranking here) and "I'll never fall in love again." At the sight of "I'll never fall in love again", I immediately recalled the "pneumonia/ never phone ya" rhyme and reckon Spike would have chosen that one. Spike - you ask why we don't have singers like Dionne Warwick anymore - maybe we do, but you can't hear them over the super-busy production that makes for radio-friendly songs these days? Or maybe we do, but the overall voice/looks/showmanship/media-handling skill package required to be famous as a musician these days is weeding out the strongest singers in favour of those better at gaming the media system? Certainly the best singer I know graduated with her music degree with a minor in business, and is now working in a tax accountant's office rather than risking starving to death if she tried to get a job in classical music or a choir. Tom -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sat Sep 17 19:49:54 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2016 15:49:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <035801d2105b$9299ff80$b7cdfe80$@att.net> References: <2ae18997-a0f7-4e3e-99c8-0cdfba77dbc2@aleph.se> <018901d20eef$f4ef6cf0$dece46d0$@att.net> <383046f1-5615-beef-57f3-16601d820a77@aleph.se> <035801d2105b$9299ff80$b7cdfe80$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-09-16 16:47, spike wrote: > Ja. But if we look deeper into an argument I discovered shortly after > Robert Bradbury perished (oy vey over five years that man has been gone, yet > I miss his demanding presence as if he left us yesterday) that a Dyson swarm > might need to direct its energy for a perfectly well-understood reason: it > would overheat otherwise. That Boyajian's star is closer than we thought > argues for a more complete but entropy-hip Dyson swarm. > > Anders do you have buddies or contacts who are up to speed on this? Do feel > free to post them this meme sir, and feel free to take ownership of the > idea, same goes for the rest here: A Dyson swarm might neeeeeed to direct > that energy in a low-ish entropy state; otherwise it would cook eventually > in its own IR band waste heat. But by my calcs, it could do that and still > extract pleeeeenty of energy to do what Dyson swarms do best: think. OK, I will bring it up with Dr D. Let's see if I get the basic argument: you have a shell of radius R. The luminosity L is absorbed, and in the standard model assumed to all be radiated away outwards, making an outside temperature T=[L/4piR^2 sigma]^(1/4). Except that in practice the radiation will, if nothing else is done, radiate equally to the inside, which means that L/2 extra IR now is radiated all over the place. So this gives L/(32 pi^2 R^4 )extra input of heating per square meter. That doesn't *seem* too bad... > Go Anders! You have the science contacts and creds, I don't. Go Anders! > Davai Davai Davai! Da Tovarishch! We will bury this problem in awesome equations! -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 15:07:59 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 08:07:59 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Anders wrote: > Let's see if I get the basic argument: you have a shell of radius R. The > luminosity L is absorbed, and in the standard model assumed to all be > radiated away outwards, making an outside temperature T=[L/4piR^2 > sigma]^(1/4). Except that in practice the radiation will, if nothing else is > done, radiate equally to the inside, which means that L/2 extra IR now is > radiated all over the place. So this gives L/(32 pi^2 R^4 )extra input of > heating per square meter. That doesn't *seem* too bad... If it is really a shell, then radiation to the inside will be in net equilibrium. Only the outside will radiate the energy from the star. But if you are imputing the weird behavior of Tabby's star to megastructure building aliens, you might want to consider the kind of thermal power satellites we developed in the last few years. Because you want to block sunlight from the radiator tubes, they radiate in an anisotropic way, the waste heat goes solar north and south and you will not see the waste heat in the plane of the local ecliptic. This assumes the path from the star to Earth is on the local ecliptic. So if we continue to find no excess IR from this star, it's supportive of certain classes of space industrial objects that radiate heat directionally. I kind of suspect a Dyson sphere isn't practical. Keith From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 15:51:20 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 08:51:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Keith Henson Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 8:08 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Anders wrote: >>... Let's see if I get the basic argument: you have a shell of radius R. > The luminosity L is absorbed, and in the standard model assumed to all... >> ...extra IR now is radiated all over the place. So this gives L/(32 pi^2 > R^4 )extra input of heating per square meter. That doesn't *seem* too bad... >...If it is really a shell, then radiation to the inside will be in net equilibrium. Only the outside will radiate the energy from the star...So if we continue to find no excess IR from this star, it's supportive of certain classes of space industrial objects that radiate heat directionally...Keith _______________________________________________ Anders and Keith, there is an approach I have been struggling with, which uses Bessel functions, but I need some adult supervision if someone here can offer it, or knows someone who can, specifically someone with access to idle graduate students armed with Matlab and such. Assume a sunlike star and assume away all planets and debris (I am not a mathematician, but I sometimes act like one when it is time to assume away planets and debris.) OK now assume a 1 square meter reference plane perpendicular to a line from the center of the square meter thru the center of the star. Out at 1 AU, there are nearly half a mole such meter squares, so it shouldn't be hard to imagine picking one. OK now imagine a kind of truncated square based pyramid (frustum) opening outward from there, such that the included angle formed by lines to the center of the star remains constant. Imagine the pyramid going out 5 AU so that the frustum base is 5 meters on a side. We now need only calculate the heat load on that small end square meter base (which is about 1400 W) and the heat emission at the 25 m^2 big end out into 3K space. The heat load thru the sides of the frustum is irrelevant, since the heat going in vs the heat going out is identical along the entire face always and forever amen. That simplifies the model to heat in at the small end, and heat load out the big end, ja? Are we ready to Bessel? OK, with that model, and some clever Matlab coding (I no longer have access to Matlab, oy) we should be able to create thermal distributions along the length of that frustum. I did that using uniform distributions and discovered that my Bessel functions predict we overheat inboard if we extract too much energy from that mass distribution (of MBrain nodes) within the Frustum. If the mass distribution of MBrain nodes within the frustum is sufficiently low, most of the energy passes thru, and the temperature distribution stays good. But if the mass distribution is high, the inboard part overheats. At some point, there is a uniform mass distribution along the length of the frustum in which the peak temperature is a nice balmy 300K. I propose we call this mass distribution the Bradbury density. Or we could call it the Bradbury300 density, so we can calculate a new density for Bradbury350 and so on. The Bradbury density assumes no directional reflection, so all the energy has to come in the 1 meter square reference plane at 1 AU and be emitted from the 5 meter square 5 AU plane. We could of course use other numbers. I propose a name for peak temperatures designated as inner diameter in AU, dash, outer diameter in AU, Bradbury, peak temperature in Kelvin. The above thought experiment assumes no low-entropy reflection and the peak temperature would be called: 1-5Bradbury300. I propose this name because had Robert lived, he would have embraced this notion, assuming I invested several hours arguing with him over it (he didn't do MBrain thermal models much and didn't cotton to them, but he liked my doing them.) spike From anders at aleph.se Sun Sep 18 11:52:14 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 07:52:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> Message-ID: <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> On 2016-09-17 23:22, spike wrote: > > OK, here it is John. We don?t know what was on Clinton?s email. We > must presume that bad guys do. So she wouldn?t be as effective in > preventing nuclear proliferation than Trump would be, for she has to > do whatever the holders of that email demand. > Sorry for getting into the debate, but Trump *urged* nuclear proliferation as a solution to avoiding foreign entanglements. That is a bit more certain than hypothetical blackmail potential. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 16:33:20 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:33:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: <006e01d211ca$5ed2e070$1c78a150$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 4:52 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server On 2016-09-17 23:22, spike wrote: >>.OK, here it is John. We don't know what was on Clinton's email. We must presume that bad guys do. So she wouldn't be as effective in preventing nuclear proliferation than Trump would be, for she has to do whatever the holders of that email demand. >.Sorry for getting into the debate, but Trump *urged* nuclear proliferation as a solution to avoiding foreign entanglements. That is a bit more certain than hypothetical blackmail potential. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Noted, thanks Anders. In one scenario the risk of nuclear proliferation increases, but that same scenario may reduce the risk of conventional warfare, which we may be facing as a result of yesterday's accidental US strike on Syrian forces. Nuclear proliferation is bad. Conventional warfare is bad. If the bad guys have Mrs. Clinton's email and she cannot remember what is in it (in accordance with her testimony to the FBI) then the bad guys could compose a plausible-looking Clinton email and use it for blackmail, increasing both the risk of nuclear proliferation and conventional warfare. Oy what a mess. All this could have easily been prevented, had our own Secretaries followed the frigging rules (also known as law.) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 17:16:28 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:16:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 11:22 PM, spike wrote: > ?>>??When one tries to compare the horrors of a global thermonuclear >> ?war with the horrors of a bad Email server what can one do but laugh? > > >### This is dumb, Jo?h?n - >>> Rafal Smigrodzki? >> >> >?Explain to me why, I really want to understand?? John K Clark > > > ?> ? > OK, here it is John. We don?t know what was on Clinton?s email. We must > presume that bad guys do. So she wouldn?t be as effective in preventing > nuclear proliferation than Trump would be, for she has to do whatever the > holders of that email demand. > ?Hillary's E-mail server,? ?it always comes back to ? ?Hillary's ?stupid ? E-mail server ? as if it were? the most significant event in world history. OK let's summarize: a unknown and probably imaginary adversary reads a unknown and probably imaginary ? E-mail on a unknown subject ?that you can't even imagine, and that will lead to blackmail, and that will lead to events worse than global thermonuclear war. ? Spike, that sounds like a very bad spy novel and I don't believe your argument would convince anyone unless they already had a visceral revulsion of Hillary Clinton. What I'm trying to figure out is what signals that revulsion in so many people and even more mysterious to me why don't they see that signal, whatever it is, in Trump? Is it the tone of her voice, the glint in her eye, her hand gestures? I honestly don't know, I'm not very good at picking up on those sort of things. I think I'm fairly good at analyzing what people say but I'm lousy at analyzing how they say it. And Spike?, Trump has said clear as day that HE DOESN'T EVEN WANT TO PREVENT NUCLEAR PROLIFERATION! And unlike most of his promises that contain no details ? (I know how to defeat ISIS very very quickly but I won't tell you how)? on this issue he tells us how the imbecile intends to achieve his dream of a world full of H-bombs. First Trump ?will? cut South Korea and Japan loose and let the ?m? deal with a nuclear armed North Korea on their own ? forcing them to go nuclear? . ? ? Then? Trump ?will? dump NATO and let a dozen countries in eastern Europe deal will his good buddy Vladimir Putin and his ? H-bombs on their own ? forcing all of them to go nuclear too? . ?And bizarrely despite all his anti-islamic rhetoric Trump is even fine ?with the religious pinheads in Saudi Arabia ? ?having H-bombs. Hillary Clinton isn't fine with any of that. For me the nuclear proliferation issue alone is a deal breaker, even if Trump were the most Libertarian man alive about everything else I'd still vote against him. And of course he isn't, Trump would be the most anti-Libertarian president in a century. But yes I admit it, if Trump were president at least we wouldn't have to face the horrifying terrifying petrifying prospect of Hillary's evil monstrous city destroying 5 year old E-mail server. ? ? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 17:20:09 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 18:20:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> References: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> Message-ID: On 18 September 2016 at 16:51, spike wrote: > OK, with that model, and some clever Matlab coding (I no longer have access > to Matlab, oy) we should be able to create thermal distributions along the > length of that frustum. > Have a look at Scilab or Octave Both are free numerical analysis programs, sort of Matlab compatible. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 19:19:42 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 14:19:42 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: Sorry for getting into the debate, but Trump *urged* nuclear proliferation as a solution to avoiding foreign entanglements. That is a bit more certain than hypothetical blackmail potential. Dr Anders Sandberg Given foreign opinion of Trump as a big negative, if he is elected he will not be a world leader in anything. If anything, other countries will go the opposite way, and that's assuming he has any backers in his own party, much less the Dems. There would be three way gridlock among Repubs, tea party, and Dems. We will lose a lot of prestige worldwide if Trump wins. bill w On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 6:52 AM, Anders wrote: > On 2016-09-17 23:22, spike wrote: > > > > OK, here it is John. We don?t know what was on Clinton?s email. We must > presume that bad guys do. So she wouldn?t be as effective in preventing > nuclear proliferation than Trump would be, for she has to do whatever the > holders of that email demand. > > > Sorry for getting into the debate, but Trump *urged* nuclear proliferation > as a solution to avoiding foreign entanglements. That is a bit more certain > than hypothetical blackmail potential. > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 19:19:26 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 12:19:26 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> Message-ID: <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ?>?Hillary's E-mail server,? it always comes back to ?Hillary's stupid ?E-mail server? Sure does, John. ?Move along citizens, there is NOTHING TO SEE HERE!? she shouted into the bullhorn with increasing enthusiasm and volume. We know there is nothing to see here. It has been obliterated by BleachBit or smashed to shards with hammers. If the frigging rules (also known as law) been followed, we could get judges to just tell us it was all just yoga and wedding plans. >? OK let's summarize? OK. >?a unknown and probably imaginary adversary? Known adversaries all over the globe, but continue please. > reads a unknown Unknown? Why is it unknown? Is it because it was carefully and intentionally made unknown to us, to the government, to the voters? By industrial-strength BleachBit? Why was that used? If the frigging rules (also known as law) been followed, we would know what was in Nixon?s 18 minutes of audio and Clinton?s thousands of yoga routines. It would have all gone away quietly? assuming of course it was all just yoga (the literal variety which involves exercise and stretching, not the kind of yoga we think it was.) >? and probably imaginary E-mail? Can you prove it? Neither can we. >? on a unknown subject? The subject most likely contains money, and an explanation of who attacked the Libyan embassy and why. >??that you can't even imagine? Oh we can imagine easily enough. It isn?t hard to do. >?? Spike, that sounds like a very bad spy novel ?John K Clark It really does John, and we wouldn?t need to endure this ongoing horror story had Powell and Clinton followed the frigging rules that they frigging vowed to uphold, those frigging rules known as the law of our land. Impeach Powell and Clinton, get the nuclear trigger away from the executive branch and back where it belongs, in congress. Hear the footsteps. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 19:45:12 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:45:12 +0100 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> Message-ID: On 18 September 2016 at 20:19, spike wrote: > It really does John, and we wouldn?t need to endure this ongoing horror > story had Powell and Clinton followed the frigging rules that they frigging > vowed to uphold, those frigging rules known as the law of our land. Impeach > Powell and Clinton, get the nuclear trigger away from the executive branch > and back where it belongs, in congress. > I think I've thought about a job for Spike after John's nuclear holocaust arrives,,,,,,, It?s a tough job, but someone has to do it. Diego the Tortoise Helps Save Species BillK From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 21:35:33 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 14:35:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: <001c01d211f4$97119510$c534bf30$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >? There would be three way gridlock among Repubs, tea party, and Dems. Ja, thanks for pointing that out BillW. >?We will lose a lot of prestige worldwide if Trump wins. bill w Good point, sir. We must be careful however, for there could be unforeseen downside to that hopeless three-party gridlock and loss of American prestige. Middle Eastern nations might stop having the US intervene in its civil wars. The loss of loss of life could be extreme. The world might stop fighting 10th century conflicts with 21st century weapons. The US could stop being the world?s policemen, which could result in still further loss of loss of life. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 22:27:06 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:27:06 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> Message-ID: <003601d211fb$caa6d3c0$5ff47b40$@att.net> >... On Behalf Of BillK Subject: Re: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . On 18 September 2016 at 16:51, spike wrote: >>... OK, with that model, and some clever Matlab coding (I no longer have > access to Matlab, oy) we should be able to create thermal > distributions along the length of that frustum. spike >...Have a look at Scilab >...or Octave >...Both are free numerical analysis programs, sort of Matlab compatible. BillK _______________________________________________ Hi BillK, thanks. I am missing not only a suitable programming environment but more important: the Matlab-based proprietary thermodynamics package that I could access until about 2013 but cannot now. I probably should roll up my sleeves and attempt a closed-form solution. What I really need are some really smart young grad students to watch over my shoulder and catch my bonehead errors. Better yet, one with current access to professors, classmates and software to whom I could share my model and have her work in parallel. In any case, Boyajian's Star is getting plenty of attention now that the Germans are reporting a possible second weird star: http://www.unknowncountry.com/news/tabbys-star-not-alone-another-star-epic-l ight-fluctuations-has-been-found This one is cool, since it is a third the distance to Tabby's star, so our Gaia results will be more certain. spike From pharos at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 22:58:48 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 23:58:48 +0100 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <003601d211fb$caa6d3c0$5ff47b40$@att.net> References: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> <003601d211fb$caa6d3c0$5ff47b40$@att.net> Message-ID: On 18 September 2016 at 23:27, spike wrote: > > Hi BillK, thanks. I am missing not only a suitable programming environment > but more important: the Matlab-based proprietary thermodynamics package that > I could access until about 2013 but cannot now. > You need to be specific. :) What thermodynamics package? The Mathworks HOT Thermodynamic Tools for Matlab is free and compatible with Octave. HOT is a package originally constructed for combustion modeling in Matlab. It calculates common thermodynamic properties such as enthalpy, specific heat, entropy, internal energy, gamma, ideal gas constant, molecular weight, etc... Full documentation is available in multiple formats at http://hot-tdb.sourceforge.net The code is also Octave compatible. ---------- BillK From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 18 23:14:20 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:14:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> <003601d211fb$caa6d3c0$5ff47b40$@att.net> Message-ID: <007401d21202$638b8c10$2aa2a430$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 3:59 PM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . On 18 September 2016 at 23:27, spike wrote: > > Hi BillK, thanks. I am missing not only a suitable programming > environment but more important: the Matlab-based proprietary > thermodynamics package that I could access until about 2013 but cannot now. > You need to be specific. :) What thermodynamics package? The Mathworks HOT Thermodynamic Tools for Matlab is free and compatible with Octave. HOT is a package originally constructed for combustion modeling in Matlab. It calculates common thermodynamic properties such as enthalpy, specific heat, entropy, internal energy, gamma, ideal gas constant, molecular weight, etc... Full documentation is available in multiple formats at http://hot-tdb.sourceforge.net The code is also Octave compatible. ---------- BillK _______________________________________________ This package I used before was developed by my former employer to be specific for calculating surface temperatures of stuff in interplanetary orbit, which was important for the kind of work that project needed. However, I can see the value of deriving the equations from first principles, beyond just mathematical hot dogging and such. Well, OK that's part of it. Or most of it. But really this problem is custom made for those who are in physics graduate school and are trying to find all the cool stuff you can do with Bessel functions. Or I might be over eager to use that particular mathematical weapon just because it is sharp and cool. spike From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 01:17:45 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 20:17:45 -0500 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <001c01d211f4$97119510$c534bf30$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> <001c01d211f4$97119510$c534bf30$@att.net> Message-ID: > > There would be three way gridlock among Repubs, tea party, and Dems. > > Ja, thanks for pointing that out BillW. > > ?We will lose a lot of prestige worldwide if Trump wins. bill w > > Good point, sir. > > We must be careful however, for there could be unforeseen downside to that > > > hopeless three-party gridlock and loss of American prestige. > > Middle Eastern nations might stop having the US intervene in its civil wars. > > > The loss of loss of life could be extreme. The world might stop fighting > > > 10th century conflicts with 21st century weapons. The US could stop being the world?s policemen, which could result in still further loss of loss of life. > > spike > > > ?I agree with this - I think - though are you using 'downside' ironically? bill w (sorry about the spacing - the more I tried to fix it the worse it got)? > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 01:47:24 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 18:47:24 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: <675A9F6F-EC98-4ED0-9B60-9414BC464F6C@gmail.com> On Sep 18, 2016, at 12:19 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Given foreign opinion of Trump as a big negative, if he is elected he will not be a world leader in anything. If anything, other countries will go the opposite way, and that's assuming he has any backers in his own party, much less the Dems. There would be three way gridlock among Repubs, tea party, and Dems. > We will lose a lot of prestige worldwide if Trump wins. I'm trying to understand why the prestige of the US political and military elites is so important? I'm not so sure those innocent foreigners harmed by the policies of those elites worry as much about US prestige. How many lives, especially innocent foreign lives, is US prestige worth? On another note: if Daryl Press is right, prestige matters far less than the actual ability to project power. Press studied the rise of Germany during the 01930s and shows that the German elite were NOT worried about French and British prestige so much as French and British (and other) military forces. He makes a strong case for this in his _Calculating Credibility_. The above doesn't mean I want or lock forward to a Trump presidency. (Shouldn't need saying.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 01:49:57 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 18:49:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: <6BE32B70-7FAF-4419-BA93-8AC065CEB972@gmail.com> On Sep 18, 2016, at 4:52 AM, Anders wrote: >> On 2016-09-17 23:22, spike wrote: >> >> OK, here it is John. We don?t know what was on Clinton?s email. We must presume that bad guys do. So she wouldn?t be as effective in preventing nuclear proliferation than Trump would be, for she has to do whatever the holders of that email demand. > > Sorry for getting into the debate, but Trump *urged* nuclear proliferation as a solution to avoiding foreign entanglements. That is a bit more certain than hypothetical blackmail potential. Giving the devil his due, I don't believe Trump advocated nuclear proliferation across the board. Wasn't he referring to Japan and South Korea? Ted Galen Carpenter (of the Cato Institute) recommended the same approach in the early 01990s, if memory serves. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 06:23:08 2016 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 08:23:08 +0200 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: References: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> Message-ID: Matlab is easy to find on the torrent sites. On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 7:20 PM, BillK wrote: > On 18 September 2016 at 16:51, spike wrote: > >> OK, with that model, and some clever Matlab coding (I no longer have access >> to Matlab, oy) we should be able to create thermal distributions along the >> length of that frustum. >> > > Have a look at Scilab > > or Octave > > Both are free numerical analysis programs, sort of Matlab compatible. > > 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 Sep 19 10:27:19 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 11:27:19 +0100 Subject: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . In-Reply-To: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> References: <005d01d211c4$804407d0$80cc1770$@att.net> Message-ID: Hmm, it sounds like a radiosity/radiometry problem. "Given a frustrum with incident energy I1 on the top, perfectly reflecting walls, and a bottom at 3K, give the equilibrium temperature distribution." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiosity_(radiometry) https://www.siggraph.org/education/materials/HyperGraph/radiosity/overview_2.htm https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~dfg/graphics/graphics2009/GraphicsHandout06.pdf http://www.helios32.com/Eigenvector%20Radiosity.pdf (much recent work has happened in computer graphics rather than in heat transfer) So we need to subdivide the walls into small patches, calculate form factors, and solve a big linear equation system. Seems totally doable, except that being lazy I wish there was a Matlab toolbox for it (HOT is just for thermodynamics). I see there are python libraries for it. On 2016-09-18 16:51, spike wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf > Of Keith Henson > Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2016 8:08 AM > To: ExI chat list > Subject: Re: [ExI] If you follow the developments with Tabby's star . . > > On Sat, Sep 17, 2016 at 12:49 PM, Anders wrote: > >>> ... Let's see if I get the basic argument: you have a shell of radius R. >> The luminosity L is absorbed, and in the standard model assumed to all... >>> ...extra IR now is radiated all over the place. So this gives L/(32 pi^2 >> R^4 )extra input of heating per square meter. That doesn't *seem* too > bad... > >> ...If it is really a shell, then radiation to the inside will be in net > equilibrium. Only the outside will radiate the energy from the star...So if > we continue to find no excess IR from this star, it's supportive of certain > classes of space industrial objects that radiate heat directionally...Keith > _______________________________________________ > > > Anders and Keith, there is an approach I have been struggling with, which > uses Bessel functions, but I need some adult supervision if someone here can > offer it, or knows someone who can, specifically someone with access to idle > graduate students armed with Matlab and such. > > Assume a sunlike star and assume away all planets and debris (I am not a > mathematician, but I sometimes act like one when it is time to assume away > planets and debris.) > > OK now assume a 1 square meter reference plane perpendicular to a line from > the center of the square meter thru the center of the star. Out at 1 AU, > there are nearly half a mole such meter squares, so it shouldn't be hard to > imagine picking one. > > OK now imagine a kind of truncated square based pyramid (frustum) opening > outward from there, such that the included angle formed by lines to the > center of the star remains constant. Imagine the pyramid going out 5 AU so > that the frustum base is 5 meters on a side. > > We now need only calculate the heat load on that small end square meter base > (which is about 1400 W) and the heat emission at the 25 m^2 big end out into > 3K space. The heat load thru the sides of the frustum is irrelevant, since > the heat going in vs the heat going out is identical along the entire face > always and forever amen. That simplifies the model to heat in at the small > end, and heat load out the big end, ja? Are we ready to Bessel? > > OK, with that model, and some clever Matlab coding (I no longer have access > to Matlab, oy) we should be able to create thermal distributions along the > length of that frustum. > > I did that using uniform distributions and discovered that my Bessel > functions predict we overheat inboard if we extract too much energy from > that mass distribution (of MBrain nodes) within the Frustum. > > If the mass distribution of MBrain nodes within the frustum is sufficiently > low, most of the energy passes thru, and the temperature distribution stays > good. But if the mass distribution is high, the inboard part overheats. At > some point, there is a uniform mass distribution along the length of the > frustum in which the peak temperature is a nice balmy 300K. I propose we > call this mass distribution the Bradbury density. Or we could call it the > Bradbury300 density, so we can calculate a new density for Bradbury350 and > so on. > > The Bradbury density assumes no directional reflection, so all the energy > has to come in the 1 meter square reference plane at 1 AU and be emitted > from the 5 meter square 5 AU plane. > > We could of course use other numbers. I propose a name for peak > temperatures designated as inner diameter in AU, dash, outer diameter in AU, > Bradbury, peak temperature in Kelvin. > > The above thought experiment assumes no low-entropy reflection and the peak > temperature would be called: > > 1-5Bradbury300. > > I propose this name because had Robert lived, he would have embraced this > notion, assuming I invested several hours arguing with him over it (he > didn't do MBrain thermal models much and didn't cotton to them, but he liked > my doing them.) > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 13:01:54 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:01:54 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 3:19 PM, spike wrote: ?>> ? >> probably imaginary E-mail? > > > ?> ? > Can you prove it? Neither can we. ?And we can't prove an alien spaceship ?didn't crash in Roswell New Mexico in 1947 either. > >> ?> ? >> ? on a unknown subject? > > ?> ? > The subject most likely contains money, and an explanation of who attacked > the Libyan embassy and why. ?Come on Spike, do you really need to invent wild conspiracy theories involving an international crime ring run by the Clintons to explain violence directed against Americans in an Islamic country during a civil war? ? ?If I hear hoofbeats during the Kentucky Derby I think horses. You say zebras. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 13:20:52 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 09:20:52 -0400 Subject: [ExI] judicial silliness of today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Wow. -Dave On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 7:49 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2016/09/16/arizona_ > child_sexual_abuse_law_guts_due_process_for_parents_and_caregivers.html > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 19 14:18:15 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 07:18:15 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> Message-ID: <00f401d21280$aa3883b0$fea98b10$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ? ? >>?The subject most likely contains money, and an explanation of who attacked the Libyan embassy and why. ?>?Come on Spike, do you really need to invent wild conspiracy theories involving an international crime ring run by the Clintons to explain violence directed against Americans in an Islamic country during a civil war? John K Clark ? I do need some kind of wild conspiracy theory to explain why the embassy was not evacuated when we knew there were credible threats. I need some kind wild conspiracy theory to explain the refusal to turn over the server when there was a legal subpoena, why the extraordinary effort to get rid of some of it (Nixon?s 18 minutes of audio and Clinton?s thousands of yoga routines) when it was perfectly clear what that would look like, why the angry ?What difference does it make? outburst, why we seem to be fighting in the Syrian civil war on the wrong side with nothing to gain, why the concussion-amnesia wiped away memory of the other dozen communication devices but not the 123 Deal, why the constantly changing story on that server, why none of the stories make sense even now. These are not wild conspiracy theories, they are all just questions. Is it possible to have a conspiracy question? Note that people asking conspiracy questions led to the discovery that the Watergate burglary traced all the way up to the Whitehouse. spike ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 15:24:45 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 08:24:45 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <00f401d21280$aa3883b0$fea98b10$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> <00f401d21280$aa3883b0$fea98b10$@att.net> Message-ID: <33923CCF-DE19-47BC-AF04-5ADADE8806A5@gmail.com> On Sep 19, 2016, at 7:18 AM, spike wrote: > ?>?Come on Spike, do you really need to invent wild conspiracy theories involving an international crime ring run by the Clintons to explain violence directed against Americans in an Islamic country during a civil war? John K Clark ? > > > I do need some kind of wild conspiracy theory to explain why the embassy was not evacuated when we knew there were credible threats. I need some kind wild conspiracy theory to explain the refusal to turn over the server when there was a legal subpoena, why the extraordinary effort to get rid of some of it (Nixon?s 18 minutes of audio and Clinton?s thousands of yoga routines) when it was perfectly clear what that would look like, why the angry ?What difference does it make? outburst, why we seem to be fighting in the Syrian civil war on the wrong side with nothing to gain, why the concussion-amnesia wiped away memory of the other dozen communication devices but not the 123 Deal, why the constantly changing story on that server, why none of the stories make sense even now. I question the adjective 'wild' above. In some cases, a conspiracy explanation seems not wild at all. > These are not wild conspiracy theories, they are all just questions. Is it possible to have a conspiracy question? Note that people asking conspiracy questions led to the discovery that the Watergate burglary traced all the way up to the Whitehouse. Indeed. I believe, though, one has to be careful when posing a conspiracy explanation to make sure a) that the phenomenon can't be more reasonably explained in other ways and b) to look for independent evidence for a conspiracy. With the Clinton server issue, I don't know what's being hidden. My guess is Clinton wanted to have as much control over information as possible -- that the whole thing about convenience is a baldfaced lie. I'm guessing she didn't think about the security implications because her focus was on keeping her emails off government servers where they might be subject to scrutiny by people she couldn't control. Does this amount to much in this election? Maybe it should. I can see the argument being made that if she's hiding this, she's probably hiding much more -- much more that's relevant. That's not a wild conspiracy theory. If you catch someone in a blatant lie about something important and they brush it off, it's not unreasonable to believe they lie about other important stuff. How does does weigh against everything else? That depends on how much weight is placed on other things. My big problem in this discussion -- aside from it being carried on here and for far too long -- is that one person is completely trivializing it and seems to not even want to admit Clinton has any problems of note. This all seems to be motivated by a blind fear of Trump. (And I don't look forward to a Trump presidency either. I'm not worried about his ruining the prestige of the office as I think the office should be abolished along with all its powers.* I'm more worried about thing he might do with the power that others won't resist, such as putting in more trade restrictions and increasing military spending -- because, you know, the US government only spends more, right now, than the next five or ten nations on the military.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst * This isn't impossible -- anymore than the fall of the Soviet Empire was impossible. It doesn't require a legal change or working within the system. It merely requires enough people simply disobey and ignore whoever's in the office. And that applies to the rest of the government too. (Of course, it might get harder to do if one provides the president or government with more tools that don't require agreement or collusion -- Anders' rational fear of a turnkey totalitarian state.) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 19 16:56:00 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 12:56:00 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <00f401d21280$aa3883b0$fea98b10$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <004501d211e1$92ffd800$b8ff8800$@att.net> <00f401d21280$aa3883b0$fea98b10$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:18 AM, spike wrote: > ?> >> ?> ? >> ?Come on Spike, do you really need to invent wild conspiracy theories >> involving an international crime ring run by the Clintons to explain >> violence directed against Americans in an Islamic country during a civil >> war? John K Clark ? > > > > ?> ? > I do need some kind of wild conspiracy theory to explain why the embassy > was not evacuated when we knew there were credible threats. > > ? There are *ALWAYS* *?* ? credible threats ? ? against the American ambassador of a ? ? Islamic country during a civil war, ?it ? ? ? comes with the job. Ambassador Stevens ? ? could have evacuated the embassy but he chose not to, and on 2 separate occasions in the month before the attack he was offered more security guards and he said no both times. ? It's true I can't prove the ambassador wasn't murdered by thugs hired by Hillary Clinton to protect her international crime empire, but you can't prove he wasn't murdered by thugs hired by Gary Johnson ? ? to protect ? ? his ? ? international crime empire. Both are equally possible. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From giulio at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 05:44:56 2016 From: giulio at gmail.com (Giulio Prisco) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 07:44:56 +0200 Subject: [ExI] Please contact me for a paid sci/tech writing opportunity Message-ID: Please contact me for a paid freelance, location-independent sci/tech writing opportunity. Futuristic tech, crypto, weird science etc. Pay per article reasonable, usual requirements apply. From pharos at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 08:48:09 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 09:48:09 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Do you suffer from Election Stress Disorder? Message-ID: Do you suffer from Election Stress Disorder? Your campaign obsession is part of a psychological epidemic ? and it may be hurting your health Political anxiety and fear used to be a health problem only in the developing world ? now it's rampant in the U.S. Laura Bolt Sep 18, 2016 Quotes: As Stosny told Salon: ?This election appeals more to the toddler brain ? emotional, all-or-nothing thinking ? with more of the toddler coping mechanisms: blame, denial, and avoidance. ~~~~~~~~~ So, is there any remedy for Election Stress Syndrome? Stosny recommends voters try to shift to the adult brain and ?hold other people?s perspectives alongside your own. Weigh evidence, see nuance, plan for the future and replace blame, denial, and avoidance with appreciation of complexity.? Of course, that won?t stop a large number of people from obsessively Googling ?how to move to Canada.? ------------------ BillK From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 14:25:08 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:25:08 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <006e01d211ca$5ed2e070$1c78a150$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> <006e01d211ca$5ed2e070$1c78a150$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 10:18 AM, spike wrote: > > > ?Come on Spike, do you really need to invent wild conspiracy theories >> involving an international crime ring run by the Clintons to explain >> violence directed against Americans in an Islamic country during a civil >> war? John K Clark > > > I do need some kind of wild conspiracy theory to explain why the embassy > was not evacuated when we knew there were credible threats. There are *ALWAYS* credible threats against the American ambassador of a Islamic country during a civil war, it comes with the job. Ambassador Stevens could have evacuated the embassy but he chose not to, and on 2 separate occasions in the month before the attack he was offered more security guards and he said no both times. It's true I can't prove the ambassador wasn't murdered by thugs hired by Hillary Clinton to protect her international crime empire, but you can't prove he wasn't murdered by thugs hired by Gary Johnson to protect his international crime empire. Both are equally possible. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 20 14:35:52 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 07:35:52 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> <006e01d211ca$5ed2e070$1c78a150$@att.net> Message-ID: <009101d2134c$4adcc3f0$e0964bd0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?Ambassador Stevens could have evacuated the embassy but he chose not to, and on 2 separate occasions in the month before the attack he was offered more security guards and he said no both times? John K Clark That isn?t Ambo?s call. The military does regular threat-assessment audits, which are sent to the State Department. If the local military says they have credible threats and inadequate resources to defend, the SecState has the responsibility to order shutdown and evacuation of personnel and classified documents. Ambo?s wishes and opinions are seldom taken into consideration, for he isn?t qualified to make military assessments. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 17:07:56 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 13:07:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <009101d2134c$4adcc3f0$e0964bd0$@att.net> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> <006e01d211ca$5ed2e070$1c78a150$@att.net> <009101d2134c$4adcc3f0$e0964bd0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:35 AM, spike wrote: *>?>??*Ambassador Stevens could have evacuated the embassy but he chose not >> to, and on 2 separate occasions in the month before the attack he was >> offered more security guards and he said no both times? John K Clark > > > ?> ? > That isn?t Ambo?s call. The military does regular threat-assessment > audits, which are sent to the State Department. If the local military says > they have credible threats and inadequate resources to defend, the SecState > has the responsibility to order shutdown and evacuation of personnel and > classified documents. Ambo?s wishes and opinions are seldom taken into > consideration, for he isn?t qualified to make military assessments. > ?Stevens was no neophyte, he was considered one of the State Department's top experts on Iran as well as Libya, and before he was ambassador he was the head of the Office of Multilateral Nuclear and Security Affairs. He knew he was in a dangerous situation, everybody did, but if they evacuated an embassy every time there was a credible threat to it there would be no embassies in Islamic countries. Stevens had all the information that Clinton had and if he was a good ambassador he should have had more, he should have had a feeling about what things were like on the streets of Benghazi that was better than anyone. Stevens was a very brave man who made a mistake, we all make mistakes but when you make one in a crises it can be lethal. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 20 17:28:37 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 10:28:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> <006e01d211ca$5ed2e070$1c78a150$@att.net> <009101d2134c$4adcc3f0$e0964bd0$@att.net> Message-ID: <015101d21364$6d090250$471b06f0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: Re: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:35 AM, spike > wrote: > ?>?>>?Ambassador Stevens could have evacuated the embassy but he chose not to? John K Clark ?> >?That isn?t Ambo?s call? he isn?t qualified to make military assessments. ?>?Stevens was no neophyte, he was considered one of the State Department's top experts on Iran as well as Libya? Stevens was a very brave man who made a mistake, we all make mistakes but when you make one in a crises it can be lethal? John K Clark John, I will certainly grant that Amb. Stevens was a fine American, a brave man and an expert on the Middle East, and that he wanted to stay. But that still isn?t his call. The Sec.State is responsible for making that decision, and if that decision is stay, the Secretary has the responsibility to have adequate security, based on the availability of military support and a reasonable evacuation plan in the event of an attack. My theory is that there were military threat assessments coming in, but those would not and could not be sent directly to Sec. Clinton because they are classified up the kazoo. An example would be an assessment which observation of an apartment building within range where a person in the top floor could fire out the window and hit a target standing at the front door of the embassy with an 80% chance of a hit per round fired. The same assessment could suggest an alternative entrance, where a rooftop shot would have only a 30% chance per round. Clearly that kind of information would be highly classified, for it would identify a vulnerability and suggest a workaround for the bad guys. Since the Secretary had no encrypted .gov account, and the embassy couldn?t use her unsecured server (for that would require an illegal act to even write on a system that could access her unsecured server) then I see no legal means for the military threat assessment to get into the proper hands. Keep in mind Stevens was making life-or-death decisions for others besides himself. The military contractors hired to rescue him in an attack are also placed at risk, as was the Information Officer Sean Smith as well as the others who escaped. Those contractors knew that if shooting started, their moral duty was to run toward the sound of gunfire to try to rescue Ambo and anyone else still alive there (which they did (but it was too late for Smith and Stevens.)) For that reason, Stevens doesn?t get to make the decision of stay or go: the Secretary makes that call based on military threat assessments. What was the schedule for periodic threat assessments? Where are these assessments? Who received them? How? Why do we still not know the answers to those questions? And, if the assessments were being received on the State Department?s .gov (legally) in what form did those reports get to the Sec.State? What was the mechanism whereby those reports made it to the person with the power to make the decision? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 20 21:44:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 14:44:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] green flag on tesla robocars Message-ID: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> Not sure how to interpret this story in the local news but it sounds like something important happened today in the regulation of robo-cars: http://patch.com/california/milpitas/s/fw19l/tesla-news-government-drops-the -green-flag-in-race-to-driverless-car?utm_source=alert-breakingnews &utm_medium=email&utm_term=business&utm_campaign=alert Anyone here have the straight dope? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 22:09:59 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 23:09:59 +0100 Subject: [ExI] green flag on tesla robocars In-Reply-To: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> References: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> Message-ID: On 20 September 2016 at 22:44, spike wrote: > > Not sure how to interpret this story in the local news but it sounds like > something important happened today in the regulation of robo-cars: > > http://patch.com/california/milpitas/s/fw19l/tesla-news-government-drops-the-green-flag-in-race-to-driverless-car?utm_source=alert-breakingnews&utm_medium=email&utm_term=business&utm_campaign=alert > > Anyone here have the straight dope? > The government appears to want to encourage driverless cars development. But it also wants to make sure all states apply the same minimum standards. BillK From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 20 23:19:48 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 18:19:48 -0500 Subject: [ExI] confounding Message-ID: If you are familiar with this term you may stop reading now. Spike and I went back and forth a few times, and it turns out that he has not heard of it. Certainly he knows the idea: Add two variables to a situation and no matter what happens you can't tell the effect of one from the other. Psych uses confounding to describe this, but I'd like to find out who else does, or if they don't, do they have a word for the idea. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu Wed Sep 21 00:01:09 2016 From: hrivera at alumni.virginia.edu (Henry Rivera) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 20:01:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] confounding In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: So it's this: In statistics, a *confounding variable* (also *confounding factor*, a *confound*, a *lurking variable* or a *confounder*) is an extraneous variable in a statistical model that correlates (directly or inversely) with both the dependent variable and the independent variable , in a way that "explains away" some or all of the correlation between these two variables. -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding I've only heard about it in the context of experiments and statistics. While Spike is a Renaissance man, he still may not have been exposed to Research Design instruction like us psychologists. -Henry On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:19 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > If you are familiar with this term you may stop reading now. > > Spike and I went back and forth a few times, and it turns out that he has > not heard of it. Certainly he knows the idea: > > Add two variables to a situation and no matter what happens you can't tell > the effect of one from the other. > > Psych uses confounding to describe this, but I'd like to find out who else > does, or if they don't, do they have a word for the idea. > > bill w > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 00:06:13 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 19:06:13 -0500 Subject: [ExI] confounding In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Yeah, I knew you would know all about it, but I am interested in what the hard science people think and what their term(s) are. They have to control for variables, so they must have some kind of vocabulary for it. bill w On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:01 PM, Henry Rivera wrote: > So it's this: > In statistics, a *confounding variable* (also *confounding factor*, a > *confound*, a *lurking variable* or a *confounder*) is an extraneous > variable in a statistical > model that correlates > (directly or inversely) with > both the dependent variable > and the independent > variable , in a way > that "explains away" some or all of the correlation between these two > variables. > -https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding > > I've only heard about it in the context of experiments and statistics. > While Spike is a Renaissance man, he still may not have been exposed to > Research Design instruction like us psychologists. > -Henry > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 7:19 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> If you are familiar with this term you may stop reading now. >> >> Spike and I went back and forth a few times, and it turns out that he has >> not heard of it. Certainly he knows the idea: >> >> Add two variables to a situation and no matter what happens you can't >> tell the effect of one from the other. >> >> Psych uses confounding to describe this, but I'd like to find out who >> else does, or if they don't, do they have a word for the idea. >> >> bill w >> >> _______________________________________________ >> extropy-chat mailing list >> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org >> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 00:19:50 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 17:19:50 -0700 Subject: [ExI] green flag on tesla robocars In-Reply-To: References: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 20, 2016, at 3:09 PM, BillK wrote: > > > The government appears to want to encourage driverless cars development. > But it also wants to make sure all states apply the same minimum standards. Seems a bit early to lock in minimum standards. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 00:34:48 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 20:34:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Given foreign opinion of Trump as a big negative, if he is elected he > will not be a world leader in anything. ?You're being a little unfair to Trump, he would be the world leader in bombing. For months Trump said he had a secret plan to defeat ISIS "*very very quickl*y" but he refused to tell us how, but then he realized "*People are thinking like I don't have a plan*" so he decided to give us a hint, Donald ?'s plan is "*I would bomb the shit out of them*". Donald believes that "*ISIS is making a tremendous amount of money because of the oil that they took away*", they aren't actually, ISIS has destroyed refineries and pipelines but they have no ability to operate any of them and no way to sell oil even if they could; they never made a dime off them, but never mind that small detail ?.? This is Donald's idea in h ?i? s own words: *?I would bomb the shit out of them. I?d just bomb those suckers. I?d blow up the pipes, I?d blow up the refineries, I?d blow up every single inch?there would be nothing left.? ?I would bomb the shit out of them.? And that's right?.? And you know what, you'll get Exxon to come in there, and in two months, you ever see these guys? How good they are, the great oil companies, they'll rebuild it brand new. In the old days, when we won a war, to the victor belonged the ?spoils. ? * *And I'll take the oil? take the oil in Iraq as part of the? ??spoils of war?.??* ?Of course it would take many decades to pump all the oil out of Iraq so American soldiers might be there for some time, but I can't see how stealing another country's oil could create any long term problems, can you? It looks like Donald has solved the terrorism problem and the nuclear arsenal of the USA is in safe hands with this deep thinker. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 00:43:06 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 20:43:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Sep 20, 2016 8:35 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > Donald believes that "ISIS is making a tremendous amount of money because of the oil that they took away", they aren't actually, ISIS has destroyed refineries and pipelines but they have no ability to operate any of them and no way to sell oil even if they could; they never made a dime off them, but never mind that small detail. Umm... actually he's right: http://www.businessinsider.com/isis-making-50-million-a-month-from-oil-sales-2015-10 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 01:13:27 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 21:13:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: > On Sep 20, 2016 8:35 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > > > Donald believes that "ISIS is making a tremendous amount of money > because of the oil that they took away", they aren't actually, ISIS has > destroyed refineries and pipelines but they have no ability to operate any > of them and no way to sell oil even if they could; they never made a dime > off them, but never mind that small detail. > > Umm... actually he's right: > > http://www.businessinsider.com/isis-making-50-million-a- > month-from-oil-sales-2015-10 > ?Actually he's not. You're article is nearly a year old, here is some much more recent information: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/06/trump-repeats-claims-that-isis-has-taken-over-libyan-oil.html ? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/25/trumps-false-claim-that-isis-is-making-a-fortune http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/apr/27/donald-trump/no-donald-trump-isis-not-making-millions-dol John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 01:45:14 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 21:45:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: You wrote "they never made a dime off them, but never mind that small detail." It doesn't matter when my article was written. I am fully aware it is a year old. It's also in direct contradiction of what you wrote above. The article contradicts pretty much everything you wrote in your original assertion. On Sep 20, 2016 9:14 PM, "John Clark" wrote: > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 8:43 PM, Dylan Distasio > wrote: > >> On Sep 20, 2016 8:35 PM, "John Clark" wrote: >> >> > Donald believes that "ISIS is making a tremendous amount of money >> because of the oil that they took away", they aren't actually, ISIS has >> destroyed refineries and pipelines but they have no ability to operate any >> of them and no way to sell oil even if they could; they never made a dime >> off them, but never mind that small detail. >> >> Umm... actually he's right: >> >> http://www.businessinsider.com/isis-making-50-million-a-mont >> h-from-oil-sales-2015-10 >> > > ?Actually he's not. You're article is nearly a year old, here is some > much more recent information: > > http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/06/trump-repeats-claims-that- > isis-has-taken-over-libyan-oil.html? > > https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/ > 04/25/trumps-false-claim-that-isis-is-making-a-fortune > > > http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/ > apr/27/donald-trump/no-donald-trump-isis-not-making-millions-dol > > John K Clark > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 01:53:33 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 21:53:33 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: ?> ? > The article contradicts pretty much everything you wrote in your original > assertion. > > ?And I quoted 3 much newer articles that pretty much contradicted everything in your original article. ? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 21 01:41:33 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 18:41:33 -0700 Subject: [ExI] confounding In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <012a01d213a9$4995a3b0$dcc0eb10$@att.net> On Behalf Of Henry Rivera Subject: Re: [ExI] confounding >?In statistics, a confounding variable (also confounding factor, a confound, a lurking variable or a confounder) is an extraneous variable in a statistical model ? Cool! Thanks Henry, I learned a new thing this day. >? While Spike is a Renaissance man, he still may not have been exposed to Research Design instruction like us psychologists. -Henry You are too kind, sir, but I am older than you think. I am more of a Dark Ages guy. Bumpy club, knapped flint, that sorta thing. Primitive. Red in tooth and claw, savage, retro. But I am working that so don?t give up on me. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 02:02:41 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 22:02:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: If you meant Libya only, you should have mentioned that. The article I sent you refers to Iraqi and Syrian oil revenue they captured that is well documented in other reputable sources. On Sep 20, 2016 9:54 PM, "John Clark" wrote: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:45 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: ?> ? > The article contradicts pretty much everything you wrote in your original > assertion. > > ?And I quoted 3 much newer articles that pretty much contradicted everything in your original article. ? ? John K Clark? _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 02:16:48 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 22:16:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 Dylan Distasio wrote: > ?> ? > If you meant Libya only, you should have mentioned that. > > ?You're right I should have specifically said Libya. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 02:40:16 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 22:40:16 -0400 Subject: [ExI] The Bomb verses a Email server In-Reply-To: <6BE32B70-7FAF-4419-BA93-8AC065CEB972@gmail.com> References: <006c01d20ed0$a834ba60$f89e2f20$@att.net> <7206d3eb-df8a-9494-b6c5-69b0ad80c114@aleph.se> <82ad6bdf-44a4-e942-2f3e-f7f6a4b91703@aleph.se> <009101d2115b$e1625620$a4270260$@att.net> <3bc9a815-3685-767e-d63b-f0e5043a6d80@aleph.se> <6BE32B70-7FAF-4419-BA93-8AC065CEB972@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 Dan TheBookMan wrote: ?> ? > Giving the devil his due, I don't believe Trump advocated nuclear > proliferation across the board. > ?On March 29 2016 Trump ?was asked the following question: ?"? *So if you said, Japan, yes, it?s fine, you get nuclear weapons, South Korea, you as well, and Saudi Arabia says we want them,* *? too?*" Trump's answer: " *Can I be honest with you? It?s going to happen, anyway. It?s going to happen anyway. It?s only a question of time. They?re going to start having them or we have to get rid of them entirely. But you have so many countries already, China, Pakistan, you have so many countries, Russia, you have so many countries right now that have them.? Now, wouldn?t you rather in a certain sense have Japan have nuclear weapons when North Korea has nuclear weapons? And they do have them. They absolutely have them. They can?t ? they have no carrier system yet but they will very soon.? ?Wouldn?t you rather have Japan, perhaps, they?re over there, they?re very close, they?re very fearful of North Korea* *?*" Trump didn't specifically say he wanted a dozen countries in eastern Europe to go nuclear but everybody knows Russia has lots and lots of H-bombs and he did say he wanted to scrap NATO and he made it very clear he thought Vladimir Putin was a great guy, so he must realize where that leads. Well..come to think of it...Trump is a world class nitwit so maybe he doesn't realize where that will lead. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Wed Sep 21 05:59:44 2016 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 22:59:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] ISIS' management and budget Message-ID: <775243a0-955e-9fff-a257-3d0244a61582@mydruthers.com> http://www.cato.org/events/isis-economically-socially-sustainable The Cato Institute had a forum in May. You can watch or listen to it at the above link. There was also a summary on Cato's daily podcast here: http://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-daily-podcast/isis-economy Bottom line: they're making boatloads of money from oil and other things, and they're managing their cashflow very carefully and sensibly. I don't know how to square this with the Post Ombudsman's article. Chris -- It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://www.pancrit.org http://mydruthers.com From pharos at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 08:27:42 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:27:42 +0100 Subject: [ExI] green flag on tesla robocars In-Reply-To: References: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> Message-ID: On 21 September 2016 at 01:19, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > Seems a bit early to lock in minimum standards. > Mike "Mish" Shedlock has a good description: Quote: Four Mish Conclusions 1. The Department of Transportation (DOT) fully embraced self-driving vehicles. There is no other interpretation. 2. DOT will set the rules. There will not be a patchwork of state-by-state regulations. States will only retain licensing, insurance, and speed limit regulations. 3. DOT expects, as do I, that HAVs will address and mitigate the overwhelming majority of crashes. DOT notes that 94 percent of crashes can be tied to a human choice or error. 4. My long-stated timeframe for millions of long-haul trucking jobs to vanish by the 2022-2024 is likely too distant. The Fed is on the verge of getting the major productivity boost it seeks. Will it like the result? ~~~~~~~~~~ BillK From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 21 14:33:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 07:33:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] head transplants again Message-ID: <007e01d21415$2a32b280$7e981780$@att.net> COOL (maybe.) This doctor claims a head transplant might get some spinal cord regeneration: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2106382-head-transplant-teams-new-anima l-tests-fail-to-convince-critics/ I liked the part about both the head and the body need to be cooled so that they cells could live longer without a pulse. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 16:52:24 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 12:52:24 -0400 Subject: [ExI] green flag on tesla robocars In-Reply-To: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> References: <003101d21388$20bca680$6235f380$@att.net> Message-ID: On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 5:44 PM, spike wrote: > Anyone here have the straight dope? http://ideas.4brad.com/critique-nhtsas-newly-released-recommendations-states-and-regulations Critique of NHTSA's newly released regulations Submitted by brad on Mon, 2016-09-19 22:58. - Robocars The long awaited list of recommendations and potential regulations for Robocars has just been released by NHTSA, the federal agency that regulates car safety and safety issues in car manufacture. Normally, NHTSA does not regulate car technology before it is released into the market, and the agency, while it says it is wary of slowing down this safety-increasing technology, has decided to do the unprecedented ? and at a whopping 115 pages. Broadly, this is very much the wrong direction. Nobody ? not Google, Uber, Ford, GM or certainly NHTSA ? knows the precise form of these cars will have when deployed. Almost surely something will change from our existing knowledge today. They know this, but still wish to move. Some of the larger players have pushed for regulation. Big companies like certainty. They want to know what the rules will be before they invest. Startups thrive better in the chaos, making up the rules as we go along. NHTSA hopes to define ?best practices? but the best anybody can do in 2016 is lay down existing practices and conventional wisdom. The entirely new methods of providing safety that are yet to be invented won?t be in such a definition. The document is very detailed, so it will generate several blog posts of analysis. Here I present just initial reactions. Those reactions are broadly negative. This document is too detailed by an order of magnitude. Its regulations begin today, but fortunately they are also accepting public comment. The scope of the document is so large, however, that it seems extremely unlikely that they would scale back this document to the level it should be at. As such, the progress of robocar development in the USA may be seriously negatively affected. Vehicle performance guidelines The first part of the regulations is a proposed 15 point safety standard. It must be certified (by the vendor) that the car meets these standards. NHTSA wants the power, according to an Op-Ed by no less than President Obama, to be able to pull cars from the road that don?t meet these safety promises. - Data Recording and Sharing - Privacy - System Safety - Vehicle Cybersecurity - Human Machine Interface - Crashworthiness - Consumer Education and Training - Registration and Certification - Post-Crash Behavior - Federal, State and Local Laws - Operational Design Domain - Object and Event Detection and Response - Fall Back (Minimal Risk Condition) - Validation Methods - *Ethical Considerations* As you might guess, the most disturbing is the last one. As I have written many times , the issue of ethical ?trolley problems? where cars must decide between killing one person are another are a philosophy class tool, not a guide to real world situations. Developers should spend as close to zero effort on these problems as possible, since they are not common enough to warrant special attention, if not for our morbid fascination with machines making life or death decisions in hypothetical situations. Let the policymakers answer these questions if they want to; programmers and vendors don?t. For the past couple of years, this has been a game that?s kept people entertained and ethicists employed. The idea that government regulations might demand solutions to these problems before these cars can go on the road is appalling. If these regulations are written this way, *we will delay saving lots of real lives in the interest of debating which highly hypothetical lives will be saved or harmed in ridiculously rare situations*. NHTSA?s rules demand that ethical decisions be ?made consciously and intentionally.? Algorithms must be ?transparent? and based on input from regulators, drivers, passengers and road users. While the section makes mention of machine learning techniques, it seems in the same breath to forbid them. Most of the other rules are more innocuous. Of course all vendors will know and have little trouble listing what roads their car works on, and they will have extensive testing data on the car?s perception system and how it handles every sort of failure. However, the requirement to keep the government constantly updated will be burdensome. Some vehicles will be adding streets to their route map literally ever day. While I have been a professional privacy advocate, and I do care about just how the privacy of car users is protected, I am frankly not that concerned during the pilot project phase about how well this is done. I do want a good regime ? and even the ability to do anonymous taxi ? so it?s perhaps not too bad to think about these things now, but I suspect these regulations will be fairly meaningless unless written in consultation with independent privacy advocates. The hard reality is that during the test phase, even a privacy advocate has to admit that the cars will need to make very extensive recordings of everything they can, so that any problems encountered can be studied and fixed and placed into the test suite. 50 state laws NHTSA?s plan has been partially endorsed by the self-driving coalition for safer streets (whose members include big players Ford, Google, Volvo, Uber and Lyft.) They like the fact that it has guidance for states on how to write their regulations, fearing that regulations may differ too much state to state. I have written that having 50 sets of rules may not be that bad an idea because jurisdictional competition can allow legal innovation and having software load new parameters as you drive over a border is not that hard. In this document NHTSA asks the states to yield to the DOT on regulating robocar operation and performance. States should stick to registering cars, rules of the road, safety inspections and insurance. States will regulate human drivers as before, but the feds will regulate computer drivers. States will still regulate testing, in theory, but the test cars must comply with the federal regulations. New Authorities A large part of the document just lists the legal justifications for NHTSA to regulate in this fashion and is primarily for policy wonks. Section 4, however, lists new authorities NHTSA is going to seek in order to do more regulation. Some of the authorities they may see include: - Pre-market safety assurance: Defining testing tools and methods to be used before selling - Pre-market approval authority: Vendors would need approval from NHTSA before selling, rather than self-certifying compliance with the regulations - Hybrid approaches of pre-market approval and self-certification - Cease and desist authority: The ability to demand cars be taken off the road - Exemption authority: An ability to grant rue exemptions for testing - Post-sale authority to regulate software changes - Much more Other quick notes: - NHTSA has abandoned their levels in favour of the SAE?s. The SAE?s were almost identical of course, with the addition of a ?level 5? which is meaningless because it requires a vehicle that can drive literally everywhere, and there is not really a commercial reason to make a car at present that can do that. - NHTSA is now pushing the acronym ?HAV? (highly automated vehicle) as yet another contender in the large sea of names people use for this technology. (Self-driving car, driverless car, autonomous vehicle, automated vehicle, robocar etc.) Today has meetings for me but much more analysis is on the way. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Wed Sep 21 22:49:05 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 18:49:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Why don't anti-Trump PACs get more creative? Message-ID: Trump's religious supporters are fine with him torturing somebody in ways that are far worse than waterboarding ? and murdering children ? but are horrified, HORRIFIED I tell you, of the very thought that anyone could say "fuck". Trump has said "fuck" in speeches many times but this fact doesn't seem to have entered very deeply into the public's consciousness. Why? One reason may be it's always bleeped, even in Hillary's attack ad she bleeps out "fuck" when Trump says it. Why couldn't a anti-Trump PAC make a 30 second ad showing exactly what Trump said in all its glory with no bleeps, namely "go fuck themselves". Some TV stations might refuse to air it because the FCC says you can't say "fuck" on the air, but the FCC also says TV stations can't edit political advertisements or refuse to air them because they don't like what they're saying. If the matter goes to court all the better, it would make great theater ?;? the FCC government lawyers arguing that a presidential candidate ?'s? campaign speech is too obscene for the public to hear, ? while free speech advocates say the ?voters have? a right to hear a presidential candidate without a government ordered filter to make him sound better. I'm not sure if the above is legal but it would certainly be moral for a anti-Trump PAC to do ?;? my next idea is the opposite, it is certainly legal but is not particularly moral. Start a small anonymous PAC with a neutral sounding name (like People for Good Government or something) and then get some Saturday Night Live people who write those satirical fake political adds to write a supposedly pro-Trump ad that was completely tone deaf and offensive; they should back off a little on the surrealism so it's not obviously fake. Being an anonymous PAC people wouldn't be sure if those who made the ad were pro ?-? Trump and ?stupid? or anti ?-? Trump and clever. Either way it's a win win for Hillary and for civilization. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 21 23:00:17 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:00:17 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Why don't anti-Trump PACs get more creative? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <003901d2145b$ecb9e170$c62da450$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] Why don't anti-Trump PACs get more creative? >? Start a small anonymous PAC with a neutral sounding name (like People for Good Government or something)? Ja, the Hilliary people need to get spending. They aren?t spending enough money yet. SPEND! Then SPEND MORE! We are told the Clinton campaign is outspending Trump?s campaign 8 to 1, while Trump is battling both mainstream parties simultaneously. Perhaps those two parties should merge? Or have they already? >? then get some Saturday Night Live people who write those satirical fake political adds ? John K Clark It?s been done, and it worked. To this day, you can ask random people who said ?I can see Russia from my house!? More people will say Sarah Palin than will say Tina Fey. That one was a gift from nature: Tina Fey looks more like Sarah Palin than Sarah Palin does. I think the reason so little effort is made to parody Trump is that he already beat them to it. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 22 00:21:40 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2016 19:21:40 -0500 Subject: [ExI] autumnal equinox Message-ID: Happy Fall, everyone, but the only thing falling around here is sweat. Still in the 90s F bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Thu Sep 22 07:03:37 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 08:03:37 +0100 Subject: [ExI] autumnal equinox In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7ac8a34c-906c-d2ff-0421-364213324eaa@aleph.se> On 2016-09-22 01:21, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Happy Fall, everyone, but the only thing falling around here is sweat. > Still in the 90s F It was so refreshing to go from the heat of Washington DC to the Atlantic drizzle of Galway in Ireland this week. It is pretty fun to see how the temperature lags the solar input: the world has a lot of thermal capacity. Also, equinoxes are beautiful: everything aligns. I think they make the proper holidays, not set by human standards. We should be celebrating equinoxes, perihelions and apehelions. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 22 14:20:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 07:20:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] autumnal equinox In-Reply-To: <7ac8a34c-906c-d2ff-0421-364213324eaa@aleph.se> References: <7ac8a34c-906c-d2ff-0421-364213324eaa@aleph.se> Message-ID: <005b01d214dc$83a07f60$8ae17e20$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders . >.Also, equinoxes are beautiful: everything aligns. I think they make the proper holidays, not set by human standards. We should be celebrating equinoxes, perihelions and apehelions. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Pagan heresy! I agree. We almost do the solstices here in the states with our Christmas buying season and our patriotic 4th of July celebrating independence from England, but on the latter, I would think the celebration would be after the war was won, rather than the signing of the document that started it. Then we would be celebrating 19 October 1781 as the birth of the nation. I would prefer a different date however: 21 June 1788, when the US constitution was ratified. This would align a patriotic holiday with a celestial event and would call attention of America to the really important event of agreeing on a structure of law, rather than kicking off a war. We can likewise find reasons to move Christmas to 21 December, or better yet, move New Year's Day there and leave Christmas where it is for historic purposes. We can likewise find good reasons to celebrate at the Autumnal equinox: Magellan set out to circumnavigate the globe in 1519, East and West Germany ratified reunification signaling the end of the cold war in 1990, both of which are good reasons for celebration. For the Spring Equinox, we can celebrate Spring Break and the legendary revelry by college students all across the land, the drunken nekkidness for which so many are fondly repentant, the youthful abandonment of propriety to which so many owe their lives. (Anders, do Europeans do wild and crazy Spring Break over there? You should.) spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 22 14:53:11 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 09:53:11 -0500 Subject: [ExI] autumnal equinox In-Reply-To: <005b01d214dc$83a07f60$8ae17e20$@att.net> References: <7ac8a34c-906c-d2ff-0421-364213324eaa@aleph.se> <005b01d214dc$83a07f60$8ae17e20$@att.net> Message-ID: ?Also, equinoxes are beautiful: everything aligns. I think they make the proper holidays, not set by human standards. We should be celebrating equinoxes, perihelions and apehelions. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Hey! What about us loonies? bill w On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:20 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *Anders > *?* > > >?Also, equinoxes are beautiful: everything aligns. I think they make the > proper holidays, not set by human standards. We should be celebrating > equinoxes, perihelions and apehelions. -- Dr Anders Sandberg > > > > > > Pagan heresy! > > > > I agree. We almost do the solstices here in the states with our Christmas > buying season and our patriotic 4th of July celebrating independence from > England, but on the latter, I would think the celebration would be after > the war was won, rather than the signing of the document that started it. > Then we would be celebrating 19 October 1781 as the birth of the nation. I > would prefer a different date however: 21 June 1788, when the US > constitution was ratified. This would align a patriotic holiday with a > celestial event and would call attention of America to the really important > event of agreeing on a structure of law, rather than kicking off a war. > > > > We can likewise find reasons to move Christmas to 21 December, or better > yet, move New Year?s Day there and leave Christmas where it is for historic > purposes. > > > > We can likewise find good reasons to celebrate at the Autumnal equinox: > Magellan set out to circumnavigate the globe in 1519, East and West Germany > ratified reunification signaling the end of the cold war in 1990, both of > which are good reasons for celebration. > > > > For the Spring Equinox, we can celebrate Spring Break and the legendary revelry by college students all across the land, the drunken nekkidness for which so many are fondly repentant, the youthful abandonment of propriety to which so many owe their lives. (Anders, do Europeans do wild and crazy Spring Break over there? You should.) > > > > spike > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From steinberg.will at gmail.com Thu Sep 22 15:47:13 2016 From: steinberg.will at gmail.com (Will Steinberg) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 11:47:13 -0400 Subject: [ExI] autumnal equinox In-Reply-To: References: <7ac8a34c-906c-d2ff-0421-364213324eaa@aleph.se> <005b01d214dc$83a07f60$8ae17e20$@att.net> Message-ID: A little bit of cool coincidence--tonight is the waning quarter moon--i.e. the 3/4 point of moonlight cycle, 50% strength and falling. And (in the northern hemisphere, of course) the sun is also at its 3/4 light, 50% strength and falling point. Neat stuff! A time of denouement, perhaps. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 22 16:57:56 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 11:57:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] autumnal equinox In-Reply-To: References: <7ac8a34c-906c-d2ff-0421-364213324eaa@aleph.se> <005b01d214dc$83a07f60$8ae17e20$@att.net> Message-ID: Neat stuff! A time of denouement, perhaps. will Great! What should I denoue? bill w On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:47 AM, Will Steinberg wrote: > A little bit of cool coincidence--tonight is the waning quarter moon--i.e. > the 3/4 point of moonlight cycle, 50% strength and falling. And (in the > northern hemisphere, of course) the sun is also at its 3/4 light, 50% > strength and falling point. > > Neat stuff! A time of denouement, perhaps. > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 23 14:45:01 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 07:45:01 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill Message-ID: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Cool, I was hoping something like this would happen. Currently if a patient has a disease that we know we have nothing to fight, patients don't really have a good way to just try something, anything, take a shot in the dark, better than just laying down your arms and dying with ammo still in your weapon just because we can't see the target, a hail Mary play, anything, just anything: http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/HealthPolicy/60419?xid=NL_bre akingnews_2016-09-23 &eun=g760153d0r OK so we see the downside: possible bad actors pushing some goofy useless pharmaceutical product for profit. So I thought of an idea. We could take all the hopeless cases, get them to sign up for something, anything. Then we get a board of overseers, non-professional, volunteers perhaps, nobody with any possible route to profit, just observers and advisors. We open up some kind of web-based public data site, so that everyone can view the database. We include what meds the patient consumed, and perhaps some kind of database to describe the vital stats, the outcome, etc. The task would be large-scale pattern recognition, the kind that cannot be readily done by machine by known means, but a million pairs of eyes might be able to extract a pattern. We could number the medications, perhaps have advisors to steer the patient away from off-label pharmas that would make any known medical condition worse (if the patient had hypertension for example, that patient's right-to-try package would eschew stimulants. One I have wondered about for a long time: those steroids that professional sports people are supposed to not take but we know they do. What if. a terminal heart patient is given big doses of that? If the patient is spinning into the ground anyway and we know what will happen if we stand around and do nothing, why not give him that? If he eagerly volunteers and we don't really know if it will help, why not just try something, anything? A wild shot in the dark is better than dying with unfired ammo, ja? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 23 16:18:59 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 11:18:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: A wild shot in the dark is better than dying with unfired ammo, ja? spike I see one little problem: the list will quickly grow to millions; it will take a big website underwritten by Bill Gates or ???? A staff of volunteers to run it,and so on. I DO think it's a good idea. I don't think any medical people will touch it - lawsuits. What it would be is a giant form of the People's Pharmacy, with everyone who wants to posting their symptoms. You would also get people referring you to doctors who have solved their cases, folk remedies (nothing wrong with that for the desperate - I tried on, soap under my sheets for leg and foot cramps and it WORKS), foreign stem cell treatments - in short, a big huge holy mess. Are you volunteering? Take it to those people who fund nonprofit startups. There's probably all kinds of this stuff on the web, but it's in bits and pieces on scores of sites (and no, I don't know any of them). Me - very introverted, very highly sensitive, very low pain threshold, very high sedation threshold (meaning it takes far more of a pain reliever to affect me). No doctor will prescribe additional meds based on the above because he will get caught for over-prescribing, which he is actually not doing; his is just adjusting the meds to the patient. There must be millions of people in the same fix. Eventually medicine will take personal genetic info and prescribe according to it, but I likely won't see it. All doctors can do is try to get you into a clinical trial, and that's very limited and hard to get in. Go get'em Spike! bill w On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:45 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > Cool, I was hoping something like this would happen. Currently if a > patient has a disease that we know we have nothing to fight, patients don?t > really have a good way to just try something, anything, take a shot in the > dark, better than just laying down your arms and dying with ammo still in > your weapon just because we can?t see the target, a hail Mary play, > anything, just anything: > > > > http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/HealthPolicy/60419?xid=NL_ > breakingnews_2016-09-23&eun=g760153d0r > > > > OK so we see the downside: possible bad actors pushing some goofy useless > pharmaceutical product for profit. So I thought of an idea. We could take > all the hopeless cases, get them to sign up for something, anything. Then > we get a board of overseers, non-professional, volunteers perhaps, nobody > with any possible route to profit, just observers and advisors. We open up > some kind of web-based public data site, so that everyone can view the > database. We include what meds the patient consumed, and perhaps some kind > of database to describe the vital stats, the outcome, etc. > > > > The task would be large-scale pattern recognition, the kind that cannot be > readily done by machine by known means, but a million pairs of eyes might > be able to extract a pattern. We could number the medications, perhaps > have advisors to steer the patient away from off-label pharmas that would > make any known medical condition worse (if the patient had hypertension for > example, that patient?s right-to-try package would eschew stimulants. > > > > One I have wondered about for a long time: those steroids that > professional sports people are supposed to not take but we know they do. > What if? a terminal heart patient is given big doses of that? If the > patient is spinning into the ground anyway and we know what will happen if > we stand around and do nothing, why not give him that? If he eagerly > volunteers and we don?t really know if it will help, why not just try > something, anything? A wild shot in the dark is better than dying with > unfired ammo, ja? > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 23 18:27:22 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 11:27:22 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: <006b01d215c8$20b6f770$6224e650$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Sent: Friday, September 23, 2016 9:19 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill >>?A wild shot in the dark is better than dying with unfired ammo, ja? Spike >?I see one little problem? I see many little problems and several big ones, but not these: >?the list will quickly grow to millions? That is a solution, not a problem. Or rather a challenge. Or in the language of business, every problem is an opportunity for excellence. This is one time when that isn?t just flapping of gums, it really is this time. >?it will take a big website underwritten by Bill Gates or ???? ? Ja, it won?t be free, but as projects go, this one shouldn?t be expensive. We would need a website with plenty of storage (very cheap) some means of database management (not all that expensive even assuming a paid professional staff) and a design team of some sort (just the thing Microsloth or Google does best with their existing staff.) >?A staff of volunteers to run it,and so on? Ja. What I have in mind is a small core of professional database people, perhaps some research-minded medics, public health grad students from Stanford perhaps who would carry out the initial design phase. Step one would be to design a structure for the database. A city has a set of metrics which describe its health. We know it isn?t perfect, but it isn?t useless either. The metrics we know best are population, income, demographics, school dropout rates, crime stats per capita and so on. These can be broken down into subcategories, such as the serious stuff (murder, rape, robbery, emailing classified info and so on (kidding bygones, John, geta sensa huma)) then the more misdemeanory stuff, down to ordinary stuff such as jaywalking, speeding and subcontract fraud (John, kidding bygones) but the point is with properly designed stats, one can get a reasonably good picture of the health of a city. Ja? OK then, we can do the same trick for the health of a prole, but I agree it is likely to be way more complicated, which is why we already have the health metrics for the city, but not the individual people who live there. We need doctors Rafal, to help us imagine or design such a thing, or? I conjecture a lotta work has already been done. Everything I ever think of, some other yahoo has already thought of it and done it a long time ago, oy vey. OK, so what is that standardized health descriptor? Is there currently a way to generate a standardized string of bytes, machine-readable, that describes a person?s health? What is the name of that standard please, and a site? Psychologists among us, we also need a bunch of metrics to describe the emotional health of the prole, since devouring random medications could have who knows what psychological impact without changing the vital stats. What do we have already? If a prole can have several hundred or several thousand descriptors (I don?t think the term ?metrics? would really be right for this application, but educate me please, doctors) then my notion is that with current digital technology we can handle several million proles each with a few hundred or even a few thousand health metrics or descriptors. Ja? Rafal? Data hipsters? We can use this system even if most of the metrics are unknown. I can show you a local example: 23&Me. There you have a database with over a megaprole, and each had the opportunity to fill out surveys with health questions and link it to the DNA signature. I did that, and spent a total of not less than about 10 hours. How much data does that generate? The genome 23 measures is 6 MB, and I would estimate I generated at least that with health surveys, but somehow Missus Google managed that database (and still does (free to the participants)) which must have been in the terabytes. Data hipsters please? Are we there yet? Once we standardize the design, we need can start filling it, even if most of the data is unknown. This creates what we in the biz might call a sparse matrix, but we have a pile of tools in the statistical toolkit for dealing with sparse matrices and extracting useful information out of them. Aerospace guys do this sorta thing for fun. Rather I did. >?I DO think it's a good idea. I don't think any medical people will touch it - lawsuits? The law I hope we get is one which offers immunity to all medics who participate, as advisors, as advocates for some approach, for statisticians who think they see a pattern, for all involved. >?What it would be is a giant form of the People's Pharmacy, with everyone who wants to posting their symptoms? Ja, but we still need some means of translating that sea of verbiage into a dataset which our statistical tools can analyze. See where I am going with that health metric suggestion above? >? soap under my sheets for leg and foot cramps and it WORKS), foreign stem cell treatments? Ja so what kind of data structure would be need to encode soap under the sheets? >? - in short, a big huge holy mess? >From which a big huge holy signal might emerge from the chaos, assuming we figure out how to take advantage of two things we didn?t really have until recently: the means of storing terabytes of information and the CPU horsepower to grind away at it using background computing (unused CPU cycles.) >?Are you volunteering? Take it to those people who fund nonprofit startups? I am if I knew how the hell to come up with standard database protocol for describing the health of an individual. I think something like this must have been done already by health insurance companies, ja? >?Go get'em Spike! bill w I do have something to contribute: my work with systematic comparison of cousin lists from AncestryDNA. If we can work that in there somehow, I think we can do the next (and better) whack at what Mrs. Google was doing with 23&Me. We know there are compact data structures which describe family trees. A lotta this stuff has already been done; we just need to figure out how to bring it together. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 23 19:15:14 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:15:14 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:45 AM, spike wrote: > http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/HealthPolicy/60419?xid=NL_ > breakingnews_2016-09-23&eun=g760153d0r > ?This is such an obviously good idea there is probably little chance of it passing both Republican controlled houses ?of congress, the Bible probably says it's against God's will or something. After all, unless we helped God out by forbidding stuff He doesn't like and empowering the police to enforce His prohibitions how could that omnipotent being ever have His will be done? The poor guy could never get His way unless we helped Him. ?If I could only ask one question to a presidential candidate to gauge their Libertarian tendencies it would be "Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide?"; isidewith.com asked them this very question and here are the results: Donald Trump ? refused to answer. ? Hillary Clinton ? said "yes". Gary Johnson ? said "? Yes, but only after a psychological examination to show they fully understand this choice ?". I find it very interesting that ? ? Hillary Clinton ? gave a more libertarian answer than the Libertarian Party candidate. ? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Fri Sep 23 19:31:44 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 15:31:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 3:15 PM, John Clark wrote: > > ?If I could only ask one question to a presidential candidate to gauge > their Libertarian tendencies it would be "Should terminally ill patients > be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide?"; isidewith.com > asked them this very question and here are the results: > > Donald Trump > ? refused to answer. > ? > Hillary Clinton > ? said "yes". > Gary Johnson > ? said "? > Yes, but only after a psychological examination to show they fully > understand this choice > ?". > > I find it very interesting that ? > ? > Hillary Clinton > ? gave a more libertarian answer than the Libertarian Party candidate. > ? > That doesn't mean anything. She's reversed herself many times and I seriously doubt she'd approve it without a psych exam. Dont' zing Johnson for giving a more complete answer. A more telling question would be "Should adults be allowed to end their lives?" -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 23 20:09:57 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 13:09:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: <00c001d215d6$75d90ff0$618b2fd0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dave Sill ? >>?Hillary Clinton gave a more libertarian answer than the Libertarian Party candidate. ? >? She's reversed herself many times and I seriously doubt she'd approve it without a psych exam. ?-Dave Too late. Just yesterday she was asked about it and said ?There?s no need for that.? http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-neurological-tests-health-2016-9 spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 23 21:43:06 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 17:43:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 23, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Dave Sill wrote: ? >> ?>> ? >> If I could only ask one question to a presidential candidate to gauge >> their Libertarian tendencies it would be "Should terminally ill patients >> be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide?"; isidewith.com >> asked them this very question and here are the results: >> Donald Trump >> ? refused to answer. >> ? >> Hillary Clinton >> ? said "yes". >> Gary Johnson >> ? said "? >> Yes, but only after a psychological examination to show they fully >> understand this choice >> ?". >> > I find it very interesting that ? >> ? >> Hillary Clinton >> ? gave a more libertarian answer than the Libertarian Party candidate. >> ? >> > > ?> ? > That doesn't mean anything. She's reversed herself many times and I > seriously doubt she'd approve it without a psych exam. Dont' zing Johnson > for giving a more complete answer. > ?If you are a true libertarian ?and are asked " Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide?" ? then "yes but" is not a more complete answer it is a inferior answer than "yes". And there are no ifs ands or even buts about it. ?> ? > A more telling question would be "Should adults be allowed to end their > lives?" > Belgium ? recently passed a law allowing ? terminally ill minor ?s? ?of any age ? to die ?,? ?and I congratulate Belgium for doing so. And a minor has already made use of the new law. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/child-dies-by-euthanasia-in-belgium-where-assistance-in-dying-is-legal/ ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 24 00:02:16 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 17:02:16 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> Message-ID: <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ? >>?Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via assisted suicide?" ? >? "yes but" is not a more complete answer it is a inferior answer than "yes". And there are no ifs ands or even buts about it?? John K Clark? Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill and deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 02:54:46 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 22:54:46 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:02 PM, spike wrote: >>?Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via >> assisted suicide?" >> ? ? >> "yes but" is not a more complete answer it is a inferior answer than >> "yes". And there are no ifs ands or even buts about it?? John K Clark? >> > > ?> ? > Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill and > deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? > Yes I think so because I am a libertarian. I also think it's irrelevant if the government or if anybody else thinks you're terminally ill or not. ? ? The question was if ? ? I ? ? want to end my life, because I'm ill or for any other reason, ? ? should I be ? ? allowed to obtain help to do so. My answer is a simple "yes" and I see no need to place a "but" after ? ? it. If the government wants to help me that's fine, ? if a company wants to help me for a fee that's fine,? if my friends want to help that's fine too and I don't want them prosecuted for murder after my death. I'm even fine with people who can't stand me helping me do what I want because they think the world will be a better place after I'm dead; if somebody does the right thing for the wrong reason it's still the right thing. I don't want you to get the wrong idea, I'm basically a happy person and I've never had a suicidal thought in my life, although it doesn't take much imagination to conceive of theoretical circumstances where that would change and I (or anybody) would want to end it all. Making somebody live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die when they want to live. That should be libertarianism 101. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 24 03:05:02 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 20:05:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> Message-ID: <01a101d21610$722bda10$56838e30$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ?>>?Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill and deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? >? Making somebody live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die when they want to live?. John K Clark Ja agreed. I am considering the risk that the government will decide a number of us outspoken ones (on the internet, which never forgets) are now terminally ill, and wish to ?assist? us in our suicide. The government of Germany decided a large number of people were terminally ill and assisted their suicides in the 1930s. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From danust2012 at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 03:39:46 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 20:39:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <01a101d21610$722bda10$56838e30$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <01a101d21610$722bda10$56838e30$@att.net> Message-ID: <4D936DAA-E909-4B71-9754-844E3B3BEC21@gmail.com> On Sep 23, 2016, at 8:05 PM, spike wrote: > From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark > > ?>>?Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill and deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? > > >? Making somebody live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die when they want to live?. John K Clark > > > Ja agreed. I am considering the risk that the government will decide a number of us outspoken ones (on the internet, which never forgets) are now terminally ill, and wish to ?assist? us in our suicide. The government of Germany decided a large number of people were terminally ill and assisted their suicides in the 1930s. That's what I thought you meant too: that the government assisting people would be regardless if they wanted to be assisted. My guess is Clinton would also say she supports some kind of evaluation too. I've often seen people argue that this is necessary because otherwise grandpa might be killed off and it made to look like he 'made' the choice by his kids and grandkids who don't want him and the hospital to eat up his fortune. I doubt any mainstream candidate who supports euthanasia, including Clinton, is against an evaluation. I also agree with Dave's point: the plumb line libertarian position is that every adult should have the right to end their life when they choose -- even if they're not terminally ill. This can be easily achieved by simply repealing all laws against suicide. (Yes, it might result in murderers trying to make their crimes look like suicide, but they already try that often enough, no?) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 13:38:15 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 08:38:15 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill Message-ID: >? Making somebody live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die when they want to live?. John K Clark Is there anything more basic to libertarianism than the idea that no one owns your body (or soul - some one has said that he was leaving his soul to whichever god could find it). Oregon has an assisted suicide law, but there should be no law of any kind. Making it legal means it was considered illegal to begin with. Now there is an idea that may be worth considering: there are laws against evading debt. Errant husbands and other fathers are legally required to provide support for the mother and child. This means that the gov. owns part of your income, not your body, but committing suicide to avoid your debts should have some legal consequences, eh? I hope this finishes off the discussion and we can get back to Spike's idea. bill w On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 10:39 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > On Sep 23, 2016, at 8:05 PM, spike wrote: > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org > ] *On Behalf Of *John Clark > > > > ?>>?Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill > and deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? > > > > >? Making somebody live when they want to die as as great a injustice as > making somebody die when they want to live?. John K Clark > > > > > > Ja agreed. I am considering the risk that the government will decide a > number of us outspoken ones (on the internet, which never forgets) are now > terminally ill, and wish to ?assist? us in our suicide. The government of > Germany decided a large number of people were terminally ill and assisted > their suicides in the 1930s. > > > That's what I thought you meant too: that the government assisting people > would be regardless if they wanted to be assisted. > > My guess is Clinton would also say she supports some kind of evaluation > too. I've often seen people argue that this is necessary because otherwise > grandpa might be killed off and it made to look like he 'made' the choice > by his kids and grandkids who don't want him and the hospital to eat up his > fortune. I doubt any mainstream candidate who supports euthanasia, > including Clinton, is against an evaluation. > > I also agree with Dave's point: the plumb line libertarian position is > that every adult should have the right to end their life when they choose > -- even if they're not terminally ill. This can be easily achieved by > simply repealing all laws against suicide. (Yes, it might result in > murderers trying to make their crimes look like suicide, but they already > try that often enough, no?) > > Regards, > > Dan > Sample my Kindle books via: > http://author.to/DanUst > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 24 14:29:35 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 07:29:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <008a01d21670$13371190$39a534b0$@att.net> >? Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill >>? Making somebody live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die when they want to live?. John K Clark >?Is there anything more basic to libertarianism than the idea that no one owns your body ? The problem with assisted suicide is that it is sometimes unclear how willing was the victim. Perhaps the 2 August demise of Shawn Lucas was assisted suicide. Even Snopes doesn?t know. >?I hope this finishes off the discussion and we can get back to Spike's idea?bill w The discussion can (and often does) branch. No worries. The following will be on the standardized database for health notion. I have been pondering this and have some ideas. We know that someone has figured out how to create and manage databases which must contain multiple terabytes of data, since the file size of the genome measured by 23&Me times the number of customers is way into the TBs, not even taking into account all the user-supplied data. That database starts in the TBs and grows from there. Yet somehow 23?s software is able to deal with it all. OK so here?s an idea. The first 64 bits can be a unique identifier assigned by chronological order that the person is entered. Then the next standard length fields contain stuff like name (at birth), DoB, DoD (if applicable), gender at birth, all that stuff usually found. Then we need an indicator of start of genome data (if it exists) with the next several MB are all genome data. The newest version of AncestryDNA (those 100 dollar spit kits) generate a DNA file of 24 MB (oy vey) so we immediately have a big problem here as you can see, for AncestryDNA?s database passed 2 million users last summer and is growing at a rate of 1% per week (cool! (but challenging!)) OK so we are already at 50TB just with the AncestryDNA people alone. But? somehow AncestryDNA and 23&me are dealing with the problem. After we get the user unique identifier data in there (somehow (help us Data wan Kenobi (I know not diddley about handling big data))) we can create a catalog of all known human ailments. Something like that must already exist, ja? We would have a reference list somewhere in which each known human ailment has a 16 bit code (medics, are there more than 64K known human ailments? (OK make it a 32 bit field.)) Then we have some kind of special command such as FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF which means go to the ailment catalog (remember when you were a kid and you had such a fun dreaming while looking thru the Sears and Roebuck catalog in the toy section? (This catalog would kinda the opposite of that.)) OK so now we have a huge database with genome and a description of an ailment, perhaps with standardized fields for when it was diagnosed, by whom, how severe and all the stuff you need to know for how severe this genome?s hemorrhoids are for instance, and on it would go about that particular ailment until it sees the next FFFFFFFF FFFFFFFF. As I wrote this, it occurred to me that my thinking is now where Anne Wojcicki?s must have been about 5 years before 23&Me ever even happened. We are reinventing the wheel already developed by Mrs. Google. This problem is just bigger than me. I need some help from those who already know how the heck to design huge interactive databases, oy vey. I am not programmer, just a country rocket scientist. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 14:57:40 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 10:57:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <4D936DAA-E909-4B71-9754-844E3B3BEC21@gmail.com> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <01a101d21610$722bda10$56838e30$@att.net> <4D936DAA-E909-4B71-9754-844E3B3BEC21@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Dan TheBookMan wrote: > ?>> >> I am considering the risk that the government will decide a number of us >> outspoken ones (on the internet, which never forgets) are now terminally >> ill, and wish to ?assist? us in our suicide. The government of Germany >> decided a large number of people were terminally ill and assisted their >> suicides in the 1930s. >> ?-Spike ? >> > > ?> ? > That's what I thought you meant too: that the government assisting people > would be regardless if they wanted to be assisted. > ?I don't see how a government approved committee of psychiatrists spouting psychobabble would prevent that. ? ?> ? > My guess is Clinton would also say she supports some kind of evaluation > too. > ?All I know is that for reasons I don't pretend to understand euthanasia is not a big issue this election and candidates aren't asked about it very often, in one of the rare times when they were asked Hillary Clinton gave a more libertarian answer than Gary Johnson did, while Donald Trump apparently thought the question was so outlandish it wasn't worth answering. ?> ? > I also agree with Dave's point: the plumb line libertarian position is > that every adult should have the right to end their life > ?In Europe they've already gone further than that, In Holland anyone over 12 has that right, in Belgium anybody of any age has that right. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 15:19:20 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 11:19:20 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Someone Is Learning How to Take Down the Internet Message-ID: ?The article is by ? Bruce Schneier ?, and he really knows his stuff.? https://www.lawfareblog.com/someone-learning-how-take-down-internet John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 24 19:46:04 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 12:46:04 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Someone Is Learning How to Take Down the Internet In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000e01d2169c$49d6f860$dd84e920$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] Someone Is Learning How to Take Down the Internet ?The article is by ?Bruce Schneier, and he really knows his stuff.? https://www.lawfareblog.com/someone-learning-how-take-down-internet John K Clark Until the web came along in the early 90s, most people hadn?t even heard of the internet. Now our entire economy will not function without it. We definitely need some kind of workaround if some commie figures out how to do massive simultaneous DoS attacks. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 20:10:08 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 15:10:08 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Someone Is Learning How to Take Down the Internet In-Reply-To: <000e01d2169c$49d6f860$dd84e920$@att.net> References: <000e01d2169c$49d6f860$dd84e920$@att.net> Message-ID: Now our entire economy will not function without it. We definitely need some kind of workaround if some commie figures out how to do massive simultaneous DoS attacks. spike Is there any way of knowing which other countries could not function either? I thought the web was backed up a googleplex of times. bill w On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 2:46 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* [ExI] Someone Is Learning How to Take Down the Internet > > > > > > ?The article is by ?Bruce Schneier, and he really knows his stuff.? > > > > https://www.lawfareblog.com/someone-learning-how-take-down-internet > > > > John K Clark > > > > > > > > > > > > Until the web came along in the early 90s, most people hadn?t even heard > of the internet. Now our entire economy will not function without it. We > definitely need some kind of workaround if some commie figures out how to > do massive simultaneous DoS attacks. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 20:25:23 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 06:25:23 +1000 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> Message-ID: On Saturday, 24 September 2016, John Clark wrote: > On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:02 PM, spike > wrote: > > >>?Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via >>> assisted suicide?" >>> ? ? >>> "yes but" is not a more complete answer it is a inferior answer than >>> "yes". And there are no ifs ands or even buts about it?? John K Clark? >>> >> >> ?> ? >> Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill and >> deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? >> > > Yes I think so because I am a libertarian. I also think it's irrelevant > if the government or if anybody else thinks you're terminally ill or not. > ? ? > The question was if > ? ? > I > ? ? > want to end my life, because I'm ill or for any other reason, > ? ? > should I be > ? ? > allowed to obtain help to do so. My answer is a simple "yes" and I see no > need to place a "but" after > ? ? > it. If the government wants to help me that's fine, > ? if a company wants to help me for a fee that's fine,? > if my friends want to help that's fine too and I don't want them > prosecuted for murder after my death. I'm even fine with people who can't > stand me helping me do what I want because they think the world will be a > better place after I'm dead; if somebody does the right thing for the wrong > reason it's still the right thing. > > I don't want you to get the wrong idea, I'm basically a happy person and > I've never had a suicidal thought in my life, although it doesn't > take much imagination to conceive of theoretical circumstances where that > would change and I (or anybody) would want to end it all. Making somebody > live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die > when they want to live. That should be libertarianism 101. > It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know will pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing themselves during the worst moments. Should we instead help all these people to die? -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 21:01:10 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 16:01:10 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> Message-ID: It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know will pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing themselves during the worst moments. Should we instead help all these people to die?- Stathis Papaioannou When you bring in mental disorders, acute or chronic, it gets complicated. As a psychologist I'd like to see some screening done. As a libertarian it's nobody's business. As a person who flirts with manic-depression (a good group to be in! Higher than average IQ), I've been nearly suicidal several times and was only restrained by ideas of my wife and family. Most times these impulses pass quickly, as they do for most people, who then are glad they did not act. So - it's a thorny one, right? bill w On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On Saturday, 24 September 2016, John Clark wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 8:02 PM, spike wrote: >> >> >>?Should terminally ill patients be allowed to end their lives via >>>> assisted suicide?" >>>> ? ? >>>> "yes but" is not a more complete answer it is a inferior answer than >>>> "yes". And there are no ifs ands or even buts about it?? John K Clark? >>>> >>> >>> ?> ? >>> Indeed sir? Suppose the government decides you are terminally ill and >>> deplorable. Is it allowed to assist you in suicide? >>> >> >> Yes I think so because I am a libertarian. I also think it's irrelevant >> if the government or if anybody else thinks you're terminally ill or not. >> ? ? >> The question was if >> ? ? >> I >> ? ? >> want to end my life, because I'm ill or for any other reason, >> ? ? >> should I be >> ? ? >> allowed to obtain help to do so. My answer is a simple "yes" and I see no >> need to place a "but" after >> ? ? >> it. If the government wants to help me that's fine, >> ? if a company wants to help me for a fee that's fine,? >> if my friends want to help that's fine too and I don't want them >> prosecuted for murder after my death. I'm even fine with people who can't >> stand me helping me do what I want because they think the world will be a >> better place after I'm dead; if somebody does the right thing for the wrong >> reason it's still the right thing. >> >> I don't want you to get the wrong idea, I'm basically a happy person and >> I've never had a suicidal thought in my life, although it doesn't >> take much imagination to conceive of theoretical circumstances where that >> would change and I (or anybody) would want to end it all. Making somebody >> live when they want to die as as great a injustice as making somebody die >> when they want to live. That should be libertarianism 101. >> > > It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a > result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know will > pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing themselves > during the worst moments. Should we instead help all these people to die? > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sat Sep 24 21:09:02 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 14:09:02 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> Message-ID: <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace ? When you bring in mental disorders, acute or chronic, it gets complicated. As a psychologist I'd like to see some screening done?bill w It isn?t that simple BillW. Currently a felony conviction forfeits one?s right in the USA to legally purchase and own firearms. The way things are going, it might eventually become illegal for those with mental health issues to bear arms as well. Result: if one wishes to protect that right, one cannot risk a professional visit to a psychologist or psychiatrist. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Sat Sep 24 22:48:27 2016 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 15:48:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide Message-ID: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a > result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know will > pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing themselves > during the worst moments. Can you point to evidence of that? Maybe it's the phrase "try to do suicide". I'd be surprised to find out that people with "depressive illness" can get their shit together well enough to successfully kill themselves. I don't have as much doubt that they "try". Is there evidence that most successful suicides are also the result of transitory situations? > Should we instead help all these people to die? I don't strongly believe that the government or medical practitioners should help people to commit suicide, it should just not be illegal. I wouldn't want to make it easy to buy a suicide kit--whatever it consisted of would be to easy to re-purpose as a murder kit. I just think doctors should be allowed to counsel people who think it's their best option, and it shouldn't be criminal to assist them if reasonable assurances could be provided to the courts that it was their choice. I think the legal terminology is "a rebuttable presumption". Chris -- It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://www.pancrit.org http://mydruthers.com From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 23:37:26 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 18:37:26 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> Message-ID: Currently a felony conviction forfeits one?s right in the USA to legally purchase and own firearms. The way things are going, it might eventually become illegal for those with mental health issues to bear arms as well. Result: if one wishes to protect that right, one cannot risk a professional visit to a psychologist or psychiatrist. spike Shotguns too? Remember Hemingway. In most states the psychologist has the same confidentiality agreement as the psychiatrist. I don't know the current obligation, if any, of the psychiatrist to alert police, in any state. If all people with strong depression were reported to the police, the police would not have time to do anything else. And it's almost always a depressive rather than a psychotic like a schizophrenic, who is usually too cognitively confused to organize a two car funeral, and who generally are not suicidal. And even if reported - the father of the latest terrorist says he contacted the feds three years ago about his son and they did nothing about it. "Dropped the ball." he said. In any case, one can always get access to a gun. Or pills. Or traffic. Or a bridge. Apropos of nothing: have you ever tried tai chi? Karate for the slow? bill w On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 4:09 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *?* > > > > When you bring in mental disorders, acute or chronic, it gets > complicated. As a psychologist I'd like to see some screening done?bill w > > > > > > It isn?t that simple BillW. Currently a felony conviction forfeits one?s > right in the USA to legally purchase and own firearms. The way things are > going, it might eventually become illegal for those with mental health > issues to bear arms as well. Result: if one wishes to protect that right, > one cannot risk a professional visit to a psychologist or psychiatrist. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sat Sep 24 23:49:09 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 18:49:09 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: I just think doctors should be allowed to counsel people who think it's their best option, Chris First, I don't think doctors should be doing an counseling at all. Nowadays I am sure they would refer the patient or even kick them out of their practice. Second, successful suicides are usually depressives who are actually coming OUT of a deep depression rather than in one. During the deep spell they don' t have enough mental energy to do it. Third - it's not transitory to the victim, though we may feel that it would have been. More like last straw to him. Fourth - there is no question but what I would assist my wife if she were in terrible pain that could not be managed, and they can put me in jail or whatever. Fifth - thought question: is watching a person taking an overdose and doing nothing an instance of aiding a suicide? bill w On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 5:48 PM, Chris Hibbert wrote: > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a >> result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know will >> pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing themselves >> during the worst moments. >> > > Can you point to evidence of that? Maybe it's the phrase "try to do > suicide". I'd be surprised to find out that people with "depressive > illness" can get their shit together well enough to successfully kill > themselves. I don't have as much doubt that they "try". Is there evidence > that most successful suicides are also the result of transitory situations? > > Should we instead help all these people to die? >> > > I don't strongly believe that the government or medical practitioners > should help people to commit suicide, it should just not be illegal. I > wouldn't want to make it easy to buy a suicide kit--whatever it consisted > of would be to easy to re-purpose as a murder kit. I just think doctors > should be allowed to counsel people who think it's their best option, and > it shouldn't be criminal to assist them if reasonable assurances could be > provided to the courts that it was their choice. I think the legal > terminology is "a rebuttable presumption". > > Chris > -- > It is easy to turn an aquarium into fish soup, but not so > easy to turn fish soup back into an aquarium. > -- Lech Walesa on reverting to a market economy. > > Chris Hibbert > hibbert at mydruthers.com > Blog: http://www.pancrit.org > http://mydruthers.com > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 25 00:07:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 17:07:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> Message-ID: <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill >>? it might eventually become illegal for those with mental health issues to bear arms as well. Result: if one wishes to protect that right, one cannot risk a professional visit to a psychologist or psychiatrist. spike >?Shotguns too? We don?t know. Prohibitions for felons include anything that goes bang. But if we do keep talking about making it illegal for the mentally ill to bear arms, then it makes mental illness functionally equivalent to a crime. At least some of those who need them will stop seeing the psych doctors. >?In most states the psychologist has the same confidentiality agreement as the psychiatrist?bill w Ja. Those with clearances were required to self-report those visits. Seeing a psych doctor was not grounds for suspension of clearance, but failure to report it to the security office definitely was. Result: in spite of what we were told, we knew to power thru it on our own if possible. I know guys who did visit mental health pros and kept their tickets (the security people are humans too) and I had one friend who finished himself off using a motorcycle at 180 mph. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 01:33:49 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2016 20:33:49 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> Message-ID: if we do keep talking about making it illegal for the mentally ill to bear arms, spike It would be unworkable. Added to the 1% of the population who are schizophrenic, depressives add a lot more. I think a workable law would have to apply only to those who have been institutionalized and diagnosed as violent and/or suicidal. Your 'run of the mill' depressive is just too common to put on the books. I would not be in favor of including suicidal people, just those who are psychotic and dangerous. But really, I do not have the experience clinically or with the literature to talk about people who are violent and choose death by cop after killing as many as he can. (notice no women - despite the fact that they are more likely to attempt suicide - by drugs, usually, not guns, which is a guy thing) bill w On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 7:07 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] right to try bill > > > > >>? it might eventually become illegal for those with mental health issues > to bear arms as well. Result: if one wishes to protect that right, one > cannot risk a professional visit to a psychologist or psychiatrist. > > > > spike > > > > >?Shotguns too? > > > > We don?t know. Prohibitions for felons include anything that goes bang. > But if we do keep talking about making it illegal for the mentally ill to > bear arms, then it makes mental illness functionally equivalent to a > crime. At least some of those who need them will stop seeing the psych > doctors. > > > > >?In most states the psychologist has the same confidentiality agreement > as the psychiatrist?bill w > > > > Ja. Those with clearances were required to self-report those visits. > Seeing a psych doctor was not grounds for suspension of clearance, but > failure to report it to the security office definitely was. Result: in > spite of what we were told, we knew to power thru it on our own if > possible. > > > > I know guys who did visit mental health pros and kept their tickets (the > security people are humans too) and I had one friend who finished himself > off using a motorcycle at 180 mph. > > > > spike > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Sep 25 10:19:56 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 11:19:56 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: <3feefa63-82f1-7a83-b0b0-bbc1e45ac485@aleph.se> On 2016-09-24 23:48, Chris Hibbert wrote: > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > >> It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a >> result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know >> will >> pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing >> themselves >> during the worst moments. > > Can you point to evidence of that? Maybe it's the phrase "try to do > suicide". I'd be surprised to find out that people with "depressive > illness" can get their shit together well enough to successfully kill > themselves. I don't have as much doubt that they "try". Is there > evidence that most successful suicides are also the result of > transitory situations? This is basically what I learned in Psychology 101. People in deep depression are too inert to do much, but sadly when antidepressants start working they sometimes get enough energy to suicide. There is also a lot of suicides due to other mental illness such as schizophrenia, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, and anorexia nervosa. But a lot of attempted suicides are part of signalling patterns rather than intended to actually end life; this is where you get more of the personality disorders. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wps.20128/full http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.6.909 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychological-medicine/article/psychological-autopsy-studies-of-suicide-a-systematic-review/49EEDF1D29B26C270A2788275995FDEE http://www.jad-journal.com/article/S0165-0327(13)00036-0/abstract Overall, people often tend to think that suicide is usually a somewhat rational response to unbearable suffering. But while this happens and should be defended, the bulk of suicides happen among people with problems that can be treated (even if they do not see it that way) or when people try to send strong signals and miscalculate. (A relative once said to my mother over the phone: "Now I will grab my knife and go into the forest." She responded with relief: "Yes, *please* do." A risky strategy, but he is still alive.) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University From anders at aleph.se Sun Sep 25 10:00:18 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 11:00:18 +0100 Subject: [ExI] Someone Is Learning How to Take Down the Internet In-Reply-To: References: <000e01d2169c$49d6f860$dd84e920$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-09-24 21:10, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Now our entire economy will not function without it. We definitely > need some kind of workaround if some commie figures out how to do > massive simultaneous DoS attacks. > > spike > > > Is there any way of knowing which other countries could not function > either? I thought the web was backed up a googleplex of times. > No, first the web is not backed up. The closest is archive.org, which is a private foundation in San Francisco storing things on tape. There are some national libraries doing partial copies of their own domains, but much of it is half-hearted. Second, it is not the web that matters. It is the communications infrastructure. This email gets to you through the Internet. So does withdrawing money from an ATM. So does buying oil for your company. So does proving that you even work for your company at the keycard reader. The problem is basically that a lot of our supply chains now depend on the internet. Nobody truly understands what parts could have a non-internet substitute, since the internet dependency might exist in a small but important subsystem. Most phones run on backbones that may or may not be dependent. The Swift credit infrastructure presumably has its own backbone up to a point, but it is meshed with internet systems. A lot of smart devices (now including cars) may have vulnerabilities to the wrong kind of outages. And even if supply chain A works fine, it might depend on supply chain B working. If credit payments become impossible, it soon does not matter if there is gas in the gas station, you can't buy it. Presumably different countries can handle internet outages differently well. Poorer countries where the infrastructure is old will be locally fine, but of course vulnerable to external shocks due to their poverty. Countries with a strong civil society and high trust can handle much more (during the Irish bank strike in the 60s people used IOUs to trade for months). The places where real trouble would strike are complex societies relying on formal rules, with key infrastructure dependencies (e.g. energy, water in cold or dry areas), and with lower trust ratings. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 13:48:06 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 08:48:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: <3feefa63-82f1-7a83-b0b0-bbc1e45ac485@aleph.se> References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> <3feefa63-82f1-7a83-b0b0-bbc1e45ac485@aleph.se> Message-ID: the bulk of suicides happen among people with problems that can be treated (even if they do not see it that way) or when people try to send strong signals and miscalculate. Anders Not to disagree at all but to point out a few things: There are many points of view here: the one of the person, and those of the people who view him. We must be careful not to project our own feelings onto the person. While we might feel that death is far to strong a fix for what's wrong, and that what's wrong can be fixed, the person often does not see it that way. Who are we to judge? If the problem is within the person, they may have tried to fix it multiple times with no success. If the problem is in the environment - relatives, bosses, friends, lovers, then we may be able to do little to help them, and their efforts may have failed every time and they get desperate. If the problem is with past life experiences, such as deaths or betrayals and such, then again we are likely to be able to do little. Another point of view that can interfere with our interpretation of the situation is our own feelings toward the person or just to people in general. We may feel terribly hurt when another person threatens or commits suicide, and focus on our feelings rather than theirs. Anders points out the personality disorder problem. I saw one of these when I was a psychiatric aide. She came in with her entire forearm covered in cuts she made with a can lid. She was treated and released and three weeks later she came in having done it to the other arm. Clearly not a suicide attempt but a call for help. Here is a link for those who want to know more. It is just wrong to say "Oh, he's just depressed." This obviously ignores the various types and depths of depression, including those who don't present outer expressions of it. http://www.webmd.com/depression/guide/depression-types#1 Freud viewed depression as aggression turned inward, and there is something to that. The violent crimes book is full of depressed people - usually against friends and family. You read about it often: "Killed his whole family and then himself." Do not mistake a depressed person as one who is harmless - he is often very dangerous. Do not belittle his depression or you could be attacked viciously. Be very very careful of drunks who may be depressed - alcohol releases emotions like violence. bill w On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:19 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > On 2016-09-24 23:48, Chris Hibbert wrote: > >> Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a >>> result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know >>> will >>> pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing >>> themselves >>> during the worst moments. >>> >> >> Can you point to evidence of that? Maybe it's the phrase "try to do >> suicide". I'd be surprised to find out that people with "depressive >> illness" can get their shit together well enough to successfully kill >> themselves. I don't have as much doubt that they "try". Is there evidence >> that most successful suicides are also the result of transitory situations? >> > > This is basically what I learned in Psychology 101. People in deep > depression are too inert to do much, but sadly when antidepressants start > working they sometimes get enough energy to suicide. There is also a lot of > suicides due to other mental illness such as schizophrenia, anxiety > disorders, substance abuse, and anorexia nervosa. But a lot of attempted > suicides are part of signalling patterns rather than intended to actually > end life; this is where you get more of the personality disorders. > > http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wps.20128/full > http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/abs/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.6.909 > https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/psychological-medici > ne/article/psychological-autopsy-studies-of-suicide-a- > systematic-review/49EEDF1D29B26C270A2788275995FDEE > http://www.jad-journal.com/article/S0165-0327(13)00036-0/abstract > > Overall, people often tend to think that suicide is usually a somewhat > rational response to unbearable suffering. But while this happens and > should be defended, the bulk of suicides happen among people with problems > that can be treated (even if they do not see it that way) or when people > try to send strong signals and miscalculate. > > > (A relative once said to my mother over the phone: "Now I will grab my > knife and go into the forest." She responded with relief: "Yes, *please* > do." A risky strategy, but he is still alive.) > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 14:23:48 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 00:23:48 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: On 25 September 2016 at 08:48, Chris Hibbert > wrote: > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a >> result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know will >> pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing themselves >> during the worst moments. >> > > Can you point to evidence of that? Maybe it's the phrase "try to do > suicide". I'd be surprised to find out that people with "depressive > illness" can get their shit together well enough to successfully kill > themselves. I don't have as much doubt that they "try". Is there evidence > that most successful suicides are also the result of transitory situations? > It's often said that a large proportion of completed suicides, 90% or more, are associated with mental illness. This problematic not only because of how the mental illness is diagnosed in those without a formal history (retrospectively, talking to those who knew the dead person) but also because the definition of mental illness can be very broad, including "adjustment disorder", which essentially covers anyone who experiences a stressful life event and becomes suicidal. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274710108_Do_90_of_Suicide_Victims_Really_have_Serious_Mental_Illness_Psychological_Autopsy_Studies_Psychopathology_and_Suicide The claim that depressed people are unable to kill themselves applies only to the most severely depressed who can't function at all, and would probably die from self-neglect if they weren't hospitalised. If you're able to go to the supermarket to buy food, you're also able to buy a box of paracetamol, or throw yourself under a truck. > Should we instead help all these people to die? >> > > I don't strongly believe that the government or medical practitioners > should help people to commit suicide, it should just not be illegal. I > wouldn't want to make it easy to buy a suicide kit--whatever it consisted > of would be to easy to re-purpose as a murder kit. I just think doctors > should be allowed to counsel people who think it's their best option, and > it shouldn't be criminal to assist them if reasonable assurances could be > provided to the courts that it was their choice. I think the legal > terminology is "a rebuttable presumption". > If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining it is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? -- Stathis Papaioannou -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 15:50:07 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 10:50:07 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining it is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? Stathis Papaioannou I do not believe that medical doctors should be involved at all. Assisting suicide clashes too strongly with their oaths, and in addition, they have little or no education in counseling mentally distraught people. Period. I don't think anyone would assist the person in your example. Not morally. Not in line with common sense. bill w On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:23 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > On 25 September 2016 at 08:48, Chris Hibbert > wrote: > >> Stathis Papaioannou wrote: >> >> It's not as simple as that. Most people who try to suicide do it as a >>> result of a situational crisis or a depressive illness, which we know >>> will >>> pass even with no intervention beyond keeping them from killing >>> themselves >>> during the worst moments. >>> >> >> Can you point to evidence of that? Maybe it's the phrase "try to do >> suicide". I'd be surprised to find out that people with "depressive >> illness" can get their shit together well enough to successfully kill >> themselves. I don't have as much doubt that they "try". Is there evidence >> that most successful suicides are also the result of transitory situations? >> > > It's often said that a large proportion of completed suicides, 90% or > more, are associated with mental illness. This problematic not only because > of how the mental illness is diagnosed in those without a formal history > (retrospectively, talking to those who knew the dead person) but also > because the definition of mental illness can be very broad, including > "adjustment disorder", which essentially covers anyone who experiences a > stressful life event and becomes suicidal. > > https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274710108_Do_90_ > of_Suicide_Victims_Really_have_Serious_Mental_Illness_ > Psychological_Autopsy_Studies_Psychopathology_and_Suicide > > The claim that depressed people are unable to kill themselves applies only > to the most severely depressed who can't function at all, and would > probably die from self-neglect if they weren't hospitalised. If you're able > to go to the supermarket to buy food, you're also able to buy a box of > paracetamol, or throw yourself under a truck. > > >> Should we instead help all these people to die? >>> >> >> I don't strongly believe that the government or medical practitioners >> should help people to commit suicide, it should just not be illegal. I >> wouldn't want to make it easy to buy a suicide kit--whatever it consisted >> of would be to easy to re-purpose as a murder kit. I just think doctors >> should be allowed to counsel people who think it's their best option, and >> it shouldn't be criminal to assist them if reasonable assurances could be >> provided to the courts that it was their choice. I think the legal >> terminology is "a rebuttable presumption". >> > > If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his > girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining it > is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > > > -- > Stathis Papaioannou > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Sun Sep 25 12:37:58 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 13:37:58 +0100 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-09-25 02:33, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > if we do keep talking about making it illegal for the mentally ill to > bear arms, spike > > It would be unworkable. Americans. You are all crazy. In most other countries this is handled through the licensing for weapons. People don't get to carry weapons unless they can show that they can handle them. Like cars. Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overview_of_gun_laws_by_nation#Comparison shows that the US is an outlier in relative lack of checking (together with Switzerland, however, even there permits are not given to psychiatrically disqualified people). -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 17:27:21 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 13:27:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! Message-ID: It's difficult to keep track of all of Donald Trump's lies but The New York Times figured if they could do it for just one week that might be a good representational sample of the total number of lies told in the entire campaign. They didn't include "untruths that appeared to be mere hyperbole or humor, or delivered purely for effect, or what could generously be called rounding errors", they were only interested in statements that concerned important things and were contradicted by facts and were objectively false. They found 31 whoppers. Keep in mind this list only includes the lies Trump made between September 15 and September 21, that means every 3.6 waking hours Trump tells a major lie to a cheering audience who love him because he's a straight shooter who tells it like it is. Go figure. =========== Tall Tales About Himself Mr. Trump?s version of reality allows for few, if any, flaws in himself. As he tells it, the polls are always looking up, his policy solutions are painless and simple and his judgment regarding politics and people has been consistent ? and flawless. The most consistent falsehood he tells about himself may be that he opposed the war in Iraq from the start, when the evidence shows otherwise. 1 He said a supportive crowd chanted, ?Let him speak!? when a black pastor in Flint, Mich., asked Mr. Trump not to give a political speech in the church. FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 15. There were no such chants . 2 ?I was against going into the war in Iraq.? SPEECH IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. This is not getting any truer with repetition. He never publicly expressed opposition to the war before it began, and he made supportive remarks to Howard Stern. 3 He said any supportive comments he made about the Iraq war came ?long before? the war began. FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. He expressed support for the war in September 2002, when Congress was debating whether to authorize military action. 4 He said he had publicly opposed the Iraq war in an Esquire interview ?pretty quickly after the war started.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. The Esquire interview appeared in the August 2004 edition, 17 months after the war began. 5 Before the Iraq invasion, he said, he had told the Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto something ?pretty close? to: ?Don?t go in, and don?t make the mistake of going in.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. Not remotely close. He told Mr. Cavuto that President George W. Bush had to take decisive action . 6 He said that when Howard Stern asked him about Iraq in 2002, it was ?the first time the word Iraq was ever mentioned to me.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. Mr. Trump expressed alarm about Saddam Hussein and the situation in Iraq in 2000 in his own book . 7 ?You see what?s happening with my poll numbers with African-Americans. They?re going, like, high.? SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20; MADE SAME CLAIM IN OHIO, SEPT. 21. Polls show him winning virtually no support from African-Americans. 8 ?Almost, it seems, everybody agrees? with his position on immigration. REMARKS IN TEXAS, SEPT. 17. Most Americans oppose his signature positions on immigration. 9 He has made ?a lot of progress? with Hispanic and black voters, and ?you see that in the polls.? FRED DICKER RADIO SHOW, SEPT. 15. No major poll has shown him making up significant ground with black or Hispanic voters. 10 He was ?never a fan? of Colin Powell. FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. In his book ?The America We Deserve,? he named Mr. Powell as among the ?best and brightest? in American society. 11 Mr. Trump said that after The Times published an article scrutinizing his relationships with women, ?All the women came out and said they think Donald Trump is terrific.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. Only one woman who was quoted in the article came to his defense after its publication. 12 ?Unlike other people? who only raise money for themselves during presidential campaigns, he also raises money for the Republican Party. FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 15. Every presidential nominee forms a joint fund-raising agreement to share money with his or her national party. Unfounded Claims About Critics and the News Media It?s not just Mrs. Clinton whom Mr. Trump belittles and tars with inaccurate information. He also distorted the facts about his Republican critics, including President George Bush and Gov. John Kasich of Ohio. And he claimed that Lester Holt, the NBC anchor moderating the first presidential debate, is a Democrat ? but Mr. Holt is a registered Republican. 13 In the primaries, Mr. Kasich ?won one and, by the way, didn?t win it by much ? that was Ohio.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. Mr. Kasich crushed him in Ohio , winning by 11 percentage points. 14 Lester Holt, the NBC anchor and debate moderator, ?is a Democrat.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. Mr. Holt is a registered Republican, New York City records show. 15 The presidential debate moderators ?are all Democrats.? ?It?s a very unfair system.? FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. Only one, Chris Wallace of Fox News, is a registered Democrat. 16 He said it ?hasn?t been reported? that Mrs. Clinton called some Trump supporters ?deplorable.? SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. It would be difficult to find a news organization that didn?t report her remark . Inaccurate Claims About Clinton Mr. Trump regularly dissembles about his opponent, attributing ideas to Mrs. Clinton that she has not endorsed, or accusing her of complicity in events in which she had no involvement. 17 ?Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it.? REMARKS IN WASHINGTON, SEPT. 16. Mrs. Clinton and her campaign never publicly questioned President Obama?s birthplace ; Mr. Trump made it his signature cause for five years. 18 Mrs. Clinton had ?the power and the duty? to stop the release of unauthorized immigrants whose home countries would not accept their deportation after they were released from prison. NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN COLORADO, SEPT. 17, AND FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. The secretary of state does not have the power to detain convicted criminals after they have served their sentences, and has little power to make foreign countries accept deportees. 19 Mrs. Clinton has not criticized jihadists and foreign governments that oppress and kill women, gay people and non-Muslims. ?Has Hillary Clinton ever called people who support these practices deplorable and irredeemable? No.? SPEECH IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. She has denounced jihadists and foreign countries on the same grounds, if not necessarily using the same words. 20 ?Do people notice Hillary is copying my airplane rallies ? she puts the plane behind her like I have been doing from the beginning.? TWITTER , SEPT. 20. He did not invent the tarmac rally or the campaign-plane backdrop. 21 Mrs. Clinton destroyed 13 smartphones with a hammer while she was secretary of state. SPEECHES IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 15 AND SEPT. 19. An aide told the F.B.I. of only two occasions in which phones were destroyed with a hammer. 22 He said Mrs. Clinton is calling for ?total amnesty in the first 100 days,? including ?a virtual end to immigration enforcement? and for unauthorized immigrants to receive Social Security and Medicare. SPEECH IN COLORADO, SEPT. 17. She has not proposed this. 23 Mrs. Clinton is ?effectively proposing to abolish the borders around the country.? NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN TEXAS, SEPT. 17. She is not even proposing to cut funding for the Border Patrol. 24 ?Hillary Clinton?s plan would bring in 620,000 refugees in her first term alone,? and would cost $400 billion. NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. She endorsed admitting 65,000 Syrian refugees this year, on top of other admissions. Mr. Trump is falsely claiming that she wants to do this every year and is estimating the cost accordingly. Stump Speech Falsehoods Some warped or inaccurate claims have become regular features of Mr. Trump?s stump speech. He routinely overstates the scale and nature of the country?s economic distress and the threats to its national security, and exaggerates the potential for overnight improvements if he were elected. 25 ?Our African-American communities are absolutely in the worst shape that they?ve ever been in before ? ever, ever, ever.? SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. No measurement supports this characterization of black America. 26 Fifty-eight percent of black youth are not working. NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 16, AND COLORADO, SEPT. 17. This misleading statistic counts high school students as out of work. Black youth unemployment actually was 20.6 percent in July. 27 Many dangerous refugees are being welcomed by the Obama administration. ?Hundreds of thousands of people are being approved to pour into the country. We have no idea who they are.? NEW HAMPSHIRE SPEECH, SEPT. 15. The Obama administration has admitted more than 10,000 Syrian refugees , using an extensive screening process . 28 ?We have cities that are far more dangerous than Afghanistan.? NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 16; COLORADO, SEPT. 17; NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20; OHIO, SEPT. 21; AND A FOX NEWS INTERVIEW ON SEPT. 21. No American city resembles a war zone, though crime has risen lately in some, like Chicago. Urban violence has fallen precipitously over the past 25 years . 29 Ford plans to cut American jobs by relocating small-car production to Mexico, and may move all production outside the United States. FOX NEWS INTERVIEW AND NEW HAMPSHIRE SPEECH, SEPT. 15. Mark Fields, Ford?s chief executive, said it was not cutting American jobs . 30 ?We have a trade deficit this year with China of approximately $500 billion.? NORTH CAROLINA SPEECH, SEPT. 20. He has made this claim repeatedly, but the trade deficit with China is significantly smaller . Esoteric Embellishments Mr. Trump often dissembles on subjects of passing interest, like the news of the day or the parochial concerns of his local audiences. But his larger pattern of behavior still holds: These misstatements, too, accentuate the grievances of his supporters, and cast his own ideas in a more favorable light. 31 Senator Bernie Sanders fell victim to ?a rigged system with the superdelegates.? SPEECHES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, SEPT. 15, AND NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. Mr. Sanders did not lose the Democratic nomination because of superdelegates. Mrs. Clinton beat him in pledged delegates , too. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 25 19:17:44 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 12:17:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> Message-ID: <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 5:38 AM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill On 2016-09-25 02:33, William Flynn Wallace wrote: if we do keep talking about making it illegal for the mentally ill to bear arms, spike It would be unworkable. Americans. You are all crazy. In most other countries this is handled through the licensing for weapons. People don't get to carry weapons unless they can show that they can handle them. Like cars. . -- Dr Anders Sandberg Ja. The reason those are treated differently here is spelled out in our constitution. Driving cars is a privilege, bearing arms is a right. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 19:58:02 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 14:58:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] saving lives Message-ID: Just what are our limits on interference with our private lives? Today in the NYT, an article says that the technology exists to cut off texting while driving. Should they? No question it would save lives of drivers, pedestrians, dogs and cats, and so on. Just another tromping on libertarians' rights to be let alone? Actually, I agree with this one. Drivers have a safe alternative: they can talk. Or perhaps they can find a carrier who doesn't block texting. I would not favor a law. Parents could then have some control over the smartphone they paid for. On the other hand, to put it in the proper perspective, it would prevent many people from making the Darwin list of stupid deaths, and thus prevent cleaning up the genetic pool. bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 20:04:02 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 15:04:02 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> Message-ID: Americans. You are all crazy anders Yes, we are. It is just too bad that the Founding Fathers did not limit the right to bear arms in some way. They were thinking of a militia. Our Congress is thinking of the money they get from the NRA. bill w On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 2:17 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *Anders > *Sent:* Sunday, September 25, 2016 5:38 AM > *To:* extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] right to try bill > > > > On 2016-09-25 02:33, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > if we do keep talking about making it illegal for the mentally ill to bear > arms, spike > > > > It would be unworkable. > > > Americans. You are all crazy. > > In most other countries this is handled through the licensing for weapons. > People don't get to carry weapons unless they can show that they can handle > them. Like cars. ? > > -- > > Dr Anders Sandberg > > > > > > > > Ja. The reason those are treated differently here is spelled out in our constitution. Driving cars is a privilege, bearing arms is a right. > > > > spike > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 25 20:25:11 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 13:25:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> Message-ID: <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill >>?Americans. You are all crazy anders >?Our Congress is thinking of the money they get from the NRA?bill w Ja however congress is irrelevant in this question. It is the Supreme Court which makes the call on constitutional rights. Had the congress the legal right to legislate away Americans? right to bear arms, they would have done it a long time ago. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hibbert at mydruthers.com Sun Sep 25 20:29:54 2016 From: hibbert at mydruthers.com (Chris Hibbert) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 13:29:54 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his > girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining it > is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? You'd have to add a lot more detail before any doctor would see that as ethical. You'd have to add a lot of unworkable detail to the law to make it airtight illegal. In the latter case, a jury would have to use their judgement and look for a broader context. If the law was tight enough that all cases fitting this description were illegal, then it would have to forbid more acts than it should. Chris -- http://waitbutwhy.com/2016/03/cryonics.html caution: long Chris Hibbert hibbert at mydruthers.com Blog: http://www.pancrit.org http://mydruthers.com From danust2012 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 21:04:35 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 14:04:35 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> Message-ID: <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> On Sep 25, 2016, at 1:25 PM, spike wrote: > >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace > Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill > > >>?Americans. You are all crazy anders > > >?Our Congress is thinking of the money they get from the NRA?bill w > > Ja however congress is irrelevant in this question. It is the Supreme Court which makes the call on constitutional rights. More precisely, the SCOTUS rules on which legal rights there are and what the limits there are to these. > Had the congress the legal right to legislate away Americans? right to bear arms, they would have done it a long time ago. Actually, until recent 2A rulings didn't the Congress and various legislatures do just that? There's no iron law preventing these legislatures from doing so again or that guarantee SCOTUS or other government courts won't just follow the legislature on these matters. The difference in recent years, IMO, is not SCOTUS but that there's a more effective gun rights movement than there was decades ago. Of course, if you want to pretend it's the SCOTUS and COTUS, fine. But actual changes in society usually involve changing people's views on things -- not on a piece of paper written in boring legalize forcing judges to do its bidding and everyone else going along with them. Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 21:55:09 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 07:55:09 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Monday, 26 September 2016, Chris Hibbert wrote: > Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > >> If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his >> girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining >> it >> is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? >> > > You'd have to add a lot more detail before any doctor would see that as > ethical. You'd have to add a lot of unworkable detail to the law to make it > airtight illegal. In the latter case, a jury would have to use their > judgement and look for a broader context. If the law was tight enough that > all cases fitting this description were illegal, then it would have to > forbid more acts than it should. > I bring up this example to show that it's facile to say that anyone who wants to kill themselves should be allowed to, and assisting them should not be a crime. -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 25 22:03:19 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 15:03:19 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> Message-ID: <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Dan TheBookMan ? >>?Had the congress the legal right to legislate away Americans? right to bear arms, they would have done it a long time ago. >?Actually, until recent 2A rulings didn't the Congress and various legislatures do just that?... Regards Dan Various legislatures can, the Federal legislature cannot. States can (and some do) make it illegal for citizens to bear arms in that state. This is OK, for their own state constitutions allow it, and states outrank the Fed. Citizens can go to a different state if they don?t like it (and do.) But there can be no Federal level infringement on the right to bear arms because of amendment 2. In a time when this heavily armed (and crazy) nation is on the verge of electing one of two presidential candidates such as these, both of whom have expressed intentions of violate law and the one who already has while in office, aren?t you glad we have a second amendment? Me too. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 23:09:32 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 18:09:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c0$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c0$@att.net> Message-ID: More precisely, the SCOTUS rules on which legal rights there are and what the limits there are to these. So, who knows what the limits are? Tanks? Machine guns? Semiautomatic is OK but full automatic not is my guess. Spike, you are too cynical. Take away right to bear arms even if they could? Nah. bill w On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:03 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *Dan TheBookMan > *?* > > >>?Had the congress the legal right to legislate away Americans? right to > bear arms, they would have done it a long time ago. > > > > >?Actually, until recent 2A rulings didn't the Congress and various > legislatures do just that?... Regards Dan > > > > > > Various legislatures can, the Federal legislature cannot. States can (and > some do) make it illegal for citizens to bear arms in that state. This is > OK, for their own state constitutions allow it, and states outrank the > Fed. Citizens can go to a different state if they don?t like it (and do.) > But there can be no Federal level infringement on the right to bear arms > because of amendment 2. > > > > In a time when this heavily armed (and crazy) nation is on the verge of > electing one of two presidential candidates such as these, both of whom > have expressed intentions of violate law and the one who already has while > in office, aren?t you glad we have a second amendment? Me too. > > > > spike > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Sun Sep 25 23:34:27 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 16:34:27 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c 0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace >?Spike, you are too cynical? It?s safer than being not cynical enough. >?Take away right to bear arms even if they could? Nah. bill w BillW as you know from reading my comments, I am extremely wary of power grabbers seeking to grab power. Both our mainstream candidates for president have shown sufficient evidence they are power grabbers. Grabbing our guns would enable unlimited subsequent power grabbing, for constitutional rights could be suspended without consequence. That would be the ultimate power, the unholy grail for a power grabber. Do let me offer a vision in terms of Orwell?s Nineteen Eighty Four. If you haven?t read it, do it today. It isn?t that long, it?s a Sunday and you have nothing more important to do unless your house is currently on fire; that short book is far more significant than anything I have to say. So if you haven?t, stop reading this, start reading that please. OK if you are still reading, I will explain my attitude toward current events in Orwellian terms. The proles are free, but the government bureaucrats had administrative powers. So they were watched constantly for power is dangerous. They had had powers for which they were accountable to the inner circle. The inner circle had more power, and they had the privilege of turning off the monitors occasionally. Imagine that ability to turn off the monitor as vaguely analogous to being given an encrypted means of communications, such as a secure email account and a secure phone line, access to a SCIF and a security clearance. When one has that access it allows the cleared person to do things while out of sight, which is a form of power. It is analogous to turning off the monitor and working under cover. If one uses those forms of communication, everything is archived and the users are accountable to others who likewise have that access. As in Orwell?s Nineteen Eighty Four, the outer circle was accountable to the inner circle and the inner circle were accountable to each other, to Big Brother. Ja? What happens when an inner circle member attempts to wield power without accountability? Does not that inner circle member then form a de facto inner inner circle? Does not that constitute an attempt at forming power with no accountability? If any person has power without accountability, what is the inevitable result? Every time please, what happens every time humans have power without accountability? What can we say about any person who seeks power without accountability? Read Orwell please. He said it so much better than I can. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Sun Sep 25 23:58:25 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Sun, 25 Sep 2016 19:58:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: > > > If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his > girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining it > is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? > ### I would not want to get my branding mixed up with dealing death. My brand, as a physician, is of somebody you go to to protect your life and heal your illness. Assisted suicide should be done by non-physicians, ideally impartial counselors, thanaticians, who would get paid if they persuade you not to die but also would get paid if you kill yourself with their help. But yes, anybody not bound by a freely given oath (such as an oath of military service) should have the right to spend his money on a thanatician. This would avoid messiness, no rotting bodies found in apartments when rent is unpaid, might relieve the organ shortage, and most importantly would avoid arbitrary interference in sacred freedoms of humans, the freedom of association, the freedom of trade, and the freedom of property. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 01:10:43 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:10:43 +1000 Subject: [ExI] Right to Suicide In-Reply-To: References: <4ba9f426-7a98-2924-dabb-be98b75e1fd6@mydruthers.com> Message-ID: On Monday, 26 September 2016, Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: >> >> >> If an 18 year old tells the doctor he plans to kill himself because his >> girlfriend left him, and the doctor helps him to do so after determining it >> is his choice, should that be both legal and ethical? >> > > ### I would not want to get my branding mixed up with dealing death. My > brand, as a physician, is of somebody you go to to protect your life and > heal your illness. Assisted suicide should be done by non-physicians, > ideally impartial counselors, thanaticians, who would get paid if they > persuade you not to die but also would get paid if you kill yourself with > their help. > > But yes, anybody not bound by a freely given oath (such as an oath of > military service) should have the right to spend his money on a > thanatician. This would avoid messiness, no rotting bodies found in > apartments when rent is unpaid, might relieve the organ shortage, and most > importantly would avoid arbitrary interference in sacred freedoms of > humans, the freedom of association, the freedom of trade, and the freedom > of property. > In the example I gave, in the jurisdiction where I live the doctor would be obliged to try to prevent the patient from killing himself. If he did not he would be open to accusations of negligence, may lose his license and may be sued by the patient's family. -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon Sep 26 06:48:11 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 07:48:11 +0100 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c0$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-09-25 23:03, spike wrote: > > >>?Had the congress the legal right to legislate away Americans? right > to bear arms, they would have done it a long time ago. > Actually, if the voters pressured Congress in a consistent manner it could pass an amendment to amend the second amendment. It is evidently not impossible to change a constitution legally. > In a time when this heavily armed (and crazy) nation is on the verge > of electing one of two presidential candidates such as these, both of > whom have expressed intentions of violate law and the one who already > has while in office, aren?t you glad we have a second amendment? Me too. > Seriously? It is not enough to actually unseat a tyrant, but it is enough for a low-level insurgency destroying your country. Imagine a situation where about half of the population thinks the election was stolen, and an armed minority use their arms to take potshots at the government (that of course responds with the excessive means it has, feeding the hatred) or supporters of the other side (who of course think they have a right and ability to defend themselves). Doesn't sound very good for democracy or liveability. Every society has cultural myths about what it is, how it was founded, and what is valuable. These make a culture work, but they can become counterproductive or even malign. In the US it is pretty obvious (at least to outsiders) that the gun myth ("guns guarantee freedom since they enabled the revolution") is making society paranoid (because it implies one should not trust government, because your neighbours are armed, and because your police is paranoid about all those guns so it becomes more military and dangerous), places emphasis on arms rather than good governance, and blocks analysis (since it turns the whole thing into a right, which is interpreted as an eternal moral right rather than a legal allowance). I don't know you can change this, or even if you should, but the price you pay is pretty steep. (Being an expat/immigrant of a philosophical bent makes me curious about how societies work, their myths, and their myth-pathologies. It is just that in most cases their are somewhat less directly lethal. The Swedish "we have solved all social problems" and the British "we are one society" myths have some bad pathologies too, but few people get shot because of them.) -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Mon Sep 26 06:59:07 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders Sandberg) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 07:59:07 +0100 Subject: [ExI] saving lives In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4b4df215-88c6-1185-aec8-06ba49752d1c@aleph.se> I think J.S. Mill got it right: society has a right to intervene when some activity is causing harm to others. Not lightly, and not without checks that it does work. Texting while driving seems to be a prime example of adding biggish harm externalities. Adding anti-text systems to cars on the other hand might make it harder to call for help or break the rules when it is really necessary. It is likely easier to use the logging functions of phones and phone systems to double the penalty if something goes bad, or automatically add a fine for messages sent by the driver, or something soft like that. Saving lives is not enough of a motivation: banning sick people from going to work or banning extreme sports would save a measurable number of lives per year, but make society less flexible and limit "experiments in living". We may still want to add soft pressures in terms of torts, insurance and safety regulations to keep people from causing too much harm. This is why I am somewhat worried about "algocracy", when we move societal decisions onto algorithms. Most algorithms are not very flexible, and hence limit how humans may act - especially since we internalize what we are allowed/able to do. On 2016-09-25 20:58, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Just what are our limits on interference with our private lives? > Today in the NYT, an article says that the technology exists to cut > off texting while driving. > > Should they? No question it would save lives of drivers, pedestrians, > dogs and cats, and so on. > > Just another tromping on libertarians' rights to be let alone? > Actually, I agree with this one. Drivers have a safe alternative: > they can talk. Or perhaps they can find a carrier who doesn't block > texting. I would not favor a law. Parents could then have some > control over the smartphone they paid for. > > On the other hand, to put it in the proper perspective, it would > prevent many people from making the Darwin list of stupid deaths, and > thus prevent cleaning up the genetic pool. > > bill w > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pharos at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 10:45:24 2016 From: pharos at gmail.com (BillK) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:45:24 +0100 Subject: [ExI] AI writes pop songs now Message-ID: AI makes pop music September 19, 2016 AI makes pop music in the style of any composer (the Beatles too!) and plans to release an album in 2017. To hear the songs and read how it was done. BillK From stathisp at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 10:54:07 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 20:54:07 +1000 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 26 September 2016 at 09:34, spike wrote: > > > > > BillW as you know from reading my comments, I am extremely wary of power > grabbers seeking to grab power. Both our mainstream candidates for > president have shown sufficient evidence they are power grabbers. Grabbing > our guns would enable unlimited subsequent power grabbing, for > constitutional rights could be suspended without consequence. That would > be the ultimate power, the unholy grail for a power grabber. > Surely you don't believe that the reason the Government is not more tyrannical is that they worry the police and soldiers they would send out to subdue the population would get shot at? -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 26 12:46:43 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 05:46:43 -0700 Subject: [ExI] AI writes pop songs now In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00f201d217f4$09408c90$1bc1a5b0$@att.net> -----Original Message----- From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of BillK Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 3:45 AM To: Extropy Chat Subject: [ExI] AI writes pop songs now AI makes pop music September 19, 2016 AI makes pop music in the style of any composer (the Beatles too!) and plans to release an album in 2017. To hear the songs and read how it was done. BillK _______________________________________________ Thanks BillK! This song makes a lot more sense than the Beatle's pleasant but puzzling Norwegian Wood. Perhaps Lennon and McCartney discovered the algorithm back in 1968? In retrospect, Norwegian Wood is a bad example of Beatles lyrics that make no sense. The Walrus was Paul? A soap impression of his wife that he ate and donated to the national trust? Oy. spike From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 26 13:24:42 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 06:24:42 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <007301d21778$a0c67240$e25356c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <011701d217f9$57c32cb0$07498610$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Anders Sandberg Sent: Sunday, September 25, 2016 11:48 PM To: extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill On 2016-09-25 23:03, spike wrote: >>.Had the congress the legal right to legislate away Americans' right to bear arms, they would have ... >.Actually, if the voters pressured Congress in a consistent manner it could pass an amendment to amend the second amendment. It is evidently not impossible to change a constitution legally.-- Dr Anders Sandberg We have an example of an amendment being legally repealed after the fact (the 21st amendment repealed the 18th.) But the inclusion of the first ten amendments was a condition of ratification of the US constitution. This is why the first ten amendments are known as the Bill of Rights rather than the bill of permissions. Had the US government the legal right to repeal the word "not" in ".shall not be infringed." they would have done it a long time ago. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 26 13:30:20 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 06:30:20 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> Message-ID: <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Stathis Papaioannou Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill On 26 September 2016 at 09:34, spike > wrote: >>? Grabbing our guns would enable unlimited subsequent power grabbing, for constitutional rights could be suspended without consequence. That would be the ultimate power, the unholy grail for a power grabber. >?Surely you don't believe that the reason the Government is not more tyrannical is that they worry the police and soldiers they would send out to subdue the population would get shot at? -- Stathis Papaioannou Kinda the opposite. The government is not more tyrannical because they worry the police and soldiers they send out to subdue the population would shoot the government. When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 14:07:55 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:07:55 -0500 Subject: [ExI] saving lives In-Reply-To: <4b4df215-88c6-1185-aec8-06ba49752d1c@aleph.se> References: <4b4df215-88c6-1185-aec8-06ba49752d1c@aleph.se> Message-ID: Texting while driving seems to be a prime example of adding biggish harm externalities. Adding anti-text systems to cars on the other hand might make it harder to call for help or break the rules when it is really necessary. Anders Just to make this clear, if it isn't, the block on texting would come from the phone carrier, not the car itself. Apple owns the technology, and could sell it to ATT and so on. If there is an emergency, people can just call - no reason to need to text. And I can't see why voice-to-text could not be used - just keep their hands on the wheel. bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:59 AM, Anders Sandberg wrote: > I think J.S. Mill got it right: society has a right to intervene when some > activity is causing harm to others. Not lightly, and not without checks > that it does work. > > Texting while driving seems to be a prime example of adding biggish harm > externalities. Adding anti-text systems to cars on the other hand might > make it harder to call for help or break the rules when it is really > necessary. It is likely easier to use the logging functions of phones and > phone systems to double the penalty if something goes bad, or automatically > add a fine for messages sent by the driver, or something soft like that. > > Saving lives is not enough of a motivation: banning sick people from going > to work or banning extreme sports would save a measurable number of lives > per year, but make society less flexible and limit "experiments in living". > We may still want to add soft pressures in terms of torts, insurance and > safety regulations to keep people from causing too much harm. > > This is why I am somewhat worried about "algocracy", when we move societal > decisions onto algorithms. Most algorithms are not very flexible, and hence > limit how humans may act - especially since we internalize what we are > allowed/able to do. > > > > On 2016-09-25 20:58, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Just what are our limits on interference with our private lives? Today in > the NYT, an article says that the technology exists to cut off texting > while driving. > > Should they? No question it would save lives of drivers, pedestrians, > dogs and cats, and so on. > > Just another tromping on libertarians' rights to be let alone? Actually, > I agree with this one. Drivers have a safe alternative: they can talk. > Or perhaps they can find a carrier who doesn't block texting. I would not > favor a law. Parents could then have some control over the smartphone they > paid for. > > On the other hand, to put it in the proper perspective, it would prevent > many people from making the Darwin list of stupid deaths, and thus prevent > cleaning up the genetic pool. > > bill w > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing listextropy-chat at lists.extropy.orghttp://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 14:44:02 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 10:44:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] saving lives In-Reply-To: References: <4b4df215-88c6-1185-aec8-06ba49752d1c@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:07 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Just to make this clear, if it isn't, the block on texting would come from > the phone carrier, not the car itself. Apple owns the technology, and > could sell it to ATT and so on. > I wouldn't consider making it mandatory unless Apple gave up the patent--which should never have been granted. If there is an emergency, people can just call - no reason to need to > text. And I can't see why voice-to-text could not be used - just keep > their hands on the wheel. > Kidnap victim in trunk/back seat manages to access a phone. Voice call isn't an option. Sure, it's unlikely. And I'm sure there are other more likely scenarios I haven't thought of. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 15:12:29 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 10:12:29 -0500 Subject: [ExI] saving lives In-Reply-To: References: <4b4df215-88c6-1185-aec8-06ba49752d1c@aleph.se> Message-ID: Well, how about this: a phone disabled from texting has an emergency number which CAN be accessed by texting. I suggest any call to 911 enables texting. bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:44 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:07 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Just to make this clear, if it isn't, the block on texting would come >> from the phone carrier, not the car itself. Apple owns the technology, and >> could sell it to ATT and so on. >> > > I wouldn't consider making it mandatory unless Apple gave up the > patent--which should never have been granted. > > If there is an emergency, people can just call - no reason to need to >> text. And I can't see why voice-to-text could not be used - just keep >> their hands on the wheel. >> > > Kidnap victim in trunk/back seat manages to access a phone. Voice call > isn't an option. Sure, it's unlikely. And I'm sure there are other more > likely scenarios I haven't thought of. > > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 15:36:48 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:36:48 -0400 Subject: [ExI] saving lives In-Reply-To: References: <4b4df215-88c6-1185-aec8-06ba49752d1c@aleph.se> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:12 AM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Well, how about this: a phone disabled from texting has an emergency > number which CAN be accessed by texting. > > I suggest any call to 911 enables texting. > Like I said, I'm sure there are cases I'm not considering. But outside of federally-mandating paying Apple to use a ridiculously obvious patent, as a libertarian I oppose all forms of nannying. Once we start up the slippery slope of technologically prohibiting risky behavior, were will it end? Studies show that even hands-free talking distracts drivers, so clearly that should be blocked. Excessive speed increases injuries and deaths, so speed limits should be enforced by cars. (Which self-driving cars will, no doubt, do.) Loud music makes it hard to hear emergency vehicles, so stereos should have a federally-specified maximum volume. Impaired driving kills and maims lots of people, so every car should have a breathalyzer/sobriety test built in. Etc., etc. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 16:25:06 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:25:06 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! Message-ID: It's difficult to keep track of all of Donald Trump's lies but The New York Times figured if they could do it for just one week that might be a good representational sample of the total number of lies told in the entire campaign. They didn't include "untruths that appeared to be mere hyperbole or humor, or delivered purely for effect, or what could generously be called rounding errors", they were only interested in statements that concerned important things and were contradicted by facts and were objectively false. They found 31 whoppers. Keep in mind this list only includes the lies Trump made between September 15 and September 21, that means every 3.6 waking hours Trump tells a major lie to a cheering audience who love him because he's a straight shooter who tells it like it is. Go figure. =========== Tall Tales About Himself Mr. Trump?s version of reality allows for few, if any, flaws in himself. As he tells it, the polls are always looking up, his policy solutions are painless and simple and his judgment regarding politics and people has been consistent ? and flawless. The most consistent falsehood he tells about himself may be that he opposed the war in Iraq from the start, when the evidence shows otherwise. 1*He said a supportive crowd chanted, ?Let him speak!? when a black pastor in Flint, Mich., asked Mr. Trump not to give a political speech in the church.* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 15. There were no such chants. 2*?I was against going into the war in Iraq.?* SPEECH IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. This is not getting any truer with repetition. He never publicly expressed opposition to the war before it began, and he made supportive remarks to Howard Stern. 3*He said any supportive comments he made about the Iraq war came ?long before? the war began.* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. He expressed support for the war in September 2002, when Congress was debating whether to authorize military action. 4*He said he had publicly opposed the Iraq war in an Esquire interview ?pretty quickly after the war started.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. The Esquire interview appeared in the August 2004 edition, 17 months after the war began. 5*Before the Iraq invasion, he said, he had told the Fox News anchor Neil Cavuto something ?pretty close? to: ?Don?t go in, and don?t make the mistake of going in.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. Not remotely close. He told Mr. Cavuto that President George W. Bush had to take decisive action.6*He said that when Howard Stern asked him about Iraq in 2002, it was ?the first time the word Iraq was ever mentioned to me.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. Mr. Trump expressed alarm about Saddam Hussein and the situation in Iraq in 2000 in his own book. 7*?You see what?s happening with my poll numbers with African-Americans. They?re going, like, high.?* SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20; MADE SAME CLAIM IN OHIO, SEPT. 21. Polls show him winning virtually no support from African-Americans. 8*?Almost, it seems, everybody agrees? with his position on immigration.* REMARKS IN TEXAS, SEPT. 17. Most Americans oppose his signature positions on immigration. 9*He has made ?a lot of progress? with Hispanic and black voters, and ?you see that in the polls.?* FRED DICKER RADIO SHOW, SEPT. 15. No major poll has shown him making up significant ground with black or Hispanic voters. 10*He was ?never a fan? of Colin Powell.* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. In his book ?The America We Deserve,? he named Mr. Powell as among the ?best and brightest?in American society. 11*Mr. Trump said that after The Times published an article scrutinizing his relationships with women, ?All the women came out and said they think Donald Trump is terrific.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. Only one woman who was quoted in the article came to his defense after its publication. 12*?Unlike other people? who only raise money for themselves during presidential campaigns, he also raises money for the Republican Party.* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 15. Every presidential nominee forms a joint fund-raising agreement to share money with his or her national party. Unfounded Claims About Critics and the News Media It?s not just Mrs. Clinton whom Mr. Trump belittles and tars with inaccurate information. He also distorted the facts about his Republican critics, including President George Bush and Gov. John Kasich of Ohio. And he claimed that Lester Holt, the NBC anchor moderating the first presidential debate, is a Democrat ? but Mr. Holt is a registered Republican. 13*In the primaries, Mr. Kasich ?won one and, by the way, didn?t win it by much ? that was Ohio.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. Mr. Kasich crushed him in Ohio, winning by 11 percentage points. 14*Lester Holt, the NBC anchor and debate moderator, ?is a Democrat.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. Mr. Holt is a registered Republican, New York City records show. 15*The presidential debate moderators ?are all Democrats.? ?It?s a very unfair system.?* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. Only one, Chris Wallace of Fox News, is a registered Democrat. 16*He said it ?hasn?t been reported? that Mrs. Clinton called some Trump supporters ?deplorable.?* SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. It would be difficult to find a news organization that didn?t report her remark. Inaccurate Claims About Clinton Mr. Trump regularly dissembles about his opponent, attributing ideas to Mrs. Clinton that she has not endorsed, or accusing her of complicity in events in which she had no involvement. 17*?Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther controversy. I finished it.?* REMARKS IN WASHINGTON, SEPT. 16. Mrs. Clinton and her campaign never publicly questioned President Obama?s birthplace;Mr. Trump made it his signature cause for five years. 18*Mrs. Clinton had ?the power and the duty? to stop the release of unauthorized immigrants whose home countries would not accept their deportation after they were released from prison.* NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN COLORADO, SEPT. 17, AND FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. The secretary of state does not have the power to detain convicted criminals after they have served their sentences, and has little power to make foreign countries accept deportees. 19*Mrs. Clinton has not criticized jihadists and foreign governments that oppress and kill women, gay people and non-Muslims. ?Has Hillary Clinton ever called people who support these practices deplorable and irredeemable? No.?* SPEECH IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. She has denounced jihadists and foreign countries on the same grounds, if not necessarily using the same words. 20*?Do people notice Hillary is copying my airplane rallies ? she puts the plane behind her like I have been doing from the beginning.?* TWITTER, SEPT. 20. He did not invent the tarmac rally or the campaign-plane backdrop. 21*Mrs. Clinton destroyed 13 smartphones with a hammer while she was secretary of state.* SPEECHES IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 15 AND SEPT. 19. An aide told the F.B.I. of only two occasions in which phones were destroyed with a hammer. 22*He said Mrs. Clinton is calling for ?total amnesty in the first 100 days,? including ?a virtual end to immigration enforcement? and for unauthorized immigrants to receive Social Security and Medicare.* SPEECH IN COLORADO, SEPT. 17. She has not proposed this. 23*Mrs. Clinton is ?effectively proposing to abolish the borders around the country.?* NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN TEXAS, SEPT. 17. She is not even proposing to cut funding for the Border Patrol. 24*?Hillary Clinton?s plan would bring in 620,000 refugees in her first term alone,? and would cost $400 billion.* NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. She endorsed admitting 65,000 Syrian refugees this year, on top of other admissions. Mr. Trump is falsely claiming that she wants to do this every year and is estimating the cost accordingly. Stump Speech Falsehoods Some warped or inaccurate claims have become regular features of Mr. Trump?s stump speech. He routinely overstates the scale and nature of the country?s economic distress and the threats to its national security, and exaggerates the potential for overnight improvements if he were elected. 25*?Our African-American communities are absolutely in the worst shape that they?ve ever been in before ? ever, ever, ever.?* SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. No measurement supports this characterization of black America. 26*Fifty-eight percent of black youth are not working.* NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 16, AND COLORADO, SEPT. 17. This misleading statistic counts high school students as out of work. Black youth unemployment actually was 20.6 percent in July. 27*Many dangerous refugees are being welcomed by the Obama administration. ?Hundreds of thousands of people are being approved to pour into the country. We have no idea who they are.?* NEW HAMPSHIRE SPEECH, SEPT. 15. The Obama administration has admitted more than 10,000 Syrian refugees, using an extensive screening process. 28*?We have cities that are far more dangerous than Afghanistan.?* NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 16; COLORADO, SEPT. 17; NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20; OHIO, SEPT. 21; AND A FOX NEWS INTERVIEW ON SEPT. 21. No American city resembles a war zone, though crime has risen lately in some, like Chicago. Urban violence has fallen precipitously over the past 25 years . 29*Ford plans to cut American jobs by relocating small-car production to Mexico, and may move all production outside the United States.* FOX NEWS INTERVIEW AND NEW HAMPSHIRE SPEECH, SEPT. 15. Mark Fields, Ford?s chief executive, said it was not cutting American jobs. 30*?We have a trade deficit this year with China of approximately $500 billion.?* NORTH CAROLINA SPEECH, SEPT. 20. He has made this claim repeatedly, but the trade deficit with China is significantly smaller. Esoteric Embellishments Mr. Trump often dissembles on subjects of passing interest, like the news of the day or the parochial concerns of his local audiences. But his larger pattern of behavior still holds: These misstatements, too, accentuate the grievances of his supporters, and cast his own ideas in a more favorable light. 31*Senator Bernie Sanders fell victim to ?a rigged system with the superdelegates.?* SPEECHES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, SEPT. 15, AND NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. Mr. Sanders did not lose the Democratic nomination because of superdelegates. Mrs. Clinton beat him in pledged delegates, too. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 16:36:09 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:36:09 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Russian Roulette Update Message-ID: According to Nate Silver there are now 3 bullets in the revolver we're all being forced to play Russian Roulette with; ?as of today ? there is a 48.8% chance that Donald Trump will be the next Commander In Chief of the USA. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 16:44:59 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:44:59 -0500 Subject: [ExI] now nanny state - Re: saving lives Message-ID: so every car should have a breathalyzer/sobriety test built in. Etc., etc. (Mary V see his full text below) -Dave It's a problem which cannot be fully resolved - ever. According to the 'your right to swing your fist stops where my nose starts', harm to mine determines the right thing to do. Until we can genetically program people not to be stupid, we need laws. I approve of breathalyzers on cars for people with dui records. What else could we do to make dangerous drivers stop being dangerous? I dunno, but whatever it is, I like it. If people won't stop endangering others, then what else can we do but put them in jail, keep them at home, and try other things to restrain their tendencies. You need a nanny when you cannot do it yourself. That's what government is - a collection of the will of the people. What are the drug laws for? To stop people from endangering others. Goes way too far, though. Ditto most other laws - for our protection which we cannot provide ourselves, like testing our own meds. So - a nanny state is congruent with libertarian principles. your turn bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Dave Sill wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:12 AM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Well, how about this: a phone disabled from texting has an emergency >> number which CAN be accessed by texting. >> >> I suggest any call to 911 enables texting. >> > > Like I said, I'm sure there are cases I'm not considering. > > But outside of federally-mandating paying Apple to use a ridiculously > obvious patent, as a libertarian I oppose all forms of nannying. Once we > start up the slippery slope of technologically prohibiting risky behavior, > were will it end? Studies show that even hands-free talking distracts > drivers, so clearly that should be blocked. Excessive speed increases > injuries and deaths, so speed limits should be enforced by cars. (Which > self-driving cars will, no doubt, do.) Loud music makes it hard to hear > emergency vehicles, so stereos should have a federally-specified maximum > volume. Impaired driving kills and maims lots of people, so every car > should have a breathalyzer/sobriety test built in. Etc., etc. > > -Dave > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 26 16:36:25 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 09:36:25 -0700 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00b401d21814$2040dce0$60c296a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! >?It's difficult to keep track of all of Donald Trump's lies ? Easier to keep track of Obama?s. The one we found out about Friday is a big one. He claimed he didn?t know Clinton was using private email. FBI says he knew and used it, under a pseudonym. Carlos Dangerfield? I suspected all along this would be a replay of 1974: it would eventually trace all the way to the top of the food chain. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 16:50:25 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:50:25 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> Message-ID: Grabbing our guns would enable unlimited subsequent power grabbing, for constitutional rights could be suspended without consequence. That would be the ultimate power, the unholy grail for a power grabber. spike I regard this as extremely unlikely. Yes, I have read Orwell, both books (actually like Animal Farm better), and have a tome of his essays. I am not naive at all, but regard arms confiscation as improbable as society stands now. Has it ever been tried anywhere? With success? Here it would start another civil war. bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 8:30 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *Stathis Papaioannou > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] right to try bill > > > > > > On 26 September 2016 at 09:34, spike wrote: > > >>? Grabbing our guns would enable unlimited subsequent power grabbing, > for constitutional rights could be suspended without consequence. That > would be the ultimate power, the unholy grail for a power grabber. > > > > >?Surely you don't believe that the reason the Government is not more > tyrannical is that they worry the police and soldiers they would send out > to subdue the population would get shot at? -- Stathis Papaioannou > > > > > > Kinda the opposite. The government is not more tyrannical because they > worry the police and soldiers they send out to subdue the population would > shoot the government. > > > > When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government > fears the people there is liberty. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 16:54:27 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:54:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Russian Roulette Update Message-ID: According to Nate Silver there are now 3 bullets in the revolver we're all being forced to play Russian Roulette with; ?as of today ? there is a 48.8% chance that Donald Trump will be the next Commander In Chief of the USA. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 16:55:53 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 11:55:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: <00b401d21814$2040dce0$60c296a0$@att.net> References: <00b401d21814$2040dce0$60c296a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Easier to keep track of Obama?s. The one we found out about Friday is a big one. He claimed he didn?t know Clinton was using private email. FBI says he knew and used it, under a pseudonym. Carlos Dangerfield? I suspected all along this would be a replay of 1975: it would eventually trace all the way to the top of the food chain. spike (I accidentally changed the date above - it's not 1975 but I forget what it is) Hey - you know what's so great about all this? The ability of all these people to determine who is lying. Sure, everyone in gov. lies, just like business, like love. Getting these lies out where anyone can read about them is a great story of freedom. It's not a great story about the people in gov., sadly. bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 11:36 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *John Clark > *Subject:* [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! > > > > >?It's difficult to keep track of all of Donald Trump's lies ? > > > > Easier to keep track of Obama?s. The one we found out about Friday is a > big one. He claimed he didn?t know Clinton was using private email. FBI > says he knew and used it, under a pseudonym. Carlos Dangerfield? I > suspected all along this would be a replay of 1974: it would eventually > trace all the way to the top of the food chain. > > spike > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 17:05:05 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:05:05 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:30 AM, spike wrote: The government is not more tyrannical because they worry the police and > soldiers they send out to subdue the population would shoot the government. ? But the police and soldiers would have guns with ?or? without the second amendment. John K Clark > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 17:25:56 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:25:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> Message-ID: But the police and soldiers would have guns with ?or? without the second amendment. John K Clark Where would we be without the 2nd amendment? More or less the same, I think. Think of the frontier society we had until fairly recently - guns were essential to taming the West. A lot of people in the South and West feed their families via guns. (Killing the most dangerous animal we have - deer.) Someone with more of a legal background than I have would know if the 2nd amendment has kept arms in the hands of the people. Has confiscation ever been tried in the USA? I think we have never been without them. So why worry? (Alfred Neuman). bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:05 PM, John Clark wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:30 AM, spike wrote: > > The government is not more tyrannical because they worry the police and >> soldiers they send out to subdue the population would shoot the government. > > > ? > But the police and soldiers would have guns with > ?or? > without the second amendment. > > John K Clark > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 18:05:36 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:05:36 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: John, you are reposting political campaign propaganda materials, which were originally published on a campaign website and then reprinted simultaneously in a number of other propaganda outlets. This is inappropriate. On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 12:25 PM, John Clark wrote: > It's difficult to keep track of all of Donald Trump's lies but The New > York Times figured if they could do it for just one week that might be a > good representational sample of the total number of lies told in the entire > campaign. They didn't include "untruths that appeared to be mere hyperbole > or humor, or delivered purely for effect, or what could generously be > called rounding errors", they were only interested in statements that > concerned important things and were contradicted by facts and were > objectively false. They found 31 whoppers. Keep in mind this list only > includes the lies Trump made between September 15 and September 21, that > means every 3.6 waking hours Trump tells a major lie to a cheering audience > who love him because he's a straight shooter who tells it like it is. Go > figure. > > =========== > > Tall Tales About Himself > > > Mr. Trump?s version of reality allows for few, if any, flaws in himself. > As he tells it, the polls are always looking up, his policy solutions are > painless and simple and his judgment regarding politics and people has been > consistent ? and flawless. The most consistent falsehood he tells about > himself may be that he opposed the war in Iraq from the start, when the > evidence shows otherwise. > > > 1*He said a supportive crowd chanted, ?Let him speak!? when a black > pastor in Flint, Mich., asked Mr. Trump not to give a political speech in > the church.* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 15. > > There were no such chants. > > 2*?I was against going into the war in Iraq.?* > > SPEECH IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. > > This is not getting any truer with repetition. He never publicly expressed > opposition to the war before it began, and he made supportive remarks to > Howard Stern. > > 3*He said any supportive comments he made about the Iraq war came ?long > before? the war began.* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. > > He expressed support for the war in September 2002, when Congress was > debating whether to authorize military action. > > 4*He said he had publicly opposed the Iraq war in an Esquire > interview ?pretty quickly after the war started.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. > > The Esquire interview appeared in the August 2004 edition, 17 months > after the war began. > > 5*Before the Iraq invasion, he said, he had told the Fox News anchor Neil > Cavuto something ?pretty close? to: ?Don?t go in, and don?t make the > mistake of going in.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. > > Not remotely close. He told Mr. Cavuto that President George W. Bush had > to take decisive action.6*He said that when Howard Stern asked him about > Iraq in 2002, it was ?the first time the word Iraq was ever mentioned to > me.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. > > Mr. Trump expressed alarm about Saddam Hussein and the situation in Iraq > in 2000 in his own book. > > 7*?You see what?s happening with my poll numbers with African-Americans. > They?re going, like, high.?* > > SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20; MADE SAME CLAIM IN OHIO, SEPT. 21. > > Polls show him winning virtually no support from African-Americans. > > 8*?Almost, it seems, everybody agrees? with his position on immigration.* > > REMARKS IN TEXAS, SEPT. 17. > Most Americans oppose his signature positions on immigration. > > 9*He has made ?a lot of progress? with Hispanic and black voters, > and ?you see that in the polls.?* > > FRED DICKER RADIO SHOW, SEPT. 15. > > No major poll has shown him making up significant ground with black or > Hispanic voters. > > 10*He was ?never a fan? of Colin Powell.* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. > > In his book ?The America We Deserve,? he named Mr. Powell as among the > ?best and brightest?in American society. > > 11*Mr. Trump said that after The Times published an article scrutinizing > his relationships with women, ?All the women came out and said they think > Donald Trump is terrific.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 18. > > Only one woman who was quoted in the article came to his defense after > its publication. > > 12*?Unlike other people? who only raise money for themselves during > presidential campaigns, he also raises money for the Republican Party.* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 15. > > Every presidential nominee forms a joint fund-raising agreement to share > money with his or her national party. > > Unfounded Claims About > Critics and the News Media > > It?s not just Mrs. Clinton whom Mr. Trump belittles and tars with > inaccurate information. He also distorted the facts about his Republican > critics, including President George Bush and Gov. John Kasich of Ohio. And > he claimed that Lester Holt, the NBC anchor moderating the first > presidential debate, is a Democrat ? but Mr. Holt is a registered > Republican. > > 13*In the primaries, Mr. Kasich ?won one and, by the way, didn?t win it > by much ? that was Ohio.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. > > Mr. Kasich crushed him in Ohio, winning by 11 percentage points. > > 14*Lester Holt, the NBC anchor and debate moderator, ?is a Democrat.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. > > Mr. Holt is a registered Republican, New York City records show. > > 15*The presidential debate moderators ?are all Democrats.? ?It?s a very > unfair system.?* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW, SEPT. 19. > > Only one, Chris Wallace of Fox News, is a registered Democrat. > > 16*He said it ?hasn?t been reported? that Mrs. Clinton called some Trump > supporters ?deplorable.?* > > SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. > > It would be difficult to find a news organization that didn?t report her > remark. > > Inaccurate Claims About Clinton > > Mr. Trump regularly dissembles about his opponent, attributing ideas to > Mrs. Clinton that she has not endorsed, or accusing her of complicity in > events in which she had no involvement. > > 17*?Hillary Clinton and her campaign of 2008 started the birther > controversy. I finished it.?* > > REMARKS IN WASHINGTON, SEPT. 16. > > Mrs. Clinton and her campaign never publicly questioned President Obama?s > birthplace;Mr. Trump made it his signature cause for five years. > > 18*Mrs. Clinton had ?the power and the duty? to stop the release of > unauthorized immigrants whose home countries would not accept their > deportation after they were released from prison.* > > NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN COLORADO, SEPT. 17, AND FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. > > The secretary of state does not have the power to detain convicted > criminals after they have served their sentences, and has little power to > make foreign countries accept deportees. > > 19*Mrs. Clinton has not criticized jihadists and foreign governments that > oppress and kill women, gay people and non-Muslims. ?Has Hillary Clinton > ever called people who support these practices deplorable and irredeemable? > No.?* > > SPEECH IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 19. > > She has denounced jihadists and foreign countries on the same grounds, if > not necessarily using the same words. > > 20*?Do people notice Hillary is copying my airplane rallies ? she puts > the plane behind her like I have been doing from the beginning.?* > > TWITTER, SEPT. 20. > > He did not invent the tarmac rally or the campaign-plane backdrop. > > 21*Mrs. Clinton destroyed 13 smartphones with a hammer while she was > secretary of state.* > > SPEECHES IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 15 AND SEPT. 19. > > An aide told the F.B.I. of only two occasions in which phones were > destroyed with a hammer. > > 22*He said Mrs. Clinton is calling for ?total amnesty in the first 100 > days,? including ?a virtual end to immigration enforcement? and for > unauthorized immigrants to receive Social Security and Medicare.* > > SPEECH IN COLORADO, SEPT. 17. > > She has not proposed this. > > 23*Mrs. Clinton is ?effectively proposing to abolish the borders around > the country.?* > > NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN TEXAS, SEPT. 17. > > She is not even proposing to cut funding for the Border Patrol. > > 24*?Hillary Clinton?s plan would bring in 620,000 refugees in her first > term alone,? and would cost $400 billion.* > > NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. > > She endorsed admitting 65,000 Syrian refugees this year, on top of other > admissions. Mr. Trump is falsely claiming that she wants to do this every > year and is estimating the cost accordingly. > > Stump Speech Falsehoods > > Some warped or inaccurate claims have become regular features of Mr. > Trump?s stump speech. He routinely overstates the scale and nature of the > country?s economic distress and the threats to its national security, and > exaggerates the potential for overnight improvements if he were elected. > > 25*?Our African-American communities are absolutely in the worst shape > that they?ve ever been in before ? ever, ever, ever.?* > > SPEECH IN NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. > > No measurement supports this characterization of black America. > > 26*Fifty-eight percent of black youth are not working.* > > NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 16, AND COLORADO, SEPT. 17. > > This misleading statistic counts high school students as out of work. > Black youth unemployment actually was 20.6 percent in July. > > 27*Many dangerous refugees are being welcomed by the Obama > administration. ?Hundreds of thousands of people are being approved to pour > into the country. We have no idea who they are.?* > > NEW HAMPSHIRE SPEECH, SEPT. 15. > > The Obama administration has admitted more than 10,000 Syrian refugees, > using an extensive screening process. > > 28*?We have cities that are far more dangerous than Afghanistan.?* > > NUMEROUS SPEECHES, INCLUDING IN FLORIDA, SEPT. 16; COLORADO, SEPT. 17; > NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20; OHIO, SEPT. 21; AND A FOX NEWS INTERVIEW ON SEPT. > 21. > > No American city resembles a war zone, though crime has risen lately in > some, like Chicago. Urban violence has fallen precipitously over the past > 25 years > . > > 29*Ford plans to cut American jobs by relocating small-car production to > Mexico, and may move all production outside the United States.* > > FOX NEWS INTERVIEW AND NEW HAMPSHIRE SPEECH, SEPT. 15. > > Mark Fields, Ford?s chief executive, said it was not cutting American > jobs. > > 30*?We have a trade deficit this year with China of approximately $500 > billion.?* > > NORTH CAROLINA SPEECH, SEPT. 20. > > He has made this claim repeatedly, but the trade deficit with China is > significantly smaller. > > Esoteric Embellishments > > Mr. Trump often dissembles on subjects of passing interest, like the news > of the day or the parochial concerns of his local audiences. But his larger > pattern of behavior still holds: These misstatements, too, accentuate the > grievances of his supporters, and cast his own ideas in a more favorable > light. > > 31*Senator Bernie Sanders fell victim to ?a rigged system with the > superdelegates.?* > > SPEECHES IN NEW HAMPSHIRE, SEPT. 15, AND NORTH CAROLINA, SEPT. 20. > > Mr. Sanders did not lose the Democratic nomination because of > superdelegates. Mrs. Clinton beat him in pledged delegates, too. > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -- 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: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 20:02:25 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:02:25 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: John, you are reposting political campaign propaganda materials, which were > originally published on a campaign website > ?No, it was originally published in yesterdays New York Times as I said in my post. ? ?> ? > This is inappropriate. > ?It would be inappropriate only if the information was incorrect, and it's not. Even by the standards of American politicians Donald Trump is a liar of staggering magnitude. ? And according to Nate Silver there are now 3 bullets in the revolver we're all being forced to play Russian Roulette with; ? as of today ? there is a 48.8% chance that Donald Trump will be the next Commander In Chief of the USA ? and will be asking his generals to explain to him yet again why if we have nuclear weapons we don't use them. ? ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 20:39:28 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 16:39:28 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 4:02 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 Rafal Smigrodzki wrote: > > John, you are reposting political campaign propaganda materials, which >> were originally published on a campaign website >> > > ?No, it was originally published in yesterdays New York Times as I said > in my post. > ### Yes, it was produced and published by the Clinton campaign and simultaneously re-printed by 4 different propaganda outlets, including the NYT. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Mon Sep 26 20:33:28 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:33:28 -0700 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <002c01d21835$3d990ee0$b8cb2ca0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark >?as of today there is a 48.8% chance that Donald Trump will be the next ? John K Clark? John you worry too much man. If this isn?t a third party run, it is as close to it as I have ever seen, more so than Ross Perot. The Republican party isn?t doing anything that I can tell to help Trump. The Bush family (all of them) have come out in favor of Clinton. Lots of party biggies have done likewise. I have seen none of them offer Trump a resounding endorsement; they know he isn?t a Republican. Other factors: Clinton is outspending Trump 15 to 1, the media is in her pocket, and she is running 50 points ahead in the polls (in DC.) All this, with Trump running as a third party, we know that third parties can never win. So why do you worry? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From interzone at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 21:00:53 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:00:53 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: <002c01d21835$3d990ee0$b8cb2ca0$@att.net> Message-ID: I see what you did there, Spike. As to John, the article you linked isn't going to change anyone's mind on any side of the aisle. You're ignoring the current zeitgeist. You would not find Trump's numbers inexplicable if you actually examined it. On Sep 26, 2016 4:48 PM, "spike" wrote: *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On Behalf Of *John Clark >?as of today there is a 48.8% chance that Donald Trump will be the next ? John K Clark? John you worry too much man. If this isn?t a third party run, it is as close to it as I have ever seen, more so than Ross Perot. The Republican party isn?t doing anything that I can tell to help Trump. The Bush family (all of them) have come out in favor of Clinton. Lots of party biggies have done likewise. I have seen none of them offer Trump a resounding endorsement; they know he isn?t a Republican. Other factors: Clinton is outspending Trump 15 to 1, the media is in her pocket, and she is running 50 points ahead in the polls (in DC.) All this, with Trump running as a third party, we know that third parties can never win. So why do you worry? spike _______________________________________________ extropy-chat mailing list extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 22:29:40 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:29:40 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: <002c01d21835$3d990ee0$b8cb2ca0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 Dylan Distasio wrote: > ?> ? > As to John, the article you linked isn't going to change anyone's mind on > any side of the aisle. > > ?I would have thought that Extropians were on the scientific method's side of the aisle and facts could change their mind, ?but apparently not. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 22:31:34 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:31:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:13 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > ?Please provide evidence that it was "?produced and published" by the > Clinton campaign and far more important, > ### http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/26/trump-lies-articles-come-weekend-clinton-campaign-course/ ------------------- > show that even one of the 31 examples of bare face lying given did not in > fact occur. Show me where it's wrong! > ### Couldn't care a flying fuck about that, I am a non-voter. Just don't like being hounded with propaganda everywhere. ------------------- > > ?So the most respected newspaper in the country > ### I learned to disrespect newspapers at about age 10, programmatically I never read them except if specific stories are recommended by trustworthy sources, so don't bother selling me any. I am almost ready to endorse Illary. At least this stream of hysterical political posts on ExI would end, maybe. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 23:12:03 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:12:03 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:13 PM, John Clark wrote: >> >> >> ?Please provide evidence that it was "?produced and published" by the >> Clinton campaign and far more important, >> > > ### http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/26/trump- > lies-articles-come-weekend-clinton-campaign-course/ > ? Trump's lies are so ? childishly ? transparent I'm sure the New York Times was ? far from ? the first to discover them, even though none of the 31 examples were ?more than a week ? old? , but ? ? how does that show the the New York Times article was plagiarized from the Clinton campaign? ?>> ? >> show that even one of the 31 examples of bare face lying given did not in >> fact occur. Show me where it's wrong! >> > > ?> ? > ### Couldn't care a flying fuck about that, I am a non-voter. Just don't > like being hounded with propaganda everywhere. > ?If it's true then it's not propaganda. I think you don't give a flying fuck about the facts because they are inconsistent with you pet theory. However what I think is always tentative, show me that one of those 31 facts reported was untrue and I'll change what I think because facts are important to me. ? ?Now correct me if I'm wrong but I imagine you're a non-voter because you don't think the government, is legitimate. I actually have some sympathy with that position, however it would be foolish to ignore the fact that governments exists and they control H-bombs. And ?a ? H-Bombs will treat you ?r? body like matter regardless of what your political philosophy is. > I learned to disrespect newspapers at about age 10, programmatically I > never read them ?Then how do you know what's going on in the world? Fox News? ? ?B? reitbart ??? John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 23:21:04 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 19:21:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:12 PM, John Clark wrote: I think you don't give a flying fuck about the facts because they are > inconsistent with you pet theory. > ### My pet theory is that I am politically powerless, so are you, and therefore arguing about politics is just wanking. ---------------- > > ?Then how do you know what's going on in the world? Fox News? ? > > ?B? > reitbart > ??? > ### http://www.unz.com/gnxp/ http://spectrum.ieee.org/ http://singularityhub.com/ https://wattsupwiththat.com/ http://newatlas.com/ and many others. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Mon Sep 26 23:21:53 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 18:21:53 -0500 Subject: [ExI] And they say Clinton is the one who's a Liar! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Then how do you know what's going on in the world? Fox News? ? ?B? reitbart ??? John K Clark Now there's an excellent question. How do we find objective sources (meaning those with our prejudices)? I read the NYT and Huffington post - both liberal up front. If I want the other side there's the WSJ. No TV source period. bill w On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:12 PM, John Clark wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:31 PM, Rafal Smigrodzki < > rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 6:13 PM, John Clark wrote: >>> >>> >>> ?Please provide evidence that it was "?produced and published" by the >>> Clinton campaign and far more important, >>> >> >> ### http://hotair.com/archives/2016/09/26/trump-lies- >> articles-come-weekend-clinton-campaign-course/ >> > > ? > Trump's lies are so > ? > childishly > ? > transparent I'm sure the New York Times was > ? > far from > ? > the first to discover them, even though none of the 31 examples were > ?more than a > week > ? old? > , but > ? ? > how does that show the the New York Times article was plagiarized from the > Clinton campaign? > > ?>> ? >>> show that even one of the 31 examples of bare face lying given did not >>> in fact occur. Show me where it's wrong! >>> >> >> ?> ? >> ### Couldn't care a flying fuck about that, I am a non-voter. Just don't >> like being hounded with propaganda everywhere. >> > > ?If it's true then it's not propaganda. I think you don't give a flying > fuck about the facts because they are inconsistent with you pet theory. > However what I think is always tentative, show me that one of those 31 > facts reported was untrue and I'll change what I think because facts are > important to me. ? > > ?Now correct me if I'm wrong but I imagine you're a non-voter because you > don't think the government, is legitimate. I actually have some sympathy > with that position, however it would be foolish to ignore the fact that > governments exists and they control H-bombs. And > ?a ? > H-Bombs will treat you > ?r? > body like matter regardless of what your political philosophy is. > > > I learned to disrespect newspapers at about age 10, programmatically I >> never read them > > > ?Then how do you know what's going on in the world? Fox News? ? > > ?B? > reitbart > ??? > > John K Clark > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 00:20:57 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:20:57 +1000 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd0$@att.net> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> Message-ID: On Monday, 26 September 2016, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *Stathis Papaioannou > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] right to try bill > > > > > > On 26 September 2016 at 09:34, spike > wrote: > > >>? Grabbing our guns would enable unlimited subsequent power grabbing, > for constitutional rights could be suspended without consequence. That > would be the ultimate power, the unholy grail for a power grabber. > > > > >?Surely you don't believe that the reason the Government is not more > tyrannical is that they worry the police and soldiers they would send out > to subdue the population would get shot at? -- Stathis Papaioannou > > > > > > Kinda the opposite. The government is not more tyrannical because they > worry the police and soldiers they send out to subdue the population would > shoot the government. > > > > When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government > fears the people there is liberty. > > The possibility that civilians may have guns wouldn't deter the government from sending police and soldiers out to subdue them, if that's what they wanted to do. Bank robbers often have guns, but that doesn't deter the government from sending police after them, and if they fail to catch them it usually isn't because the bank robbers outshoot them; and police are lightly armed compared to the military. If the government are afraid of going into armed conflict against dissenters it is because they are afraid of the consequences of slaughtering them, not because its agents would be shot at. -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 27 00:47:21 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 17:47:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <00bf01d21785$5bd969f0$138c3dd 0$@att.net> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> Message-ID: <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On ? ? >>? When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the government fears the people there is liberty. >?The possibility that civilians may have guns wouldn't deter the government from sending police and soldiers out to subdue them, if that's what they wanted to do?-- Stathis Papaioannou They want to, I can assure you. The reason the government doesn?t send police and soldiers to subdue the people is that if they tried that, then they are no longer the government. That?s why the constitution is designed the way it is: should the government violate our rights, it isn?t the government anymore. Ours is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The soldiers and police are on our side. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stathisp at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 01:37:48 2016 From: stathisp at gmail.com (Stathis Papaioannou) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:37:48 +1000 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> Message-ID: On 27 September 2016 at 10:47, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > ?* > > ? > > >>? When the people fear the government there is tyranny. When the > government fears the people there is liberty. > > >?The possibility that civilians may have guns wouldn't deter the > government from sending police and soldiers out to subdue them, if that's > what they wanted to do?-- Stathis Papaioannou > > > > > > > > They want to, I can assure you. The reason the government doesn?t send > police and soldiers to subdue the people is that if they tried that, then > they are no longer the government. That?s why the constitution is designed > the way it is: should the government violate our rights, it isn?t the > government anymore. Ours is a government of the people, by the people, and > for the people. The soldiers and police are on our side. > That's the case everywhere: if the government is brutal enough, the people, including soldiers and police, might rebel. This is regardless of whether there is a formal constitution or not; nations like the UK and New Zealand do OK without one, while many others uch as the Soviet Union, have fine-sounding constitutions which don't seem to help. But the point I wanted to make was that citizens bearing arms is NOT a deterrent to tyrrany. If anything, it gives the police an excuse to shoot them, as we are actually seeing. -- Stathis Papaioannou -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Tue Sep 27 03:27:44 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 20:27:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] water vapor plumes on europa Message-ID: <00f701d2186f$1d6cc5f0$584651d0$@att.net> Oh this is cool: http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-hubble-spots-possible-water-plumes- erupting-on-jupiters-moon-europa If there are vapor plumes, there are likely oceans of water beneath the ice. I wouldn't be surprised if we find life there. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From hkeithhenson at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 04:27:44 2016 From: hkeithhenson at gmail.com (Keith Henson) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:27:44 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Austin Message-ID: Hi folks Been invited to talk about power satellites here: New Worlds 2016 Conference, Nov. 4-5 If would help a lot if there is someone I can stay with in Austin. Best wishes, Keith From danust2012 at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 04:50:41 2016 From: danust2012 at gmail.com (Dan TheBookMan) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 21:50:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] water vapor plumes on europa In-Reply-To: <00f701d2186f$1d6cc5f0$584651d0$@att.net> References: <00f701d2186f$1d6cc5f0$584651d0$@att.net> Message-ID: <0FA8CA48-5518-456C-A824-ABC46E5A8185@gmail.com> From: spike To: 'ExI chat list' Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 8:27 PM Subject: [ExI] water vapor plumes on europa Oh this is cool: http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-s-hubble-spots-possible-water-plumes-erupting-on-jupiters-moon-europa If there are vapor plumes, there are likely oceans of water beneath the ice. I wouldn?t be surprised if we find life there. spike Way cool! It might be possible, if there's microbial life, that some of them ride the plumes and have become radiation-resistant via a selection process, no? And might it not also be possible that life might've arose there and has then been scattered about the Jupiter system, perhaps even to Mars or Earth? Haven't looked at the average travel times or that overall environment, but it would seem to be like a sweepstakes route for life to spread throughout the outer solar system and maybe to the inner and elsewhere? (I know others have proposed life being scattered from Earth to there. That's also a sweepstakes route. Which seems more likely? Someone must have crunched the numbers... I'm thinking it's easier to go sunward, Jupiter has a huge gravity well. Also, Jupiter's radiation environment sets up another barrier, though might not equally effect incoming vs outgoing life bearing 'rafts' depending on the dynamics.) Regards, Dan Sample my Kindle books via: http://author.to/DanUst -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 18:57:03 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 13:57:03 -0500 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again Message-ID: It got me to thinking: the basic objection is that it was done without permission. Now I assume that many of us in this group are in favor of genetically modifying embryos to eliminate undesirable traits, and perhaps even to enhance desirable ones. How can you reconcile the two attitudes? bill w -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Tue Sep 27 21:37:35 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 22:37:35 +0100 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> On 2016-09-27 19:57, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > It got me to thinking: the basic objection is that it was done > without permission. > > Now I assume that many of us in this group are in favor of genetically > modifying embryos to eliminate undesirable traits, and perhaps even to > enhance desirable ones. > > How can you reconcile the two attitudes? General purpose goods. Being healthy, long-lived, intelligent etc. is good for nearly all plausible life projects. These general purpose goods increase the range of possibilities open for the person. Circumcision is something that does not provide a good except for a fairly narrow range of life projects. There is also a timing issue: most of the above GPGs need to be given on the embryo stage for them to provide their benefits. Circumcision can be done later (and voluntarily). -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 13:57:18 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 08:57:18 -0500 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> Message-ID: Circumcision is something that does not provide a good except for a fairly narrow range of life projects. anders This is just gutbusting funny! Anders, you have found a new career: writer for dry wit comics. bill w On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Anders wrote: > On 2016-09-27 19:57, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > It got me to thinking: the basic objection is that it was done without > permission. > > Now I assume that many of us in this group are in favor of genetically > modifying embryos to eliminate undesirable traits, and perhaps even to > enhance desirable ones. > > How can you reconcile the two attitudes? > > > General purpose goods. > > Being healthy, long-lived, intelligent etc. is good for nearly all > plausible life projects. These general purpose goods increase the range of > possibilities open for the person. Circumcision is something that does not > provide a good except for a fairly narrow range of life projects. > > There is also a timing issue: most of the above GPGs need to be given on > the embryo stage for them to provide their benefits. Circumcision can be > done later (and voluntarily). > > > > -- > Dr Anders Sandberg > Future of Humanity Institute > Oxford Martin School > Oxford University > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 28 15:59:53 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 08:59:53 -0700 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> Message-ID: <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of Anders Subject: Re: [ExI] circumcision again >? Circumcision is something that does not provide a good except for a fairly narrow range of life projects. anders I am not an expert on these matters, but it isn?t the least bit clear to me that circumcision provides *any* advantage in any range of life projects, narrow or broad. On the contrary, I can see at least one disadvantage. Reasoning: if one?s intimate partner prefers a circumcised penis, then an uncircumcised man can opt for the surgery to demonstrate his willingness to endure significant pain, to sacrifice something near and dear to his heart for that partner. That gives an eager young man a pause to ponder if he considers this sweetheart really worth all that. Anyone who wishes to return that serve, it?s your turn. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 28 16:29:37 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 09:29:37 -0700 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00bc01d219a5$822b74f0$86825ed0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of spike Subject: Re: [ExI] circumcision again >>? On Behalf Of Anders Subject: Re: [ExI] circumcision again >>? Circumcision is something that does not provide a good except for a fairly narrow range of life projects. anders >?I am not an expert on these matters, but it isn?t the least bit clear to me that circumcision provides *any* advantage in any range of life projects, narrow or broad. On the contrary, I can see at least one disadvantage. ? Shame on me, spike, oh shame, me lad. At least one disadvantage, I said. ONE disadvantage, said I! ONE! Shame on me. I am guilty of the same ethical and moral crime that has perpetuated this barbaric practice for millennia: completely disregarding the excruciating pain of the unwilling victim. SPIKE! How in the goddam hell did you not offer THAT one FIRST, with the other bit second if at all? Spike my son, you know better than that, sheesh, I taught me better than that. OK, now that I have started out my Wednesday giving myself a well-deserved ass chewing. >?Anyone who wishes to return that serve, it?s your turn. spike Oh I will slam that one into the next county and it will still be climbing when it gets there. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 16:53:54 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 11:53:54 -0500 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: <00bc01d219a5$822b74f0$86825ed0$@att.net> References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> <00bc01d219a5$822b74f0$86825ed0$@att.net> Message-ID: Oh I will slam that one into the next county and it will still be climbing when it gets there. spike OK - now can we return to the question that started this? From Anders post I assume he thinks that any good done by genetic meddling is OK. Is that it? When you become aware of what was done to you by the gengineers you are just thankful because they created you as good as you could be with the genes you were given and those that they reprogrammed, were donated by someone else and so on, are OK too? I remember from Heinlein's Friday ("My mother was a test tube") that being a hybrid of sorts and not 'natural' was looked down on. You were a second class citizen. Was Heinlein simply wrong about people's reactions to not being 'natural'? bill w On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:29 AM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *spike > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] circumcision again > > > > > > > > *>>?* *On Behalf Of *Anders > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] circumcision again > > > > >>? Circumcision is something that does not provide a good except for a > fairly narrow range of life projects. anders > > > > >?I am not an expert on these matters, but it isn?t the least bit clear to > me that circumcision provides **any** advantage in any range of life > projects, narrow or broad. On the contrary, I can see at least one > disadvantage. ? > > > > > > Shame on me, spike, oh shame, me lad. At least one disadvantage, I said. > ONE disadvantage, said I! ONE! Shame on me. I am guilty of the same > ethical and moral crime that has perpetuated this barbaric practice for > millennia: completely disregarding the excruciating pain of the unwilling > victim. SPIKE! How in the goddam hell did you not offer THAT one FIRST, > with the other bit second if at all? Spike my son, you know better than > that, sheesh, I taught me better than that. > > > > OK, now that I have started out my Wednesday giving myself a well-deserved > ass chewing. > > > > >?Anyone who wishes to return that serve, it?s your turn. spike > > > > Oh I will slam that one into the next county and it will still be climbing > when it gets 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: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 28 17:10:46 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 10:10:46 -0700 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> <00bc01d219a5$822b74f0$86825ed0$@att.net> Message-ID: <011b01d219ab$41963230$c4c29690$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] circumcision again >? OK - now can we return to the question that started this? >From Anders post I assume he thinks that any good done by genetic meddling is OK. Is that it? When you become aware of what was done to you by the gengineers you are just thankful because they created you as good as you could be with the genes you were given and those that they reprogrammed, were donated by someone else and so on, are OK too? >?I remember from Heinlein's Friday ("My mother was a test tube") that being a hybrid of sorts and not 'natural' was looked down on. You were a second class citizen. Was Heinlein simply wrong about people's reactions to not being 'natural'? bill w Hi BillW, OK then. Leaving the DNA recombination to chance is also doing something. A similar argument was made to me regarding my stance on circumcision: my blocking that was doing something. Now my son must face that operation later, they said. My volley: sure but if he does, he is the willing victim if he opts for it. Regarding the act of facilitated genetic recombination, we again have all the moral dilemmas posed by the puzzling dichotomy of doing something vs doing nothing. I don?t have the answer for that, other than to make the following claim: if the technology is available (it is now) to eliminate some known genetic diseases, then failing to do so is an action. Doing nothing is doing something. Assuming that natural is good is doing something. We might speculate that it will likely eventually be the anti-Heinlein situation: those births left entirely to chance will likely be looked down upon. I know that isn?t an answer, only an observation. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 17:51:27 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 13:51:27 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> Message-ID: On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Stathis Papaioannou wrote: But the point I wanted to make was that citizens bearing arms is NOT a > deterrent to tyrrany. > ### Are there any historical examples of tyrannies (or more specifically, highly centralized, highly unpopular and highly intrusive government) successfully functioning against well-armed societies? Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 18:03:38 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 13:03:38 -0500 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: <011b01d219ab$41963230$c4c29690$@att.net> References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> <00bc01d219a5$822b74f0$86825ed0$@att.net> <011b01d219ab$41963230$c4c29690$@att.net> Message-ID: We might speculate that it will likely eventually be the anti-Heinlein situation: those births left entirely to chance will likely be looked down upon. I know that isn?t an answer, only an observation. spike I think it's a good answer. In a couple of scifi books I've read 'naturals' compose a control group who suffer allergies and all that 'natural' brings. I am totally in favor of messing around with the gene pool. I do have serious questions as to how we are going to get started on it (though we already have). Here's an item I found in Dnut: DNA Threesome Produces Healthy Three-Parent Baby Surprise! It has been possible for a child to have three biological parents since the 1990s ! But according to a report in New Scientist , there is now a *new* method that proved successful earlier this year. A baby was born in Mexico in May with two biological mothers and one biological father. The method, which uses a small amount of mitochondrial DNA from a third parent, is banned in the United States. It was used in this case to prevent the child from inheriting a disease from its mother. Critics say there may be numerous unknown failed cases and ethical questions that still need to be answered . The whole thing really gives a new meaning to the term ?m?nage ? trois.? Cute, eh? So getting rid of diseases is going to become old hat real fast. But how about improvements? (Yes, preventing a disease is an improvement but you won't catch me saying 'positive improvement'). You can't take mice data for human data, and so any attempt to improve an embryo is going to be very iffy. Can you see the pile of legal documents the parents will have to sign? Just a few screwups and they'll ban improvements - not in Mexico or elsewhere, but here. I am sure Anders can supply us with some ethical question links on this subject. bill w On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:10 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *>?* *On Behalf Of *William Flynn Wallace > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] circumcision again > > > > > > >? OK - now can we return to the question that started this? From Anders > post I assume he thinks that any good done by genetic meddling is OK. Is > that it? When you become aware of what was done to you by the gengineers > you are just thankful because they created you as good as you could be with > the genes you were given and those that they reprogrammed, were donated by > someone else and so on, are OK too? > > > > >?I remember from Heinlein's Friday ("My mother was a test tube") that > being a hybrid of sorts and not 'natural' was looked down on. You were a > second class citizen. Was Heinlein simply wrong about people's reactions > to not being 'natural'? bill w > > > > > > Hi BillW, > > > > OK then. Leaving the DNA recombination to chance is also doing > something. A similar argument was made to me regarding my stance on > circumcision: my blocking that was doing something. Now my son must face > that operation later, they said. My volley: sure but if he does, he is the > willing victim if he opts for it. > > > > Regarding the act of facilitated genetic recombination, we again have all > the moral dilemmas posed by the puzzling dichotomy of doing something vs > doing nothing. I don?t have the answer for that, other than to make the > following claim: if the technology is available (it is now) to eliminate > some known genetic diseases, then failing to do so is an action. Doing > nothing is doing something. Assuming that natural is good is doing > something. > > > > We might speculate that it will likely eventually be the anti-Heinlein > situation: those births left entirely to chance will likely be looked down > upon. > > > > I know that isn?t an answer, only an observation. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 28 19:30:39 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 12:30:39 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> Message-ID: <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Rafal Smigrodzki Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:51 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: But the point I wanted to make was that citizens bearing arms is NOT a deterrent to tyrrany. ### Are there any historical examples of tyrannies (or more specifically, highly centralized, highly unpopular and highly intrusive government) successfully functioning against well-armed societies? Rafa? Rafal, to become a tyranny, they need to disarm the society first. As soon as a government starts down that road, we already know what they have in mind. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 20:07:20 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 15:07:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: Rafal, to become a tyranny, they need to disarm the society first. As soon as a government starts down that road, we already know what they have in mind. spike Do you regard Britain as a tyranny because of their gun laws? bill w On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 2:30 PM, spike wrote: > > > > > *From:* extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] *On > Behalf Of *Rafal Smigrodzki > *Sent:* Wednesday, September 28, 2016 10:51 AM > *To:* ExI chat list > *Subject:* Re: [ExI] right to try bill > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:37 PM, Stathis Papaioannou > wrote: > > > > But the point I wanted to make was that citizens bearing arms is NOT a > deterrent to tyrrany. > > > > ### Are there any historical examples of tyrannies (or more specifically, > highly centralized, highly unpopular and highly intrusive government) > successfully functioning against well-armed societies? > > > > Rafa? > > > > > > Rafal, to become a tyranny, they need to disarm the society first. As > soon as a government starts down that road, we already know what they have > in mind. > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 20:18:05 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 13:18:05 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Elon's IAC presentation Message-ID: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sY_5vSxmLQ http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2016/09/elon-musk-reveals-giant-reusable.html http://phys.org/news/2016-09-spacex-ceo-musk-mind-mars.html https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2016/09/spacex-reveals-mars-game-changer-colonization-plan/ I notice he fails to address what all those people would actually be doing to make a living on Mars. Even assuming he could get $1 trillion to fund this thing - more than enough to take a million people over there and emplace starting infrastructure, at the costs he's quoting - that's still a finite amount of money, that will eventually run out. If they aren't doing anything that makes it worthwhile, to them, to stick around and raise families there...well, that's how ghost towns happen. On smaller scale space missions, we've been calling that result "flags and footprints". A self-sustaining colony must be financially self-sustaining as well, and there will inevitably be ties back to Earth so they will participate in the (multi-)global economy. (If there were no such ties then financial self-sustenance would be trivial: no costs, therefore no income needed. But this is not the case.) This has been the case with every long-lived colony on Earth so far, and there is reason to believe this applies in space too. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Wed Sep 28 20:28:04 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 16:28:04 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 4:07 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > Do you regard Britain as a tyranny because of their gun laws? bill w > Disarmament is a necessary condition of tyranny, but it's not sufficient to cause it. Of course, our founding fathers *did* consider Britain a tyranny. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Wed Sep 28 20:44:23 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 13:44:23 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d8378 0$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <025a01d219c9$193ec270$4bbc4750$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of William Flynn Wallace Subject: Re: [ExI] right to try bill >?Rafal, to become a tyranny, they need to disarm the society first. As soon as a government starts down that road, we already know what they have in mind. spike >?Do you regard Britain as a tyranny because of their gun laws? bill w BillW, Britain?s people started out as subjects of a monarch. US citizens never were subjects. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 03:58:44 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 23:58:44 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! Message-ID: He's done. The man has no gravitas. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/09/28/gary-johnson-another-aleppo-moment/91249582/ John K Xlark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 29 04:43:32 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 21:43:32 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> >? On Behalf Of John Clark Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! >?He's done. The man has no gravitas. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/09/28/gary-johnson-another-aleppo-moment/91249582/ John K Xlark Weld did even worse. Angela Merkel was his favorite foreign leader? Sheesh, the woman was a catastrophe for Germany. If these guys can balance the budget I don?t care if they don?t know a single foreign leader and don?t talk to any of them the whole time they are in office. I notice neither of the mainstream candidates are even talking about budgets. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 05:21:11 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 22:21:11 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 8:58 PM, John Clark wrote: > He's done. > He was done the moment the first Trump-Clinton debate started. He remains a good choice for those in states that are definitely going one way or the other regardless of how one votes, though. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Wed Sep 28 21:21:34 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2016 22:21:34 +0100 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: References: <98b51609-a4a0-c8f9-37f8-6a9897b0d68a@aleph.se> <009401d219a1$5aab98f0$1002cad0$@att.net> <00bc01d219a5$822b74f0$86825ed0$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-09-28 17:53, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > > OK - now can we return to the question that started this? From > Anders post I assume he thinks that any good done by genetic meddling > is OK. Is that it? When you become aware of what was done to you by > the gengineers you are just thankful because they created you as good > as you could be with the genes you were given and those that they > reprogrammed, were donated by someone else and so on, are OK too? > Maybe. But there is a difference between having longevity genes and having green skin. Even if being green-skinned in a sense is part of who you have grown up to be, it is not a general purpose good: it is useful for some life projects but bad for others. So while you may be thankful for being who you are, you have less reason to be thankful for the particular enhancement. This gets more extreme the more narrow the enhancements are. > I remember from Heinlein's Friday ("My mother was a test tube") that > being a hybrid of sorts and not 'natural' was looked down on. You > were a second class citizen. Was Heinlein simply wrong about people's > reactions to not being 'natural'? > People value naturalness differently based on culture. One can imagine strains of our culture looking down on "hybrids" and strains regarding them with envy. In fact, both concerns show up when people try to formulate arguments against genetic enhancement. The conclusion is that it is an empirical question and one cannot base an ethical argument on it; a better use of ethicist effort is to create the right conditions for just treatment of people. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 14:47:41 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 10:47:41 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:43 AM, spike wrote: > ?> > If these guys can balance the budget > > ?Like Bill Clinton did? > ?> > I don?t care if they don?t know a single foreign leader and don?t talk to > any of them the whole time they are in office. > > ?Face it Spike, thanks to Johnson the Libertarians ?are getting the reputation as the silly party, not to be confused with the Republicans who now will forever be known as the stupid party. ?Hillary is the only grownup running.? > > ?> ? > I notice neither of the mainstream candidates are even talking about > budgets. > > ?Why should they? The budget deficit ?is not a pressing issue, although a case could be made that it's too small. John K Clark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sparge at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 16:24:26 2016 From: sparge at gmail.com (Dave Sill) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 12:24:26 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:47 AM, John Clark wrote: > Face it Spike, thanks to Johnson the Libertarians ?are getting the > reputation as the silly party The Libertarians have had that problem all along. The problem is that nobody takes "third" parties seriously, so serious candidates don't run as Libertarians. Classic chicken/egg. -Dave -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Thu Sep 29 18:42:09 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 11:42:09 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> Message-ID: <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 7:48 AM To: ExI chat list Subject: Re: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 12:43 AM, spike > wrote: ?>>?If these guys can balance the budget ?>?Like Bill Clinton did? Like Newt Gingrich did? Actually neither of them did: it was accounting tricks. They robbed Social Security by moving welfare cases to SS disability. They needed to arrange for them to all have disabilities. It wasn?t hard to do; that?s why we have so many disabilities now. Now these guys aren?t even talking about balancing the budget. ?>?Face it Spike, thanks to Johnson the Libertarians ?are getting the reputation as the silly party, not to be confused with the Republicans who now will forever be known as the stupid party. ?John what kind of reputation do you think Hilliary has given her party? Come on, say it John, you know what I am thinking. ? > >?I notice neither of the mainstream candidates are even talking about budgets. ?>?Why should they? The budget deficit ?is not a pressing issue, although a case could be made that it's too small?John K Clark What happens when interest rates go back up? With a debt this size, we will devour our entire revenue just paying interest. This will not be good. spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 21:34:56 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:34:56 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:42 PM, spike wrot ?e:? > ?>>?If these guys can balance the budget > > >?Like Bill Clinton did? > > > > Like Newt Gingrich did? Actually neither of them did: it was accounting > tricks. They robbed Social Security by moving welfare cases to SS > disability. > ?That is incorrect, even if you ignore Social Security there was *STILL* a surplus ? of $1.9 billion in 1999 and $86.4 billion in 2000 ?, Clinton's? ?last year. http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/ > ?> >> ?> ? >> ?Face it Spike, thanks to Johnson the Libertarians ?are getting the >> reputation as the silly party, not to be confused with the Republicans who >> now will forever be known as the stupid party. > > > ?> >> John what kind of reputation do you think Hilliary has given her party? > > ?The Democratic party will have s reputation for nomination somebody knowing ?what Aleppo is and being able to name a foreign leader, several in fact. > ?> >> ?> ? >> The budget deficit ?is not a pressing issue, although a case could be >> made that it's too small > > ?> ? > What happens when interest rates go back up? With a debt this size, we > will devour our entire revenue just paying interest. This will not be good. > ?If the government is ever going to borrow money, as its been doing nearly every year since 1835, then now is certainly the time to do it when interest rates are almost zero.? ? John K Clark > > > spike > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 22:38:20 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:38:20 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! Message-ID: The Libertarians have had that problem all along. The problem is that nobody takes "third" parties seriously, so serious candidates don't run as Libertarians. Classic chicken/egg. -Dave ?Or maybe Catch 22 Esteemed political philosopher Herr Professor Wallace here at your service. I think the problem with the Libertarians is that, as far as I know and have heard, they only run for big offices. You build a party from the ground up, meaning start small, establish some validity and reputation for honesty and so on. Start local and work up from there. I cannot understand the purpose of running for offices you clearly are not going to win. It establishes you as a loser, an also-ran, maybe even kind of an oddball. In other words, poor psychology. Thus you will likely need a new name, which no doubt will be supplied by Spike, and look like this: The Humanitarian Freedom Liberty Extropy Posthuman Centrist Party bill w On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 4:34 PM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 2:42 PM, spike wrot > ?e:? > >> ?>>?If these guys can balance the budget >> >> >?Like Bill Clinton did? >> >> >> > Like Newt Gingrich did? Actually neither of them did: it was >> accounting tricks. They robbed Social Security by moving welfare cases to >> SS disability. >> > > ?That is incorrect, even if you ignore Social Security there was *STILL* > a surplus ? > of $1.9 billion in 1999 and $86.4 billion in 2000 > ?, Clinton's? > > ?last year. > > http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-budget-and-deficit-under-clinton/ > > >> ?> >>> ?> ? >>> ?Face it Spike, thanks to Johnson the Libertarians ?are getting the >>> reputation as the silly party, not to be confused with the Republicans who >>> now will forever be known as the stupid party. >> >> >> ?> >>> John what kind of reputation do you think Hilliary has given her party? >> >> > ?The Democratic party will have s reputation for nomination somebody > knowing ?what Aleppo is and being able to name a foreign leader, several in > fact. > > >> ?> >>> ?> ? >>> The budget deficit ?is not a pressing issue, although a case could be >>> made that it's too small >> >> > > ?> ? >> What happens when interest rates go back up? With a debt this size, we >> will devour our entire revenue just paying interest. This will not be good. >> > > ?If the government is ever going to borrow money, as its been doing > nearly every year since 1835, then now is certainly the time to do it when > interest rates are almost zero.? > > ? > > John K Clark > > > > > > > > >> >> >> 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: From interzone at gmail.com Thu Sep 29 23:27:07 2016 From: interzone at gmail.com (Dylan Distasio) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 19:27:07 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Sep 29, 2016 5:35 PM, "John Clark" wrote: >> ? >> What happens when interest rates go back up? With a debt this size, we will devour our entire revenue just paying interest. This will not be good. > > > ?If the government is ever going to borrow money, as its been doing nearly every year since 1835, then now is certainly the time to do it when interest rates are almost zero.? > > One of the main reasons interest rates have remained low is that central banks are now the primary buyers of sovereign debt (in addition to the Fed keeping the short end of the curve artificially low for an extended period of time). One scenario to consider is what happens when they start to tighten short term rates and stop maintaining/expanding their balance sheet. Markets have not been allowed to clear properly since 2008. Certain asset classes are inflating as a result including corporate debt that is being used to retire stock instead of being deployed for organic growth. The entire value of fiat currencies is dependent on a belief in the issuer to make good on their IOUs. What is going to happen to interest rates if the world loses faith in a particular currency? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From atymes at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 00:32:57 2016 From: atymes at gmail.com (Adrian Tymes) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 17:32:57 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sep 29, 2016 3:40 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" wrote: > I think the problem with the Libertarians is that, as far as I know and have heard, they only run for big offices. You build a party from the ground up, meaning start small, establish some validity and reputation for honesty and so on. Start local and work up from there. > > I cannot understand the purpose of running for offices you clearly are not going to win. It establishes you as a loser, an also-ran, maybe even kind of an oddball. In other words, poor psychology. I've been saying this for years. Heck, if I had the resources to recruit across most of the 50 states and start a political party, that's how I would do it: start in races where one of the major parties has no chance, run candidates that aren't "the enemy party" but aren't the incumbent party with all its faults (and adhere to an at least somewhat transhumanist view, to give the party some cohesion), and absolutely no presidential runs until the new party has state or federal legislators in states with a total of at least half of the electoral college. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 30 02:31:21 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 19:31:21 -0700 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> Message-ID: <00ba01d21ac2$bc3b34a0$34b19de0$@att.net> From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of John Clark ? ?>?If the government is ever going to borrow money, as its been doing nearly every year since 1835, then now is certainly the time to do it when interest rates are almost zero.?..John K Clark What happens when interest rates go back up? Who loses when the inevitable default happens? There is something we as optimistic future-thinkers really fail to admit: the future holds fewer jobs. Control theory is advancing to the point where all our robot dreams will happen. The obvious one is the self-driving cars and trucks, but near me is an experimental farm being set up to do completely automated labor. What then? What happens when we have fewer and fewer workers to pay the bills? We borrowed when half of us were earning wages. In the future a quarter of us will be struggling to pay off the debt, and they will fail. Then what? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 07:14:02 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 03:14:02 -0400 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 4:07 PM, William Flynn Wallace wrote: > Rafal, to become a tyranny, they need to disarm the society first. As > soon as a government starts down that road, we already know what they have > in mind. > > > > spike > > > Do you regard Britain as a tyranny because of their gun laws? > ### You may want to review the precise wording of my question, which excludes Britain from the listing. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 07:25:34 2016 From: rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com (Rafal Smigrodzki) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 03:25:34 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: <00ba01d21ac2$bc3b34a0$34b19de0$@att.net> References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> <00ba01d21ac2$bc3b34a0$34b19de0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31 PM, spike wrote: > > > What happens when we have fewer and fewer workers to pay the bills? We > borrowed when half of us were earning wages. In the future a quarter of us > will be struggling to pay off the debt, and they will fail. Then what? > > > ### The return to capital will rise well in excess of any possible decreases in return to labor, thus allowing capital-holders to easily cover all the expenses. In some countries capital-holders may elect to eliminate labor altogether, using automated security equipment, but hopefully in the more genteel areas of the planet, such as the US, labor will have the option to join capital in the new world of relative plenty. However, if the drain on resources inflicted by the parasitic elements of the society (non-labor, non-capital = government and its wards) outstrips the growth of productivity there is no end to the misery that could befall us. Rafa? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 12:50:06 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 07:50:06 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d83780$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Rafal Smigrodzki < rafal.smigrodzki at gmail.com> wrote: > > ?I made this same mistake the other day. I did not write what is > attributed to me below. And the question on Britain was addressed to > Spike. bill w? > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 4:07 PM, William Flynn Wallace < > foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Rafal, to become a tyranny, they need to disarm the society first. As >> soon as a government starts down that road, we already know what they have >> in mind. >> >> >> >> spike >> >> >> Do you regard Britain as a tyranny because of their gun laws? >> > > ### You may want to review the precise wording of my question, which > excludes Britain from the listing. > > Rafa? > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 15:59:21 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 11:59:21 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: <00ba01d21ac2$bc3b34a0$34b19de0$@att.net> References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> <00ba01d21ac2$bc3b34a0$34b19de0$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:31 PM, spike wrote: ?> >> ?>? >> ?If the government is ever going to borrow money, as its been doing >> nearly every year since 1835, then now is certainly the time to do it when >> interest rates are almost zero...John K Clark > > > ?> ? > What happens when interest rates go back up? > ?When circumstances change the correct course of action also changes. If rates are are almost zero as they are now, then borrowing money is a very good idea because a dollar today is worth more than a dollar in ten years. If rates get high again, as they will, then not so much.? > ?> ? > Who loses when the inevitable default happens? > ?Why on earth is default inevitable? The government of the USA has never defaulted on its debt and has only come close to doing so once, the USA came within minutes of default on ? October 16, 2013 ? due to a Republican stunt in the congress. Incidentally I changed my lifelong party affiliation from Republican to Democrat on October 17 2013. ? > ?> ? > There is something we as optimistic future-thinkers really fail to admit: > the future holds fewer jobs. Control theory is advancing to the point > where all our robot dreams will happen. ?That is very true, advances in AI will vastly decrease the number of jobs, but it will also vastly increase the wealth generating capacity that exists on this planet. ? And although I know Libertarians don't want to hear this, that means if you expect to have any sort of social stability in the future, ?that is to say if rich people expect their necks not to be chopped off, there is going to have to be some sort of massive wealth redistribution scheme. In 2014 the richest 85 people had as much money as the poorest 3.5 billion, in 2015 the richest 80 did, in 2016 the richest 62 did. ?The rise of robots and AI will enormously amplify this trend toward inequality, or it would if there wasn't a revolution first, and there certainly will be unless measures are taken to give some of that wealth to the poor and unemployed; after all it's only a matter of time before EVERYBODY is unemployed because no matter what your job is a machine can do it better. And yes I know wellfare runs contrary to the ideology of most on this list, me too, but facts are facts and as Richard Feynman said " *reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled* *?*"? . > ?> ? > What happens when we have fewer and fewer workers to pay the bills? When everybody is on welfare (and I don't mean almost everybody I mean everybody) then the robots will pay the bills. And if there is not to be a French style revolution complete with guillotines you'd better not have the payments to 62 welfare queens equal the payments to 3.5 billion people. ? John K Clark? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From spike66 at att.net Fri Sep 30 15:51:41 2016 From: spike66 at att.net (spike) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 08:51:41 -0700 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d8378 0$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> Message-ID: <018901d21b32$89fefd30$9dfcf790$@att.net> ? ### You may want to review the precise wording of my question, which excludes Britain from the listing. Rafa? What we are seeing is a divergence in models of what a federal government is supposed to do. I tend to see federal government as a body that makes, interprets and enforces law, runs the military and some infrastructure, but that?s all. Plenty of the social services stuff is done at that level, but I see all that as the domain of state governments. If one sees the federal government as a law man, then that government wants its citizens armed, for they are then allies in defeating lawlessness. If a federal government wants to be a parent-like structure, then it wants the citizenry disarmed, for being a parent-structure requires more centralized power, a lot more money and strict obedience from its subjects, since it is a much bigger task. In that context, what is the British government? spike -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From johnkclark at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 16:37:12 2016 From: johnkclark at gmail.com (John Clark) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 12:37:12 -0400 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Dylan Distasio wrote: > ?> ? > The entire value of fiat currencies is dependent on a belief in the issuer > to make good on their IOUs. > > ?That is precisely true. > ?> ? > What is going to happen to interest rates if the world loses faith in a > particular currency? > > ?If people think their IOUs will not be honored Interest rates will trend toward infinity and the currency will collapse; and if the currency is the dollar then the world economy will collapse with it. That is why I can never forgive Republicans from coming within minutes of defaulting on its debt on October 16 2013. John K Clark ? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 16:49:56 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 11:49:56 -0500 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <018901d21b32$89fefd30$9dfcf790$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <010f01d215f6$e9e19960$bda4cc20$@att.net> <001201d216a7$e10cfd00$a326f700$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> <018901d21b32$89fefd30$9dfcf790$@att.net> Message-ID: I tend to see federal government as a body that makes, interprets and enforces law, runs the military and some infrastructure, but that?s all. Plenty of the social services stuff is done at that level, but I see all that as the domain of state governments. spike The huge trouble with that model is that the ability of the states to perform social services differs widely. Contrast California and Mississippi: MS can afford just about nothing. All the social aid comes from the feds and if it didn't we would not have any social services. Now you may think that's fair according to your theory of gov. But I think it would probably violate the 14th amendment (I think that's the one) for equal protection. bill w On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 10:51 AM, spike wrote: > *?* > > > > ### You may want to review the precise wording of my question, which > excludes Britain from the listing. > > > > Rafa? > > > > > > > > > > What we are seeing is a divergence in models of what a federal government > is supposed to do. I tend to see federal government as a body that makes, > interprets and enforces law, runs the military and some infrastructure, but > that?s all. Plenty of the social services stuff is done at that level, but > I see all that as the domain of state governments. > > > > If one sees the federal government as a law man, then that government > wants its citizens armed, for they are then allies in defeating > lawlessness. If a federal government wants to be a parent-like structure, > then it wants the citizenry disarmed, for being a parent-structure requires > more centralized power, a lot more money and strict obedience from its > subjects, since it is a much bigger task. > > > > In that context, what is the British government? > > > > spike > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From foozler83 at gmail.com Fri Sep 30 16:54:32 2016 From: foozler83 at gmail.com (William Flynn Wallace) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 11:54:32 -0500 Subject: [ExI] Johnson has ANOTHER "Aleppo moment"! In-Reply-To: References: <001b01d21a0c$08b38c40$1a1aa4c0$@att.net> <00f001d21a81$300234c0$90069e40$@att.net> Message-ID: And if there is not to be a French style revolution complete with guillotines you'd better not have the payments to 62 welfare queens equal the payments to 3.5 billion people. ? John K Clark? This economic illiterate wants to know just how employee-owned companies fit in to our future. Prima facie it looks like a good model. All employees would get to vote on the distribution of money including the CEO's pay. Maybe we should be finding ways to encourage this. bill w On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 11:37 AM, John Clark wrote: > On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 7:27 PM, Dylan Distasio > wrote: > >> ?> ? >> The entire value of fiat currencies is dependent on a belief in the >> issuer to make good on their IOUs. >> >> ?That is precisely true. > >> ?> ? >> What is going to happen to interest rates if the world loses faith in a >> particular currency? >> >> ?If people think their IOUs will not be honored Interest rates will trend > toward infinity and the currency will collapse; and if the currency is the > dollar then the world economy will collapse with it. That is why I can > never forgive Republicans from coming within minutes of defaulting on its > debt on October 16 2013. > > John K Clark ? > > > > > _______________________________________________ > extropy-chat mailing list > extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org > http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From anders at aleph.se Fri Sep 30 16:34:27 2016 From: anders at aleph.se (Anders) Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2016 17:34:27 +0100 Subject: [ExI] right to try bill In-Reply-To: <018901d21b32$89fefd30$9dfcf790$@att.net> References: <001001d215a9$11060830$33121890$@att.net> <00a701d216c0$c415ca60$4c415f20$@att.net> <005f01d21761$7ef44550$7cdccff0$@att.net> <000e01d2176a$eb5df020$c219d060$@att.net> <1B20E425-FCD5-4892-B55A-1B66FB4A6055@gmail.com> <000a01d217fa$21481280$63d8378 0$@att.net> <009501d21858$b5d29070$2177b150$@att.net> <019901d219be$cc289ce0$6479d6a0$@att.net> <018901d21b32$89fefd30$9dfcf790$@att.net> Message-ID: On 2016-09-30 16:51, spike wrote: > If one sees the federal government as a law man, then that government > wants its citizens armed, for they are then allies in defeating > lawlessness. If a federal government wants to be a parent-like > structure, then it wants the citizenry disarmed, for being a > parent-structure requires more centralized power, a lot more money and > strict obedience from its subjects, since it is a much bigger task. > > In that context, what is the British government? > The British government doesn't want one thing. It is simultaneously representing the citizens as an overworked social worker, trying to teach them to behave like an exasperated teacher, helping them express themselves freely and obey like children, and treating them as customers. Note that guns are not the issue here: gun rights are not relevant for the question of how people relate to their government here. The relationship is very much about what social relationship it is, but violent power is not a major part of it. This email is written from inside Windsor Castle. I am literally at the nuclear core of British sovereignty (OK, I am in the Lower Ward, so the monarchon radiation is not too dangerous here). The evensong from St George's chapel and grandeur of the facade is a more potent weapon for keeping the citizenry in line than any amount of guns. This is soft power. -- Dr Anders Sandberg Future of Humanity Institute Oxford Martin School Oxford University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From cryptaxe at gmail.com Tue Sep 27 19:35:03 2016 From: cryptaxe at gmail.com (CryptAxe) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 12:35:03 -0700 Subject: [ExI] circumcision again In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I don't think circumcision is helping out the child, it certainly hasn't improved my life in any measurable way. I would be okay with eliminating some kind of detrimental gene which would cause defects or a short life. Doing something out of the movie gattaca and making super humans though, I feel weird about. I might be alone in that feeling, everyone else might say go for it on this list. So for me, helping the baby by removing known bad genes is okay. Cosmetic changes, or changes that don't prevent anything but actually enhance what would be a fine human, I'm not sure about. Once we have been assimilated with the computers, we hopefully won't even need to worry about our penis or other birth defects anymore :) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: